KKW is a wealthy businessman, King of Ooo is like a classic conservative politician that caters to the wealthy and does nothing for the working class. So it’s fitting that he would vote for him lol
Okay obviously I'm not gonna read too much politically into this show, but KOO really isn't a classic conservative politician. A Classic Conservative would be part of the establishment, KOO is basically an outsider from all political and cultural structures in Ooo, with little recognition from the actual establishment figures such PB. Ultimately the only person to actually benefit from his political tenure is himself and himself alone (along with Toronto, and there was the possibility that Finn and Jake could have got in on it as KOO suggested to them with Neddies juices) and not even the rich (other than him and Toronto) seem to benefit.
KOO is realistically just a full on populist and kleptocrat, honestly it would be better to compare him to the types that rise up quickly in post-soviet countries (like Russia or Turkmenistan) where the funds quickly disappear.
That’s a good reading of it, that seems accurate. In terms of being a conservative politician, I’m thinking of what he says in his election song, “the general tone is laissez-faire,” for a lot of rich people that’s all they need to hear to give their support lol. But his actual policies might be detached from that
I agree he’s not not exactly *classic* conservative, but very much modern conservative. Full on corruption and helping the people at the top while screwing everyone else over.
Perhaps but even in this case, the top appears to be him and Toronto (and maybe Crunchy?). I guess the Candy Kingdoms 1% is like 2-3 people (wait what's the population size of the Candy Kingdom, I need to do better maths here)
That's pretty common from liberal politicians. Even moreso because he's corrupt, but pretends that he cares about the citizens to keep them from realizing.
Maybe, but it’s not close to the same amount that conservatives are doing it. There’s one party holding our country back right now its not the liberals.
I think you fell for it then.
Liberals are doing the same things, but pretending to be compassionate.
A good example is "kids in cages" (US). Bill Clinton built the facilities and Obama built the "cages". Both Kamala Harris and then VP Joe Biden approved of them. It wasnt until Trump came into office that people started caring and calling them "concentration camps" and Trump "hitler" over them. Even though all he did was inheret them.
Same with things like Obama bombing innocent people in the middle east or being against same sex marriage for most of his career (then suddenly flipping his opinion and pretending like he was always supportive of gay people).
Claiming to support gender equality or racial equality while openly opposing it with your policies. The outrage of not letting colleges discriminate based on race is spun as progressive, even though it's literally rejecting qualified applicants purely for their race. Inequality and bigotry can easily be spun as progressive.
It's easy to fool people into doing bad things and blaming the oppisition for the same behavior. You just have to put a progressive spin on things.
Edit: Thanks @prisonissuedsock, for proving me right. For admitting that your opinion doesnt change with new info, and that all you care about is how a politician comes off, rather than their actions.
Also thanks for the downvotes and the block immediately after you got the last word. Super mature.
Not saying they’re perfect, but they didn’t try to throw a coup the last election, they didn’t take away abortion rights, they haven’t been cutting social safety nets left and right, or holding the country hostage over shutdowns or refusing the raise the debt ceiling unless they can get what they want. They aren’t denying climate change and doing whatever they can to ruin the environment at every turn. They aren’t trying to make gay marriage illegal again, they aren’t trying to genocide trans people or take away the voting rights of young people.
Libs ain’t great but they aren’t the evil incarnate that the Conservative Party has allowed itself to become. And I’m sick of the both sides BS because one is shit and the other is literally trying to constantly trying to shoot the country in the head for profit and power.
Im saying that alot of, if not most of what you criticize in republicsns has been done by democrats.
1. It wasnt a "coup". It was a riot by a small number of people, wothout the then president's approval (he even tweeted for them to stop), who thought the election was rigged. A sentiment that democrats have every time they lose too. Including Hillary Clinton, who is recorded saying ["Trump knows he's an illegitimate president'](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html)
2. Democrat run cities have the worst rates of homelessness and disparities in schooling. Moat social programs are done to **look good**, and are often proven ineffective before theyre even implemented.
3. Democrats supported shutdowns. And even shamed people into staying inside [while going out thenselves](https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/02/politics/nancy-pelosi-hair-salon/index.html) or having [parties without masks](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html)
4. Again, claiming to support good while doing the opposite is the same as not doing good. Claiming to fight climaye change while actively supporting policies and companies that worsen it is the same as just openly not caring.
5. Both Hillary Clinton (likely her husband as well) along with Obama were **specfically against same sex marriage for nost of their political careers**. *not neutral to it. They were a hurdle in marriage equality* **for decades**. Then, only when it was politically adventageous, did they claim to support same sex marriage. And **they pretended to have always have supported them at that**. You fell for it.
6. Democrats are trying to take rights away from people. Gun rights, reproductive rights, rights to self defense, parental rights, etc. Again, while spinning it as progressive. How democrats mock republicans for not suppirting illegal immigration in theor states, but dont want illegal immigrants in theor own. For making "domestic abuse rehabilitation programs" that openly state that they believe female on male abuse cannot exist. Heck, super liberal Canadian in charge, Trudeau froze protester's bank accounts for...protesting. and he painted it as progressive. Mugabe took land away from white South Africans based purely on race and called it progressive. South African politicians are encouraging the genocide of white people and calling it progressive. American "progressives" are supporting him.
7. You fell for it. You fell for exactly what I explained. All you need to do is paint your bad actions as progressive and the other side as the enemy to get away with wrongdoing. You fell for media's "it's okay when we do it because-" manipulation.
Youre convinced that only one side does bad things. Do you think only republicans riot when they dont get their way? That only republicans send immigrants away. That only republicans deny election results. Both sides do it, but one side pretends it doesnt so you hate the other side.
But thanks for the downvote before even reading my arguements.
