explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2464: Muller's Ratchet

2021-05-18T20:56:53Z

162.158.75.160:

I do this frequently: Seeking out the best quality of two media I've seen put together, in an effort to improve the quality of the resultant combined media.

I had no idea, all this time I'd been creating recombinant PNG.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 20:58, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

This is the first time I've encountered recombination, but I've seen the many versions of images scattered across the internet for sure --[[User:Char Latte49|Char Latte49]] ([[User talk:Char Latte49|talk]]) 21:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

On a number of occasions I've had to edit images given to me to submit to a resource. The original photographer ''insists'' on having a 'burnt-on' timestamp directly on the image (he's always done that, and won't accept metadata does the job); meanwhile, the resource's policies are heavily against such 'decoration' and moderators often reject such. When I can't easily clone a 'coverage' area from within the same image - and feather its edges to blend in - I sometimes find another original (but slightly different viewpoint) submitted image that has a sufficiently unsullied 'patch' to let it pass muster. That's a slightly meta-example, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.161|141.101.99.161]] 23:17, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Sexual reproduction pictures on teh Interwebz mkay, but I lament a certain underrepresentation of amoeba pr0n. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.134|141.101.105.134]] 08:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

im guessing this time traveller ^^ just came back from 2008. dont go to 2020. ever. just dont. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.59|162.158.79.59]] 14:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Bumpf

That's a squirrel?? Look at its tail - squirrels have thick fluffy tails, not that skinny one. And if it is a squirrel, it's by far the largest I've ever seen - unless Hairbun and Cueball are children. I was 100% certain when I saw it that it was a cat. --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.42.124|172.69.42.124]] 14:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
:: And we do know how Randall draws squirrels: [[1503]], [[1578]], [[776]], and [[1156]] all contain examples. I vote that this be changed. --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.42.21|172.69.42.21]] 14:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
:: I'm not sure that's a cat, the muzzle looks wrong to me. Some other feline, maybe. A 4-legged furry mammal with a tail, almost definitely. Could we ask Randall for clarification? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.132|172.69.22.132]] 19:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
:::Looks like a rat to me. Maybe a possum or something? It has a pointed muzzle. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 20:56, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

94: Profile Creation Flowchart

2020-11-12T19:22:21Z

162.158.75.160: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 94
| date = April 26, 2006
| title = Profile Creation Flowchart
| image = profile_flowchart.jpg
| titletext = This one goes out to xxCrazyPixie1987xx
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|The title text isn't explained.}}
{{w|AIM_(software)|AIM}} (short for AOL Instant Messenger, now defunct) offered its users profile pages to share info about themselves or their friends. Randall notes that these pages fall into one of three categories:

*People without friends or significant others who linked to their {{w|LiveJournal}} (a blogging service popular in the early 2000s);
*People with friends and significant others who would celebrate their relationship all over their page;
*People with friends who would fill their profile with inside jokes only their friends could understand.

Both AIM and LiveJournal were known for their teenage user base, as shown by the title text's fictional AIM screen name.

The title text seems to reference the kind of behavior someone with a tribute page would display.

==Transcript==
[A flowchart is shown.]
:Have Friends? → No → Link to your LiveJournal
:Have Friends? → Yes, and want to alienate everyone else → Inside jokes!
:Have Friends? → Yes → Have Boyfriend/ Girlfriend? →
::No → Angsty about it? →
:::Yes → Link to your LiveJournal
:::No → Yes you are → Angsty about it?
::Yes → A profile tribute is the greatest possible expression of love.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Flowcharts]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

Talk:2379: Probability Comparisons

2020-11-01T21:43:33Z

162.158.75.160: 2nd to last entry doesn't actually say that Barack Obama answers, nor that the phone number dialed is his.

(Sidenote: for the 88% entry in the comic, "outside" is misspelled as "outide" as of the current moment.)

What's the best way to organize the explanations for this comic, when they begin to be added? By the order they're listed in the comic? That seems inefficient, since presumably many of the entries can be answered as a group by a single explanation. If they should be grouped, how should they be grouped? --[[User:V2Blast|V2Blast]] ([[User talk:V2Blast|talk]]) 03:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: The table I added is sortable. You could add a "type" column of some sort and users could sort by that if they want. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 04:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
There's a discrepancy between the version here and the current official version. Here, 0.2% has the red M&Ms thing paired with the odds of drawing a flush in poker ("you draw 5 cards and they're all the same suit"); the official version has it with "You draw 2 random Scrabble tiles and get M and M." Here, the latter piece of information is at 0.1%, and there the 0.1% item is "Three randomly chosen people are all left-handed." I'm guessing we have an old version of the page? [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 06:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: Updated. [[User:Natg19|Natg19]] ([[User talk:Natg19|talk]]) 08:29, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:: Cool, thanks. [[User:Captain Video|Captain Video]] ([[User talk:Captain Video|talk]]) 01:22, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Wouldn't the Lord of the rings one be, technically, 67%, since 66.6666666... rounds to 67%, not 66? Also, we should really add a better comment interface. [[User:BarnZarn|BarnZarn]] ([[User talk:BarnZarn|talk]]) 06:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
: The same goes for the next entry, imho, since LOTR-one is 2 out of 3 movies and the dice rolls are 4 out of 6, which comes down to the exact same percentage.

Hooray, xkcd is finally xkcd again! For the last fifty strips it’s basically been lighter SMBC. Yay Randall!

Also, if anyone wants to read something very English and very horrible, https://endicottstudio.typepad.com/poetrylist/the-white-road-by-neil-gaiman.html. [[User:Lightcaller|Lightcaller]] ([[User talk:Lightcaller|talk]]) 07:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I have to think the second to last is off. First, what is meant by "just been"? Minutes, hours, days? Second, does anyone know the correct number of 10-digit phone numbers that are answered by people named "Barack Obama" (as pronounced, not spelled)? I remember that Obama had a cell, and including the phones in his office and his bedroom (separate #'s), so during his term, that's at least 3. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 15:50, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:first of all, this is no longer his term, so the number of phone numbers he has nowadays might be different. Also, the scenario requires him to pick up the phone, and he probably wouldn't simultaneously be available to pick up a phone in both his office and bedroom, and unless it's a cell phone, only a fraction of the time would he be there. Also, like many people, he might not answer calls from unknown numbers, or he may have a secretary or someone screening his calls. Judging from the following line though, the calculations used here probably just used 1 in 10 billion for that value, leaving only the "just been an 8.0 earthquake in Calfornia" part.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

:Isn't the second to last entry really just a sneaky way of listing the probability of a magnitude 8 earthquake having just occurred in California? The entry says nothing about Barack Obama actually answering the phone, nor even that the number dialed being Barack Obama's. If agreed, then can the explanation in the table be updated? If disagreeing, then I'd appreciate you pointing out where I'm in error.

guys i have never edited the transcript section im scared. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:This comic has so many American jokes and brands I can't understand this... I found this from [https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1263600/probability-of-picking-up-two-mms-of-same-color-randomly mathematics stack exchange] and that helped me understand what this M&M stuff is... — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
::Alright, I if the only colours are red green and blue how can there be fucking yellow or brown godammit I give up someone else do this shit AHAHAHA — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:45, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:::There are currently 6 colors, blue, red, brown, yellow, green and orange. Each comes in different ratios, for some reason. If there were all the same ratio, then getting 2 that are both red would be 1/36=2.777%, so red is below average. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
::::The colors used to be different a number of years ago. I forget what year, but they had a contest for people to vote on a new M&M flavor. They had people vote between blue, pink, and purple. I guess blue won as both pink and purple are considered girly colors and blue is considered manly, but the presencee of two girly colors split the vote for that. At the same time they got rid of there having used to be light brown M&Ms, and for a while they had commercials with blue M&Ms singing the blues. Anyway, I also read speculation the reason some colors are more common is they put less of the ones where the dye they use is more expensive, though I'm not sure if that's accurate.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand the "You share a birthday with two US Senators" as being 4%. If there is only one pair of U.S. Senators with the same birthday, then your chance of sharing a birthday with them would be 1/365 (~0.27%). --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.143|162.158.74.143]] 20:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
:I'm not certain of the math offhand, but it is the odds of randomly sharing a birthday with 2 out of 100 Senators. Not that just a pair shares one with you. Although all this birthday talk ignores Feb 29 births. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
::I just noticed the note about there being 9 days that have a pair of Senators sharing a birthday. Does the 4% take that into consideration? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 01:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Um... in the Trivia section, someone wrote:

"the 67% probability of rolling at least a 3 with a D6 is correct. "At least a 3" means a 3, 4, 5, or 6."

Four out of six is ~67%, right? Please don't tell me I've forgotten basic maths. I'm going to delete that section, but feel free to add it back in if I'm just being an idiot. [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 22:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

The explanation for the Social Security Number is wrong- it should be that there are ten possible digits for each of the four digits you're trying to guess. The number of digits in a SSN doesn't matter since the comic specifies you're only guessing the last four. [[User:Duraludon|Duraludon]] ([[User talk:Duraludon|talk]]) 00:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:In addition, there are no valid SSN's with any group as all zeros, so there are only 9999 valid numbers to guess at. Still close enough to .01% [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 13:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

XKCD comics are getting later and later in the (American) day. This one was posted Sunday the 1st, from the point of view of us Aussies. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.119.159|162.158.119.159]] 01:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== 2/3 = both 66% and 67%? ==

I get picking either 66% or 67% as a rounding for 2/3 but to have one of each?? Is there any actual reason for this?

