American Eagle Jeans Commercials

ZenMode said:
I doubt there are many MAGA teenagers or 20 somethings out there. When I was a teenager and in my early 20s, politics was right next to reorganizing my sock drawer on my list of priorities and never influenced my clothing selection.
Click to expand...


If you think no teenagers or 20 something are political...well, I hope you're right about maga.
 
donbosco said:
If you think no teenagers or 20 something are political...well, I hope you're right about maga.
Click to expand...
From what I have seen, a very small number of teenagers are truly focused on politics.

An ENORMOUS number of teenagers and early-20 somethings are extremely concerned about their ability to get a job, buy a house, etc.

So I'm all in favor of letting the Pubs fight the culture wars like this ad campaign, and let's focus on policies that will show young people they won't have to live in their parents' basement forever.
 


Also a good excuse to show more videos of Sydney Sweeney, probably.

As an aside, first thing I saw her in was White Lotus and never really got over my dislike of that character — so I remain surprised by her ascendancy (though I understand she has proven herself a solid actor in some subsequent roles).
 
lawtig02 said:
From what I have seen, a very small number of teenagers are truly focused on politics.

An ENORMOUS number of teenagers and early-20 somethings are extremely concerned about their ability to get a job, buy a house, etc.

So I'm all in favor of letting the Pubs fight the culture wars like this ad campaign, and let's focus on policies that will show young people they won't have to live in their parents' basement forever.
Click to expand...
Speaking from absolute and complete ignorance about whether teenagers are focused on politics, I am in no position to comment on it. However, (words signifying bull feces to follow) when I was a teenager, the Vietnam War was still active, the draft was still in effect, and the right to vote--via the 26th Amendment--was enacted. Two somewhat contradictory points about this: 1) I considered getting the right to vote at age 18 a big deal when draftees under the age of 21 were being sent to Vietnam. 2) Somewhat contradictory, a key reason I enlisted in the Army was to qualify for GI Bill educational benefits. I specifically asked my recruiter about the minimum time I could serve on active duty (all enlistments were for six years, with various splits between active duty, active reserves, and inactive reserves) and still get the maximum GI Educational Benefits. I served my time, graduated college debt free, and purchased my first home--way before I could have afforded it otherwise--with a 30-year VA loan with a zero down-payment. My next home was purchased with a 15-year regular bank loan, due to the appreciation of my first home. My current home was purchased with a 10-year regular bank loan that I paid off in the sixth year, because of how much money I brought over from the sale of my previous home.

Neither my education nor my homes would have been possible without (a) the extra maturity I had when I entered college, (b) the "free money" from GI Bill Education Benefits, and (c) a zero-down payment first home loan. All of the above is a form of political interest. It definitely was also self-interest, but politics was definitely involved. If there is any doubt about my abysmal ignorance of teenagers of voting age, then let me remove that doubt: I have no idea if what I did could be done by teenagers today, but I seriously doubt it could be.
 
ZenMode said:
I didn't say there was anything emotional in regard to risk tolerance. It's just an personality trait.
Click to expand...
you claim liberals are more empathetic which is an emotional trait and you brought up liberal desires for more regulation. the regulatory desires are based on logic, not emotion. i don't really disagree that liberals are more empathetic but it doesn't control all of their policy.
 
nycfan said:
. . .. Also a good excuse to show more videos of Sydney Sweeney, probably. . . ..
Click to expand...
That's pretty much a "full-stop" for me. To paraphrase a line from "Jerry Maguire," you had me a Sydney Sweeney in skin-tight jeans.
 
4thgenheel said:
the regulatory desires are based on logic, not emotion.
Click to expand...
Indeed, all federal regulations since 1981 have been subject to cost-benefit analysis per executive order, statute or both. Cost benefit analysis is like the least emotional thing out there. It literally involves putting a price on peoples' lives. Debates among regulators are often of the form, "we think human lives are worth $8M and you think they are worth only $5M."

Of course this poster has no clue about any of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top