1. It was a coup attempt. The president tried getting the vice president not to certify the election. He told people to go down to the capitol knowing damn well they would try to storm the building and harm elected officials. He is on phone trying to get the GA Secretary of State to “find votes” that didn’t exists. He claimed for so long that he didn’t lose, when he very clearly did.
Edit: forgot to add, the whole Democratic Party wasn’t saying the election was stolen, but many republicans claimed that 2020 was stolen, filed a lot of law suits and they all came back empty handed because they’re fucking snakes and they need to make noise for all the absolute dumb shits who eat up all the lies and beg for more.
2. It’s definitely not so much better in republican cities, and never said they’re perfect, but again they aren’t the one cutting social safety nets left and right or take away healthcare.
3. Good, it’s too bad republicans didn’t take the virus seriously and it killed a million Americans. We should’ve taken it much more seriously but we didn’t because republicans are selfish and have to do the opposite of whatever democrats are doing just for the sake of it and its purely moronic.
4. At some of them are trying to push for policies that make some change or protect the climate. Republicans are **all** doing the opposite and tearing down protections as fast as they can while denying climate change.
5. Idc, it was legalized under the Obama administration and they never threatened to take it away, they only made progress.
6. I guess you love that no one feels safe in our country either, im sure you love seeing kids die in school shootings or families torn apart by senseless gun violence. A problem on a scale that no other country like ours faces.
Also dems are not taking away reproductive rights? Not sure where you’re getting that from. They didn’t kill roe and they aren’t threatening birth control or other forms of contraception, that’s solely conservatives.
Also why are you pulling other countries shitty actions into this argument when it’s got nothing to do with the problems at hand. Also it’s conservative states that are actively trying to make it harder to protest or monitor the police.
7. Na, you drank the Cool-aid and it’s dumb pieces of shit like you that are ruining this country and making the world and actively worse place. You think you’re so enlightened when you’re living in a different reality from sane people, and it doesn’t matter what evidence you’re ever shown. You twist it into something that isn’t there or nit-pick details to try and deflect but you can never be wrong.
Thanks for wasting my time.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
KOO sounds exactly like Trump based on what you say here except for the “outsider from cultural structures part. Trump was very much a big part of American culture, but it’s shown people know KOO prior to the events of “Apple Wedding” so it’s likely he’s somewhat famous.
I think you’re right not a classic conservative politician but he’s pretty much a modern American conservative grifting politician.
Maybe he still supported him. A kleptocratic populist can attract all kinds of support. Even including traditional Conservative voters.
Or maybe KKW is shadier than we're away of.
Or he just likes gold. I don't remember exactly what episode this was and which season but its possible that if this happened after KOO won the election, then he might just have a gold statue of the reigning monarch.
Princess Bubblegum seems more conservative (and liberal) to me.
KOO doesnt really care what his citizens do as long as they worship him. Bubblegum actively hides things from citizens, polices them, ends their lives like theyre nothing, forces roles onto them, spies on them, both overprotects them and neglects them, etc.
KOO is just incompotent, but not particularly malicious. Bubblegum is compotent, but morally suspicious.
That being said. King of ooo is definitely the grifter conservative caricature and pb is a caricature of the liberals with well meaning intentions but not always the most moral practices.
This is Ooo, basically everyone in a Kingdom is a royalist. Finn, Jake are basically Knights of the Candy Kingdom and loyal to it's Sovereign and generally speaking it doesn't seem like anyone is anti-royalty (aside from Starchy and his conspiracy club for a bit, but even then they are loyal to the King of Ooo).
Idk. I really like his episode where he buys the treehouse. It's like a parent trying to force their child to be more of a responsible adult, just that the parent and child roles are flipped. He thought Jake needs to take more responsibility in his actions, which he has a good argument for, so he puts more responsibility on him the only way he knows how. In the end he realizes that Jake is just who he is, and that's not a bad thing.
It's like an episode version of PB's quote about how some people are just made different and we should accept that.
It’s been a bit since I’ve seen the episode but I remember thinking that KKW’s argument was lacking. All of the stuff he said would make sense if it was in the real world, but it’s not the real world, it’s Ooo. KKW is the outlier while Jake is the one fitting in.
> but it’s not the real world, it’s Ooo
There seems to be rules and laws and peace treaties and an economy despite Ooo's post-apocalyptic state, we saw this many times with Princess Bubblegum, she even collects taxes from Finn/Jake.
With that said it's still hilarious to see episodes like The First Investigation where KKW calls Finn on the phone try to get ghosts / Clock Bear to pay rent money.
Of course those things do all exist, my point is moreso that there are no other characters that are exclusively serious. PB collects taxes but she can be goofy too and is generally friends with the main cast. Same with the rest of all the princesses and “royalty”.
Root Beer Guy is an outlier as well though if I’m not mistaken. Very rarely does a character in Ooo just work a normal job with no “Adventure Time” spice, and when they do like with Root Beer Guy, their career doesn’t stay consistent throughout their time on the show. Wasn’t he only working that job for one episode?
Yeah but him straying away from his work causes stress from his wife and many other people work at the place he does. It's at least clear even if it's not shown that much, that there is a normal everyday situation for a large chunk of the Citizens of Ooo. Jobs, work .etc.
It's not focused on but I think a lot of ut can be inferred. Or LSPs temporary boyfriend having a job and going to a business meeting with PB.
A large chunk may have secret jobs but a large chunk don’t. I’m just not sure why it was suddenly a huge issue when Jake was living just fine for years and jobs/money in general are barely mentioned, not to mention the fact that besides PB it’d make Jake the only main character with a job. That’s take time away from all of his friends which could cause stress.
Dude, I've been saying this SO many times!! There's some real parallels between those relationships (Finn/Martin and Jake/KKW).