<blockquote>66% A randomly chosen movie from the main Lord of the Rings trilogy has “of the” in the title twice 67% You roll at least a 3 with a d6</blockquote>

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.152|162.158.79.152]] 21:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I wonder what time frame he meant for there "just" having been an earthquake in California.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.124|108.162.216.124]] 09:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Angus King is from Maine, that’s ME not MN. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.200|108.162.219.200]] 14:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== Do we do calculus? ==

I think I've got how Randall did the birthday party/free-throw calculations, but it's kind of math-intensive. How much should I put in the explanation column? It's quite easier to explain with summations, but that requires a lot of background to someone who doesn't know calculus (i.e., probably a lot of people who read this). Should I forego the sum entirely? Should I say "the proof is by magic"? Also, at least some of this is stemming from the fact that I have no clue how one would insert a summation sigma into the editing, and I'm too afraid to try it. I'll write it with a bunch of plus signs (basically a sum, but longhand notation) until somebody decides to step in and clean it up. [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 18:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

== Let's talk M&Ms ==

I'm beginning to think Randall is nerd-sniping us, because none of the values for M&M colours seem to line up with his source. The easiest example to demonstrate is '77% : An M&M is not blue'. '''Nowhere in the article is there a value which rounds to 23% for blue M&Ms.''' Most of the other calculations also seem to have small-scale differences, and a few have differences so big only using the 95% confidence interval values help. Can anybody figure out his line of reasoning with this? [[User:BlackHat|BlackHat]] ([[User talk:BlackHat|talk]]) 19:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
:You have to remember that 87% of all stats are made up. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 21:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2361: Voting

2020-10-25T13:46:37Z

162.158.75.160: Shark Week

To current and future readers: Ruth Bader Ginsburg died today. The timing of this comic may even coincide with this fact.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.67|162.158.74.67]] 03:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
: Maybe, but [[Randall]] has posted tons of election articles before, especially expressing his love for Hillary (and thus dislike for Trump). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.228|108.162.216.228]] 04:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
:I read it as a "just vote, don't even care who you vote for, but vote" thing. Maybe Randall will show his own ideas later (though I can only imagine the one way that he'll lean, having ruled out ruling ''everyone'' out) but this is only actually anti-Trump insofar as Trump undeniably courts anti-voting (in his favour), more than pretty much any of the ideological-opposites do (in theirs). Don't read much more into this. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.116|162.158.159.116]] 10:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
:I {{w|Ruth Bader Ginsburg|looked who she is}} but I'm still unsure how would the comics be related to that. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 03:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
:@Hkmaly RBG was one of nine Supreme Court judges. She, like three others, leaned left ("Progressive"). Four lean right ("Conservative"), and one is centrist. Supreme Court judges hold their office for life. They are nominated by the current U.S. President, who historically nominates judges who lean the way they do. In the US, the Supreme Court, as the "Highest Court in the Land", can effectively overturn legislation or otherwise change society - for example, "Roe v Wade" is the Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal in every State. If you want to change U.S. society to be more like you want, you'll vote for a President who leans your way -- not least because they will take the opportunity to stack the Supreme Court with "your" kind of judge. In early 2016, the majority Republican Senate refused to vote on the Democratic President's nomination because "it was an election year; we'll wait for the next President to be voted in." In late 2020, the majority Republic Senate will apparently fast-track the vote on whomever the Republican President nominates despite the election in less than six weeks. [[User:John.Adriaan|John.Adriaan]] ([[User talk:John.Adriaan|talk]]) 01:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
:It seems unlikely to me to be related, since there is normally a time delay between when a comic is written and when it's published. [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 15:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

The election isn't two months from now; more like six weeks.
:It's also two months away. Not next month, but the one after that. Just, but it is. (I suppose I wouldn't have said this without also deciding I could remind people to sign the posts with the four tildes.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.36|162.158.155.36]] 15:09, 19 September 2020 (UTC) It's also "less than 2 months from the time of the comic's publication" so there's that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.53|162.158.74.53]] 10:52, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

"I will brave mobs of vigilantes armed with pistols, rifles and machine guns, to vote this year, if I have to." "OK, now you're just being ridicu... wait, I take that back." [http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/08/trump-wants-to-station-armed-guards-at-2020-polls Trump Wants to Station Armed Guards at the 2020 Polls] [https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/gop-recruits-army-poll-watchers-fight-voter-fraud-no-can-n1217391 GOP recruits army of poll watchers to fight voter fraud no one can prove exists] [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 05:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
: This is missing from the article. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.145|173.245.52.145]] 15:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

== Images not loading ==

Images on xkcd are failing to load with error 503 certificate has expired. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.6|162.158.238.6]] 00:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

And what-if.xkcd.com too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.197|162.158.183.197]] 00:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

:xkcd seems to have fixed itself, although uniXKCD and What-If are still 503-ing. [[User:Bubblegum|bubblegum]]-[[User_talk:Bubblegum|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bubblegum|contribs]] 03:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
If this was late July/Early August there would be sharks(or references to sharks) on seemingly *every* chsnnel[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 13:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:369: Dangers

2020-10-22T20:13:53Z

162.158.75.160:

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22died+in+a+blogging+accident%22&biw=1366&bih=599&tbs=cdr:1,cd_max:1/10/2008&start=0&sa=N&filter=0
I seem to be incapable of finding any google search results before 10th of January 2008 featuring the phrase "Died in a blogging accident" that is not relevant to this XKCD comic. Weird.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.208.177|108.162.208.177]] 17:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Google now has 687000 results for "Died in a blogging accident", "can be found on over 10000 web pages" doesn't reflect that, but I wouldn't know which number to use for an edit :) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.9|141.101.92.9]] 00:28, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I highly doubt the gardening search had anything to do with Spinal Tap. Gardening accidents are common. {{unsigned|Flewk}}

According to some sleuths on StackExchange, it sadly seems the original "died in a blogging accident" posts no longer exist, as they were posts from a Myspace that is now gone. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.190|172.68.141.190]] 09:06, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

There aren't any results for 'died in a knitting accident' before Jan 11, 2008. I wonder if there's a similar situation there?

When I attempted to find the two results for blogging accidents, I didn't use the date query feature, and instead narrowed it down by deleting search terms that came up that were usually signs of being influenced by the xkcd comic. However, with this search query:
"died in a blogging accident" -xkcd -randall -instagram -chexquest -knitting

on page four, you get two results from the steelguitarforum:
https://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=36877&view=next (from 2001)
https://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=881412&sid=2668da1dbca46c81ce7f6fd2b7b8b620 (from 2007)
So, unless these dates were changed after the fact, this implies that these two search results were what Randall got.
Unfortunately, these aren't people, instead they're a beer brand and a hard drive, respectively. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 20:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

1891: Obsolete Technology

2020-10-18T05:34:38Z

162.158.75.160:

{{comic
| number = 1891
| date = September 18, 2017
| title = Obsolete Technology
| image = obsolete_technology.png
| titletext = And I can't believe some places still use fax machines. The electrical signals waste so much time going AROUND the Earth when neutrino beams can go straight through!
}}

==Explanation==
This comic mocks people who criticize an industry for using obsolete technology, even when said technology is sufficient for the task at hand. The claim often comes with the implication that those in charge of the industry are behind the times and cannot adapt to the cutting edge. What these critics often fail to realize is that there are cost benefits to sticking with "obsolete" infrastructure, and that upgrading to the newest tech can introduce unwanted side effects and other risks.

Here, [[Ponytail]] acts as one such critic, complaining that the business is taking "forever" to get with the times. [[Megan]] uses sarcasm to deliver her counterargument: despite the advent of nuclear weapons, fireworks use the ancient technology of {{w|gunpowder}} (invented in the 9th century), because fireworks are used by civilians for celebratory purposes and should have as few lethal side effects as possible.

As they use gunpowder, fireworks do claim a handful of lives and cause thousands of injuries each year due to improper handling procedures; between June 18th and July 18th of 2016 (thus including the {{w|Independence Day (United States)|Independence Day}} celebrations on July 4th), fireworks caused an estimated 11,000 injuries, of which 7,000 had to be treated in hospitals. In the whole year of 2016, four people died. (U.S. stats, [http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2017/06/30/456213.htm]). Nuclear explosions, meanwhile, have "detrimental effects" on human health in the same way sledgehammers have "detrimental effects" to chicken eggs. For example, should a nuclear explosion at a firework display be too powerful, the spectators, and possibly the neighborhood around the display, would be vaporized instantly. Fallout from a nuclear reaction could spread radiation across a wide area, leading to increased risks of cancers and other detrimental genetic mutations.

In other words, sometimes using newer technology is "overkill" for the purpose, and it might be costlier to switch to a newer technology. For example, many industrial machines were designed and sold in the 1990s when {{w|floppy disk}}s were the prevalent means of storing the instructions, but those machines still have one or two or even more decades of usable lifetime left, and the instruction files still fit on those floppy disks. So, in 2017, there are several companies that thrive on buying, refurbishing and selling floppy disks. This [https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/why-do-floppy-disks-still-exist-the-world-isnt-ready-to-move-on/ report] portrays one of these companies.

{{w|MS-DOS}} is a computer operating system made by {{w|Microsoft}} that was dominant during much of the 1980s. When Microsoft released the Windows line of operating systems, they encouraged people to switch to the new platform, which many did. MS-DOS became essentially obsolete when Microsoft released {{w|Windows 95}} in 1995. However, there remain rare circumstances in which MS-DOS (or another command-line operating system) is still preferred, such as when no mouse, touchscreen, or other pointing hardware is available, or when the hardware does not support a newer operating system. To make matters simpler, there is {{w|DOSBox}}, a free and open-source MS-DOS emulator which is actively maintained and extended. Likewise, {{w|FreeDOS}} is a free and open-source operating system designed to run on both older and newer computers which is compatible with programs written for MS-DOS.

The title text uses a different twist, criticizing the current use of {{w|fax}} machines. In many respects, faxing is obsolete compared to e-mail; it supports only black-and-white images, it complicates the process of modifying sent text by rendering it as images, it consumes the recipient's paper and toner and, in some countries, requires the recipient to pay a fee. Fax machines are a peculiar topic among "obsolete" technology; in some fields, like lawyer offices, pharmacies and medical practices, they staunchly hold their ground, as they offer a way to quickly transfer handwritten and hand-signed documents. Confidentiality is also an issue; fax, which uses a landline, is more difficult to intercept than internet-based traffic. In some countries, a telecopy is a valid document, having the same legal value as the original. A patient can thus call their doctor to fill a prescription, which is faxed to the pharmacy where the patient can fetch their drugs, saving precious time. In the same manner, a legal request can be sent to the receiver, without having to use a courier or express mail.

But rather than argue on any of the above points, the title text instead claims that faxing is obsolete due to being electron-based, while {{w|neutrino}}-based communication would be faster. In 2017, neutrino detectors are heavy and expensive, used for nuclear research only. Electronic communications travel at a fair share of the speed of light and the advantage of path would be at most a factor of π/2, so neutrino-based communication would normally be far too expensive compared to the speed gain. Even in the most extreme case (communicating between {{w|antipodes}}), the time saved would be a few hundredths of a second – insignificant for almost all purposes, but potentially enough to gain an edge in {{w|high-frequency trading}}, as suggested in a [https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2012/04/30/neutrinos-to-give-high-frequency-traders-the-millisecond-edge/#25d0ba7a590c 2012 ''Forbes'' article.] Real-world fax detractors would rather replace it with other electronic communication systems, not neutrinic ones.

