New Hampshire's Citizens Speak Out...
January 24, 2004 11:07 PM   Subscribe

Will New Hampshire Be A Gigantic Yawn? Or a YEAAARGH? Dave Barry is sleeping now. Mark Steyn, despite his annoying hubris, is clearly worried. They both live in New Hampshire, but... just how important was Howard Dean's exuberance? (Fwiw, for a Latin living overseas, it looks like a load of hype. What was so outrageous? Isn't America the home of rah-rah-rah?)
posted by MiguelCardoso (59 comments total)

 
give it up, man. he's unelectable. my tv said so.
posted by quonsar at 11:18 PM on January 24, 2004


just how important was Howard Dean's exuberance?

Enough to make a third FPP about it in a week. ;)
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 11:31 PM on January 24, 2004


He's too unpresidential.
posted by The God Complex at 11:32 PM on January 24, 2004


there is a whole site dedicated to the scream at DeanGoesNuts.com you can see the context of the scream a lot better than in a 4 second clip. To me, I mean he's excited, but it's not like he was yelling at someone, or being violent or anything.
posted by rhyax at 11:32 PM on January 24, 2004


Dean, bah! I want to hear more about Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and the federal investigators who seized his computer. But I guess unless he screams in public, few will notice.
posted by homunculus at 11:53 PM on January 24, 2004


Some radio commercial around here (Denver) was pointing out how similar he sounds to Timmy on South Park. It's just bizarre, and as God Complex says, unpresidential. I can see a President making this noise, if, say, he was visiting England and one of the Queen's little dogs just chomped down on his testicles... but otherwise, no. I mean, if you passed someone on the street making that noise, you wouldn't exactly get a good, fuzzy feeling about them, would you? Or in your office? You'd think they were a lunatic.

I've been a Clark supporter, but basically I was going to be hapy to vote for anyone but Bush. Now, I really hope Dean doesn't get the nomination-- he just gives me the creeps. My husband had a real dislike for Dean before the "YEEARGH". Not because of his political views, but he just personally dislikes him for reasons he can't really put his finger on. Apparently most Iowa Dems feel the same way.
posted by Shoeburyness at 12:08 AM on January 25, 2004


After watching the video I cannot believe so many people are talking/thinking about this. What a non-event. Granted, if you play the audio for that one syllable, all by itself, it sounds like a getting-shot-and-falling-off-something scream out of an Indiana Jones movie, or something, but for fuck's sake, the man was giving a pep talk to a bunch of supporters after a setback. And he's being ridiculed for having some energy? Sheezus. Go back to bed America. More dunderheaded tough-talk from your current President is being scripted right now and will broadcast shortly.
posted by scarabic at 12:08 AM on January 25, 2004


We get what we deserve. That includes Miguel.
posted by machaus at 12:12 AM on January 25, 2004


there is a whole site dedicated to the scream at DeanGoesNuts.com you can see the context of the scream a lot better than in a 4 second clip. To me, I mean he's excited, but it's not like he was yelling at someone, or being violent or anything.

I actually saw 'teh scream' live on TV. It made me uncomfortable, then pissed. But by the third day all I could do was laugh. I think by now I think people have put it into perspective (and deans excuse, "I was just trying to motivate my people, and I got carried away") rings true.

In any event, even if it was bad for dean it was good for democratic party. Why? Because the media didn't spend more then two minutes on Bush's State of the Union (mostly, wow the democrats didn't clap much, and also the speech was pretty lame) before going back to "Is dean nuts?" mode.

Right now the dem leadership wants this primary season to be decided quickly, so that they get to work on smacking bush around. But there making a mistake. If this primary season keeps up the level of drama it's been getting, it should keep the public tuning in, and hearing each candidates message. What the party needs now is Survivor: dem nominee.

Btw. If dean doesn’t get the nod, whoever wins would be well advised to pick him as a running mate. Why? Because I think most dean supporters would be happy to keep their wallets open even if he was only the VP.
posted by delmoi at 12:13 AM on January 25, 2004


Shoeburyness: Well, you should watch the whole speech in context, rather then judge him by one or two seconds. I don't think the fact that he can get animated would make him a bad president.

---

In any event, he seems like a pretty polarizing figure. People either love him or hate him, even without the political stuff.
posted by delmoi at 12:22 AM on January 25, 2004


and as God Complex says, unpresidential.