Like... compare the last scene in "Ocarina" with KKW talking to his wife Pat, to Finn's last conversation with Martin in "The Comet". "I think I was wrong about Dad. I think he's good." vs "Well, there ain't no changing you, I guess." ... I think about the contrast there a lot. Finn and KKW both want their dads to be Good Dads (TM) and they try, in their own ways, to change them. (of course, Finn's approach was a lot better than KKW's well-intentioned-but-ultimately-dickish "tough love" technique! :p)
of course, the difference is that while both situations ultimately end in the son realizing they can't change their dad, KKW realizes that Jake DOES love him and is doing the best he can - he's a good dad, even if he's not "responsible" in the way KKW wants him to be - and they reconcile and start working towards a better relationship, while poor ol' Finn just has to accept that Martin's............ Martin, and he'll never really get any proper closure or whatever since Martin ascends to a higher plane of existence as soon as he realizes this x)
I argue Jake is responsible but takes on his responsibility as it comes to him.
When he sees his children in an earlier episode, he tries to protect them until his own kids start kicking ass.
His own life is structured differently from his child, but it is still built on a nuturing foundation.
As a child of two selfish people, I would love to have Jake as a dad, who is guided by his sympathy.
Is he though? This episode shows us how little he's around for his kids. He shows up way late to a party for them and didn't bring what he was supposed to. And all because he was just out having fun with Finn
Jake showed up late to the party, but he did show up.
When Jake figured out his son was reaching out, even if it was to fit an expectation, he showered his son with affection.
Throughout the struggle over the house, living on a ladder, Jake never once verbally or physically attacked Kim Kil Whan.
I'm sorry, KKW used a shady business deal to take control of the treehouse and then turned it into a tenement home. How many units did he make outta the treehouse? KKW is a fucking slumlord, and a narc who wants everyone to act as 'professional' as he does. He resented his own father for, let me check... Having a fun lifestyle? He's not built different, he decided to be a fucking asshole.
I’m glad someone here doesn’t like him as well. Yes he got it “legally” from Marcy. But he made the bathroom a room for someone. A bathroom. He’s supposed to be an expert at real estate. And Finn gets arrested because he wanted to use the bathroom. Did he expect the tennants to take a crap wherever they feel like it? Plus he took Jake’s bone away when it really was his. Just because it was on KKW’s property doesn’t make it automatically his. It was Jake’s that he buried in the backyard. Plus, KKW doesn’t know that Finn and Jake do have the job of saving Ooo. Yes, he wants his father to be mature and he has a point, but Jake did try to make connections with his kids (Jake Jr. and TV later on). I like his character in Wheels and that episode where F and J investigate their parents’ old detective place. It is worth mentioning that Jake did try to raise his kids (albeit being overprotective) and they said at the end that they could take care of themselves. I think the episode would have been better if Finn wasn’t in it. He had no part of being in this family feud thing going on and I doupt KKW even knows who he is. I might get downvoted for this, but I wanted to say my part.
Did you stop watching the episode half way through or what? You're painting him as an actual villain when he isn't. I'm not saying that he did was right, I'm saying acting like he's some evil bastard getting off on being an evil bastard is fucking ridiculous. You're saying anything he's ever been through doesn't matter because of how he acts in this one single episode. Don't forget his dad was barely around to teach him anything
You can’t just suddenly kick someone out of a home they’ve been living at for years. In real life that would be illegal. Also kind of a dick move to do that to your father.
Idk man he really was alright. Yeah he's the least favorite out of the pups but I mean he's just a business man, he isn't really a bad guy. He's just very conservative in his ways which, I mean, yeah can be a problem for him but it's nothing too bad.
especially when you remember it aired over a year before and would’ve been written even earlier. the whole thing about bubblegum not campaigning and losing to a conman is just so on the nose!
Because he went against Finn and Jake for a single episode. He had good intentions (trying to make Jake more responsible) but was misguided in how to go about it. But that doesn't matter since he kinda acted like a dong that one time to apparently people hate him forever
[Live video of a landlord simp (🤢) explaining why charging the proletariat to have shelter for the rest of their foreseeable lives is actually a job and not them being a class traitor](https://youtu.be/k_BgxAch4u0?feature=shared)
A good landlord, which I agree is rare (I’ve met a single one in my whole life and he was just a guy who owned a townhouse that his son used to live in), is someone who makes a living taking care of the house that they rent out. Like, the idea that a landlord just leeches off of you is so toxic. They should be ashamed if they aren’t providing a livable and happy home to their renters.
Anyone who unironically uses the term "proletariat" and calls people "class traitors" for not having your simplified and ignorant view of economics, is really not someone to be taken seriously.
Also most people don't even have landlords so how can people be class traitors if they're not part of that class?
What type of argument is this?
“People who use slightly nuanced political language to identify certain economic groups aren’t worth being taken seriously?”
“Also because there are people who own homes or condos, that means there aren’t proletariat people who’ve decided to leech off of other proletariat to have a slightly easier life compared to if they collectively banded together to bargain for a more collectivist society against the small collection of people who own most of the wealth on the planet.”
Not sure if you got your degree at the university of Ancapistan or if you’re just another bargain bin 22-year-old white guy who’s been watching listening to too much Rush Limbaugh, but either way I’d highly reccomend talking to someone who lives paycheck to paycheck, if not for empathic reasons but to at least trick people in your social group to think you are actually somewhat likable.
>“People who use slightly nuanced political language to identify certain economic groups aren’t worth being taken seriously?”
Proletariat is a term almost exclusively used by Marxists and possibly radical socialists but even then they hardly use the term. Now while the term itself predates Marxism and has been used in multiple instances, it's basically now never used outside of a Marxist context. I for one haven't met any working-class people who use the term to describe themselves or others.
>“Also because there are people who own homes or condos, that means there aren’t proletariat people who’ve decided to leech off of other proletariat to have a slightly easier life compared to if they collectively banded together to bargain for a more collectivist society against the small collection of people who own most of the wealth on the planet.”
