What Is Wrong With Losers Campaigning?
TV ClubHouse: Archives: What Is Wrong With Losers Campaigning?
Bohica | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 10:50 pm     Monalisa IIRC, Danielle told Lisa that she was nominating her and Amy and that Lisa was safe. THEN she called in Jason (with Lisa present) and told him that he was safe from nomination. She also told him (once again if front of Lisa) that she promised Lisa that she was safe from eviction. Dani then asked him (once again with Lisa present) if he had any problem with that plan. In essence, she asked him, in front of Lisa, if he would keep Lisa and vote out Amy. That, IMO, was telling Jason that he had to vote to keep Lisa. It Dani's decision and she told Jason this with Lisa present to make sure she got her way. |
Draheid | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 10:52 pm     WHAT??????? Al Gore is on the campaign trail again?? Already??? |
Battlestar | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:00 pm     said this before and I'll say it again. --if the people in the final 2 have only played the game to the people inside the house then they are forgetting about the 13th HG----and forgetting about that one will lose you this game Last year it was the 'Devil and the Demon' in the final 2/ and the Demon was more disliked |
Monalisa | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:13 pm     Bohica, I guess what I mean is that they are no longer playing the game, but are now part of the game. Yes, that has been Dani's mistake in not considering this. But, would she still been in the game had they not found her so entertaining? They all had a good time when she was doing her "impressions" and "bashing." If they weren't laughing it up, they were joining in. Some were even having these sessions without Dani, and even about Dani. Jason was the only one who remotely seemed uncomfortable with it. And, maybe Lori, but even Lori didn't have a problem when Marc did it. The evicted hg's have only had a problem with it when they seen her doing it about them (like it should be some huge surprise...lol), even though she did it to their faces on some occassions. What other conclusion can be drawn when they are saying "tell your story of...", "here, let me show you my impression of...", then when they are out of the house say "ooh, she was so mean." For any of them to use this as their litmus test just seems a bit hypocritical to me. |
Eden | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:15 pm     I just find it sad that DR entries from this BB on will be meaningless drivel, a la Roddy. I liked players being able to freely express thoughts and strategy in the DR. It was a huge part of the pleasure of actually watching the show. If the DR is not going to reveal anything more than pandering doublespeak, I see no reason to watch the show at all. The live feeds are more worthwhile. DR confidentiality was important and is now made moot. No more insider info into the REAL thoughts and motivations of the players. A huge loss to the show, to the game, to the fans. |
C1mag | Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:21 pm     Agree Eden! |
Gina8642 | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 06:36 am     Absolutely nothing is wrong with the former HGs campaigning. These contestants signed up for BB. Part of BB is being able to return to the 'real' world if you are evicted while the game is still on-going. You can talk to whoever you want to, you can read whatever you want to, etc. If you changed this, you change the game. Then it wouldn't be Big Brother, it would be some other game. |
Lucymac | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 06:56 am     I see nothing wrong with evicted houseguests campaigning if in fact that is what they are really doing. Some of the remaining houseguests unfortunately forgot that part of the game was still playing to the evicted houseguests in order to get their vote. Maybe they played well to stay in the house, but their game was weak in garnering the votes. They should be rewarded or penalized for their total game. Also if part of the game is manipulating the others for votes in the house why shouldn't it be when out of the house. Evicted houseguests are still part of the game since they are the voters, they should be able to still play. I think Roddy is being given more credit than he deserves. Eric, Gerry, Marc and Chiara all said their opinion of Dani had changed once evicted. Roddy was still in the house when they were evicted, so they all came to this conclusion on their own. Just like when they are in the house it is up to each one whether or not they want to listen to each other or go on what they thing on their own. |
Demeter | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 07:25 am     Jurys vote on the information they have. In this situation, the evicted HGs are the jury. They have a good deal to go on with their votes: experiences in the house, taped shows, the internet, each other's opinions, and the public opinion. If someone wants to campaign, it's fair. They all have a ton of information to go on. The information may favor one candidate over another. That's how choices are made. I too believe most will vote from their own experience and then how they perceived things after viewing tapes, etc. Someone campaigning may or may not influence them. They may come to the same decision, but not necessarily because of the campaigning. |