I wasn't serious. Of all the things to critique someone for, that seems the least important.
posted by The God Complex at 12:33 AM on January 25, 2004


and as God Complex says, unpresidential.

I wasn't serious. Of all the things to critique someone for, that seems the least important.


Well, if someone is running for President, why wouldn't it be germane how well he fits the job? You wouldn't hire an unitimidating bouncer, or an accountant who seems like he's not good at math. Our current President is embarrasing enough-- don't we want someone with a little gravitas?
posted by Shoeburyness at 1:39 AM on January 25, 2004


don't we want someone with a little gravitas?

I'd rather have someone with a little honesty, which I feel like I get from Dean.

In any event, a big part of the job of a bouncer is to intimidate people, and the job of an accountant is to do math. On the other hand, the job of the president is to run the country, not sit around looking presidential. If that was all they needed to do, bush would be a great president.
posted by delmoi at 1:50 AM on January 25, 2004


They both live in New Hampshire, but...

Dave Barry lives in South Florida, Miguel, and is a long-time columnist/humorist for the Miami Herald (which is where your link comes from). He goes on the road to cover stories once in a while, usually during the Olympics or a presidential election.
posted by LeLiLo at 2:17 AM on January 25, 2004


When people say someone isn't "presidential" what they often mean is the person wears too much emotion on his or her sleeve and isn't "serious" enough to be the president. Why this would ever be more important than having a president who is both an ideological trainwreck and an unintelligent buffoon is thoroughly beyond me, but that seems to be the popular consensus amongst a lot of people (Dean's just too crazy! He'd never win against Bush!). I was speaking to you directly, Shoeburyness, just commenting on a strange phenomenon. I don't understand how anybody can think Dean getting a little over-excited (or rightly terse with a heckler) is even in the same ballpark as anything Bush has done.
posted by The God Complex at 2:22 AM on January 25, 2004


I mean, if you passed someone on the street making that noise, you wouldn't exactly get a good, fuzzy feeling about them, would you? Or in your office? You'd think they were a lunatic.

no. i might think for a moment that i had been somehow beamed into the middle of an amway seminar, but then i'd shrug and move on. lunatic?

he just gives me the creeps.

you've just been manipulated by a talking box in your living room. who's crazy, exactly?
posted by quonsar at 3:00 AM on January 25, 2004


He's too unpresidential.

Absolutely. Bring on the coke addict frat boy John Wayne-lite chimps to muddle about in confusion!
posted by rushmc at 5:49 AM on January 25, 2004


Speaking of the debate, I was there and I yelled to Dave Barry:

"DAVE BARRY: STOP GLOBAL WARMING!"

He smiled at me. I guess I'm a semi-celebrity now.
posted by crazy finger at 7:02 AM on January 25, 2004


I mean, if you passed someone on the street making that noise, you wouldn't exactly get a good, fuzzy feeling about them, would you? Or in your office? You'd think they were a lunatic.

Yes I would think someone was a lunatic in those situations. But if I was at a pep rally where the number one preseason ranked team had an upset and the coach was trying to get the supporters and players motivated for the rest of the season, it wouldn't seem out of place at all. That is a more reasonable comparison than someone in my office busting out some MachoMan screaming on me. Would you have rather he had sad-sacked it like Gephardt?

I was a Dean supporter, but I do think he is unelectable now, simply because so many people have bought that he is unelectable. Kerry seems a little like Dukakis 2 (New England liberal that the rest of the country can't get excited about) and doesn't inspire me at all. Edwards is a little moderate for my tastes, but he does have an "up from poverty" (or at least "up from middle class") background and I think the Bush team is praying (they do that, you know) that he doesn't get the nomination.
posted by spartacusroosevelt at 7:04 AM on January 25, 2004


So, basically, the symbol of the Democratic Party has now gone from a donkey to a dead horse.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:11 AM on January 25, 2004


Not presidential?

Perhaps as a nation we are so hung up on having our presidents neatly packaged and stagecrafted, and served up to us on a platter that we forget what real leaders are like. Give me someone real any day over this Ken doll president with his photo-opp wardrobe.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:43 AM on January 25, 2004


What I don't get is this "Dean is unelectable meme." Correct me, but there seems to be two schools of thought about this election.

