#i need to clear out my following list on both platforms tbh

[astronaut-executable]

i realized a couple days ago that despite the dopamine hit tiktok/instagram give me i kind of just… don’t like them. insta’s comments outside of my small range of followed accs (even on them) are so toxic and honestly annoying and it makes it so much harder to find new ppl to follow and tiktok is just kind of Like That yk. esp cuz their algo changed recently it hasn’t been nearly as fulfilling

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

sarahf (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): Last week, congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Tlaib captured headlines for breaking with House Democrats and Nancy Pelosi on an emergency border aid bill that lacked protections for migrant children.

This wasn’t the first time the so-called “Squad” broke ranks. Or the first time their public disagreement with House leadership has led to sniping in the press (Pelosi told New York Times op-ed columnist Maureen Dowd that “All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world. But they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got.”)

But it’s not just Democratic leadership taking aim. Republicans have tried to paint “the Squad” as part of the “radical left,” and the direction the party is moving in. And on Sunday, President Trump sparked a firestorm — at least among Democrats — when he tweeted that “‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen” should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

So what is it about the Squad that has captured the attention of both Republicans and Democrats? Let’s try to tackle this in two parts: 1) What role do we think the Squad has in pushing the Democratic Party in a new direction? 2) And what, if any, do we think will be the electoral repercussions in 2020?

To get us started, what do we make of the news surrounding the Squad and their split from Pelosi and House Democrats on the emergency border aid bill?

julia_azari (Julia Azari, political science professor at Marquette University and FiveThirtyEight contributor): Well, I can start from providing the view from poli sci Twitter, which tends to be a fairly pro-party group of people (and leans Democratic/anti-Trump). So in response to the Twitter fight between the House Democrats’ account and AOC’s chief of staff, there was a lot of talk like “have these fights behind closed doors, don’t have a big, public blowup.”

But I disagree. Party infighting should not be done in a smoke-filled room. That’s just not what people want from politics anymore, and I think when that does happen, it contributes to further institutional distrust and disengagement.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): I’d note that AOC has a Trump score of 18 percent, meaning that she’s voted in line with Trump’s position 18 percent of the time. But according to her data, you’d expect her to vote with Trump about… 0 percent of the time based on how liberal her district is.

So she’s actually proving a bit problematic for Pelosi, in the sense that she should be a guaranteed vote, but Pelosi is only getting her ~80 percent of the time. Except none of this has really mattered since Pelosi has room to spare in the House, and a lot of legislation that passes the House has no chance of passing a GOP-led Senate anyway.

sarahf: Is there at least an argument to be made that Pelosi and the Squad should take fewer swipes at each other over their disagreements, as too much of a focus on intraparty fighting can’t be good for the party?

julia_azari: So here’s my galaxy brain take.

natesilver:

julia_azari: It’s good for the Squad for Pelosi, at least, to take swipes at them. After all, part of the anti-establishment brand is to be in tension with, well, the establishment. And it’s possible that leaders like Pelosi know this! What I’m not really sure about is how good the Squad (so much shorter than typing all their names) is for the Democratic Party.

I don’t think they’re a problem, but it’s too early to gauge their party-building potential. And obviously, they make some people nervous. But if the goal is to engage young people, women and people of color, and keep the left flank of the party somewhat happy, they seem like a good bet.

I am really long-winded today. #sorrynotsorry

perry (Perry Bacon Jr., senior writer): It would be smart for the party establishment to think of this as natural tension between the wings of the party.

The problem is I don’t think they actually do, which is one of the reasons why this is all so interesting. (The House leadership’s official Twitter account attacked AOC’s chief of staff over the weekend, with the implication that she should fire him.)

sarahf: To Julia’s point about the Squad’s party-building potential, isn’t there an argument to be made that they don’t even need to have that? Their ethos is that they’re here to do away with the old system. They agitate for change; they don’t need to bridge consensus within the party, unlike say, Pelosi, who has a very different role to play.

And the fact that virtually all of the 2020 Democratic candidates have a position on the Green New Deal is a testament to their effectiveness at pushing the party in new directions, no?

julia_azari: Right. Which maybe Pelosi likes and maybe she doesn’t. Obviously, moving to the left carries risks. But (and this is where I got into it with a bunch of people on Twitter on Sunday), it’s not clear to me that Democratic leaders actually want to go back to the 1990s and early 2000s.

Yes, the party was more “professionalized,” and less split internally, than it is now. It also won two plurality elections and lost to George W. Bush. Not to mention, voter turnout was low.

So one lesson you might learn from the 2008 period onward is that the party does well with fresh faces, even if it also has to win suburban swing districts that might not view AOC and Rashida Tlaib all that favorably.

perry: But the Democratic establishment (I don’t know about Pelosi, personally) seems to think that the prominence of these four women is not a natural, healthy tension, and instead is broadly bad for the party.