Keiffer | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 08:30 am     I don't see how campaigning would do any good from evicted HG's. The only way campaigning is effective is if you can offer the perosn you are trying to sway something they want. In the real world its healthcare, tax cuts, or social security. In the BB house it was an alliance, a voting block, or a promise not to nomminate. What does an evicted HG have to offer other evicted HG's? I will answer that.... nothing. SUre they can point out why they are voting the way they are, and maybe give another a different view point, but they have nothing to offer other than why they are doing something. |
Onlyhuman | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:01 am     Monalisa, on the one hand, I agree with you, that if they watched Danielle in the house, they would have suspected that Danielle would talk behind their backs since she was so willing to do it with the other HGs. The problem is, Danielle was also very good at making the others feel like they were her "friends" and that the others weren't and that she would never say things about them like this. In fact, one time Amy asked her if she was saying bad things about her and Danielle told her "If I have a problem with you, I'll say it to your face." She used the bashing as a bonding tool but now they all feel bashed, so it's working against her. If she could have found a different bonding tool, she would be $500,000 richer when this is all over! |
Monalisa | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:32 am     Onlyhuman, I agree some of them will be hurt. I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it should not be a litmus test for the final vote, it would be hypocritical to them to vote based on that since they are all guilty. |
Bigbrotherbelle | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 10:26 am     If Roddy was manipulating Amy to his way of thinking, you'd think Amy would want Lisa to win, since that's who Roddy wants to win. But she doesn't, she wants Jason to win. |
What555456 | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 10:34 am     The problem is, Danielle was also very good at making the others feel like they were her "friends" and that the others weren't and that she would never say things about them like this. You know, Only, you may have hit the nail on the head right there. It may be that it was not the gossiping and backstabbing she has done -- but the fact she made everyone feel like her friend who she would not attack like she was the others. And then they find out she did it to them as well. It may be more a sense of betrayal they are feeling than anger over being attacked behind their backs. Very insightful. |
Phillymom | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:13 pm     Back to the original topic of this thread -- I don't think there is anything wrong with "losers" campaigning, although I seriously doubt that it will have much effect. From what I've been reading, after the evictees left the house and watched some of the shows, they came to a decison pretty quickly on their own about who they wanted to win. Roddy, Josh, Chiara, and Eric seem to be in touch with each other on and off, and they want different people to win (Roddy and Eric want Lisa, Josh wants Dani, and Chiara wants Jason). So I say, if someone wants to campaign, go for it, but I don't think it will make any difference. |
Jaysgal | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:25 pm     "You know, Only, you may have hit the nail on the head right there. It may be that it was not the gossiping and backstabbing she has done -- but the fact she made everyone feel like her friend who she would not attack like she was the others. And then they find out she did it to them as well." By my definition, that is part of what constitutes a professional gossip. P.S.: Only Human, you always state my position so eloquently. LOL! Way better than I would.... |
Earthmother | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:28 pm     There is nothing wrong with losers campaigning, they have been doing it all season.....OH! you mean the evicted..oops........lol |
Jaysgal | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:36 pm     Speaking of losers campaigning: The game isn't over. They are jurors. Part of playing the game and a good one is serving as jurors. Jurors realistically try to persuade other jurors. They'll hardly have another opportunity on the day of verdict to deliberate amongst themselves. Additionally, one stands the chance of being eliminated from jury duty. Of course I would want my vote or opinion to count. So, it would only make sense that I converse with other jurors and try to persuade them to see my point of view. Hence, if I should be eliminated from jury duty my vote would count or be present through someone else's vote. Keep in mind that campaigning is not an assurance. It could as well backfire. Other houseguests may get resentful and choose to vote in favour of the person one has been campaigning against. |
Muse | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:51 pm     I like to think that HGs cannot influence or change who another person votes for. I don't like it when fans "tell" an evicted HG to vote for (or not vote for) a certain person, either. I just think it'd be more interesting if everyone just voted their heart (to use a phrase used so often in the house ). They're all pretty different/unique individuals, and there's bound to be some different perspectives and interesting jury conversation before the vote. Besides, I think it's sad that someone is so insecure with their own opinion that they allow someone to tell them what to do. I sort of wish that the HGs would just check out the live feeds and/or updates, watch the episodes, and figure out their vote based on those thing and their personal feelings/experiences in the house. However, that being said, do I think it's fair for jury members to manipulate others? Definitely. The game is still going on, and there's no rule about HGs not being allowed to speak to each other. If *I* were an evicted HG, I'd probably be tempted to get others to see my way, too. While I might not enjoy feeling like someone caved to another person's influence, that's just too bad. I didn't like seeing Roddy and Josh convince Chiara to vote for Lisa, but I didn't think it was unfair. The same thing goes here, IMO. They have the right to do what (or manipulate who ) they want. |