One is the classic, Clintonesque 'get the swing voter.' I'm a data sample of one, but I wonder if there's not many like me that trend Republican but are very disenchanted with President Bush over a range of domestic policy issues, and would seriously consider Dean on the basis of his gubernatorial record. The scream? Funny for a few days but not particularly relevant.

Senator Kerry, on his character and record (an ADA rating higher than Kennedy's?) never gets my vote. Senator Edwards? Way too inexperienced.

On the other hand, many say electorate is already polarized, that most voters have made their decision about the President, and undecided voters are too thin on the ground to be worth pursuing. Energizing your base is name of the game in 2004. Sure seems to me that is exactly what Dean's done.
posted by mojohand at 8:11 AM on January 25, 2004


Here's a social software smart mob concept. People should vote for Howard Dean because he made such a fool of himself on national television. Here's your chance to blow up the media monopoly. Think of all the brain cells that will burn in New York and Washington. Save the smart bits for the Web, when you're on radio or TV you must act like an idiot. It's a meme. Make it viral. We love you Howard. Let's do a logo. Pass it on!
(scripting news)
posted by Slagman at 8:12 AM on January 25, 2004


:::nods in agreement with mojohand:::
posted by rushmc at 8:19 AM on January 25, 2004


This site carries a copy of the Dean speech from the point of view of the Iowa crowd. It doesn't look the least bit crazy, in my opinion. I found it interesting that the speech only became an issue in later media reports, as if some powerful spinmeisters had recognized their opportunity to make it one.

As a non-American, I don't know too much about Dean, but I enjoyed listening to this remix of Dean quotes. He strikes me as an MLK-like personality, the kind of guy who would be capable of creating a movement that is outside the control of the mainstream media, and who is therefore perceived as a threat. Not a wild eyed liberal, perhaps, but too independent for many people's tastes. I wonder if, when Dean loses the nomination, he will come up with some kind of contingency plan to save his movement, e.g. by announcing the creation of a "Howard Dean Foundation for Progressive Values".

He might be an effective social reformer -- he now has national prominence and a huge number of followers, and without a presidential bid, the occasional yee-haw wouldn't matter.
posted by Eloquence at 8:32 AM on January 25, 2004


Now that I've finally seen the whole thing, I entirely fail to see what the big deal is. This smells like a smear campaign, and/or media manipulation, it's making a big deal out of nothing. Just because the meme (that this is a huge, embarrassing, bid-ending debacle) has spread like wildfire doesn't make it reasonable or believable. It looks to me like a politician enthusiastically rallying his supporters, nothing more. What a successful job has been done by those who wish to make something so mundane seem so significant. I don't know much about how you run things down here, but I've been to plenty of election pep rallies in Canada, and Dean's was in no way unusual in my experience. People must have some pretty weird standards for a man's sincere enthusiasm to make him unelectable.
posted by biscotti at 9:08 AM on January 25, 2004


People must have some pretty weird standards for a man's sincere enthusiasm to make him unelectable.

Actually I did not think about this whole thing until you posted that. Now I am a little freaked out by him too. What I want is a president who thinks it is the worst job on the planet, cause it should be.
posted by thirteen at 9:54 AM on January 25, 2004


he just gives me the creeps.

you've just been manipulated by a talking box in your living room. who's crazy, exactly?


Yeah, if you weren't cheering enthusiastically when Dean gave that speech or if you have any negative feelings towards him, you must be a lemming manipulated by the Dean-hating media because no free thinker would ever feel that way.
posted by gyc at 9:54 AM on January 25, 2004


I was there.
posted by RakDaddy at 10:06 AM on January 25, 2004


All the candidates are now out there for us to look at, and decide about...some of us here like Dean, some Kerry, some Edwards, some Clark, some haven't decided yet, and some fools still like Bush ; >
And after these past 3 years, there's no such thing as "presidential behavior", imho.

My psychic prediction for New Hampshire is Dean in a very strong 2nd place, and then South Carolina hurting both Dean and Kerry, and boosting Edwards and Clark. (Lieberman's out after New Hampshire.) It's a real race this time, which is great!
posted by amberglow at 10:11 AM on January 25, 2004


Who's more presidential? (Quicktime.)
posted by homunculus at 10:19 AM on January 25, 2004


My husband had a real dislike for Dean before the "YEEARGH". Not because of his political views, but he just personally dislikes him for reasons he can't really put his finger on.