And I think their preferred outcome is that the AOC wing basically stays quiet until December 2020 (after the presidential election). That’s where the real tension is.

julia_azari: We’ve (and here, I specifically mean academics and the media) way overemphasized the concept of party unity.

sarahf: I guess I just don’t understand why the Democratic establishment is making this into such a big deal. But I agree with Perry that they definitely would prefer the AOC wing of the party stay quiet, especially when polls like this are leaked. (Axios wouldn’t disclose the group that conducted the poll, so there’s a lot we don’t know about it, and its findings should be treated with skepticism. But it reportedly found that many likely general election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education had a negative opinion of AOC and socialism.)

julia_azari: For the record, that Axios piece is extremely misleading.

sarahf:

It’s just hard for me to believe that these four women really would have that much of an impact on 2020?

natesilver: I kinda come back to Occam’s razor on this. When you have a bunch of new members who want to push the party in a more ideological direction, it usually entails electoral risk. But the benefit, potentially, is that you also shift the party’s platform in that direction.

perry: Yes, but so many party establishment people want to take away any unnecessary election risks–and I think they would argue AOC talking about getting rid of the Department of Homeland Security, for example, is an unnecessary election risk.

natesilver: It’s also probably a very marginal electoral risk in a world where Donald Trump is president and there’s much bigger news all the time.

julia_azari: Part of the problem is that the lessons of 2016 aren’t clear. You could say that 2016 showed that there was a real push to move Democrats to the left. Or you could say that 2016 was about how Democrats lost groups of voters to Republicans (e.g. the diploma divide among white voters). And those forces push the party in different directions.

perry: The party establishment is probably overstating the rise of the AOC wing in terms of affecting the 2020 elections. But their risk assessment, I think, is driving these tensions–leading Pelosi to bash the AOC wing fairly often, for example.

natesilver: But it’s not crazy for the party establishment to be worried about it! Sometimes I think everyone in this discussion is not always clear about what they think will be electorally advantageous versus what they do — or don’t — like policywise.

julia_azari: Most of this in relation to the Squad is marginal, though, no matter how many hot headlines Axios posts with polls that don’t actually say anything about AOC being the face of the party or about swing states.

natesilver: Journalistic malpractice on Axios’s part TBH to publish a poll without even listing who conducted the poll.

We don’t even know who leaked it. We don’t even know if the poll was real. We should be that skeptical when basic facts and details about a poll are missing like that.

sarahf: That’s fair. And I know we’ve talked about this before, but I think part of what we’re seeing play out here, especially with AOC, is there is now a group of politicians that aren’t willing to play by the old rules. And they will use their large social media followings to get their message across, and on their terms.

So maybe party leadership is scared of losing control?

And so we see Pelosi snipe about how they’re only four votes.

Maybe the Freedom Caucus and the headaches it has caused for the Republican Party has so scarred Democratic leadership that they’ll do anything to stop this faction of their party from growing.

But is this kind of fear misplaced? How much is the Squad really moving the party to the left?

natesilver: Clare said this yesterday on the podcast, but the Squad are very effective at getting media attention, and the media is quite happy to play up the “Democrats IN DISARRAY!” storylines. So in that sense it does seem like a mistake for Pelosi et al. to hit back at them.

perry: About a third of the 235 House Democrats (CNN has this number at 82) support starting an impeachment inquiry into Trump.

Ninety-five support the Green New Deal; 118 support Medicare for All. So just in terms of raw numbers, the positions of the AOC wing are much broader than four people.

I think the big shift for Pelosi is that she has never had a vocal, powerful group saying that she is too far to the right. For basically the entire time Pelosi has led the House Democrats, her biggest tension has been with the right flank of the party — some conservative Democrats in the House thought that she was too far to the left.

But now, Pelosi is being attacked from the left in a serious way, for the first time. And I actually think she and Biden are responding in similar ways to these attacks from the left.

My sense is they both see themselves as liberal icons–the man who helped elect the first black president, the woman who pushed through a huge health care reform that extended insurance to millions. And I think this criticism from the younger generation of Democrats makes them mad. Pelosi seems indignant at times, so does Biden.

julia_azari: Biden and Pelosi also managed to establish themselves as liberals when cultural/LGBT issues were on the rise in the party, and you didn’t have to do anything particularly radical to be liberal enough on economics and race.

In 2019, it takes more to be a liberal icon.

natesilver: I mean… I don’t know that the Squad always pick their battles all that well, and in that sense they are pretty Freedom Caucus-like. On the other hand, they have a lot more star power than the Freedom Caucus. There is a lot of political talent there.

And they’re all pretty young. So a lot of my critiques of Bernie Sanders’s campaign, for instance, i.e. that he doesn’t have a good plan to expand his base, definitely doesn’t apply to the Squad when they can unify leftist Democrats with nonwhite Democrats.

sarahf: Something I think we’re all touching on here is the fact that it is four women of color pushing the party to the left and challenging the status quo. And that matters. Each of them have made appeals to their background and how they represent people who historically haven’t had a seat at the table.

And this probably, to put it bluntly, does make certain older vanguards of the party uncomfortable, because they consider themselves to be liberal, and that now they’re forced to reckon with the idea that they’re maybe not as liberal as they think.

perry: I want to come back to something Nate said earlier that I think is essential.