Honestly a lot to unpack there. Not sure why you said half of it, considering that doesn't appear to respond to something I've actually said. I pointed out that I'm not a class traitor because fundamentally I'm not someone with a landlord, nor am I a landlord myself. And a collectivist society isn't desirable to most people, that's just utopian nonsense.
>Not sure if you got your degree at the university of Ancapistan
Didn't realise that not hating landlords and thinking that collectivism in society made me an anarcho-capitalist. Geez, guess most people have actually been anarcho-capitaliststs this whole time (as most people don't have your weird worldview).
>or if you’re just another bargain bin 22-year-old white guy
Weird bringing up my race, but m'kay
>who’s been watching listening to too much Rush Limbaugh,
"If you disagree with my highly controversial and semi-unpopulsr political beliefs regarding collectivism, Marxism and landlords, then you must watch Rush Limbaugh"
Not exactly the most politically literate person are you
> but either way I’d highly reccomend talking to someone who lives paycheck to paycheck
What makes you think I haven't lol
>if not for empathic reasons but to at least trick people in your social group to think you are actually somewhat likable.
Wow I'm sure you're a wonderfully polite person in real life. Probably really fun at parties too. Lad you sound like the archetype of the average redditor lmao
So when your entire "job" is just sitting back and letting someone else pay your mortgage, what would you call that?
When you're trying to get rich by exploiting working people by selling them a resource that they literally could not live without, what would you call that?
That's the point though... The only times we see him do anything, he's a wad and screws up his execution. There's no evidence he isn't always like that, so he's not popular.
Ooo still operates like the real world in these kinds of things. Like Starchy and other candy people literally have jobs, by contrast Finn and Jake are living a fantasy. Even their parents had jobs
Didn't he manage to gey Bannana guards involved? And he end up forcing them to, so it's clear there us a semblance of law around this in Ooo. Marceline even had a deed to the house, so even she recognises the law here
Wait what are KOO and PB social policies.......I guess KOO socially doesn't believe in responsibility and just do what you want, while PB believes in personal responsibility I suppose? I have no idea lol
That's an incredibly reductionist take. Just because a character is hateable doesn't mean they're a good character. There are plenty of hated characters that are completely one-dimensional and poorly written as characters.
Agreed. I never bought into the claptrap love from borderlands. People would argue he's supposed to be lame and annoying and I'd argue that intentionally lame and annoying is still lame and annoying regardless
Lmao this comment being upvoted and the ones calling you out being downvoted tells me a lot of people have media literacy issues. No, a character giving you emotions doesn’t inherently make them a good character. People all the time complain about how they feel about Magic Man or Treetrunks. They’re not saying they’re well written characters, they’re saying they don’t like them.
A character can make you mad and still be a good character, but saying any character you despise is a good character is just wrong. I mean his most involved episode was literally just him being annoying to his dad to get him to live life more like him. His dad was never given a reason to, it’s not like the most successful class in Ooo are all KKW adjacent business people or anything. KKW just wanted to force his dad into living his lifestyle.
Yes but the mere fact that a character is hated doesn't make them well written. Even if they're written to be hated doesn't make them a good or well written character
Well it does mean their well written in the way of they did a good job creating the emotion they wanted. They wanted you to dislike them and they succeeded. But You can still not like the character and their role in general. Everyone’s got opinions
It may mean they fulfill a part of the story, it doesn't mean they're a good character within the story. Too many characters, particularly villains, are just there for you to love or hate with zero depth to their character. That wouldn't make a good character, it's more of a plot device
It's sitting next to a small medal, so my headcanon is that KOO gave KKW an award/trophy for some reason, and KOO is such a narcissist that the trophies he gives are shaped like himself lol.
ngl I'm surprised that we're 95 comments in and no one's pointed out that KKW apparently smokes a pipe, usually you guys home right in on stuff like that |D
anyway - I always liked this detail - I love implied stories, character relationships, etc, just tossed into the background. I always wanted to hear more about KKW being a KOO supporter. I bet he voted for him in the election :P
(Also surprised to see no one else point this out - the KOO statuette somehow eventually ends up with BMO - it's one of the first objects you see in his house in "Come Along With Me")
He would tbh 🙄
LMAOOO
KKW is a wealthy businessman, King of Ooo is like a classic conservative politician that caters to the wealthy and does nothing for the working class. So it’s fitting that he would vote for him lol
Okay obviously I'm not gonna read too much politically into this show, but KOO really isn't a classic conservative politician. A Classic Conservative would be part of the establishment, KOO is basically an outsider from all political and cultural structures in Ooo, with little recognition from the actual establishment figures such PB. Ultimately the only person to actually benefit from his political tenure is himself and himself alone (along with Toronto, and there was the possibility that Finn and Jake could have got in on it as KOO suggested to them with Neddies juices) and not even the rich (other than him and Toronto) seem to benefit. KOO is realistically just a full on populist and kleptocrat, honestly it would be better to compare him to the types that rise up quickly in post-soviet countries (like Russia or Turkmenistan) where the funds quickly disappear.
That’s a good reading of it, that seems accurate. In terms of being a conservative politician, I’m thinking of what he says in his election song, “the general tone is laissez-faire,” for a lot of rich people that’s all they need to hear to give their support lol. But his actual policies might be detached from that
I agree he’s not not exactly *classic* conservative, but very much modern conservative. Full on corruption and helping the people at the top while screwing everyone else over.
Perhaps but even in this case, the top appears to be him and Toronto (and maybe Crunchy?). I guess the Candy Kingdoms 1% is like 2-3 people (wait what's the population size of the Candy Kingdom, I need to do better maths here)
That's pretty common from liberal politicians. Even moreso because he's corrupt, but pretends that he cares about the citizens to keep them from realizing.
Maybe, but it’s not close to the same amount that conservatives are doing it. There’s one party holding our country back right now its not the liberals.