That pretty much sums up how elections are decided here in the U.S.
posted by boredomjockey at 10:20 AM on January 25, 2004


I think that the most important numbers is not just going to include who is first, but also how many show up. Primaries are usually poorly attended but the Democratic Iowa caucus reported double the number of voters from 2000. If this trend carries on through the primary season, that could be a heck of a lot of momentum to carry through to November.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 10:23 AM on January 25, 2004


kerry beats bush in national poll. the only candidate to do so... food for thought.

www.pollingreport.org

kerry also gets the endorsement of the excellent league of conservation voters.


meanwhile the storm brews over whether bush was merely awol - or in fact a "deserter" during the vietnam war.
posted by specialk420 at 10:30 AM on January 25, 2004


How to be a Good Democrat.
posted by hama7 at 10:31 AM on January 25, 2004


hama, they left out 22: You think that anyone believing that collection of lies, exaggerations and distortions is not too bright.
posted by amberglow at 10:35 AM on January 25, 2004


I've been doing a lot of thinking about Dean's "Yeeeeaaaaaargh!" and I've come to the conclusion that it's exactly the noise one might make when choking on a pretzel.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:47 AM on January 25, 2004


Things you have to believe to be a Republican today.
posted by homunculus at 10:55 AM on January 25, 2004


"the man was giving a pep talk to a bunch of supporters after a setback. "
"But if I was at a pep rally where the number one preseason ranked team had an upset and the coach was trying to get the supporters and players motivated for the rest of the season, it wouldn't seem out of place at all"

I don't buy this argument. It wasn't just a speech to rabid supporters after a painful loss. It was broadcast nationally by basically every news station ( cnn, msnbc, fox... ) at a time of major importance for his run to be the President of the US, the biggest, baddest power in the world. I don't think any Dem speech has been covered live, on all big channels, in the election. Even debates are usually only covered live one one channel, if they are covered.

The context of the yell makes it important. The fact that he got overtaken by emotion after a big loss when everyone was looking was important. That's the sort of situation he'll be in a lot if he becomes president of the US. He was trying to fight against the media portrayal of Angry Dean (or maybe Overly Emotional Dean), but at his moment of biggest media exposure, direct to the voters, that exactly what he gave them. The media certainly pushes a story/a stereotype for all it's worth, but this event basically proved the story true.

Those post-Iowa speeches seemed important to me. The showed Gephart a good man, Dean an emotional one, Edwards a damn good speaker, and Kerry used to babbling on in the Senate for hours.

But all this might just be my sour grapes because I live in a state that gives me no voice in the selection of a Dem, besides cash.
posted by superchris at 10:57 AM on January 25, 2004


we do have to change the primary schedules--it's absurd that tiny states have so much influence over who gets to be the nominee--I liked a regional idea I heard about...
posted by amberglow at 11:15 AM on January 25, 2004


I like the regional idea more for the separation of time between caucuses/primaries than the regional part. I do also like the idea of switching which state goes first, too. Small states have limitations (Iowa+HN are too white), but they do allow for voters to have direct contact with the candidates. Regional and large state primaries still seems too media/money driven to me. Maybe one changing state from each changing region voting instead of the whole region. Sadly, lengthening the time of the process seems to be against the wishes of parties. I guess it makes more sense for big parties to want to have a single candidate quickly, but I think it hurts us voters.
posted by superchris at 11:53 AM on January 25, 2004


hama7: That link was beneath you. (And homophobic to boot.)
posted by boredomjockey at 12:49 PM on January 25, 2004


I don't understand how anybody can think Dean getting a little over-excited (or rightly terse with a heckler) is even in the same ballpark as anything Bush has done.

Who, exactly, said that? Why do all the Dean supporters keep telling themselves that if Dean isn't nominated, we'll be stuck with Bush? This is what weirds me out about Dean and his minions... their fanaticism. "Kerry, Edwards, Clark? Never heard of 'em. IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT FOR DEAN, YOU'LL BE STUCK WITH BUSH FOREVER. YEEEEAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!"

