u/Idk_Very_Much

IDK if something this small is worth making a post for but I get annoyed every time I see something so confidently incorrect/misleading get posted so often here.

For those who don't know, on January 3, 2022, Nate tweeted out

>It's probably foolish to think a NYC mayor will successfully translate into being a national political figure, but I still think Eric Adams would be in my top 5 for "who will be the next Democratic presidential nominee after Joe Biden?

This is very often used on this sub as a way to bash on Nate's punditry. I really don't think it's a good example of that. It's just not a very big claim he's making: most people now quote it as Nate predicting Adams to be "the future of the Democratic Party" which as far as I can tell is just lying and/or a game of telephone confusing people.

The rest of the thread makes Nate's reasoning clear

>He's going to be good at getting media attention and he has a chance of carving out a niche that's different from what other Democrats are offering. That's a potentially powerful combination given how primaries are conducted nowadays. Also, the competition isn't great.

>People aren't thinking about this quite right. Other than Kamala Harris, nobody is more than ~10% to be the right answer to this question. They're all inherently long shots. So you'd rather have someone with obvious strengths and obvious liabilities rather than a "generic" D.

>The "former mayors of NYC have a bad track record" talking point is also really underpowered. If something like 10-15% of presidential primary campaigns are successful (assuming ~8 candidates per cycle) and NYC mayors are 0-for-4, that tells you basically nothing statistically.

Basically, Nate was saying "In the event that something really weird happens and Harris doesn't succeed Biden, Adams is the sort of weird nominee we might get." He said himself that it was a very unlikely scenario and that Adams has "obvious liabilities".

Did Nate underestimate just how badly Adams's term was going to go? Yeah, probably. But IMO, it isn't such an extraordinarily bad take to be worth constantly beating up on Nate for years later. If you're looking for one, a much better example would be him offering a bet of 100k that Trump wouldn't win Florida by more than 8 in 2024.

I think in most years it would just default to someone in the Animated Film winner, but there are some exceptions that I go into detail about.

2001-Eddie Murphy (Shrek)

2002-Rumi Hiiragi (Spirited Away)

2003-Albert Brooks (Finding Nemo)

2004-Someone from The Incredibles. I feel like you could make a good case for Nelson, Hunter, or Bird.

2005-Peter Sallis in Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. Could definitely see Helena Bonham Carter in Corpse Bride taking it due to being a bigger name though.

2006-Robin Williams in Happy Feet

2007-Peter O'Toole in Ratatouille

2008-Dustin Hoffman in Kung Fu Panda

2009-Ed Asner in Up

2010-Tom Hanks in Toy Story 3

2011-Johnny Depp in Rango

2012-I honestly don't know? I can't really tell whether Brave voters would favor MacDonald or Thompson, and maybe it's just that I'm a hater of that movie but I feel like there's not much passion for either of them? Maybe Reilly or Silverman from Wreck-It Ralph would take it.

2013-Idina Menzel in Frozen Scarlett Johansson in Her, who I forgot about.

2014-Scott Adsit in Big Hero 6

2015-Amy Poehler in Inside Out

2016-Jason Bateman in Zootopia

2017-Gael García Bernal in Coco

2018-This is another year where I'm torn. I'm not sure who in Spider-Verse would stand out, Moore has by far the best role but he's also not nearly as known as Mulaney or Cage or Ali. An Incredibles cast member who lost in 2004 would also have a good case.

2019-Another close year. Hanks would have already won, so maybe there'd be a push for Allen even though he wasn't doing anything exciting. Tony Hale was a bit of a breakout too. And Klaus had a lot of hype behind it, so maybe J.K. Simmons would win in the end.

2020-Jaime Foxx in Soul

2021-Stephanie Beatriz in Encanto

2022-Antonio Banderas in Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. I think the overdue factor would push him over the Pinocchio actors.

2023-Shameik Moore in Across the Spider-Verse, though Hailee Steinfeld wouldn't shock me.

2024-Lupita Nyong’o in The Wild Robot

2025-Arden Cho in KPop Demon Hunters

In Breaking Bad, there is not really a “good ending” available to the characters. I guess the case scenario would be for Walt to take the Gray Matter job and pay off his treatment, and maybe patch up his marriage a bit along the way. But he’d still die, probably with a feeling that he hadn't made the best choices. Jesse, ironically, may have actually benefited from going through the series, because even if it was hell it was probably the only thing that could get him out of a business where he’d probably die young.

On the other hand…it’s so easy to see Jimmy and Kim having a happy, fulfilled, successful life together as legitimate lawyers. And they had so many chances to take that opportunity. That was a possibility for Jimmy at least until S4, and it was for Kim all the way until she drove back at the end of S6E6 so they could go through with the Howard scheme. Instead, they live separate, passionless lives for years, dealing with their traumas in equally depressing ways. The finale has a little optimism, but they’ll still never be back to what they once could have been. And they chose that for themselves, over and over again. Even if Breaking Bad has a lot of sad scenes (and I obviously love it as well), I don't think it has that sort of existentially bleak feeling to it.