Richardfan | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 12:55 pm     It's one thing to be in the room and hear people speak as opposed to watching on TV. Has anyone ever heard their own voice on an answering machine and thought "Wow, do I REALLY sound like that?". This makes me think the evicted HGs are seeing an entirely different perspective of things that were said in the house. One that is not very flattering most of the time. The real campaigning that's going on is what the evicted HGs see on the CBS episodes, read on the net, or hear about from friends, family, or other HGs (including the ones still in the house). |
Jaysgal | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:00 pm     "Besides, I think it's sad that someone is so insecure with their own opinion that they allow someone to tell them what to do." Haven't you heard of persuasion before? Persuasion is an art. Just as it was part of the game to persuade players within the house, it is part of the game to persuade jurors. It's even fairer to persuade outside of the house because the evicted houseguests all have the privilege to watch the videos or read live feed transcripts themselves. So, if someone is making up stories, they can be caught in their lies. Persuasion is an art. Coercion would be another subject, but we're speaking of persuasion here. |
Earthmother | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:02 pm     That is true Richardfan...People will be judged by what they are projecting, not what someone else tells them. |
Cricket | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:38 pm     Zachsmom stated: Quote Yea for them..I think it's great that they were able to form relationships with each other outside of the house.. End Quote Just wait until the vote is over. Let's see how long Roddy remains a good friend to all these people. We'll get our answer then if this is just manipulation. |
Reeniehere | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:46 pm     I think it's fair that evicted houseguests who are upset about losing attempt to influence others. It's a part of the game. What surprises me is that Roddy--who so disdains "popular culture" and seemed to feel intellectually and morally superior to most of the houseguests--would be spending so much time involved in it. I thought someone with that amount of kindness and intellect and goodness would be too busy collecting for the poor, or writing a book on the migratory habits of bats, or advising the Pope on how to raise his moral standards. |
Maris | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:47 pm     Before Roddy can advise the Pope he wants to get rid of the Devil first. |
Oregonfire | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 01:52 pm     LOL Reenie! Very funny. I think that influencing the vote from outside the house is fair game, loathe as I am to admit it. Those who are on the outside will be easy to rally because of sour grapes. That said, I'm totally not surprised that Roddy would be the one doing it. |
Reeniehere | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 02:04 pm     Maris, I think Roddy would consider the Devil a worthy opponent and might even vote for him. I suspect that the fact that he was outwitted by a woman, one who wasn't even a college graduate, is what sent him out on this mission. |
Mrdisguise | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 02:10 pm     See how wise it was of JASON to not nominate Roddy. Roddy is pissed off at Danielle and probably neutral at Jason. He is hoping that Lisa will win. But initially he wanted Lisa or Jason to win. If Jason had nominated Roddy- Roddy would have campaigned against Jason for sure. |
Lancecrossfire | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 03:50 pm     Reeniehere, I haven't seen anything to indicate Roddy has an isuse of being outplayed by a woman with our without a degree. What leads you to this assumption? (as opposed to the assumptions based on what he has said is important to him) |
Reeniehere | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 05:01 pm     Lance, His pride in his superior intellectual ability has been documented often, but my assumption of his opinion of females comes from the time he informed Chiara of what he expected from his women. Among others things he felt he had the right to control every aspect of their lives including: overseeing the balancing of their check books; the right to know where they were every minute of the day; the right to demand they carry cells phones and respond to him instantly if he called--among other things. From that I inferred he possibly saw women as servants or slaves or objects, but he certainly didn't see them as equals. My suspician may be wrong, but I feel we're dealing with a hungry ego here. |
Spear | Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:23 pm     I'll start by saying I'm not a Dani fan. However, having Jason evicted may be a good thing for Dani. There is nothing in the tapes that would change Jason's mind about Dani. I don't think that even the great Mancuso's magic will work on Jason. Anyway, to tie it to this thread, wouldn't Jason want to help Dani get the $500K? If anyone can convince the other jury members to support Dani, it's Jason, right? At least Amy, Marcellas, and maybe Chiara might listen to him. If you're a Dani fan, wouldn't you want to put that idea into Jason's mind? |
|