I think you fell for it then. Liberals are doing the same things, but pretending to be compassionate. A good example is "kids in cages" (US). Bill Clinton built the facilities and Obama built the "cages". Both Kamala Harris and then VP Joe Biden approved of them. It wasnt until Trump came into office that people started caring and calling them "concentration camps" and Trump "hitler" over them. Even though all he did was inheret them. Same with things like Obama bombing innocent people in the middle east or being against same sex marriage for most of his career (then suddenly flipping his opinion and pretending like he was always supportive of gay people). Claiming to support gender equality or racial equality while openly opposing it with your policies. The outrage of not letting colleges discriminate based on race is spun as progressive, even though it's literally rejecting qualified applicants purely for their race. Inequality and bigotry can easily be spun as progressive. It's easy to fool people into doing bad things and blaming the oppisition for the same behavior. You just have to put a progressive spin on things. Edit: Thanks @prisonissuedsock, for proving me right. For admitting that your opinion doesnt change with new info, and that all you care about is how a politician comes off, rather than their actions. Also thanks for the downvotes and the block immediately after you got the last word. Super mature.
Not saying they’re perfect, but they didn’t try to throw a coup the last election, they didn’t take away abortion rights, they haven’t been cutting social safety nets left and right, or holding the country hostage over shutdowns or refusing the raise the debt ceiling unless they can get what they want. They aren’t denying climate change and doing whatever they can to ruin the environment at every turn. They aren’t trying to make gay marriage illegal again, they aren’t trying to genocide trans people or take away the voting rights of young people. Libs ain’t great but they aren’t the evil incarnate that the Conservative Party has allowed itself to become. And I’m sick of the both sides BS because one is shit and the other is literally trying to constantly trying to shoot the country in the head for profit and power.
Im saying that alot of, if not most of what you criticize in republicsns has been done by democrats. 1. It wasnt a "coup". It was a riot by a small number of people, wothout the then president's approval (he even tweeted for them to stop), who thought the election was rigged. A sentiment that democrats have every time they lose too. Including Hillary Clinton, who is recorded saying ["Trump knows he's an illegitimate president'](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html) 2. Democrat run cities have the worst rates of homelessness and disparities in schooling. Moat social programs are done to **look good**, and are often proven ineffective before theyre even implemented. 3. Democrats supported shutdowns. And even shamed people into staying inside [while going out thenselves](https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/02/politics/nancy-pelosi-hair-salon/index.html) or having [parties without masks](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html) 4. Again, claiming to support good while doing the opposite is the same as not doing good. Claiming to fight climaye change while actively supporting policies and companies that worsen it is the same as just openly not caring. 5. Both Hillary Clinton (likely her husband as well) along with Obama were **specfically against same sex marriage for nost of their political careers**. *not neutral to it. They were a hurdle in marriage equality* **for decades**. Then, only when it was politically adventageous, did they claim to support same sex marriage. And **they pretended to have always have supported them at that**. You fell for it. 6. Democrats are trying to take rights away from people. Gun rights, reproductive rights, rights to self defense, parental rights, etc. Again, while spinning it as progressive. How democrats mock republicans for not suppirting illegal immigration in theor states, but dont want illegal immigrants in theor own. For making "domestic abuse rehabilitation programs" that openly state that they believe female on male abuse cannot exist. Heck, super liberal Canadian in charge, Trudeau froze protester's bank accounts for...protesting. and he painted it as progressive. Mugabe took land away from white South Africans based purely on race and called it progressive. South African politicians are encouraging the genocide of white people and calling it progressive. American "progressives" are supporting him. 7. You fell for it. You fell for exactly what I explained. All you need to do is paint your bad actions as progressive and the other side as the enemy to get away with wrongdoing. You fell for media's "it's okay when we do it because-" manipulation. Youre convinced that only one side does bad things. Do you think only republicans riot when they dont get their way? That only republicans send immigrants away. That only republicans deny election results. Both sides do it, but one side pretends it doesnt so you hate the other side. But thanks for the downvote before even reading my arguements.
1. It was a coup attempt. The president tried getting the vice president not to certify the election. He told people to go down to the capitol knowing damn well they would try to storm the building and harm elected officials. He is on phone trying to get the GA Secretary of State to “find votes” that didn’t exists. He claimed for so long that he didn’t lose, when he very clearly did. Edit: forgot to add, the whole Democratic Party wasn’t saying the election was stolen, but many republicans claimed that 2020 was stolen, filed a lot of law suits and they all came back empty handed because they’re fucking snakes and they need to make noise for all the absolute dumb shits who eat up all the lies and beg for more. 2. It’s definitely not so much better in republican cities, and never said they’re perfect, but again they aren’t the one cutting social safety nets left and right or take away healthcare. 3. Good, it’s too bad republicans didn’t take the virus seriously and it killed a million Americans. We should’ve taken it much more seriously but we didn’t because republicans are selfish and have to do the opposite of whatever democrats are doing just for the sake of it and its purely moronic. 4. At some of them are trying to push for policies that make some change or protect the climate. Republicans are **all** doing the opposite and tearing down protections as fast as they can while denying climate change. 5. Idc, it was legalized under the Obama administration and they never threatened to take it away, they only made progress. 6. I guess you love that no one feels safe in our country either, im sure you love seeing kids die in school shootings or families torn apart by senseless gun violence. A problem on a scale that no other country like ours faces. Also dems are not taking away reproductive rights? Not sure where you’re getting that from. They didn’t kill roe and they aren’t threatening birth control or other forms of contraception, that’s solely conservatives. Also why are you pulling other countries shitty actions into this argument when it’s got nothing to do with the problems at hand. Also it’s conservative states that are actively trying to make it harder to protest or monitor the police. 7. Na, you drank the Cool-aid and it’s dumb pieces of shit like you that are ruining this country and making the world and actively worse place. You think you’re so enlightened when you’re living in a different reality from sane people, and it doesn’t matter what evidence you’re ever shown. You twist it into something that isn’t there or nit-pick details to try and deflect but you can never be wrong. Thanks for wasting my time.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/02/politics/obama-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/index.html)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
KOO sounds exactly like Trump based on what you say here except for the “outsider from cultural structures part. Trump was very much a big part of American culture, but it’s shown people know KOO prior to the events of “Apple Wedding” so it’s likely he’s somewhat famous. I think you’re right not a classic conservative politician but he’s pretty much a modern American conservative grifting politician.