Fact is, it's days later, and the whole country is still laughing at Dean. There may be some advantage in replacing a malicious buffoon with a benevolent buffoon, but why not replace the malicious buffoon with someone who ISN'T A BUFFOON AT ALL? Wow, what an idea.
posted by Shoeburyness at 12:55 PM on January 25, 2004


Also, you'll have to excuse me if I don't find "He's WAY less of an embarassing moron than George Bush" to be a good reason to vote for someone.
posted by Shoeburyness at 1:50 PM on January 25, 2004


The Dean scream: oh fuck people. Has any one seen the video of ballmer jumping around screaming? Its called working a crowd. Yes - they look silly to anyone not caught up in the energy and excitement.

I was sort of resting on my laurels cause Dean was doing well. i think ill register this year - just because there are idiots who think that Bush's abuses *are* presidential, or being Bush's secret skull and bones ass buddy, voting for the war in iraq, the patriot act, and the 87 billion aid package for Iraq *cough* haliburton *cough* is totally electable material (kerry).
posted by Tryptophan-5ht at 2:21 PM on January 25, 2004


Yeah, if you weren't cheering enthusiastically when Dean gave that speech or if you have any negative feelings towards him, you must be a lemming manipulated by the Dean-hating media because no free thinker would ever feel that way.

gyc: go back and read what she wrote, dumbass.
posted by quonsar at 3:48 PM on January 25, 2004


gyc: go back and read what she wrote, dumbass.

I did. I stand by my statement. What the hell is wrong with you?
posted by gyc at 5:39 PM on January 25, 2004


dirty tricks against the dean campaign
posted by amberglow at 8:25 PM on January 25, 2004


Who, exactly, said that? Why do all the Dean supporters keep telling themselves that if Dean isn't nominated, we'll be stuck with Bush?

That's not what I said. What I said is it seems to be popular in the mass media circles recently to make it clear that Dean is "angry" and overly emotional, therefore making him bad presidential material, who would, himself, be incapable of defeating Bush because of these "faults." My point is simply that the things they're harping on aren't faults; they're mostly juvenile, highschool bullshit that doesn't have a thing to do with whether or not he'd be a good president. He looks cool. Now that's a president! That kind of thing.

I made a typo in my last post to you, however; I meant to say that I wasn't speaking to you directly, not that I was. I was addressing a general feeling the media is giving off.

This is what weirds me out about Dean and his minions... their fanaticism. "Kerry, Edwards, Clark? Never heard of 'em. IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT FOR DEAN, YOU'LL BE STUCK WITH BUSH FOREVER. YEEEEAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!"

So now you've devolved into the realm of misguided rants: "minions", "fanaticism," and then another lame poke at the scream (ohhh, the scream), as if it proves absolutely anything.

If you carefully re-read what I said, I didn't espouse myself to Dean in the least. I happen to think he seems like an ok enough sort, at least compared to most of the other candidates, but I'm not an American so my opinion is simply that of an outsider looking in.

Fact is, it's days later, and the whole country is still laughing at Dean. There may be some advantage in replacing a malicious buffoon with a benevolent buffoon, but why not replace the malicious buffoon with someone who ISN'T A BUFFOON AT ALL? Wow, what an idea.

Yes, and why are they laughing at them? That's the entire point of this entire thread. Simply restating what's happening makes no discernible point, since we're already discussing why people are being led towards this conclusion.

I'd assert quite strongly that there is more than "some advantage" to replacing a malicious, murdering, crusading cowboy. I'd also, again, question why Dean is a "buffoon" for showing a little too much excitement. I generally try to steer clear of reading too much into what people write, but your continued refusal to let go of shallow observations (bad feelings, lunatic, buffoon) made without the benefit of any factual backing mark you as the type these media outlets target, as Quonsar elegantly and somewhat harshly pointed out earlier.