==Transcript==

:[Ponytail sits in front of an old computer. Megan stands behind her.]
:Ponytail: Whoa, this is running MS-DOS! It's weird how new technology takes forever to reach some industries.
:Megan: Yeah. Like how we still use gunpowder for fireworks, even though we've had nuclear weapons for over 70 years.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

Talk:2373: Chemist Eggs

2020-10-17T09:31:09Z

162.158.75.160:

Chemists get another solid pummeling from xkcd dot com. Also, double question marks, very Ryan North. [[User:Lightcaller|Lightcaller]] ([[User talk:Lightcaller|talk]]) 00:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

You could disguise the smell of your rotten eggs with [https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2012/05/15/things_i_wont_work_with_selenophenol selenophenol] and [https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2009/06/11/things_i_wont_work_with_thioacetone thioacetones]. Nobody will complain about your mere sulphides then... (ETA: I wonder about selenoacetones?)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.167|162.158.154.167]] 00:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Seperately, I recall the time when I was still at school and we'd made some compound that had produced the distinct smell of almonds. Mentioning this later to my father (a chemist himself) he was initially quite concerned before I clarified whatever-it-was as whatever it actually was and not an actual cyanogen compound. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.82|141.101.107.82]] 01:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
:About that whole almonds and cyanide thing, wild almonds were originally what are typically called "bitter almonds" which have some substantial differences from the "sweet almonds" you usually see (bitter almonds aren't normally sold in the US at all). Thing is, they contain a chemical that when it reacts with water produces hydrogen cyanide (very little of this is in sweet almonds), to the point where eating enough (depending on your weight, possibly as few as a dozen) could produce a lethal dose of cyanide. However this breaks down when cooked, so they are only dangerous raw. It is these bitter almonds that smell somewhat like cyanide in other contexts might, and is quite unlike the normal smell of sweet almonds (though it isn't quite the same as other sources of cyanide, but resembles it much more than whatever almonds you've most likely encountered). Oddly enough, the smell of bitter almonds isn't from the hydrogen cyanide, but another substance the same thing breaks down into called benzaldehyde (which is also poisonous.)--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 09:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I always heave a mental sigh when I see some bit of safety literature informing me that natural gas smells like rotten eggs. First, as Randall points out, that's not a very useful explanation for most people. Second, it isn't the natural gas (i.e. methane) that has that odour, but the thiols that are added to it as a safety feature. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 02:42, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Pretty sure the current version explanation is wildly overthinking this - sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes a comic about how weird it is that we reference things smelling like rotten eggs when they’re uncommon is just that. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.28|172.69.34.28]] 05:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Actually, sulphides (H2S in particular) smell more like farts that rotten eggs. But science teachers know that if they use the word "fart" in front of a class, there will be no more work done in that lesson, and probably none by that class.

The kids recognise the smell, of course. We used to call it "fartrogen dioxide". Paul Seed 07:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

There was a time, before refrigeration or stock rotation, when bad eggs were much more common. Hence the story of the Curate's egg [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curate%27s_egg], updated here [https://twitter.com/VictorianHumour/status/1014537505587302400]

The Halloween reference could use an explanation. I don't live in the US (or wherever Halloween tradition lives), and connection to eggs is not clear to me. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.183.152|162.158.183.152]] 08:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
:Kids sometimes throw raw eggs at houses on Halloween just to annoy people. That is all. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.35.31|172.69.35.31]] 08:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2372: Dialect Quiz

2020-10-17T09:11:34Z

162.158.75.160:

Fun fact: shallots, scallops, and scallions ran against each other in [[1529: Bracket]]. (This will probably end up in the Trivia tab when one is created.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.10.135|172.69.10.135]] 20:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
:Apparently "scallops" is used in the UK for 'potato fritters', but in ''my'' youth in family camping trips the term was used for (fried) potato slices - like 'chips' (UK type) in thickness, but cut only in one dimension, not two. Often in the same pan, at the same time, as the sausages for the first night's meal, so with the distinct taste of lard and sausage-fat. I assume there's other names for this (greasy, possibly slightly charred/sausage-char-coated in places) delicacy. Similar slices (from boiled tatties, which might have been the preprepared state of the slices fried as above) were also ate un(re)heated in a salad/generic packed-lunch context. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.247|162.158.158.247]] 18:23, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Cosmetology both sounds like "Cosmology" but it's also the fancy word for people who study cosmetics. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.92|172.68.174.92]] 21:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
: Aren't stars the people we took cosmetics advice from before there were influencers? Or are they the same thing? Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.102|162.158.155.102]] 00:55, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I mean the water fountains might as well be gutter pipes
21:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

@kswoll: Pretty sure this is a direct parody of the NYTimes quiz here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/dialect-quiz-map.html

* I agree, this was also tweeted about 3 days earlier by Nate Silver [https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1315348221565206530] - based on [[2371: Election Screen Time]], it's likely that Randall saw that tweet [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.27|162.158.62.27]] 03:29, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The Google pronunciation question might be a reference to a reference to [https://youtu.be/epj8OzP6z-M?t=177 a scene] from the second-to-last episode of Halt and Catch Fire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.165|162.158.79.165]] 23:35, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

My guess is it is a reference to Yahoo another search engine that had commercials with high pitched yelp and some might put emphasis on either the "Ya" or the "hoo"

While I agree that most people know what a hammer is, this is not hammer - or rather, may not be considered "standard" hammer. Personally I would call it "Hammer with that thing for pulling nails out", but I could be easily convinced that it has some other name which doesn't include the word "hammer", instead of (presumably correct) {{w|claw hammer}}. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
:My feeling is that claw hammers are the type of hammer that most people are familiar with, and would consider the archetype of hammer. If you go to {{w|hammer}} the first picture is a claw hammer. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]]
:: Objection, your honor! In German, this would be called a "Zimmermannshammer" (carpenter's hammer, which IS a claw hammer). But the Plato hammer has a simple wedge on the other side. Maybe a German almost never has the need to pull out nails again, /schweinhund/! :-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.103|162.158.158.103]] 08:08, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 06:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
::: Well, this quiz is about English dialects, so German words aren't very relevant, and that term includes "hammer" as part of it anyway, as with most terms an English speaker would call this type of hammer, as people would indeed recognize it as a type of hammer and understand anyone referring to it as just "hammer" even if they might have a more specific name for the variety of hammer it is. People would not normally use the terms listed here for it.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.109|162.158.74.109]] 08:49, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
* Yeah, I was thinking it was a claw hammer, also. I do have a friend that pronounces the word jen-er-uh, even though I have specifically said the word correctly around him after he has used it. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 00:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
:: "genera" is a word. I typed it into Google, marvelled at the incomprehensible phonetic version, and tapped a speaker button. My computer said "Genera" and a box popped up that reads "Learn to pronounce", which I consider to be rude. But after all, I pressed the button. Robert Carnegie rja.carnegie@excite.com [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.225|162.158.158.225]] 00:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
::Russian probe sent to Venus? And I'm so confident about that, that I shall not even check before posting. (No idea how it's said in Russian, but the Anglophone versios doesn't differ between anglophonic countries as much as "Moscow" does.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.72|162.158.155.72]] 01:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
::Yeah, yeah, so I now know I merged two different Russian space-thingies. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.140|162.158.159.140]] 01:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, who’s the joker that put “Citation needed” at the end of “ "Google" is not generally pronounced with a high-pitched yelp on either syllable.[citation needed]”
:I was about to do the same myself (i.e., put "Citation needed" about pronunciation of 'Google') until I read the note about Yahoo. But isn't 'Citation needed' used as a bit of a running joke in Explain xkcd, placed after bold claims that nobody would actually challenge because they're obviously correct?{{Citation needed}}[[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.43|162.158.166.43]] 02:10, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

"Many-legged scaly creature" makes me think of silverfish, centipedes or millipedes, though they have exoskeletons rather than scales, and ''certainly'' don't eat light bulbs. It seems to me that a segmented exoskeleton is reminiscent of scales, though. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.167|162.158.154.167]] 07:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
:Question 8 sounds like a hybrid, to me, with another part coming from a glow worm / firefly question. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.12|141.101.68.12]] 10:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
::I don't think he had an specific real animal in mind there, as though people are saying segments can resemble scales, they aren't really the same thing, and nothing with many legs is truly "scaly", and the things people are coming up with, though it's possible they could be in an attic, they don't primarily live just in those to the point that is one of the characteristics people would describe them with (any such thing can be found elsewhere as well, and probably seen more often outside of attics as many people don't enter attics often.)--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 09:11, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

13 seems to be referring to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pholcidae these] to me. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.169|173.245.52.169]] 12:30, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Please feel free to edit/condense my rambly explanation of shallots/scallions. Debating removing the second and third detailed paragraphs entirely. I'm from NSW and have seen confusion on recipes posted online so not exactly impartial. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.134|103.22.201.134]] 16:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm half remembering in the original Thunderbirds series, an old NASA colleague of Geoff Tracey who 'poses' as an generic ¿Deep South? country-bumpkin/local-yokel (grown up in the area, though obviously smart enough to get into NASA and then later 'retire' to become a trusted International Rescue local agent... or so I may extrapolate) calling Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward, with whom he was clearly familiar, "Penn elope" (to "rhyme with antelope"). I shall have to dig up my complete VHS tapes to confirm... and probably spend a couple of days just watching them all, for old times' sake ...but clearly the script called for an uneducated (mis)pronunciation of her name - maybe feigned as part of his act/through habit. So if it aint an actual misconception/affectation by ''someone'', that the scriptwriters (or voice-actor) used, then it needs far more explanation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.72|162.158.155.72]] 02:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
:When I was very very young, I did believe that Penelope rhymed with antelope. But ''The Perilous Perils of Penelope Pitstop'' soon put paid to that. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.52|141.101.98.52]] 10:27, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Re: "genre" - what about the Alex Trebek pronunciation? [[User:QoopyQoopy|QoopyQoopy]] ([[User talk:QoopyQoopy|talk]]) 03:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
:Anecdotal, I know, but I've never heard someone pronounce "genre" the same way they pronounce "Alex Trebek".
Also it was only a few months ago I figured out that Scallions weren't Scallops, so they can indeed easily be confused (in discussion, not when actually present, hopefully!) [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 06:56, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

In Question 9, "Devil's Marks" may also be a reference to the question about rain on a sunny day in the Harvard study and NYT quiz. One of the answers is "The Devil is beating his wife" [[User:Thaledison|Thaledison]] ([[User talk:Thaledison|talk]]) 17:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

In slightly expanding the "animated video file" entry I left out the following (related, but possibly slightly too unrelated) information. In Louis Carol's Jabberwocky, the phrase "Gyre and Gymble" (in its initial version, with "y"s in there where all "i"s would later be, but also "ye" for "the", or rather the y-like character it would take too long to conveniently copy into here) was undoubtedly doubly a hard-G. "Gimbling" was apparently derived from the action of punching holes for "gimlets" (possibly a feeding behaviour, the slithy toves (slimy+lithe creatures that are part badger, part lizard and part corkscrew) presumably poking their noses into the ground). "Gyring" is spinning like a "gyroscope" (to further send their helical snouts deeper). Both are authoritatively intended to be hard-Gs as even "gyroscope" was, at that time, so mouthed. Though I've heard many a "jire and gimble" in modern recitation (the reader missing the likely opportunity for aliteration), as well as the double-hard-G approaches. Interestingly also the occasional "jire and jimble" version, presumably the reader doubling-down on their soft-G choice for the former ''and'' respecting the repetition intuitively intended. Me, I'm probably inclined to doubling the hard version, but it's been so long since ever I had to recite it that I can't even remember what I might have initially cold-read it as. ;)

Additionally additionally, the product "Jif" (bathroom cleaning cream) which was supposed to be the homophonic inspiration for the "gif" file's soft-G, was changed (in the UK market) maybe two decades ago to "Cif" - apparently to match the mainland Europe marketing name ("J" varies from soft-G to a 'hard-Y' over there, possibly even to other sounds). But there was much derision at the time by those who pointed out the new issue of whether it was a hard-C ("kif") or soft-C ("sif"), whatever the TV ads announcing the change said (soft!). ((Not sure when exactly that happened, especially in relation to the Opal Fruits->Starburst and Marathon->Snickers renamings, etc, but I think there was also eye-rolling at the changing of a long-recognised major (localised) brand-name for perhaps rather crass 'business' reasons.)) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.154|141.101.98.154]] 19:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Mad props to Randall for running the survey questions on @xkcd twitter. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.14|172.68.141.14]] 23:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

1330: Kola Borehole

2020-09-11T05:51:32Z

162.158.75.160: removed redundancy and rephrased

{{comic
| number = 1330
| date = February 14, 2014
| title = Kola Borehole
| image = kola_borehole.png
| titletext = Tonight's top story: Lucifer, the Prince of Darkness, died in his home this morning at the age of [unintelligible rune]. Due to the large number of sharks inhabiting his former kingdom, no body could be recovered.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|Kola Superdeep Borehole}} is the result of a scientific drilling project by the Soviet Union in what is now north-western Russia that began in 1970 and continued through 1992. It was an attempt to drill as far into the Earth as possible. The deepest hole reached 12,262 metres (40,230 ft). It remains the {{w|Extreme points of Earth#Lowest point (artificial)|deepest artificial point on earth}}.