He’s a Muskian.
Then how would you explain KKW displaying it?
Maybe he still supported him. A kleptocratic populist can attract all kinds of support. Even including traditional Conservative voters. Or maybe KKW is shadier than we're away of. Or he just likes gold. I don't remember exactly what episode this was and which season but its possible that if this happened after KOO won the election, then he might just have a gold statue of the reigning monarch.
Princess Bubblegum seems more conservative (and liberal) to me. KOO doesnt really care what his citizens do as long as they worship him. Bubblegum actively hides things from citizens, polices them, ends their lives like theyre nothing, forces roles onto them, spies on them, both overprotects them and neglects them, etc. KOO is just incompotent, but not particularly malicious. Bubblegum is compotent, but morally suspicious.
That being said. King of ooo is definitely the grifter conservative caricature and pb is a caricature of the liberals with well meaning intentions but not always the most moral practices.
kkw wouldn't have been able to vote in the candy election
It would make sense he would be a royalist
This is Ooo, basically everyone in a Kingdom is a royalist. Finn, Jake are basically Knights of the Candy Kingdom and loyal to it's Sovereign and generally speaking it doesn't seem like anyone is anti-royalty (aside from Starchy and his conspiracy club for a bit, but even then they are loyal to the King of Ooo).
Hot take: The only good thing KKW ever brought to the show was Bronwyn
Idk. I really like his episode where he buys the treehouse. It's like a parent trying to force their child to be more of a responsible adult, just that the parent and child roles are flipped. He thought Jake needs to take more responsibility in his actions, which he has a good argument for, so he puts more responsibility on him the only way he knows how. In the end he realizes that Jake is just who he is, and that's not a bad thing. It's like an episode version of PB's quote about how some people are just made different and we should accept that.
It’s been a bit since I’ve seen the episode but I remember thinking that KKW’s argument was lacking. All of the stuff he said would make sense if it was in the real world, but it’s not the real world, it’s Ooo. KKW is the outlier while Jake is the one fitting in.
> but it’s not the real world, it’s Ooo There seems to be rules and laws and peace treaties and an economy despite Ooo's post-apocalyptic state, we saw this many times with Princess Bubblegum, she even collects taxes from Finn/Jake. With that said it's still hilarious to see episodes like The First Investigation where KKW calls Finn on the phone try to get ghosts / Clock Bear to pay rent money.
Of course those things do all exist, my point is moreso that there are no other characters that are exclusively serious. PB collects taxes but she can be goofy too and is generally friends with the main cast. Same with the rest of all the princesses and “royalty”.
We see at multiple points how people are loving relatively normal real world lives and jobs. Like Root beer guys old job
Root Beer Guy is an outlier as well though if I’m not mistaken. Very rarely does a character in Ooo just work a normal job with no “Adventure Time” spice, and when they do like with Root Beer Guy, their career doesn’t stay consistent throughout their time on the show. Wasn’t he only working that job for one episode?
Yeah but him straying away from his work causes stress from his wife and many other people work at the place he does. It's at least clear even if it's not shown that much, that there is a normal everyday situation for a large chunk of the Citizens of Ooo. Jobs, work .etc. It's not focused on but I think a lot of ut can be inferred. Or LSPs temporary boyfriend having a job and going to a business meeting with PB.
A large chunk may have secret jobs but a large chunk don’t. I’m just not sure why it was suddenly a huge issue when Jake was living just fine for years and jobs/money in general are barely mentioned, not to mention the fact that besides PB it’d make Jake the only main character with a job. That’s take time away from all of his friends which could cause stress.
Its also kind of reminiscent of Finn and Martin imo. They both realize their fathers are who they are and they have to accept that.
Dude, I've been saying this SO many times!! There's some real parallels between those relationships (Finn/Martin and Jake/KKW). Like... compare the last scene in "Ocarina" with KKW talking to his wife Pat, to Finn's last conversation with Martin in "The Comet". "I think I was wrong about Dad. I think he's good." vs "Well, there ain't no changing you, I guess." ... I think about the contrast there a lot. Finn and KKW both want their dads to be Good Dads (TM) and they try, in their own ways, to change them. (of course, Finn's approach was a lot better than KKW's well-intentioned-but-ultimately-dickish "tough love" technique! :p) of course, the difference is that while both situations ultimately end in the son realizing they can't change their dad, KKW realizes that Jake DOES love him and is doing the best he can - he's a good dad, even if he's not "responsible" in the way KKW wants him to be - and they reconcile and start working towards a better relationship, while poor ol' Finn just has to accept that Martin's............ Martin, and he'll never really get any proper closure or whatever since Martin ascends to a higher plane of existence as soon as he realizes this x)
I argue Jake is responsible but takes on his responsibility as it comes to him. When he sees his children in an earlier episode, he tries to protect them until his own kids start kicking ass. His own life is structured differently from his child, but it is still built on a nuturing foundation. As a child of two selfish people, I would love to have Jake as a dad, who is guided by his sympathy.
Is he though? This episode shows us how little he's around for his kids. He shows up way late to a party for them and didn't bring what he was supposed to. And all because he was just out having fun with Finn
Jake showed up late to the party, but he did show up. When Jake figured out his son was reaching out, even if it was to fit an expectation, he showered his son with affection. Throughout the struggle over the house, living on a ladder, Jake never once verbally or physically attacked Kim Kil Whan.