My apologies, but I certainly hope neither you nor your husband ever end up with jury duty of any sort if you rely on intuition to make your assessments of a person's worthiness.
posted by The God Complex at 8:44 PM on January 25, 2004


a getting-shot-and-falling-off-something scream out of an Indiana Jones movie

You mean the Wilhelm.
posted by muckster at 9:13 PM on January 25, 2004


yes, I do, thanks! (god the intuition in this room is amazing)
posted by scarabic at 12:33 AM on January 26, 2004


God Complex: I don't watch TV news, so how exactly is the media "targeting" me? Quonsar pointed nothing out elegantly, unless you consider "You don't like the guy I like so you must be stooooopid" to be elegant. Quonsar, at least in this thread, seems like exactly the kind of frothing-at-the-mouth Deaniac I'm talking about. "If you don't like Dean, you're a lemming lead around by the Dean-hating media. They all hate him, for no good reason! It's a conspiracy of the media! There is no one but Dean. THERE IS NO ONE BUT DEAN, YOU HEAR ME!!!!" A man who inspires this kind of cultish weirdness makes me leery. Apparently a lot of Iowans were leery of him too, BEFORE the scream. The democratic candidates don't really have much to distinguish them. For the most part, I don't think we really care. We just want someone who isn't Bush. I could have lived with any of them, until I realized that Dean does NOT inspire my confidence. Dean has just distinguished himself from the other three-- he's the one who acts weird. When I have three other choices, why would I pick the one who acts weird? Like it or not, public perception is a HUGE part of running a country. You can't run a country effectively if no one has confidence in you. The fervor of the Deaniacs is far too close to the fervor of Bush's minions for my comfort.
posted by Shoeburyness at 1:18 AM on January 26, 2004


Another thing that bugs me about the entire speech: Dean got his ass handed to him, but yet he's hopping around like he just won the whole election. It makes me think that he didn't understand what the hell happened. I don't like that Dubya-esque disconnect with reality.
posted by Shoeburyness at 3:33 AM on January 26, 2004


The least important audience in range of Dean's evangelical histrionics was his slightly dispirited band of supporters. His Starbuckian pep rally was an ill-timed self-indulgence. He should have played to the cameras - really - he should have - there was a whole damn planet on the other side of 'em.

If nothing else, it was a surprisingly 'duh' moment. Sorry, but it was.
posted by Opus Dark at 5:42 AM on January 26, 2004


Dean got his ass handed to him, but yet he's hopping around like he just won the whole election. It makes me think that he didn't understand what the hell happened.

Seems pretty clear to me that you are in denial about the true facts here, Shoeburyness. I suggest you try reading some of the first-person accounts linked to by people who were actually there. They might clear things up for you.

And there is a very good reason why some people might suggest that Dean is the only viable Democratic candidate—because we find the other people running unacceptable for one reason or another. Again, this has been noted in this thread and others.
posted by rushmc at 9:58 AM on January 26, 2004


His Starbuckian pep rally

Does that mean anything?
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 10:24 AM on January 26, 2004


I don't watch TV news, so how exactly is the media "targeting" me?

MSNBC.com, CNN.com, Foxnews.com, etc. Where did you see "the scream" if you didn't see it on television news? Or did you hear about it from friends who watched news, because second-hand manipulation isn't all that much better.

Quonsar never intimated that he liked Dean, only that you're being swayed by a talking box in your living room. Your reading into his statement against indicates your willingness to assume things about people based on very little information. The fact is you used what might be a politically unsavvy move--of the most inane and ridiculous shade--to reinforce a bunch of intuitions you had about his character that neither you no your significant other could place their finger on. As a rule, relying on "feelings" you have about people might work on occasion, but when there's a plethora of material at your disposal to make a judgement about someone (you know, political history, ideology, that sort of thing) it's about the worst possible way to make a judgement. If you simply think another candidate is stronger on issues, fine, but if you think that appearances is foreign countries and other Americans on a purely surface level is more important than I simply can't respect that.

When I have three other choices, why would I pick the one who acts weird?

Because, believe it or not, some of them actually have different stances on different issues. Sure, Kerry is positioning himself strongly now, but where was he when they invaded Iraq? Maybe that doesn't matter to you, maybe it does. Personally, that would disqualify him as a reasonable choice for me, but that's somewhat beside the point.

Also, what the venerable rushmc said.
posted by The God Complex at 11:57 AM on January 26, 2004


again, not against. my apologies.
posted by The God Complex at 12:03 PM on January 26, 2004


Does that mean anything?

No.
posted by Opus Dark at 12:13 PM on January 26, 2004


« Older What if...  |  Centauromachies, Amazonomachie... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments