ktchong

I bought a property in Orange County with the intention of renting it out, but my wife wanted us to move there - and, much to my dismay at one of my wife's rationales, so that both of us could vote against Dana Rohrabacher (and all future Republican candidates.) Personally, I did not want to live in a Republican neighborhood of White people with whom I share no interests or values, but my wife talked me into moving there. Anyway, we registered there and voted. The result was close, which meant our two votes actually mattered. My wife was ecstatic.

It was a close race and even yesterday I thought that all hopes were lost... but Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) LOST! OMG THANK YOU! I VOTED AGAINST THAT TRUMP STOOGE AND RUSSIAN PUPPET! My first vote as a resident in Orange County! Another minus one for Republicans in the House!

So Sinema's victory is flipping a Republican seat. As I said, minus one for the overall Republican's gains in the Senate. Three and four seats gain is significant in a 100-seat Senate that is split about halfway. One or two... not so much. Everyone has been saying... there was no Blue Wave; this did not look like a Blue Wave. Seriously? Look at the bigger overall picture: 400 seats nationwide flipped from Republicans to Democrats, in one day. Republicans basically got clobbered at the state level (and in the House,) and this year's election map for state elections was actually favorable to Republicans, (compared to what's coming for Republicans in 2020 - when more Republicans than Democrats will be vulnerable at every level.) Frankly, Tuesday was not a wave. It was a tsunami. I am not sure why the whole media seems to be distracted by the federal elections and have missed that big picture of the overall results, but I think that could actually be a record for a number of nationwide seats flipped in one day.

Kyrsten Sinema was a Green Party candidate before joining Democrats, and gay. She is a Blue Dog, which means she is liberal on social issue but "conservative" on economic issues such as trade. i.e., She supports free trade and immigration, neither of which is a Republican position under Trump. Given the radical departure from free trade and immigration, Republicans will NOT be able to reserve course and return to their old positions after Trump is gone. They will certainly try, but people will most certainly be cynical and reject the opportunistic reversal. The entire Republican party has bent their knees to Trump and abandoned their (fake) positions on free trade and immigration, and Trump has revealed them for who they really are. There is no turning back for Republicans - certainly not for any current Republicans. People will ask, "if you really believe in those things, why didn't you stand up to Trump when he was against trade, against immigration? What kind of farce and hypocrite are you to think you can just change your position and then for us to believe you are sincere and real? GTFO." The way I see it: Trump has really won at all cost - he has destroyed the Republican party to win. When he is gone, the Republican party will be in a shamble and impossible position to advance or reverse. So no, it's not "replacing a Republican with a Republican." It's replacing a Republican with a Democrat.

Kyrsten Sinema will win the Arizona Senate seat. She has been pulling further and further ahead of her Republican opponent. At this point, there are not enough uncounted votes left for the Republican candidate to turn the tide: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/416033-dem-sinema-widens-lead-over-mcsally-in-arizona-senate-race Even Trump knows Sinemia has won. Which is why he was raging on Twitter, claiming voter fraud and demanding a new election in Arizona: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1060993836984324096 So that is minus one for Republicans' gains in the Senate.

UPDATE: It's close to 400 seats now. 400 national and local seats that Republicans lost on Tuesday. Democrats flipped 400 seats from Republicans on Tuesday. Flipping 400 seats in one day is NOT, "normal", as some right-wingers and Republicans in here try to trivialize their losses. So, we already know that Democrats have already won 37 House seats and expect to pick up another 3, at least. And Republicans' gain in the Senate is now down to one or maybe two seats as counting continues. For local or state elections: > Democrats picked up a net of seven governorships... > > ... > > Democrats flipped at least 350 state legislative seats... Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2018#State_elections - the article provides links to the original sources. So that's 40 House + 7 Governors + 350 State Legislatures = 397 local or state seats flipped from Republicans, close to 400 seats. At least. For now. As the counting of votes continues. The results were revised from yesterday's 330 yesterday to today's 397 as the counting continued. I expect them to be revised upward again over the next few days. Many places are still counting votes and have not yet called for a winner, and those are places that still use paper ballots and manually count votes, (which is why they are slower to report results.) BTW, the places that use paper ballots instead of computers and voting machines tend to favor Democrats for whatever reason... it's almost as if there were some shenanigans going on with the voting machines, (all of those machines were made and sold by THREE companies: Premiere, ES&S, and Hart - and all three are Republican backers. Seriously Democrats need to strip them of their contracts or just eliminate their businesses when they get back in power. There have been really dirty tricks going on with those Republican-made voting machines.) So, recap: 400 losses, on the national and state level, in one day, only two years after Trump's presidency, his first election/test after he became the President. Republicans loved to harp on Obama for losing over 1,000 national and local seats in eight years, to show how unpopular Obama was. Well, Trump has just lost 400 seats in only two years, in one day. That is just devastating for Republicans. It was not a Blue Wave. It was actually a Blue TSUNAMI. The funny thing is... we won't realize the full extent until we see the final results for everything, which will come in early next week, and until someone in the mainstream media finally mentions, "wait, has anyone else noticed that Republicans lost 400 seats last week?! How the hell did we miss that??" It is like a huge blind spot right now because the media is obsessed with "OMG Beto lost," (in TEXAS,) "Democrats lost Florida," (actually not yet,) and "Republicans gained in the Senate," (yeah, down to the gain of only ONE seat, compared to losing House and 40 House seats.)