[[Megan]] mentions the {{w|well to Hell hoax}} that the drilling hit a super-hot cavern which is disproved at [http://www.snopes.com/religion/wellhell.asp www.snopes.com: "The Well to Hell"]. Although super-hot temperature was the reason the project was abandoned, no chamber or voices were discovered. As Megan notes, the hoax plays on the popular notion that {{w|Hell}} is literally a physical place below us — therefore by definition, towards the centre of the Earth — whereas Heaven is above us; often depicted in the clouds.

Megan suggests that the miners therefore sealed the hole to "seal in" Hell. There is no mention in the Wikipedia article about the hole being sealed; however there is a picture with the caption "The borehole itself (welded shut)". If "sealing the hole" is considered to mean filling the entire hole up with concrete or some other material, then given the potential for future scientific data, the 22 years spent drilling and the cost of sealing the hole, this would not seem to be a reasonable thing to do.

[[Black Hat]] suggests that if the Hoax were true and the miners did believe they'd drilled into Hell, a better alternative to sealing the hole would have been to dig a canal to the ocean, thereby allowing water to flow into the hole and into Hell. As all of Hell is depicted as below the surface of the Earth, and characterized by fire, brimstone, and extreme heat, this would entirely fill Hell with water, drastically altering it. (Depending on the volume of Hell, this could have significant effects on the global sea level and the atmosphere.)

Megan never thought of that possibility and compliments Black Hat's ingenuity by suggesting that if there were ever a real conflict with Hell, she would want to be "on his side", given his clever suggestion on how to destroy Hell. He responds by suggesting that Megan is "nice" and therefore probably won't be on his side. This suggests Black Hat considers himself evil and thinks he would be fighting for Hell or maybe on behalf of those consigned there, rather than against it. Alternatively, he thinks he is worse than the devil and that Megan would be on the "nicer" side.

The title text parodies a nondescript news report of a person's death. In this case it is about {{w|Lucifer}} being killed by Black Hat carrying out his plan to flood Hell. However, the report is written in a non-descript way that ignores the presumed sensationalism of the story (i.e., that Hell exists and has been flooded). It is notable that "Lucifer" is often used in modern times to refer to {{w|Satan}} and both are used to refer to the "leader" or "keeper" of Hell, although the Bible never directly identifies them as the same entity, and he/they are never tied directly to Hell anywhere in the Bible. Much of the modern image of Hell is derived from Dante's "{{w|Inferno (Dante)|Inferno}}" along with a variety of additional details which have been added and changed throughout the years. The reference to sharks is a reference to [[1326: Sharks]] that was released a week before.

==See also==
*[[1040: Lakes and Oceans]], [http://xkcd.com/1040/large/ 1040 large], on the right hand side.
*{{w|Well to Hell hoax}}

==Transcript==
:[Megan and Black Hat are sitting in front of their laptops.]
:Megan: Ever hear of the Kola Borehole?
:Black Hat: No—what's that?
:Megan: A Soviet project to drill deep into the Earth's crust.

:Megan: There's a hoax report claiming that their drill broke through into a superhot cavern, and when they lowered a microphone into the hole, they heard tormented screaming. People say that's why the miners sealed the well and abandoned the project.

:Black Hat: Why would anyone ''believe'' that story?
:Megan: I guess some people think Hell is literally an underground place.

:Black Hat: No - I mean, why would the miners seal the opening? Why not just dig a canal connecting it to the ocean? Unless they '''''like''''' Hell.

:Megan: ...If there's ever a war between Earth and Hell, I hope I'm on '''''your''''' side.
:Black Hat: You seem nice; you probably won't be.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Sharks]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2020-09-11T05:32:03Z

162.158.75.160: more spelling errors, and explanation of Kate McKinnon

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, the Act names two members of Congress as successors. There are serious questions as to whether this violates the principle of Separation of Powers. The second issue is that the Act allows for anyone skipped over for succession to later assume the office if circumstances change to allow them to hold it. This would mean that the person in question could effectively unseat a sitting President, which raises serious constitutional issues.

There are also practical concerns regarding the Act. The line of succession includes all members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established, with the oldest departments first. No consideration is given to which departments would be most relevant to the Presidency, particularly considering that this type of succession would presumably involve a serious crisis, which the new president would need to be able to address immediately. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is last in the current Presidential line of succession, behind Secretaries in much less sensitive roles, such as those of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Education.

Another concern is that, by including members of Congress immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis. It even presents the possibility that simultaneous assassinations of the President and Vice President could function as an effective coup, shifting power to their opponents.

Finally, there is the issue that, usually, everyone in the line of succession lives and works in Washington D.C. Hence, a sufficiently destructive attack or natural disaster impacting the city could realistically incapacitate all of them, leaving the USA leaderless at a time of extreme crisis. It is already established practice in the USA that everyone in this line not gather together at once. In cases where most senior government officials gather (such as the {{w| State of the Union}}), at least one member of the line of succession (referred to as the "designated survivor") is secured off-site, and would assume the presidency in the unlikely event that a {{w| mass casualty event}} were to kill or incapacitate everyone else in the line. However, disasters impacting an entire city remain a possibility, and no provision is made for them in current law.

To correct these issues, a think tank known as the {{w| Continuity of Government Commission}} prepared a report recommending a new line of succession, which would not include members of Congress, would reorder the cabinet secretaries so that the most suitable roles would be the first successors, and would include people who do not live or work in Washington DC. The full text of their report can be found [https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf here]. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is [https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission here].

The first six members of the commission's list are taken from the current line of succession, though the order is changed; they propose that after this, five new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of assuming the presidency, if needed. Randall's list begins with these eleven people (combining the five new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list becomes increasingly comical and ridiculous.

Randall's list omits members of Congress, as well as other cabinet positions, in accordance with the report's concerns about constitutionality and qualifications. However, his other additions totally ignore these issues, including people with no apparent qualifications for the office (such as actors, athletes, and competitive eaters) and people who are constitutionally ineligible for the office. The US Constitution requires that the President of the United States must be a natural-born US citizen, at least 35 years of age, and have resided in the US for at least fourteen years. Randall's list includes many people who don't meet these requirements. Most notably, he includes the entire succession to the British crown, almost none of whom meet the requirement of being natural-born citizens of the United States.

{{w|Tom Hanks|Tom Hanks}} is an American actor who has had acting and voice acting roles in numerous popular movies, such as ''Toy Story'', ''Forrest Gump'', and ''The Polar Express''. He is widely considered to be an excellent actor as well as a likeable and kind person: for example, ''Last Week Tonight'' comedically insulted someone by saying he "doesn't like Tom Hanks". Although he may be a good person, he has no particular qualifications making him suitable to be President of the United States.

It may be expected that many of the athletes, musicians and actors on this list are likely to be ineligible as well. Most professional athletes in the relevant sports are under 35 years old, particularly those at the peak of their careers (when they'd likely win MVP awards), the most popular musicians also tend to be younger than 35, and many who meet these requirements were not born US citizens (and some many not even reside in the US). However, the existing line of succession can also contain ineligible people, who would simply be skipped over for succession. For example, at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US, rather than native-born (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

{{w|Kate McKinnon|Kate McKinnon}} is an American actress and comedian, best known for her performances on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She has done impressions of {{w|Hillary Clinton}} many times in sketches on that show, which may be why Randall put her on the list; however, this actually being considered a qualification to be President is comedically absurd.

The title text mentions that ties will be broken by whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|Habitability of natural satellites|potential habitability}}. This is likely a parody of systems in which ties are broken by semi-arbitrary rules (such as the older candidate automatically winning a tie) or a randomized ones (such as ties being decided by a coin flip). The position of Europa with respect to Earth at the time of one's birth depends on enough factors that it acts as a pseudo-random tie breaker, albeit a needlessly complicated one.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|POTUS|President}}
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|{{w|POTUS|Vice president}}
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|{{w|United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State}}
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. As mentioned above, the existing Succession Act includes the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, which presents serious practical and constitutional issues. The Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the country's international relations and diplomatic missions, and would be a logical successor, particularly in times of crisis.
|-
|4
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense}}
|{{w|President pro tempore of the United States Senate|President pro tempore of the Senate}}
|Moved up from 7th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The existing succession places the Secretary of Defense behind the Secretary of the Treasury in succession. If the three preceding officials were simultaneously killed or incapacitated, there would be a high likelihood that the country was either under attack, and other powers could easily try to take advantage of any power vacuum. Since the Secretary of Defense is most connected to the nation's military, and most in tune with information regarding potential threats and risks, this would be a logical succession.
|-
|5
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security|Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position. Likely a serious suggestion. As with the Secretary of Defense, this officer would likely be closely aligned with the national emergency response infrastructure (including overseeing the {{w|Federal Emergency Management Agency}}), and would be well equipped to deal with a major attack or natural disaster.
|-
|6
|{{w|United States Attorney General|Attorney General}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury}}
|Moved up from 8th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The Attorney General oversees national law enforcement, and would be in a position to deal with internal chaos that could result from a disaster that impacted the federal government so deeply.
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission to prevent the danger of the entire line of succession being removed in a single event.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior}}
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, its Governor ({{w|Jerry Brown}} at the time of publication) would have been first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|{{w|United States Secretary of Agriculture|Secretary of Agriculture}}
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|{{w|United States Secretary of Commerce|Secretary of Commerce}}
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President. At the time the comic was released, she was 34 years 5 months old; thus she was not "available" until seven months later.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) was legally eligible for the office; all the others were too young, and Sheeran is additionally from the United Kingdom.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time at the time of publication were: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it is unclear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen, as he was born in the United Kingdom to a British father and American mother.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was a top female tennis player. She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and killed everyone in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are Venezuelan and Canadian citizens respectively, and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) were too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

At the time of publication, Pullman's immediate descendants consisted of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29. Thus all but Bill Pullman himself were too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 59 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans were on the list when the comic was published. However, after this comic was published {{w|Archie Mountbatten-Windsor}} was born on May 6, 2019; he is currently seventh in the line of succession to the British throne and has US citizenship through his mother {{w|Meghan, Duchess of Sussex}}. As with Mark Foale, though, whether that qualifies as natural-born has not be tested (leaving aside his age and the fact that many royals in his position have historically relinquished their birthright US citizenship voluntarily, which he may choose to do once he reaches age 16). In theory, the full British succession list includes [http://www.wargs.com/essays/succession/2011.html several thousand people] (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States beyond Master Archie.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession. A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner was {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner was {{w|Miki Sudo}}. At the time of publication, neither was old enough to assume the office.