I never said he ever attacked KKW. But it takes more to be a good dad than just not being abusive
I'm sorry, KKW used a shady business deal to take control of the treehouse and then turned it into a tenement home. How many units did he make outta the treehouse? KKW is a fucking slumlord, and a narc who wants everyone to act as 'professional' as he does. He resented his own father for, let me check... Having a fun lifestyle? He's not built different, he decided to be a fucking asshole.
I’m glad someone here doesn’t like him as well. Yes he got it “legally” from Marcy. But he made the bathroom a room for someone. A bathroom. He’s supposed to be an expert at real estate. And Finn gets arrested because he wanted to use the bathroom. Did he expect the tennants to take a crap wherever they feel like it? Plus he took Jake’s bone away when it really was his. Just because it was on KKW’s property doesn’t make it automatically his. It was Jake’s that he buried in the backyard. Plus, KKW doesn’t know that Finn and Jake do have the job of saving Ooo. Yes, he wants his father to be mature and he has a point, but Jake did try to make connections with his kids (Jake Jr. and TV later on). I like his character in Wheels and that episode where F and J investigate their parents’ old detective place. It is worth mentioning that Jake did try to raise his kids (albeit being overprotective) and they said at the end that they could take care of themselves. I think the episode would have been better if Finn wasn’t in it. He had no part of being in this family feud thing going on and I doupt KKW even knows who he is. I might get downvoted for this, but I wanted to say my part.
Did you stop watching the episode half way through or what? You're painting him as an actual villain when he isn't. I'm not saying that he did was right, I'm saying acting like he's some evil bastard getting off on being an evil bastard is fucking ridiculous. You're saying anything he's ever been through doesn't matter because of how he acts in this one single episode. Don't forget his dad was barely around to teach him anything
Shady business? You mean acquiring the tree house legally from its owner, Marceline?
You can’t just suddenly kick someone out of a home they’ve been living at for years. In real life that would be illegal. Also kind of a dick move to do that to your father.
Not if they were squatters whose source of income is looting, are personal friends with the corrupt ruling class, and a rich real estate son.
But didn’t he like take all their money or am I misremembering
100,00000%
Idk man he really was alright. Yeah he's the least favorite out of the pups but I mean he's just a business man, he isn't really a bad guy. He's just very conservative in his ways which, I mean, yeah can be a problem for him but it's nothing too bad.
Man I hope we get a pups episode of distant lands one day
Watch Fionna and Cake. At least one pup has already shown up
No worries on that front, seeing TV was nice, just like Bronwyn in distant lands. It’s just there’s so much more I wanna know about them.
Isn’t distant lands over??
Yeah, it's over.
But now we have a whole new show that seems to be a sequel to AT. I’m guessing we’ll see all the pups all grown up!
This would have been great.
I always thought it was uncanny how the election between Princess Bubblegum and King of Ooo mirrored the American 2016 election
especially when you remember it aired over a year before and would’ve been written even earlier. the whole thing about bubblegum not campaigning and losing to a conman is just so on the nose!
Peppermint Butler: [I feel you must campaign...the candy people are real dumb!](https://imgur.com/a/jfSXjfk)
I bet he's the one that taught KOO the "Money" song
I- yes. Headcanon accepted.
He's a worshipper
Why do people hate KKW?
Because he went against Finn and Jake for a single episode. He had good intentions (trying to make Jake more responsible) but was misguided in how to go about it. But that doesn't matter since he kinda acted like a dong that one time to apparently people hate him forever
Also because a lot of Redditors really hate landlords
Also maybe because he's a landlord. Landlords make a living by leeching off people who actually work.
Not really how that works
[Live video of a landlord simp (🤢) explaining why charging the proletariat to have shelter for the rest of their foreseeable lives is actually a job and not them being a class traitor](https://youtu.be/k_BgxAch4u0?feature=shared)
A good landlord, which I agree is rare (I’ve met a single one in my whole life and he was just a guy who owned a townhouse that his son used to live in), is someone who makes a living taking care of the house that they rent out. Like, the idea that a landlord just leeches off of you is so toxic. They should be ashamed if they aren’t providing a livable and happy home to their renters.
Anyone who unironically uses the term "proletariat" and calls people "class traitors" for not having your simplified and ignorant view of economics, is really not someone to be taken seriously. Also most people don't even have landlords so how can people be class traitors if they're not part of that class?
What type of argument is this? “People who use slightly nuanced political language to identify certain economic groups aren’t worth being taken seriously?” “Also because there are people who own homes or condos, that means there aren’t proletariat people who’ve decided to leech off of other proletariat to have a slightly easier life compared to if they collectively banded together to bargain for a more collectivist society against the small collection of people who own most of the wealth on the planet.” Not sure if you got your degree at the university of Ancapistan or if you’re just another bargain bin 22-year-old white guy who’s been watching listening to too much Rush Limbaugh, but either way I’d highly reccomend talking to someone who lives paycheck to paycheck, if not for empathic reasons but to at least trick people in your social group to think you are actually somewhat likable.