“Sometimes I think everyone in this discussion is not always clear about what they think will be electorally advantageous versus what they do — or don’t — like policywise.”

The AOC wing at times says its ideas, like Medicare for All, are both the right thing to do on policy AND will help Democrats electorally, by either increasing turnout among people who might not otherwise vote or appealing to swing voters. Whereas the establishment wing often says a policy is bad on substance and that it will hurt Democrats’ chances in 2020.

To me, both sides are overconfident in saying that their policy views are the best electoral position, too.

natesilver: I get annoyed by this sort of question for a couple of different reasons. On the one hand, I think it’s generally bullshit to think that a policy that polls as being quite unpopular will magically turn out to be electorally helpful because it motivates the base or whatever.

On the other hand, there’s a lot of bullshit in which more establishment/centrist Democrats will deride a policy for being unpopular, when their real motivation against it is that they don’t like the policy.

perry: I know it’s our job to analyze elections. But I think it’s really hard to figure out exactly how policy ideas and outcomes affect election results. So I find claims people make suggesting “Policy X is unpopular so Candidate Y will lose” to be way too overconfident at times. At the same time, we can make some judgements.

For example, “Medicare for everyone who wants it’ (the basic position of Biden, Pete Buttigieg and other more centrist Democrats) is probably a safer political position than “Medicare for everyone and change the whole system” (the stance of AOC and Sanders). I say that even though Medicare for All might be a better health care policy.

natesilver: “Medicare for everyone who wants it” is indeed quite a bit more popular than “Medicare for all,” and one of the reasons “Medicare for all” polls well is because people assume “Medicare for all” means “Medicare for everyone who wants it.”

julia_azari: So my view on the policy thing is complicated. Nate has the Occam’s razor view that I think makes sense, but here’s another galaxy-brain take. I spend most of my time in Wisconsin, a state with a long anti-establishment political tradition, and around a lot of younger people (my students), so my sense of how popular some anti-establishment and left-leaning policies are is probably inflated. But in general, I think most people are NOT sophisticated on policy specifics, but they are sensitive to scary images and wording. There’s even evidence that policies that sound too left-leaning or disruptive are especially vulnerable to scary images and messaging. So while it might seem like a lot of people are not happy with the status quo, that does not mean major, risky policy change isn’t still intimidating.

perry: That’s well put. Medicare for All is very vulnerable to scare tactics.

sarahf: Especially when abolishing private insurance enters the equation.

natesilver: I don’t know. I sort of agree with Vox’s Matt Yglesias that people are learning the wrong lesson from Trump. He was actually perceived as a relative moderate by voters in 2016.

perry: I understand many voters said that Trump was more moderate than Clinton.

But I just have a hard time with this idea that the candidate who ran calling for a ban on Muslims traveling to the United States and suggested that he would “lock up” his opponent was the moderate candidate.

natesilver: IDK, I think we’ve shifted from a media environment in which a lot of outlets took an (implicitly center or center-left) “view from nowhere” to one in which the media is more outspoken, and the difference between partisan and nonpartisan media is a little blurrier.

And I think that’s shifted the assumptions about whether centrism is electorally advantageous in a direction that claims that, actually, elections are all about turning out your base. But I don’t think there’s actually any evidence that how you win elections has changed.

julia_azari: I don’t think I read Matt’s piece but that’s not gonna stop me from saying I’m not sure I think the discussion around moderate candidates is useful. Even if Trump was thought of as a moderate, he ran in a way that criticized the status quo.

Basically I’ve become one of those Twitter trolls who reads the headline and then makes a critique.

natesilver: Trump also won independents 46-42 though!

sarahf: We can’t downplay just how much Clinton and Trump were disliked in 2016, though. Yes, Trump won, but that might say more about how we think about women in politics more than anything else.

natesilver: What if Clinton had run as more of a centrist, though? Would she have gotten more than 8 percent of the Republican vote? The Democrats had a pretty darn liberal platform.

julia_azari: My suspicion is that it’s a wash, but I may be discounting the impact of Democrats being perceived as too left/liberal.

sarahf: If Clinton had higher favorables, I don’t think it would have mattered how she ran, i.e. centrist or super liberal.

perry: So that gets to the real question. Would Democrats be marginally better off if AOC

and company were a little less prominent till December 2020?

sarahf: Yes, I think that’s the argument Pelosi and leadership are making. I just don’t think it’s particularly salient. But I also haven’t seen the attack ads yet, I suppose.

perry: My own, non-data judgement, is yes, Democrats would be slightly better off if AOC and her allies were less prominent in the run-up to the 2020 election. Why? Because having issues of race and identity (like immigration policy and four very liberal, female people of color) being central to the presidential election is hard for Democrats. They have become the party of people of color but most voters are white and this is especially true in key swing states (in particular, Michigan and Wisconsin). Also, Trump is likely to run a 2020 campaign about race and identity that raises the question of who should represent America–forcing voters to take sides.

Pelosi, I assume, does not want the 2020 election to be seen by the public as a battle between AOC’s vision of America (even if Biden is the Democratic nominee) and Trump’s vision of America. And I think she is right to be concerned about that. This is not a new challenge for Democrats. Hillary Clinton was probably not helped by the rise of Black Lives Matter preceding the 2016 election, and backlash to the civil rights movement arguably helped Richard Nixon win the 1972 election.

natesilver: I guess the counterargument, which folks were sorta alluding to above, is that Pelosi can push back against the Squad to show that actually she’s the “reasonable,” moderate one. I’m not sure I buy that counterargument, but it’s an argument.

julia_azari: YES, THE GALAXY BRAIN TAKE.

My read on this is that this stuff is always bubbling under the surface, also. Like you can’t indefinitely ignore race issues because they’re tricky politically.

natesilver: Democrats derive certain benefits from having a more diverse coalition, one of which is that the coalition is simply broader — more people identify as Democrats in this country than Republicans. It also entails certain costs, including tension among different parts of your constituency that can have racial undertones (or even overtones).

The hard part for Democrats right now is that nonwhite voters are significantly disempowered by the Electoral College, and especially by the Senate.

[clumsyclifford]

hello!! i am back and on desktop this time. the blog is just as pretty. alex + yellow = v v attractive jfc. this is a long one so buckle in.

to begin: i hope you have the most fun on your day road trip and sing your heart out to atl and taylor swift. i love driving long distances and idk just driving in general is fun. have the absolute best time MWAH

my birthday is in november!! november 23 to be specific. i share it with miley cyrus which is something i always found to be very cool when i was growing up and watching hannah montana. it also means i am a sagittarius and funny little fact i realized is that my best friend is a gemini. alex and jack are also a sagittarius and a gemini. from being 13 i know that tyler and josh from twenty one pilots are also a sagittarius and a gemini. something about sagittarius and gemini besties idk.

also yeah!! ao3 year in review!! it's a bit complicated to figure out at first and if you read a lot the finding pages thing can be pretty tedious, but it's def worth it once you figure it out. it gives you a lot of different stats about everything you read and it's pretty cool. now i am going to go look at your fics to remember my favs. you deserve the praise so i am willing to offer it. jeez you write a lot i respect the motivation sm. you write quite a bit of angst and i won't lie i try to stay away from angst so i haven't read your fics that seem super angst-y based on the tags. BUT there are still so many i recall reading and loving nonetheless. on a quick scroll-through: i usually don't read high school AUs but "paint me in trust (i'll be your best friend)" was super adorable and lovely. "thank god i'm yours" is one of my favs iirc. also i love love love "it's not always easy (but i'm here forever)" like yes please romanticize alex gaskarth i love it sm. "i won't be silent (and i won't let go)" and "i fell asleep in a city that doesn't" are both super fluffy and romantic and are favs of mine. in case you haven't picked up on it i adore very fluffy and romantic fics lmao. alright i am continuing to scroll and there are so many more i could list that i love but this section is getting quite long. just know if it's about a kitchen or hotel rooms being for lovers i probably read it and adored it and that pov is so valid.

waterparks!! will not lie i only really started listening to them about 6 months ago having been distantly aware of their existence for several years by being a fan of bands in the same genre. listen as long as you let yourself be vaguely annoyed by awsten is prevents you from being in love with him. follow him on any social media platform for like a day and you'll be sick of him typing in nothing but all caps within hours. simply do not romanticize him and you can keep yourself from falling!! so this is coming from a slightly fake parx fan, but some of my favs by them have been peach (lobotomy), crave, numb, fuzzy, violet!, you'd be paranoid too, and lowkey as hell. that is a very songs-from-their-most-recent-album-heavy rec, but whatever. i did give the disclaimer about being a fake parx fan.

yeah hayley does have 2 solo albums now!! petals for armor and flowers for vases / descansos. pfa is the one i didn't really like upon first listen but has grown on me. i haven't even listened to the second one in its entirety oops but we won't mention it. dead horse is good but simmer (pretty sure that was the other single??) just ain't it for me. the album has some lovely songs but it's just a hit or miss album all the way through. some favs of mine on it include pure love, taken, crystal clear, watch me while i bloom, and why we ever. it's sorta a storyline album about healing if that adds anything to it?? but anyways. i started listening to paramore around the time after laughter dropped and it grew to be one of my fav albums in existence. idle worship is probably one of my fav songs like ever. i def understand being slightly put off by bands with songs that make religious references (me with twenty one pilots' earlier music that makes a lot more religious references considering i'm not religious whatsoever) but i think i am blinded by being in love with hayley williams and just ignore it. idk that she's like super religious?? she's addressed believing in god and stuff a few times but she's def not the "rub it in your face" type and if she's making refs in music more recently then they're subtle enough i'm not noticing them. ik albums like brand new eyes had a lot more because it was shortly after that the band split and the songwriting process was essentially her and ex-bandmate co-songwriter arguing about their religious beliefs (turns out he ended up being super homophobic and transphobic all based on his religion so do with that what u will and thank the clown for leaving). i feel u on the "i meant to start listening to them" because that's essentially how i started listening to them. i told myself i was going to and then finally forced myself to do it. fuck falling for awsten knight what's more risky is falling in love with hayley </3

also yeah!! you've articulated my feelings towards tde. every song is so vastly different that it's hard to like it all. #1 fan is pretty decent though, and that's not just my bias about finding both ross and his gf hot and a cute couple and getting to see them together and ross half naked in a mirror in the video nope not at all. he's my fav himbo!! he has no personality!! no thoughts head empty!! i still love him and his strawberry-growing saga on twitter tho <3 the hazard of being in love with ross lynch since i was 12. girlfriend better be a fucking banger and there's quite a few already released singles in the tracklist so i have hope. i believe my show is in chicago on november 19 which is a thursday. kinda sucks since i intentionally bought the chicago tix nearly two years ago (the show was originally supposed to be april 25 2020. lol.) because the show was on a saturday and i have to drive 3 hours to get there. obviously i can't speak for them as tde but r5 shows always fucking slapped and i can vouch for them (realized i haven't seem them live since 2016?? 5 YEARS?? wtf) so if u genuinely like them. would recommend going to see them.

anyways. i have not listened to luke's solo album yet. i plan on it. this has gotten so long but i tried to respond in all areas and even organized it in different paragraphs this time (thanks being on desktop!!). hope you are well. hope you have a lovely day. hmm what's a little "going on in my life" fact. i got new glasses a few days ago and my eyes essentially said fuck off because adjusting to the new prescription has left me with eyes that hurt and occasionally slightly nauseous. here is to hoping my eyes get their shit together. mwah LOVE YOU TOO - the other bella/cubs anon/idk

okay hi hello. i have put this off because holy hell it's long but let's do it. i am putting a cut because this whole thing is long even without my answer

first: the road trip was super fun thank you!!! i am intrigued by this information regarding sags and geminis, we should do some scientific inquiry. enquiry. i don't know if there's a difference between those words.

aha! well i tried the ao3 year in review thing and i would say it had about 55% accuracy but still i agree it's fun to look back at that kind of stuff. and i feel you on the angst thing i go through phases of writing angst-heavy stuff and then writing very fluffy stuff and it is entirely based on my mental state buuuut i have lots of fluff and i'm glad you found it all and that you liked it yay <333 KITCHENS ARE FOR LOVERS i will die on that fuckin hill. hotel rooms as well but primarily kitchens.

dfgjhgdlfkhgdfmj honestly i dont use twitter enough that i would see his tweets enough that that would bother me also the fact that he tweets in all caps means that i just picture him yelling everything he tweets which i find absolutely hysterical so i don't think that would help. i have added these parx songs to my listen asap playlist and will get to them when i get a chance thank you i am excited also i already know lowkey as hell and it slaps super hard so im very much lookin forward to the rest of these. merci merci

YEAH simmer was the one i didnt vibe with. and honestly i feel zero compulsion to get into hayley williams as a solo artist. i just don't vibe enough to want to do that so i doubt i'll be listening to her anytime soon but maybe if i hear the songs in passing or get super bored one night, idk who can really say. but yeah christianity typically puts me off of music (speaking as a very jewish bitch) although there are notable exceptions in the cases of thomas rhett and the driver era. i'm just not attached to hayley enough to be like ehhh this doesnt matter. does that make sense

FAVORITE HIMBO PLEASE HGSDFGDFGKLFGJ i dont follow him on twitter but i have seen some interviews of ross and rocky and tbh they're great i love the way ross speaks like i like his speech mannerisms and i like his FACE and HAIR and. yeah. i think hes pretty. and i think he and 5sos SHOULD collab i think that would be sexy as hell. can you imagine that. oh my god can you imagine a ross lynch/luke hemmings collab. i'm not even really talking to you anymore bella because i know you haven't listened to luke yet and don't have a stake in it but if anyone else is reading this long ass answer. ross & luke collab. okay im going to move on and not think about that now. but i probably won't see tde unless i get a job this semester because i'm trying to stop spending so much money on big indulgent things like concerts likeee i was in a really good habit of not spending that much and then suddenly i got paid for one summer and i was just goin Crazy and i need to dial it back. plus i wanna see ajr and noah kahan equally bad so like. i have to make some calls about priorities here. it's Much to think about

good luck to your eyes i'm sure your new glasses are hella cute tho!!! LOVE YOUUUUUUU

[omanu]

i have a few tags to do, so im gonna do them all in one post so i dont keep tagging the same ppl in multiple things idk. dont worry, you dont need to do them if u dont want to ♥

i was tagged by @nashira , the angel ♥

¤ nickname: well, irl is manu, but tbh my name is manu. i have another nickname my family uses, that is budi lol

¤ zodiac sign: sagittarius 

¤ height: the best scenario here is 167cm, idk how much that is in ft or whatever lmao

¤ orientation: ….. like everyone 

¤ favourite fruit: cantaloupe 

¤ favourite season: winter and fall

¤ favourite book: i dont think i have one, but like, the last book i read was fucking amazing everyone should read, it’s gay, it’s a series of three books, and it’s called when women were warriors.