The comic does not specify whether the men's or women's winner should take office, creating a tie that would be broken by distance from Europa at birth. Had they both been eligible, [https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29132/was-earth-closer-to-europa-on-1983-11-25-or-1985-07-22 Sudo would have won] by between 0.125 and 4 {{w|Astronomical unit}}s.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the date the comic was published'''.
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Jim Mattis}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}})
#{{w|Jeff Sessions}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Jerry Brown}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Rick Scott}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|Bruce Rauner}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|John Kasich}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Rick Snyder}} (Governor of Michigan)
#{{w|Nathan Deal}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Haslam}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Mark Dayton}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|John Hickenlooper}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Matt Bevin}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Mary Fallin}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Dannel Malloy}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Phil Bryant}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Jeff Colyer}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Brian Sandoval}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Susana Martinez}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Butch Otter}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Paul LePage}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Dennis Daugaard}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Matt Mead}} (Governor of Wyoming) Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. Kate McKinnon was only 34 years 5 months old at the time the comic was released, making her unavailable.
#{{w|Luis Fonsi}} (Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist) Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
#{{w|Tom Brady}} ({{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}) The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
#''line of succession to the British throne'' Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists due to citizenship issues. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions were too young to hold the office.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament)

Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the current date'''. (Last updated on 15 April 2020)
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Mark Esper}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Chad Wolf}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}) Wolf is currently the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. It's unclear whether this proposal would include acting officers.
#{{w|William Barr}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Barr.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Gavin Newsom}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Ron DeSantis}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|J. B. Pritzker}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|Mike DeWine}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Gretchen Whitmer}} (Governor of Michigan) Notably, the first woman on this list.
#{{w|Brian Kemp}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)|Bill Lee}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Tony Evers}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Tim Walz}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|Jared Polis}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Andy Beshear}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Kevin Stitt}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Ned Lamont}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Tate Reeves}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Laura Kelly}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Steve Sisolak}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Michelle Lujan Grisham}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Brad Little}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Janet Mills}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Kristi Noem}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Mike Dunleavy (politician)|Mike Dunleavy}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Mark Gordon (politician)|Mark Gordon}} (Governor of Wyoming)
#{{w|Kate McKinnon}} (Kate McKinnon) If she is available. Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. All artists from the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2019}} were under 35.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of Bill Pullman's children are old enough to become President at this time.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} (most recent match: win against {{w|Anastasija Sevastova}}, Fed Cup QLS R1) The MVPs of all listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#''line of succession to the British throne''
#{{w|Joey Chestnut}} (Men's champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest) {{w|Miki Sudo}}, the women's champion, is ineligible due to age.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament) Assumes that the number of eligible US Citizens does not exceed 536,870,912.

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2020-09-11T05:16:54Z

162.158.75.160: capitlzaition

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, the Act names two members of Congress as successors. There are serious questions as to whether this violates the principle of Separation of Powers. The second issue is that the Act allows for anyone skipped over for succession to later assume the office if circumstances change to allow them to hold it. This would mean that the person in question could effectively unseat a sitting President, which raises serious constitutional issues.

There are also practical concerns regarding the Act. The line of succession includes all members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established, with the oldest departments first. No consideration is given to which departments would be most relevant to the Presidency, particularly considering that this type of succession would presumably involve a serious crisis, which the new president would need to be able to address immediately. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is last in the current Presidential line of succession, behind Secretaries in much less sensitive roles, such as those of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Education.

Another concern is that, by including members of Congress immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis. It even presents the possibility that simultaneous assassinations of the President and Vice President could function as an effective coup, shifting power to their opponents.

Finally, there is the issue that, usually, everyone in the line of succession lives and works in Washington D.C. Hence, a sufficiently destructive attack or natural disaster impacting the city could realistically incapacitate all of them, leaving the USA leaderless at a time of extreme crisis. It is already established practice in the USA that everyone in this line not gather together at once. In cases where most senior government officials gather (such as the {{w| State of the Union}}), at least one member of the line of succession (referred to as the "designated survivor") is secured off-site, and would assume the presidency in the unlikely event that a {{w| mass casualty event}} were to kill or incapacitate everyone else in the line. However, disasters impacting an entire city remain a possibility, and no provision is made for them in current law.

To correct these issues, a think tank known as the {{w| Continuity of Government Commission}} prepared a report recommending a new line of succession, which would not include members of Congress, would reorder the cabinet secretaries so that the most suitable roles would be the first successors, and would include people who do not live or work in Washington DC. The full text of their report can be found [https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf here]. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is [https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission here].

The first six members of the commission's list are taken from the current line of succession, though the order is changed; they propose that after this, five new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of assuming the presidency, if needed. Randall's list begins with these eleven people (combining the five new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list becomes increasingly comical and ridiculous.

Randall's list omits members of congress, as well as other cabinet positions, in accordance with the report's concerns about constitutionality and qualifications. However, his other additions totally ignore these issues, including people with no apparent qualifications for the office (such as actors, athletes, and competitive eaters) and people who are constitutionally ineligible for the office. The US Constitution requires that the President of the United States must be a natural-born US citizen, at least 35 years of age, and have resided in the US for at least fourteen years. Randall's list includes many people who don't meet these requirements. Most notably, he includes the entire succession to the British crown, almost none of whom meet the requirement of being natural-born citizens of the United States.

It may be expected that many of the athletes, musicians and actors on this list are likely to be ineligible as well. Most professional athletes in the relevant sports are under 35 years old, particularly those at the peak of their careers (when they'd likely win MVP awards), the most popular musicians also tend to be younger than 35, and many who meet these requirements were not born US citizens (and some many not even reside in the US). However, the existing line of succession can also contain ineligible people who would simply be skipped over for succession. For example, at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US, rather than native-born (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions that ties will be broken by whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|Habitability of natural satellites|potential habitability}}. This is likely a parody of systems in which ties are broken by semi-arbitrary rules (such as the older candidate automatically winning a tie) or a randomized ones (such as ties being decided by a coin flip). The position of Europa with respect to earth at the time of one's birth depends on enough factors that it acts as a pseudo-random tie breaker, albeit a needlessly complicated one.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|POTUS|President}}
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|{{w|POTUS|Vice president}}
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|{{w|United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State}}
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. As mentioned above, the existing Succession Act includes the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, which presents serious practical and constitutional issues. The Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the country's international relations and diplomatic missions, and would be a logical successor, particularly in times of crisis.
|-
|4
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense}}
|{{w|President pro tempore of the United States Senate|President pro tempore of the Senate}}
|Moved up from 7th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The existing succession places the Secretary of Defense behind the Secretary of the Treasury in succession. If the three preceding officials were simultaneously killed or incapacitated, there would be a high likelihood that the country was either under attack, and other powers could easily try to take advantage of any power vacuum. Since the Secretary of Defense is most connected to the nation's military, and most in tune with information regarding potential threats and risks, this would be a logical succession.
|-
|5
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security|Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position. Likely a serious suggestion. As with the Secretary of Defense, this officer would likely be closely aligned with the national emergency response infrastructure (including overseeing the {{w|Federal Emergency Management Agency}}), and would be well equipped to deal with a major attack or natural disaster.
|-
|6
|{{w|United States Attorney General|Attorney General}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury}}
|Moved up from 8th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The Attorney General oversees national law enforcement, and would be in a position to deal with internal chaos that could result from a disaster that impacted the federal government so deeply.
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission to prevent the danger of the entire line of succession being removed in a single event.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior}}
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, its Governor ({{w|Jerry Brown}} at the time of publication) would have been first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|{{w|United States Secretary of Agriculture|Secretary of Agriculture}}
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|{{w|United States Secretary of Commerce|Secretary of Commerce}}
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President. At the time the comic was released, she was 34 years 5 months old; thus she was not "available" until seven months later.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) was legally eligible for the office; all the others were too young, and Sheeran is additionally from the United Kingdom.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time at the time of publication were: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it is unclear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen, as he was born in the United Kingdom to a British father and American mother.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was a top female tennis player. She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and killed everyone in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are Venezuelan and Canadian citizens respectively, and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) were too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

At the time of publication, Pullman's immediate descendants consisted of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29. Thus all but Bill Pullman himself were too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 59 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans were on the list when the comic was published. However, after this comic was published {{w|Archie Mountbatten-Windsor}} was born on May 6, 2019; he is currently seventh in the line of succession to the British throne and has US citizenship through his mother {{w|Meghan, Duchess of Sussex}}. As with Mark Foale, though, whether that qualifies as natural-born has not be tested (leaving aside his age and the fact that many royals in his position have historically relinquished their birthright US citizenship voluntarily, which he may choose to do once he reaches age 16). In theory, the full British succession list includes [http://www.wargs.com/essays/succession/2011.html several thousand people] (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States beyond Master Archie.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession. A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner was {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner was {{w|Miki Sudo}}. At the time of publication, neither was old enough to assume the office.

The comic does not specify whether the men's or women's winner should take office, creating a tie that would be broken by distance from Europa at birth. Had they both been eligible, [https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29132/was-earth-closer-to-europa-on-1983-11-25-or-1985-07-22 Sudo would have won] by between 0.125 and 4 {{w|Astronomical unit}}s.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the date the comic was published'''.
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Jim Mattis}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}})
#{{w|Jeff Sessions}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Jerry Brown}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Rick Scott}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|Bruce Rauner}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|John Kasich}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Rick Snyder}} (Governor of Michigan)
#{{w|Nathan Deal}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Haslam}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Mark Dayton}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|John Hickenlooper}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Matt Bevin}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Mary Fallin}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Dannel Malloy}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Phil Bryant}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Jeff Colyer}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Brian Sandoval}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Susana Martinez}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Butch Otter}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Paul LePage}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Dennis Daugaard}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Matt Mead}} (Governor of Wyoming) Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. Kate McKinnon was only 34 years 5 months old at the time the comic was released, making her unavailable.
#{{w|Luis Fonsi}} (Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist) Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
#{{w|Tom Brady}} ({{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}) The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
#''line of succession to the British throne'' Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists due to citizenship issues. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions were too young to hold the office.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament)

Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the current date'''. (Last updated on 15 April 2020)
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Mark Esper}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Chad Wolf}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}) Wolf is currently the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. It's unclear whether this proposal would include acting officers.
#{{w|William Barr}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Barr.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Gavin Newsom}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Ron DeSantis}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|J. B. Pritzker}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|Mike DeWine}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Gretchen Whitmer}} (Governor of Michigan) Notably, the first woman on this list.
#{{w|Brian Kemp}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)|Bill Lee}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Tony Evers}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Tim Walz}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|Jared Polis}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Andy Beshear}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Kevin Stitt}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Ned Lamont}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Tate Reeves}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Laura Kelly}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Steve Sisolak}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Michelle Lujan Grisham}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Brad Little}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Janet Mills}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Kristi Noem}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Mike Dunleavy (politician)|Mike Dunleavy}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Mark Gordon (politician)|Mark Gordon}} (Governor of Wyoming)
#{{w|Kate McKinnon}} (Kate McKinnon) If she is available. Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. All artists from the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2019}} were under 35.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of Bill Pullman's children are old enough to become President at this time.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} (most recent match: win against {{w|Anastasija Sevastova}}, Fed Cup QLS R1) The MVPs of all listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#''line of succession to the British throne''
#{{w|Joey Chestnut}} (Men's champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest) {{w|Miki Sudo}}, the women's champion, is ineligible due to age.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament) Assumes that the number of eligible US Citizens does not exceed 536,870,912.

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2020-09-11T05:16:32Z

162.158.75.160: spelling errors

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, the Act names two members of Congress as successors. There are serious questions as to whether this violates the principle of Separation of Powers. The second issue is that the Act allows for anyone skipped over for succession to later assume the office if circumstances change to allow them to hold it. This would mean that the person in question could effectively unseat a sitting President, which raises serious constitutional issues.

There are also practical concerns regarding the Act. The line of succession includes all members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established, with the oldest departments first. No consideration is given to which departments would be most relevant to the Presidency, particularly considering that this type of succession would presumably involve a serious crisis, which the new president would need to be able to address immediately. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is last in the current Presidential line of succession, behind Secretaries in much less sensitive roles, such as those of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Education.

Another concern is that, by including members of Congress immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis. It even presents the possibility that simultaneous assassinations of the President and Vice President could function as an effective coup, shifting power to their opponents.

Finally, there is the issue that, usually, everyone in the line of succession lives and works in Washington D.C. Hence, a sufficiently destructive attack or natural disaster impacting the city could realistically incapacitate all of them, leaving the USA leaderless at a time of extreme crisis. It is already established practice in the USA that everyone in this line not gather together at once. In cases where most senior government officials gather (such as the {{w| State of the Union}}), at least one member of the line of succession (referred to as the "designated survivor") is secured off-site, and would assume the presidency in the unlikely event that a {{w| mass casualty event}} were to kill or incapacitate everyone else in the line. However, disasters impacting an entire city remain a possibility, and no provision is made for them in current law.

To correct these issues, a think tank known as the {{w| Continuity of Government Commission}} prepared a report recommending a new line of succession, which would not include members of congress, would reorder the cabinet secretaries so that the most suitable roles would be the first successors, and would include people who do not live or work in Washington DC. The full text of their report can be found [https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf here]. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is [https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission here].

The first six members of the commission's list are taken from the current line of succession, though the order is changed; they propose that after this, five new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of assuming the presidency, if needed. Randall's list begins with these eleven people (combining the five new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list becomes increasingly comical and ridiculous.

Randall's list omits members of congress, as well as other cabinet positions, in accordance with the report's concerns about constitutionality and qualifications. However, his other additions totally ignore these issues, including people with no apparent qualifications for the office (such as actors, athletes, and competitive eaters) and people who are constitutionally ineligible for the office. The US Constitution requires that the President of the United States must be a natural-born US citizen, at least 35 years of age, and have resided in the US for at least fourteen years. Randall's list includes many people who don't meet these requirements. Most notably, he includes the entire succession to the British crown, almost none of whom meet the requirement of being natural-born citizens of the United States.

It may be expected that many of the athletes, musicians and actors on this list are likely to be ineligible as well. Most professional athletes in the relevant sports are under 35 years old, particularly those at the peak of their careers (when they'd likely win MVP awards), the most popular musicians also tend to be younger than 35, and many who meet these requirements were not born US citizens (and some many not even reside in the US). However, the existing line of succession can also contain ineligible people who would simply be skipped over for succession. For example, at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US, rather than native-born (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions that ties will be broken by whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|Habitability of natural satellites|potential habitability}}. This is likely a parody of systems in which ties are broken by semi-arbitrary rules (such as the older candidate automatically winning a tie) or a randomized ones (such as ties being decided by a coin flip). The position of Europa with respect to earth at the time of one's birth depends on enough factors that it acts as a pseudo-random tie breaker, albeit a needlessly complicated one.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|POTUS|President}}
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|{{w|POTUS|Vice president}}
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|{{w|United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State}}
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. As mentioned above, the existing Succession Act includes the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, which presents serious practical and constitutional issues. The Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the country's international relations and diplomatic missions, and would be a logical successor, particularly in times of crisis.
|-
|4
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense}}
|{{w|President pro tempore of the United States Senate|President pro tempore of the Senate}}
|Moved up from 7th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The existing succession places the Secretary of Defense behind the Secretary of the Treasury in succession. If the three preceding officials were simultaneously killed or incapacitated, there would be a high likelihood that the country was either under attack, and other powers could easily try to take advantage of any power vacuum. Since the Secretary of Defense is most connected to the nation's military, and most in tune with information regarding potential threats and risks, this would be a logical succession.
|-
|5
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security|Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position. Likely a serious suggestion. As with the Secretary of Defense, this officer would likely be closely aligned with the national emergency response infrastructure (including overseeing the {{w|Federal Emergency Management Agency}}), and would be well equipped to deal with a major attack or natural disaster.
|-
|6
|{{w|United States Attorney General|Attorney General}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury}}
|Moved up from 8th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The Attorney General oversees national law enforcement, and would be in a position to deal with internal chaos that could result from a disaster that impacted the federal government so deeply.
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission to prevent the danger of the entire line of succession being removed in a single event.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior}}
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, its Governor ({{w|Jerry Brown}} at the time of publication) would have been first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|{{w|United States Secretary of Agriculture|Secretary of Agriculture}}
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|{{w|United States Secretary of Commerce|Secretary of Commerce}}
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President. At the time the comic was released, she was 34 years 5 months old; thus she was not "available" until seven months later.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) was legally eligible for the office; all the others were too young, and Sheeran is additionally from the United Kingdom.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time at the time of publication were: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it is unclear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen, as he was born in the United Kingdom to a British father and American mother.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was a top female tennis player. She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and killed everyone in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are Venezuelan and Canadian citizens respectively, and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) were too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

At the time of publication, Pullman's immediate descendants consisted of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29. Thus all but Bill Pullman himself were too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 59 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans were on the list when the comic was published. However, after this comic was published {{w|Archie Mountbatten-Windsor}} was born on May 6, 2019; he is currently seventh in the line of succession to the British throne and has US citizenship through his mother {{w|Meghan, Duchess of Sussex}}. As with Mark Foale, though, whether that qualifies as natural-born has not be tested (leaving aside his age and the fact that many royals in his position have historically relinquished their birthright US citizenship voluntarily, which he may choose to do once he reaches age 16). In theory, the full British succession list includes [http://www.wargs.com/essays/succession/2011.html several thousand people] (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States beyond Master Archie.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession. A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner was {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner was {{w|Miki Sudo}}. At the time of publication, neither was old enough to assume the office.

The comic does not specify whether the men's or women's winner should take office, creating a tie that would be broken by distance from Europa at birth. Had they both been eligible, [https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29132/was-earth-closer-to-europa-on-1983-11-25-or-1985-07-22 Sudo would have won] by between 0.125 and 4 {{w|Astronomical unit}}s.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the date the comic was published'''.
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Jim Mattis}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}})
#{{w|Jeff Sessions}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Jerry Brown}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Rick Scott}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|Bruce Rauner}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|John Kasich}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Rick Snyder}} (Governor of Michigan)
#{{w|Nathan Deal}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Haslam}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Mark Dayton}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|John Hickenlooper}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Matt Bevin}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Mary Fallin}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Dannel Malloy}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Phil Bryant}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Jeff Colyer}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Brian Sandoval}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Susana Martinez}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Butch Otter}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Paul LePage}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Dennis Daugaard}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Matt Mead}} (Governor of Wyoming) Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. Kate McKinnon was only 34 years 5 months old at the time the comic was released, making her unavailable.
#{{w|Luis Fonsi}} (Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist) Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
#{{w|Tom Brady}} ({{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}) The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
#''line of succession to the British throne'' Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists due to citizenship issues. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions were too young to hold the office.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament)

Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the current date'''. (Last updated on 15 April 2020)
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Mark Esper}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Chad Wolf}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}) Wolf is currently the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. It's unclear whether this proposal would include acting officers.
#{{w|William Barr}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Barr.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Gavin Newsom}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Ron DeSantis}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|J. B. Pritzker}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|Mike DeWine}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Gretchen Whitmer}} (Governor of Michigan) Notably, the first woman on this list.
#{{w|Brian Kemp}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)|Bill Lee}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Tony Evers}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Tim Walz}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|Jared Polis}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Andy Beshear}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Kevin Stitt}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Ned Lamont}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Tate Reeves}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Laura Kelly}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Steve Sisolak}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Michelle Lujan Grisham}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Brad Little}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Janet Mills}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Kristi Noem}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Mike Dunleavy (politician)|Mike Dunleavy}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Mark Gordon (politician)|Mark Gordon}} (Governor of Wyoming)
#{{w|Kate McKinnon}} (Kate McKinnon) If she is available. Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. All artists from the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2019}} were under 35.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of Bill Pullman's children are old enough to become President at this time.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} (most recent match: win against {{w|Anastasija Sevastova}}, Fed Cup QLS R1) The MVPs of all listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#''line of succession to the British throne''
#{{w|Joey Chestnut}} (Men's champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest) {{w|Miki Sudo}}, the women's champion, is ineligible due to age.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament) Assumes that the number of eligible US Citizens does not exceed 536,870,912.

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2020-09-11T05:15:12Z

162.158.75.160: grammar and spelling

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, the Act names two members of Congress as successors. There are serious questions as to whether this violates the principle of Separation of Powers. The second issue is that the Act allows for anyone skipped over for succession to later assume the office if circumstances change to allow them to hold it. This would mean that the person in question could effectively unseat a sitting President, which raises serious constitutional issues.

There are also practical concerns regarding the Act. The line of succession includes all members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established, with the oldest departments first. No consideration is given to which departments would be most relevant to the Presidency, particularly considering that this type of succession would presumably involve a serious crisis, which the new president would need to be able to address immediately. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is last in the current Presidential line of succession, behind Secretaries in much less sensitive roles, such as those of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Education.

Another concern is that, by including members of Congress immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis. It even presents the possibility that simultaneous assassinations of the President and Vice President could function as an effective coup, shifting power to their opponents.

Finally, there is the issue that, usually, everyone in the line of succession lives and works in Washington D.C. Hence, a sufficiently destructive attack or natural disaster impacting the city could realistically incapacitate all of them, leaving the USA leaderless at a time of extreme crisis. It is already established practice in the USA that everyone in this line not gather together at once. In cases where most senior government officials gather (such as the {{w| State of the Union}}), at least one member of the line of succession (referred to as the "designated survivor") is secured off-site, and would assume the presidency in the unlikely event that a {{w| mass casualty event}} were to kill or incapacitate everyone else in the line. However, disasters impacting an entire city remain a possibility, and no provision is made for them in current law.

To correct these issues, a think tank known as the {{w| Continuity of Government Commission}} prepared a report recommending a new line of succession, which would not include members of congress, would reorder the cabinet secretaries so that the most suitable roles would be the first successors, and would include people who do not live or work in Washington DC. The full test of their report can be found [https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf here]. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is [https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission here].

The first 6 members of the commission's list are taken from the current line of succession, though the order is changed, after which they propose that 5 new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of assuming the presidency, if needed. Randall's list begins with these 11 people (combining the 5 new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list becomes increasingly comical and ridiculous.

Randall's list omits members of congress, as well as other cabinet positions, in accordance with the report's concerns about constitutionality and qualifications. However, his other additions totally ignore these issues, including people with no apparent qualifications for the office (such as actors, athletes, and competitive eaters) and people who are constitutionally ineligible for the office. The US Constitution requires that the President of the United States must be a natural-born US citizen, at least 35 years of age, and have resided in the US for at least fourteen years. Randall's list includes many people who don't meet these requirements. Most notably, he includes the entire succession to the British crown, almost none of whom meet the requirement of being natural-born citizens of the United States.

It may be expected that many of the athletes, musicians and actors on this list are likely to be ineligible as well. Most professional athletes in the relevant sports are under 35 years old, particularly those at the peak of their careers (when they'd likely win MVP awards), the most popular musicians also tend to be younger than 35, and many who meet these requirements were not born US citizens (and some many not even reside in the US). However, the existing line of succession can also contain ineligible people who would simply be skipped over for succession. For example, at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US, rather than native-born (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions that ties will be broken by whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|Habitability of natural satellites|potential habitability}}. This is likely a parody of systems in which ties are broken by semi-arbitrary rules (such as the older candidate automatically winning a tie) or a randomized ones (such as ties being decided by a coin flip). The position of Europa with respect to earth at the time of one's birth depends on enough factors that it acts as a pseudo-random tie breaker, albeit a needlessly complicated one.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|POTUS|President}}
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|{{w|POTUS|Vice president}}
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|{{w|United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State}}
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. As mentioned above, the existing Succession Act includes the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, which presents serious practical and constitutional issues. The Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the country's international relations and diplomatic missions, and would be a logical successor, particularly in times of crisis.
|-
|4
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense}}
|{{w|President pro tempore of the United States Senate|President pro tempore of the Senate}}
|Moved up from 7th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The existing succession places the Secretary of Defense behind the Secretary of the Treasury in succession. If the three preceding officials were simultaneously killed or incapacitated, there would be a high likelihood that the country was either under attack, and other powers could easily try to take advantage of any power vacuum. Since the Secretary of Defense is most connected to the nation's military, and most in tune with information regarding potential threats and risks, this would be a logical succession.
|-
|5
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security|Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position. Likely a serious suggestion. As with the Secretary of Defense, this officer would likely be closely aligned with the national emergency response infrastructure (including overseeing the {{w|Federal Emergency Management Agency}}), and would be well equipped to deal with a major attack or natural disaster.
|-
|6
|{{w|United States Attorney General|Attorney General}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury}}
|Moved up from 8th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The Attorney General oversees national law enforcement, and would be in a position to deal with internal chaos that could result from a disaster that impacted the federal government so deeply.
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission to prevent the danger of the entire line of succession being removed in a single event.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior}}
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, its Governor ({{w|Jerry Brown}} at the time of publication) would have been first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|{{w|United States Secretary of Agriculture|Secretary of Agriculture}}
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|{{w|United States Secretary of Commerce|Secretary of Commerce}}
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President. At the time the comic was released, she was 34 years 5 months old; thus she was not "available" until seven months later.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) was legally eligible for the office; all the others were too young, and Sheeran is additionally from the United Kingdom.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time at the time of publication were: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it is unclear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen, as he was born in the United Kingdom to a British father and American mother.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was a top female tennis player. She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and killed everyone in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are Venezuelan and Canadian citizens respectively, and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) were too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

At the time of publication, Pullman's immediate descendants consisted of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29. Thus all but Bill Pullman himself were too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 59 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans were on the list when the comic was published. However, after this comic was published {{w|Archie Mountbatten-Windsor}} was born on May 6, 2019; he is currently seventh in the line of succession to the British throne and has US citizenship through his mother {{w|Meghan, Duchess of Sussex}}. As with Mark Foale, though, whether that qualifies as natural-born has not be tested (leaving aside his age and the fact that many royals in his position have historically relinquished their birthright US citizenship voluntarily, which he may choose to do once he reaches age 16). In theory, the full British succession list includes [http://www.wargs.com/essays/succession/2011.html several thousand people] (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States beyond Master Archie.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession. A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner was {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner was {{w|Miki Sudo}}. At the time of publication, neither was old enough to assume the office.

The comic does not specify whether the men's or women's winner should take office, creating a tie that would be broken by distance from Europa at birth. Had they both been eligible, [https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29132/was-earth-closer-to-europa-on-1983-11-25-or-1985-07-22 Sudo would have won] by between 0.125 and 4 {{w|Astronomical unit}}s.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the date the comic was published'''.
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Jim Mattis}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}})
#{{w|Jeff Sessions}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Jerry Brown}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Rick Scott}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|Bruce Rauner}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|John Kasich}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Rick Snyder}} (Governor of Michigan)
#{{w|Nathan Deal}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Haslam}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Mark Dayton}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|John Hickenlooper}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Matt Bevin}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Mary Fallin}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Dannel Malloy}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Phil Bryant}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Jeff Colyer}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Brian Sandoval}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Susana Martinez}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Butch Otter}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Paul LePage}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Dennis Daugaard}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Matt Mead}} (Governor of Wyoming) Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. Kate McKinnon was only 34 years 5 months old at the time the comic was released, making her unavailable.
#{{w|Luis Fonsi}} (Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist) Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
#{{w|Tom Brady}} ({{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}) The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
#''line of succession to the British throne'' Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists due to citizenship issues. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions were too young to hold the office.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament)

Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the current date'''. (Last updated on 15 April 2020)
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Mark Esper}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Chad Wolf}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}) Wolf is currently the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. It's unclear whether this proposal would include acting officers.
#{{w|William Barr}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Barr.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Gavin Newsom}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Ron DeSantis}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|J. B. Pritzker}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|Mike DeWine}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Gretchen Whitmer}} (Governor of Michigan) Notably, the first woman on this list.
#{{w|Brian Kemp}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)|Bill Lee}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Tony Evers}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Tim Walz}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|Jared Polis}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Andy Beshear}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Kevin Stitt}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Ned Lamont}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Tate Reeves}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Laura Kelly}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Steve Sisolak}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Michelle Lujan Grisham}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Brad Little}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Janet Mills}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Kristi Noem}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Mike Dunleavy (politician)|Mike Dunleavy}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Mark Gordon (politician)|Mark Gordon}} (Governor of Wyoming)
#{{w|Kate McKinnon}} (Kate McKinnon) If she is available. Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. All artists from the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2019}} were under 35.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of Bill Pullman's children are old enough to become President at this time.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} (most recent match: win against {{w|Anastasija Sevastova}}, Fed Cup QLS R1) The MVPs of all listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#''line of succession to the British throne''
#{{w|Joey Chestnut}} (Men's champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest) {{w|Miki Sudo}}, the women's champion, is ineligible due to age.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament) Assumes that the number of eligible US Citizens does not exceed 536,870,912.

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

2003: Presidential Succession

2020-09-11T05:13:12Z

162.158.75.160: capitalization

{{comic
| number = 2003
| date = June 6, 2018
| title = Presidential Succession
| image = presidential_succession.png
| titletext = Ties are broken by whoever was closest to the surface of Europa when they were born.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|United States presidential line of succession}} is the order of people who serve as president if the current incumbent president is incapacitated, dies, resigns, or is removed from office.

The {{w|Presidential_Succession_Act#Presidential_Succession_Act_of_1947|Presidential Succession Act of 1947}} revised the presidential order of succession to its current order. This Act, though never challenged in the courts, may not be constitutional for two reasons. First, the Act names two members of Congress as successors. There are serious questions as to whether this violates the principle of Separation of Powers. The second issue is that the Act allows for anyone skipped over for succession to later assume the office if circumstances change to allow them to hold it. This would mean that the person in question could effectively unseat a sitting President, which raises serious constitutional issues.

There are also practical concerns regarding the Act. The line of succession includes all members of the Cabinet in the order that their department was established, with the oldest departments first. No consideration is given to which departments would be most relevant to the Presidency, particularly considering that this type of succession would presumably involve a serious crisis, which the new president would need to be able to address immediately. The Department of Homeland Security is in charge of the security and protection of the United States and its citizens and would probably already be privy to sensitive intelligence and briefings related to national security, but because it is the latest of the Departments to have been established (in 2003), the Secretary of Homeland Security is last in the current Presidential line of succession, behind Secretaries in much less sensitive roles, such as those of Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and Education.

Another concern is that, by including members of Congress immediately after the Vice President, there is a serious risk that the simultaneous death of the President and Vice President could cause the Presidency to change to the opposing party, which could lead to serious political instability at the precise moment when the country is facing a national crisis. It even presents the possibility that simultaneous assassinations of the President and Vice President could function as an effective coup, shifting power to their opponents.

Finally, there is the issue that everyone in line of succession lives and works in Washington D.C. A sufficiently powerful attack or natural disaster impacting the city could realistically incapacitate all of them, leaving the US leaderless, at a time of extreme crisis. It is already established practice in the US that everyone in this line not gather together at once. In cases where most senior government officials gather (such as the {{w| State of the Union}}), at least one member of the line of succession is secured off-site, and would assume the presidency in the unlikely event that a {{w| mass casualty event}} were to kill or incapacity everyone else in the line. However, disasters impacting an entire city remain a possibility, and no provision is made for them in current law.

To correct these issues, a think tank known as the {{w| Continuity of Government Commission}} prepared a report recommending a new line of succession, which would not include members of congress, would reorder the cabinet secretaries so that the most suitable roles would be the first successors, and would include people who do not live or work in Washington DC. The full test of their report can be found [https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/06_continuity_of_government.pdf here]. A short, readable summary, including the report's recommended new line of succession, is [https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-continuity-of-the-presidency-the-second-report-of-the-continuity-of-government-commission here].