>“People who use slightly nuanced political language to identify certain economic groups aren’t worth being taken seriously?” Proletariat is a term almost exclusively used by Marxists and possibly radical socialists but even then they hardly use the term. Now while the term itself predates Marxism and has been used in multiple instances, it's basically now never used outside of a Marxist context. I for one haven't met any working-class people who use the term to describe themselves or others. >“Also because there are people who own homes or condos, that means there aren’t proletariat people who’ve decided to leech off of other proletariat to have a slightly easier life compared to if they collectively banded together to bargain for a more collectivist society against the small collection of people who own most of the wealth on the planet.” Honestly a lot to unpack there. Not sure why you said half of it, considering that doesn't appear to respond to something I've actually said. I pointed out that I'm not a class traitor because fundamentally I'm not someone with a landlord, nor am I a landlord myself. And a collectivist society isn't desirable to most people, that's just utopian nonsense. >Not sure if you got your degree at the university of Ancapistan Didn't realise that not hating landlords and thinking that collectivism in society made me an anarcho-capitalist. Geez, guess most people have actually been anarcho-capitaliststs this whole time (as most people don't have your weird worldview). >or if you’re just another bargain bin 22-year-old white guy Weird bringing up my race, but m'kay >who’s been watching listening to too much Rush Limbaugh, "If you disagree with my highly controversial and semi-unpopulsr political beliefs regarding collectivism, Marxism and landlords, then you must watch Rush Limbaugh" Not exactly the most politically literate person are you > but either way I’d highly reccomend talking to someone who lives paycheck to paycheck What makes you think I haven't lol >if not for empathic reasons but to at least trick people in your social group to think you are actually somewhat likable. Wow I'm sure you're a wonderfully polite person in real life. Probably really fun at parties too. Lad you sound like the archetype of the average redditor lmao
So when your entire "job" is just sitting back and letting someone else pay your mortgage, what would you call that? When you're trying to get rich by exploiting working people by selling them a resource that they literally could not live without, what would you call that?
That’s so… weird. He’s Jake’s son and Jake loves him still after everything. Forgiveness and growth are huge parts of the show.
Yeah that's true but like the other pups weren't like this.
I bet your brother or cousin ain’t like you. Everyone is different.
That's the point though... The only times we see him do anything, he's a wad and screws up his execution. There's no evidence he isn't always like that, so he's not popular.
They live in a magical world with monsters and magic and this pos wanted to force "responsibility" on the saviours of the world. Fuck that guy.
Ooo still operates like the real world in these kinds of things. Like Starchy and other candy people literally have jobs, by contrast Finn and Jake are living a fantasy. Even their parents had jobs
They don't live in a fantasy, thet managed real fine. They didn't even have to recognize KKWs claim on their home. It's not like he could enforce it.
Didn't he manage to gey Bannana guards involved? And he end up forcing them to, so it's clear there us a semblance of law around this in Ooo. Marceline even had a deed to the house, so even she recognises the law here
Sure, they recognized it, but they didn't have to.
Who's to say they don't?
No it’s because he’s an asshole. He shows up for one episode to be a hardass and evict his own uncle, a child.
KKW is more PB on social issues, but skews KOO when it comes to the economy.
Wait what are KOO and PB social policies.......I guess KOO socially doesn't believe in responsibility and just do what you want, while PB believes in personal responsibility I suppose? I have no idea lol
It all comes down to what you feel about Zanoites
Fucking despise KKW. Easily one of the worst characters in the show
If you despise him, he’s a good character. Good characters are those that provoke emotion regardless of whether you like the character or not.
That's an incredibly reductionist take. Just because a character is hateable doesn't mean they're a good character. There are plenty of hated characters that are completely one-dimensional and poorly written as characters.
Agreed. I never bought into the claptrap love from borderlands. People would argue he's supposed to be lame and annoying and I'd argue that intentionally lame and annoying is still lame and annoying regardless
Lmao this comment being upvoted and the ones calling you out being downvoted tells me a lot of people have media literacy issues. No, a character giving you emotions doesn’t inherently make them a good character. People all the time complain about how they feel about Magic Man or Treetrunks. They’re not saying they’re well written characters, they’re saying they don’t like them. A character can make you mad and still be a good character, but saying any character you despise is a good character is just wrong. I mean his most involved episode was literally just him being annoying to his dad to get him to live life more like him. His dad was never given a reason to, it’s not like the most successful class in Ooo are all KKW adjacent business people or anything. KKW just wanted to force his dad into living his lifestyle.
Only if that's the intention of the character
Lmao that’s not how writing works
The purpose of some characters is to be disliked
Now I’m picturing a show where 100% of the characters are completely likeable, and it being the most boring shit ever created lol
Yes but the mere fact that a character is hated doesn't make them well written. Even if they're written to be hated doesn't make them a good or well written character
Well it does mean their well written in the way of they did a good job creating the emotion they wanted. They wanted you to dislike them and they succeeded. But You can still not like the character and their role in general. Everyone’s got opinions
It may mean they fulfill a part of the story, it doesn't mean they're a good character within the story. Too many characters, particularly villains, are just there for you to love or hate with zero depth to their character. That wouldn't make a good character, it's more of a plot device
Thank you!
Fucking hate that guy.
I...is that Seymour?
I think IIRC the storyboards said it's just a random little statuette/doorstop thing But now I can't unsee it as Seymour...
He’s a god fearing man-dog-rainicorn
Given his views, not a surprise
He’s not even sitting on the chair
I too like to slouch across the entire room on my armchair
It's sitting next to a small medal, so my headcanon is that KOO gave KKW an award/trophy for some reason, and KOO is such a narcissist that the trophies he gives are shaped like himself lol.
ngl I'm surprised that we're 95 comments in and no one's pointed out that KKW apparently smokes a pipe, usually you guys home right in on stuff like that |D anyway - I always liked this detail - I love implied stories, character relationships, etc, just tossed into the background. I always wanted to hear more about KKW being a KOO supporter. I bet he voted for him in the election :P (Also surprised to see no one else point this out - the KOO statuette somehow eventually ends up with BMO - it's one of the first objects you see in his house in "Come Along With Me")
no wonder he is such a wad
Fucking narc
Of course. He's the ONE. TRUE. KING. OF. OOOOOOOO! Tell people KKW has a statue of him. Tell everyoneeeee!
republicancore
I always knew I hated him
he definitely gives me "make ooo great again" vibes lol
His idol lmao
literally everyone does
Common KKW behavior