¤ favourite flower: all of them? i love flowers in general

¤ favourite scent: RAIN, and ngl the scent of matches 

¤ favourite animal: dogs and cats

¤ favourite colour: light colors and also black and blue

¤ coffee, tea or hot cocoa: hot cocoa

¤ average sleep hours: well now i sleep a lot i would say 8-12 

¤ cat or dogs: BOTH

¤ n° of blankets: just one

¤ dream trip: ANY GOOD BEACH

¤ blog created: idr well, but 2015? or maybe late 2014. but ive been on tumblr since 2009/2010 lol

¤ favourite song: ……..dude idk rn is any song of bts, but on my last fm it’s probably a song by adam, the love of my life. and i love too many songs so i cant just write them all

Rules: Use the first letter of your name to answer each question. Real answers only. If the person who tagged you has the same initial, you must give different answers. You cannot use the same word twice. Once you enter your answers, tag 10 other people! i was tagged by @superunknwn​ , another angel ♥

Your name: Manu

A four letter word: mole *looks at nashira and sara* A boy’s name: … Manu An occupation: Musician Something you can wear: mittens  A place: McDonald's  A reason for being late: … idk … Moving? Medical matter? idk i used two words but they both begin with the letter m lol Something you shout: mYLES A movie title: Moana Something you drink: Martini An animal: Monkey A type of car: Mercedes  Song title: Ma City by bts lol i was just singing this

i was tagged by @bensun​ a looooong time ago sorry, but i too love doing these so why not. this one is similar to the first tag game, but im doing it anyway

Answer the questions and tag 20 followers you would like to get to know better! —————– Name: Manu

Nicknames: budi. i want new nicknames tbh, cute ones.

Zodiac Sign: sagittarius

Height: 167cm 

Orientation: same, i like all genders but the s*x part is……. uh, idrl

Ethnicity: native brazilian (indigenous) (wow i just saw this on the internet and im using it), mixed with whi*te some time in the past. i would know better if whi*es hadnt done that

Favorite Fruit: Probably blueberries or just berries in general and I loooove smoothies …. with any fruit to be honest

Favorite Season: Fall and winter

Favorite Book: to mention another one im reading the third book of the vampire chronicles, i love the second one, i love lestat

Favorite Flowers: yeah i like flowers, but idrn their names, i just love it

Favorite Color: light colors, but also black and blue again

Favorite Animal: dogs and cats

Coffee, tea, or hot chocolate: hot chocolate

Average Sleep Hours: 8-12 ay

Cat or Dog Person: BOTh

Favorite Fictional Character: MIDNIGHTER

Number of Blankets I sleep with: just one

Ideal trip: beach!!

Blog Created: 2015 ig 

dear @superunknwn​ tagged me on this a looooooooooooooong ass time ago, sorry ily (actually she didnt tagged me but i wanted to do this so i just saved on my drafts) 
Rules: 
1. go to this site: https://www.random.org/lists/ 2. Pick 15 of your favorite characters or favorite people from your fandoms and list them 3. Tag at least 5 people 4. Have fun with it! 
— 
1. Mom/dad: Apollo!!!!!!!!!! yes!!!!! 2. Your sibling: jim halpert lmaoo thats fine 3. Your grandma/grandpa:  michael jackson 4. Haunts you: park seo joon 5. Your boyfriend/girlfriend: adam lambert (ok…. i would prefer jhope but ok) 6. Your ex: taystee hdsfkhfdksjh 7. Your best friend: MIDNIGHTER 8. Proposed to you: MYLES KENNEDY DHJKSHFDF 9. Your boss: slash….. thats not ideal but glad that i know him 10. The random person you met at the bar: lestat fdkslsd friend 11. Your rival: seo in guk NOOOOO he is my bf wtf 12. Gave you your first kiss: rothen skljkld 13. Drunk and singing karaoke with: lzzy hale my love 14. Played 7 minutes in heaven with:  JHOPE DFHKFSDJKSFHKJSD 15. Gave you your favorite dessert: chris traeger, my favorite dessert is not raisins

tbh im not gonna tag ppl anymore, ive already tagged everybody, yall just can do it

@lionesslindsey tagged me on this a looong time ago too, no surprise

RULES: answer all questions, add one question of your own and tag as many people as there are questions. (but that’s so many D: I’m too awkward for so many) (relatable lmao) Tagging: everyone i tagged on this long ass post Whoever wants to do this though, go ahead!