People keep saying how Obama lost over 1,000 seats during his eight years in the White House - but that was counting both federal-level and state-level elections including governorship and state legislatures. Well, Trump actually lost over 300 seats on Tuesday — if we include both federal and state elections. He lost as many as 1/3 of seats Obama had lost in his (Trump's) first major election in White House two years in. (It will be closer to 330 seats when all the races are called.) That is saying something. Also, as it stands now: Democrats have won at least 33 House seats, but they look poised to win closer to 40 — there are 13 races that are either not called or too close to call, and Democrats have a solid chance of winning seven of those. There was a Blue Wave on Tuesday. We just do not see it yet because of the slow vote-counting process and not all the races have been called yet. I think by Monday, when all the votes are counted and all the races are called, we will have realized that, "wow, there was a Blue Wave." Losing 40 House seats (if not more) and altogether over 300 federal and state seats (will be more) is actually, crushing.

Actors who can sing, or singers who can act.

Just played a bit of the new God of War last weekend. Some thoughts about God of War: PS4 is the first Playstation I own, so I have never had the opportunity to play a God of War game before this new one. However, I have seen videos of the old God of War games on YouTube, so I was somewhat aware of his stories and characterization in the games. I had always thought the characterization of Kratos in the past games was dull, shallow and uninspired - one of the reason why the God of War trilogy was never a "system seller" that could appeal to me to buy a Playstation. Kratos was just the stereotypical "look at me I am such a badass" with zero depth to impress young teenage gamer boys, (i.e., so, Kratos is kinda like Master Chief of the Halo series in that respect - another popular "tough guy" video game character with no real depth to speak of.) This new God of War has reinvented Kratos. Now he is actually interesting as a character, a depressed and tormented father with a checkered and secretive past, who was initially reluctant to be drawn into any action or confrontation. That is called character depth. In term of storytelling, the reluctant, retired hero who was forced into action is always more interesting than the "I am looking for a fight because I am such a badass" protagonist, (whose shallowness seems to appeal to only young male gamers.)

Also, the pacing of the new DLC is rather poor, These new campaigns are overall shorter but harder than the main campaign with all the DLC, and you can play them ONLY in Ironman Mode. However, you unlock weapons, armors and other bonuses that you can use in the main campaign. Those bonus items are mostly starting-level items, but they are better than the default starting-level items in the main campaign. Which means, first-time players should play through the Legacy Tactical campaigns BEFORE the main campaign - so you get those bonuses. However, the Legacy campaigns is more difficult than the main campaign. It does not even make sense.

So, in the final campaign of the new Tactical Legacy "prequel" DLC, you play two NPC (out of a squad) who would later die in the tutorial of the original XCOM 2 game. Those two characters, Peter Osai and Ana Ramirez, became so powerful at the end of the DLC that it makes absolutely no sense for them to be killed by a bunch of ADVENT grunts at the beginning of XCOM. Also, Jane Kelly (a starting character whom you got to keep if you played through the tutorial in the main game) has the set nickname "Quiet" in the DLC. Yet she gets a different randomly-generated nickname in every different playthrough of the original game. Unlike Elena "Outrider" Dragunova and Pratal "Mox", who are also hero/story characters that have the same nicknames in every game. (I will rename Jane Kelly's nickname to "Quiet" every time from now on.) This new DLC proves that Faraxis did not have a grand plan for all the DLC ahead of time. So of course they have to retcon everything.

Wait... people actually read novels written for video games??!?

Eva Green is too old. Netflix has to cast someone young with the consideration that the show could continue for years. Evan Green is 38. If the series runs for seven seasons/years, she will be 45. Yennifer is perpetually young (looks late-20ish or 30) and does NOT look 45. Arya Chalotra is 23 and will grow into the role nicely. Nowadays, when casting for a franchise that runs for many years, the producers have to cast actors who are young enough so they can play the roles for that long and still look the parts. It is much easier to make someone look older (with makeup) than younger (with makeup or CGI).

Here is a better picture of Arya Chalotra, who was cast as Yennifer:

The actresses are "Freya" (cast as Ciri) and "Anya" (as Yennifer). Not only did Netflix finally decide not to change the character race and have a "multiracial" cast for the main characters, they cast white European actresses with the whitest names and looks possible. Have to say though, the casting is spot-on, exactly as the books described and the video game portrayed them. P.S. Nevermind. Cholotra is actually an INDIAN name - so is Anya. After some research, I found out she is actually Indian ethnic. Which means, Netflix actually cast an Indian actress who can pass for white. Here is a video of her:

IMO, there is really no reason for a console to exist if it does not have real or true exclusives. Microsoft had wanted to pursue a (self-defeating and stupid) console strategy of having no real exclusives. Which is why they got rid of all their first- and second-party developers: Bungie, Bioware, 2K, Epic, FASA, Ensemble, Lionhead, one after another, one way or another. That had been Microsoft's business strategy for Xbox. Microsoft thought Xbox could survive and thrive on multiplatform, multiplayer, and "fake" exclusives (= "console" exclusives that are also on the PC and "timed" exclusives.) Microsoft wrongly thought multiplatform games and third-party developers would carry Xbox. Looking at the sale figures and how far Xbox One has fallen behind PS4, now we know for certain that Microsoft's console strategy was severely flawed and has crippled Xbox's competitiveness against Playstation. Playstation has won the console war and defeated Xbox for this generation - and very likely the next generation as well, (because there won't be enough time for Microsoft to quickly turn out really good "AAA" exclusives for the next Xbox between now and the launch of the next Xbox in a year or so.) I hope Microsoft has finally realized how important exclusives are to the ecosystem and competitiveness of a console. Maybe now Microsoft has finally waken up, and they are taking actions to correct their past mistakes. Maybe that is why Microsoft is on a frenzy to buy studios and acquire first-party developers. Which is a complete turnaround from their previous (stupid) plan for Xbox. Of course, it is good for me as a PC gamer for Microsoft to put out their "fake" exclusives on both Xbox and Windows - which means, there is absolutely no reason for me to ever consider buying an Xbox. Let's be honest here: unless Xbox starts putting out real/true great exclusives that are NOT available on PC, I will NEVER even consider buying an Xbox. On the other hand, now that I have bought my very first Playstation last year, (a PS4,) and I have been very happy with my decision to buy a PS4, I will almost certainly buy a PS5. That is how Microsoft lost a console war.

I sincerely, truly, hope this new Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade. Conservatives, Evangelicals and Republicans had wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade for the longest time since 1973. They have consistently turned out to vote with great discipline. They have the long-term goal to control both the White House and Senate at some point, so they could install five anti-abortion Justices on the Supreme Court. Then the Supreme Court would finally rule to overturn Roe v. Wade. They have accomplished 90-percent of that goal. Now they just have to wait for an abortion case to reach the Supreme Court - which will happen within the next two years. Democrats and liberals have become "addicted" to the judicial branch of the government. Ever since the Supreme Court ruled a series of landmark cases on civil rights and women's rights in liberals' back in the 1960s and 1970s, liberals have become complacent and overly dependent on the judicial (particularly federal judges and the Supreme Court) to side with them on every social issues and further their social justice agendas. The Supreme Court has already ceased to become favorable to liberals since 1991, when the conservative Justice Clarence Thomas replaced the liberal Justice Thurgood Marshall, (and Thomas' nomination was confirmed by a Democrat-majority Senate led by Joe Biden - a big mistake on Democrats' part.) Since the appointment of Clarence Thomas onto the Supreme Court in 1991, (which shifted the balance of the Supreme Court,) the five conservative Justices have consistently ruled in favor of conservationism and libertarianism on economic and political issue issue. However, the liberals have not cared. All those ****ing liberals - or more accurately, neoliberals - have only cared about social justice issues like abortion "right", gay marriage, equal bathroom access for transvestites. etc. They are the so-called "identity politics" and "social justice" (neo)liberals. As long as women have the "right" to abortion, gays get to married, and transvestites get to use whatever bathrooms they want, Blacks and Hispanics get preferential treatment when they apply to colleges and universities, those neoliberals have not given a damn about dark money, labor unions, gerrymandering or any other economics or political issues. (Neoliberals are just social liberals who have libertarian beliefs or leanings on economic issues - they want social justice for minorities, women and LGBTQ but also have blind faith in capitalism and free market, i.e., the establishment corporatist Clinton and Obama faction in the Democrat Party.) Those neoliberals have not cared to vote. They have a misplaced blind faith in the judicial, a blind belief that the laws would always be on their side. They have thought - or *wanted* - judges and Justices to rule against anything that does not agree with their ideologies and worldview on social justice. Neoliberals have forgotten that, laws are ultimately made by the legislature (the Congress) in conjunction with the administration (the President). When conservatives gained full control of both branches of legislature and administration, it was just the matter of time for them to rewrite the laws and completely reshape the judicial. Frankly, IMO is how democracy supposed to work: conservatives have unified and been consistently voting with purposes and towards specific goals. So now they are being rewarded for decades of disciplines and persistence. Laws are created and interpreted by men, i.e., by the legislature and administration. Now that conservatives control both the legislature and administration, they get to remake and reinterpret the laws. Which is why Roe vs. Wade has never been a settled law. Law can be remade and reinterpreted. Neoliberals should have worked toward passing a constitutional amendment or landmark bill if they had wanted abortion choice to be a settled law, instead of being overly dependent on the judicial to rule (in effect, *create*) laws in their favor. Personally, I do not care about Roe v. Wade, but I do care about other progressive issues - economic and political justice issues. I hope that this new Supreme Court *will* overturn Roe v. Wade. Neoliberals need to be taught a harsh lesson on the reality of how our democracy works, that they should not have become completely dependent on the judicial to interpret and make laws in their favor, that they should not have continually relied on federal judges and Supreme Court Justices to rule in their favor to overturn the will of the legislature and/or administration. Now that those neoliberals, now that their asses are on fire, they will probably wake up and start organizing towards retaking the government and slowly towards reshaping the judicial. It will take them the next twenty years, at least, to do so, because they have already lost the war for this generation.