1. coke or pepsi: i dont drink soda heh 2. disney or dreamworks: I love them both, but my absolute fav movie is The Lion King. lindsey i just copied ur answer bc BITCH ME TOO, just addin Mulan here 3. coffee or tea: i dont like coffee and i never really wanted to try tea lmao 4. books or movies: Both!!!!! 5. windows or mac: only tried windows 6. dc or marvel: DC pls 7. xbox or playstation: even though i dont have and console, i like ps better 8. dragon age or mass effect: never played. dont have a console lmao 9. night owl or early riser: if those are video games…. never played i dont have a console 10. cards or chess: cards! 11. chocolate or vanilla: Chocolate 12. vans or converse: converse, never owned vans bc im poor af, so i would probably like both 13. lavellan, trevelyan, cadash, or adaar: have no idea what those are 14. fluff or angst: fluff pls 15. beach or forest: beach!!!!!!! 16. dogs or cats: BOTH 17. clear skies or rain: BOTH 18. cooking or eating out: it depends on my mood tbh 19. Spicy food or mild food: both 20. halloween/samhain or solstice/yule/christmas: what 21. would you rather forever be a little too cold or a little too hot: a little too cold 22. if you could have a superpower, what would it be: stop time 23. animation or live action: animations 24. paragon or renegade: what 25. baths or showers: baths, even though i dont own a bathtub 26. team cap or team ironman: Iron Man 27. fantasy or sci-fi: Fantasy 28. do you have three or four favourite quotes? not really 29. youtube or netflix: youtube 30. harry potter or percy jackson: hp, but pj was pretty awesome and diverse than hp.... actually I think I only like hp more bc of the movies, but pj... is very awesome too idk 31. when you feel accomplished: 6. dc or marvel: when i finish a drawing 32. star wars or star trek: star wars 33. paperback books or hardback books: as long as i have books 34. horror or rom-com: yikes rom-com 35. to live in a world without literature or music: death 36. pastel colours or dark colours: i love both!!!!!! 37. tv shows or movies: bitch everything is both here 38. city or countryside: city, but i too love contryside 39. if any other zodiac sign could describe you, what would it be: i have no idea 40. if you could only listen to one album for the rest of your life what would it be: dont ask me that omg 41. cinema or theatre: cinema 42. if you could be any fictional character’s best friend, who’d you be: midnigher’s 43. smiling or smirking: slut for both 44. are you an ‘all or nothing’ type or are you more consistent: i dont do anything so idk dude 45. playlists or your whole library on shuffle: shuffle 46. travelling or staying at home: traveling, but i would love staying at my own home 47. books or fanfiction: Both 48. If you could live in a fantasy world, what world would it be: huh, i had never thought about this, i cant answer now. but probably i would choose to live in one of my daydreaming shit 49. your favorite cartoon: idk i live irmão do jorel, a brazilian cartoon 50. name the weirdest five songs on your itunes, current or past: bruh im dont know 51. mountains or plains: both! 52. favorite anime (or tv show if you don’t watch anime): YURI ON ICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 53. which social media platform are you most like yourself on: Tumblr AND youtube 54. What are some of your passions: music 56. If you have a pet, do they do anything interesting/weird (like a cat that plays fetch, a bird that can say funny things, etc)? : not really. my cat sleeps funny sometimes hsajkdhas

[icawritestbh]

REVIEW: Moonlight Drawn by the Clouds

I love reading books and watching tv shows and movies, and even though I have yet to gain the ascendancy to be a /critic/ of professional work, I like critiquing stuff anyway. Hahaha. I'm especially particular about plotlines, and I've been obsessing over Bo Gum a lot, so why not write about it?

So here's a short review of Moonlight Drawn by the Clouds. It's alternate title is Love in the Moonlight, but I prefer to refer to it as Moonlight Drawn by the Clouds because this is the direct translation from the Korean title and when you watch the whole thing, you'd see that it's the more meaningful title between the two.

Like I said, I have no ascendancy to be a real /critic/, so don't take this seriously as this is just my opinion.

 WHAT IS MOONLIGHT DRAWN BY THE CLOUDS?

It is a kdrama about a female eunuch, Hong Ra On, who has been disguising herself as a man since she was a kid, and about the ambitious yet unconventional Crown Prince, Lee Young, who is preparing to become king of Joseon. The two cross paths and fall in love as they untangle the issues surrounding Ra On's family and the politics of Joseon.

 THE GOOD

1.       Characterization + Acting

 Lee Young is a very complex character, who is just layers on layers. From the onset, he's very cheeky and mischievous. But as we get to know him more, he is shown to be very brilliant, courageous and genuine in his desire to be a good king for the people. He's deeply loyal to his friend, Byeong Yeon, his lover, Ra On, and to the memories of his mother.

  And Park Bo Gum does an amazing job making this entire character come to life. Despite Lee Yeong having a very different (or even opposite) personality from Bo Gum, Bo Gum acts him out so naturally. And every side of Lee Young was made believable through Bo Gum's acting, as well as the cohesiveness of the story. Bo Gum is really such a talented actor; he can express so much without saying a word.

 [MAJOR SPOILER]

Probably my favorite scene in the series was the end of Ep 16-start of Ep 17, where we approach the resolution to some of the story's major conflicts: the capture of Hong Gyeong Nae, Ra On's identity as both Lee Young's lover and the daughter of Gyeong Nae, and the loyalty of Byeong Yeon to the Prince and the rebels. As the first two conflicts were unfolding, the feelings of distress and confusion were so evident in Bo Gum's face as he was trying to think on his toes to arrive at the best solution.