Detroit: Become Human It is a choose-your-own-adventure game like a TellTale game, but it is superior to an actual TellTale game. (TellTale's biggest failing was it had never improved and updated its game engine or gameplay.) You play three different Android characters who are unrelated in the beginning, but their destinies and fates converge and intertwine later in the game. The game has a lot of amazing cinematic set pieces:

BTW, you want to build or buy a new PC NOW before January before Trump's tariffs on Chinese imports start in January. Prices for components and parts will go up by as much as 25%.

Most people do not know that, with the same amount of money for an Xbox One ($300) or Xbox One X ($500), you can actually build a PC with comparable if not better performance. Here are the instructions and recipes: https://www.reddit.com/r/PCMasterRace/wiki/builds

Unless Microsoft fixes its "Xbox has no exclusive" problem, I predict the next-generation Xbox will be the final-generation Xbox. Frankly, I think this-generation Xbox (Xbox One and Xbox One X) is already dead in the water. PS4 has sold 85+ million units while Xbox One has sold LESS THAN HALF of that at 39 million units. No one is buying Xbox One because it does not have exclusives. (Okay, not "no one", but less than half of the number of people who bought a PS4.) Microsoft has been on an acquisition frenzy recently, buying up five or six game studios. It is obviously the last-ditch attempt to fix the lack-of-exclusive problem. However, it will take at least five years from the time of the acquisitions to finally putting out some good exclusives. That is not fast or soon enough to save Xbox One/Xbox One X. The best Microsoft can hope for is to save the next-generation Xbox in the console's mid-life cycle.

I do not own an Xbox One or Xbox One X. Last year, I bought a Playstation 4 to play Horizon: Zero Dawn as well as the The Uncharted series and The Last of Us. This year, I got to play God of War 4, Spider-man, and (IMO) underrated Detroit: Become Human. All those games are real exclusives on the PS4. So, the shopping season is coming up. I am looking at the game library of Xbox One... it literally has almost NO exclusives. The only good "exclusives" it has are console or timed (no longer) exclusives, which I also call FAKE exclusives because they are not real exclusives. If I can play the games on my preferred platform PC, why should I spend money to buy a console to play them??? WHY?? I literally could NOT think of a reason to buy an Xbox One or Xbox One X. IMO, Microsoft's BIG blunder was to lose Bioware as an exclusive developer, (i.e., Mass Effect used to be an Xbox exclusive.) Now that Playstation has the highly-acclaimed exclusive Horizon: Zero Dawn, (which is a Bioware-style RPG that will become a trilogy,) Xbox really needs an exclusive RPG series that can compete with Horizon to stay in the game. Horizon is the main reason why I own a PS4 but not an Xbox One. BTW, if you are thinking about buying a console as a gift for someone this Christmas, please do not buy an Xbox One or Xbox One X. For that person's sake of good gaming, buy a PS4 instead because, "Xbox has no (exclusives) games" is real.

It's super interesting that Kanye West and Taylor Swift seem to be on the opposite side of every incident or issue. They are like archenemies.

Also, the economy is ridiculously good right now. If Democrats control the House and/or Senate, it will be an endless partisan fight between the Congress v. White House and/or House vs. Senate. That kind of political fights and unpredictability will only derail the economy.