 And then, out of nowhere, Lee Young turns and directs his sword at the Prince instead. The utter confusion as to how to react to his best friend's betrayal was portrayed so perfectly.

 [END OF SPOILER]

 Park Bo Gum was truly the standout of the show because his character was, hands down, the most complex.

 Hong Ra On was also a very interesting character, although she was definitely more interesting at the beginning when she was actively facing her problems. There comes a point where she  becomes a more passive character (who is always the victim) which I understand because she was always in a tough and seemingly hopeless circumstances. Kim Yoo Joon also does a great job breathing life into this cheerful and playful young girl who tries her best to cope with problems and conflicts too difficult for a regular 18-year-old to handle.

 And as a whole, all the actors and actresses performed well. Our other main characters, Byeong Yeon and Yoon Sung, were also very lovable. Even though they were not given the spotlight, you also root for them and feel sad for them when [MAJOR SPOILER] they almost die/die lol [END OF SPOILER]. The bad guys were also well-acted, and you really despise them as they try to bring down our prince. Shout out to the evil queen, who has perfected that look of malice.

 2.       Cohesiveness of the storyline

 The writers of the drama definitely adhered to the Chekhov's gun principle, which states that "If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there." This basically means that everything placed in the story has to have some sort of relevance. I can't think of a single element placed in the story that didn't have a greater meaning in the end, which, to me, is how stories should be written.

  THE BAD/NOT SO GOOD

 There are more things on this list than the "Good," but that's because the two things I wrote in "Good" were very general and applied to the show as a whole. The four things I'm listing down below are small and nitpicky, and do little to offset the two major good things I pointed out.

 1.       It was predictable

 Do I even need to put a spoiler alert before saying that [MAJOR SPOILER] our two lovers end up together? That Prince Yeong becomes king? [END OF SPOILER] I don't think so, but that's a flaw of kdramas in general.

 2.       The love triangle

…which wasn't a real love triangle to begin with. Yoon Sung never stood a chance. Never. And tbh, all it did for the plot was just add a little more drama, but it didn't advance our story.

 3.       Yoon Sung's character

I love Jinyoung as Yoon Sung, but I really think they could have developed Yoon Sung's character more. All throughout the story, he was nothing but the silent partner of our main characters, who did nothing but help everyone, even the Prince who has become his rival. In relation to my previous point, they didn't even make him a believable contender for Ra On's love. Also, he made so many sacrifices for Ra On even though their relationship wasn't so deep. I couldn't help but wonder why he was so in love with her even if they never really got close. If they were gonna make him the hopeless romantic martyr lover of Ra On, I think they should have deepened their relationship so that the love triangle will be of more significance and so that the endearing character of Yoon Jung wouldn’t be limited to a plot device.

 4.       The major death and almost death scene

 [MAJOR SPOILER]

 I really loved Byeong Yeon's death scene. As I mentioned earlier, my favorite scene in the show was when he directed his sword to the Prince. Later on, we see that in doing so, he was able to save the rebels without causing real harm to the prince, instead sacrificing his life because of course, the palace won't let him get away with threatening the prince like that. So he puts his sword down, then the palace guards attack him.

 The only problem with this beautiful death scene is that you later find out that it wasn't actually a death scene. Byeong Yeon's meaningful sacrifice becomes less meaningful because he didn't actually die. To me, it's such a waste of that scene which the writers invested a lot in.

 On the other hand, Yoon Jung dies for Ra On in such a stupid way. In the last episode, in his attempt to save Ra On, he ends up single-handedly battling his own guards and dying. I mean, c'mon. Our Yoon Jung is so much smarter than that. Obviously, the writers just wanted to kill off the character so they just wrote a silly death for him that wouldn’t complicate things and fit in the one hour time limit of the final episode. Meanwhile, they invested so much in Byeong Yeon's almost death.

 IMO, they should have just kept Byeong Yeon dead and kept Yoon Jung alive. Then although our beloved prince loses his best friend, maybe in the end when all the conflicts (esp. the political ones) are resolved, he could finally reconcile things with Yoon Jung again. After all, it was clear all throughout the show that the two still cared for each other but just couldn't be friends because of all the politics. It would have given the ending a nice bittersweet touch, instead of Yoon Jung’s death being the bitter part of the bittersweet end, but doing little to move me because his death scene was just so dumb.

 [END OF SPOILER]

 OVERALL

 I recommend this show especially to those who have already developed their kdrama goggles and can overlook (or have learned to embrace) the tropes of the kdrama world. It really is worth the watch. (If I end up watching more kdramas and writing more reviews, I'll develop a numerical rating scheme but for now, a qualitative rating will do)

Lol. This may seem out of place in this blog but writing reviews is something I want to learn also since I’m so fond of nitpicking these things with my friends. 

Thinking of writing reviews on another platform though cus I had difficulty formatting this on tumbr.