The first 6 members of the commission's list are taken from the current line of succession, though the order is changed, after which they propose that 5 new people should be appointed specifically for the purpose of assuming the presidency, if needed. Randall's list begins with these 11 people (combining the 5 new appointees into #7); afterwards, his list becomes increasingly comical and ridiculous.

Randall's list omits members of congress, as well as other cabinet positions, in accordance with the report's concerns about constitutionality and qualifications. However, his other additions totally ignore these issues, including people with no apparent qualifications for the office (such as actors, athletes, and competitive eaters) and people who are constitutionally ineligible for the office. The US Constitution requires that the President of the United States must be a natural-born US citizen, at least 35 years of age, and have resided in the US for at least fourteen years. Randall's list includes many people who don't meet these requirements. Most notably, he includes the entire succession to the British crown, almost none of whom meet the requirement of being natural-born citizens of the United States.

It may be expected that many of the athletes, musicians and actors on this list are likely to be ineligible as well. Most professional athletes in the relevant sports are under 35 years old, particularly those at the peak of their careers (when they'd likely win MVP awards), the most popular musicians also tend to be younger than 35, and many who meet these requirements were not born US citizens (and some many not even reside in the US). However, the existing line of succession can also contain ineligible people who would simply be skipped over for succession. For example, at the comic's publication, {{w|Elaine Chao}} was the Secretary of Transportation and would normally be 14th in line, but because she is a naturalized citizen of the US, rather than native-born (she was born in Taiwan) she would not qualify for the office if the line came to her.

The title text mentions that ties will be broken by whoever was closest to the surface of {{w|Europa}} when they were born. Europa is a moon of Jupiter and one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for {{w|Habitability of natural satellites|potential habitability}}. This is likely a parody of systems in which ties are broken by semi-arbitrary rules (such as the older candidate automatically winning a tie) or a randomized ones (such as ties being decided by a coin flip). The position of Europa with respect to earth at the time of one's birth depends on enough factors that it acts as a pseudo-random tie breaker, albeit a needlessly complicated one.

==Order of succession==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
!#
!Randall's order
!Current order by the 1947 Act
!Notes
|-
|1
|{{w|POTUS|President}}
|President
|Not generally considered part of the line of succession, as incumbents cannot "succeed" to their own post. (This should really be item 0 on the list.)
|-
|2
|{{w|POTUS|Vice president}}
|Vice president
|No change
|-
|3
|{{w|United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State}}
|Speaker of the House of Representatives
|Moved up from 5th position. This is likely a serious suggestion. As mentioned above, the existing Succession Act includes the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, which presents serious practical and constitutional issues. The Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the country's international relations and diplomatic missions, and would be a logical successor, particularly in times of crisis.
|-
|4
|{{w|United States Secretary of Defense|Secretary of Defense}}
|{{w|President pro tempore of the United States Senate|President pro tempore of the Senate}}
|Moved up from 7th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The existing succession places the Secretary of Defense behind the Secretary of the Treasury in succession. If the three preceding officials were simultaneously killed or incapacitated, there would be a high likelihood that the country was either under attack, and other powers could easily try to take advantage of any power vacuum. Since the Secretary of Defense is most connected to the nation's military, and most in tune with information regarding potential threats and risks, this would be a logical succession.
|-
|5
|{{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security|Secretary of Homeland Security}}
|Secretary of State
|Moved up from 19th position. Likely a serious suggestion. As with the Secretary of Defense, this officer would likely be closely aligned with the national emergency response infrastructure (including overseeing the {{w|Federal Emergency Management Agency}}), and would be well equipped to deal with a major attack or natural disaster.
|-
|6
|{{w|United States Attorney General|Attorney General}}
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Treasury|Secretary of the Treasury}}
|Moved up from 8th position. Likely a serious suggestion. The Attorney General oversees national law enforcement, and would be in a position to deal with internal chaos that could result from a disaster that impacted the federal government so deeply.
|-
|7
|Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the President's term and confirmed by the Senate
|Secretary of Defense
|{{w|Washington, D.C.}} is the capital of the United States, and is where the {{w|White House}}, the President's residence, is located. Presumably this provision covers the case where much of the government, including positions 1–6 here, are killed by a natural disaster or attack in Washington, D.C.

This suggestion establishes no qualifications for these people, but the fact that they'd need to be confirmed by the Senate suggests that they would be chosen to be competent for the role. It is also unclear if an order is determined among these five or if they take up a joint presidency. This suggestion is taken from the Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission to prevent the danger of the entire line of succession being removed in a single event.
|-
|8
|{{w|Tom Hanks}}
|Attorney General
|Academy Award-winning American actor. This is the first unambiguously unserious suggestion.{{Citation needed}} Tom Hanks is very popular and considered exceptionally likeable by many Americans, but has never served in public office or displayed any particular affinity for politics. The implication is that Mr. Hanks would be easily accepted as a leader, based solely on his personal charm.
|-
|9
|State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
|{{w|United States Secretary of the Interior|Secretary of the Interior}}
|Also taken from Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission. At the time of publication, the last {{w|United States Census}} was the 2010 Census. As California is the most populous state, its Governor ({{w|Jerry Brown}} at the time of publication) would have been first in line.

See also the {{w|2010_United_States_Census#State_rankings|state population rankings}} and the {{w|list of current United States governors}}. As worded, this criterion would exclude territorial governors (and the Mayor of Washington, D.C.).
|-
|10
|Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
|{{w|United States Secretary of Agriculture|Secretary of Agriculture}}
|Oscars, or {{w|Academy Awards}}, are annual film awards awarded by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. At the time of publication, the only Oscar awarded for playing a governor was {{w|Broderick Crawford}}'s 1949 Best Actor award for the fictional Willie Stark in ''{{w|All the King's Men (1949 film)|All the King's Men}}'' (a character based on {{w|Huey Long}}). However, Crawford died in 1986, so would be unable to serve as President.

May be a reference to the {{w|Political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger}}: a highly-lauded actor who became governor of California, but did not win an Oscar or play a governor before being elected. (As a naturalized citizen, he is also ineligible for the Presidency.)
|-
|11
|Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
|{{w|United States Secretary of Commerce|Secretary of Commerce}}
|The {{w|Governors Awards}} are an annual award ceremony hosted by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to present lifetime achievement awards within the film industry. As this award is a lifetime achievement award, it does not seem possible that an actor could win this award for simply playing someone named Oscar. Notwithstanding the nature of the award, at the time of publication, no recipient of a Governors Award has played a character named Oscar.

Obviously, the joke is that changing the order of the words from the previous proposal produces something that could actually exist.
|-
|12
|{{w|Kate McKinnon}}, if available
|Secretary of Labor
|Comedic actress famous for being a cast member on {{w|Saturday Night Live}}. She is known for her character work and celebrity impressions. She has recently done impersonations of members of the Trump administration including Spokeswoman {{w|Kellyanne Conway}} and Attorney General {{w|Jeff Sessions}}. She also played {{w|Hillary Clinton}} during the 2016 campaign and presumably would have played her when she was President had she won; but since Clinton lost, McKinnon has not actually played a President. At the time the comic was released, she was 34 years 5 months old; thus she was not "available" until seven months later.
|-
|13
|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
|Secretary of Health and Human Services
|The {{w|Billboard Hot 100}} is the music industry standard record chart in the United States for singles, published weekly by Billboard magazine. The weekly data is aggregated into a cumulative {{w|Billboard Year-End}} (based on a "year" that ends the third week of November, in order to meet December publication deadlines). At the time of publication, the most recent such list was the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017}}.

Based on that list, the artists considered for the presidential succession would be: {{w|Ed Sheeran}}, {{w|Luis Fonsi}}, {{w|Bruno Mars}}, {{w|Kendrick Lamar}}, Alex Pall (of {{w|The Chainsmokers}}), {{w|Quavo|Quavoius Keyate Marshall}} (of {{w|Migos}}), {{w|Sam Hunt}}, {{w|Dan Reynolds}} (of {{w|Imagine Dragons}}), and {{w|Post Malone}}. There are only nine names instead of ten because The Chainsmokers had two of the top 10 singles in 2017. Of these, only Luis Fonsi (40 years old, born in Puerto Rico) was legally eligible for the office; all the others were too young, and Sheeran is additionally from the United Kingdom.
|-
|14
|The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
|Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
|Astronauts are highly respected and rigorously selected, but most have little involvement in politics. According to [https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders NASA], the top 5 US astronauts by cumulative space time at the time of publication were: {{w|Peggy Whitson}}, {{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}}, {{W|Scott Kelly (astronaut)|Scott Kelly}}, {{w|Mike Fincke}}, and {{w|Mike Foale}}. However, it is unclear whether Foale would qualify as a natural-born citizen, as he was born in the United Kingdom to a British father and American mother.
|-
|15
|{{w|Serena Williams}} (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
|Secretary of Transportation
|As of the time of publication, Serena Williams was a top female tennis player. She is arguably the greatest female tennis player of all-time, winning 39 {{w|Grand Slam (tennis)|Grand Slam}} titles, including 23 women's singles titles. At the time of publication Serena Williams did win her most recent match (2018 French Open, third round, on June 2nd), although she withdrew from her next match against Maria Sharapova (which perhaps should count as a loss, especially if she withdrew in order to preserve her place in the line of succession and killed everyone in place ahead of her).

If her most recent defeat was to a non-US player, presumably she would be skipped over in line although this is not explicitly stated (the current succession list skips over anyone who would not normally qualify for not being a natural-born US citizen).
|-
|16
|The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
|Secretary of Energy
|MVP stands for {{w|Most Valuable Player}}. The 4 listed leagues are the major sports leagues in the United States, the {{w|National Basketball Association}} (NBA), the {{w|National Football League}} (NFL), {{w|Major League Baseball}} (MLB), and the {{w|National Hockey League}} (NHL). We're assuming that Randall meant the regular season MVPs of each league, as each league also awards MVPs for their respective championships (or in the case of the NHL's {{w|Conn Smythe Trophy}}, their entire playoffs).

As of the time of publication, the most recent MVPs for the listed sports were {{w|Russell Westbrook}} (NBA), {{w|Tom Brady}} (NFL), {{w|José Altuve}} and {{w|Giancarlo Stanton}} (MLB has two, one for the American League and one for the National League), and {{w|Connor McDavid}} (NHL). Of these, only Brady would qualify for the list - Altuve and McDavid are Venezuelan and Canadian citizens respectively, and Westbrook (29) and Stanton (28) were too young.
|-
|17
|{{w|Bill Pullman}} and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
|Secretary of Education
|American actor, known for playing President Thomas J. Whitmore in the 1996 film ''{{w|Independence Day (1996 film)|Independence Day}}''.

Absolute primogeniture is a form of succession where the oldest direct descendant regardless of gender receives the title. This is contrasted to {{w|Male-preference primogeniture}}, in which males come before females in the order of the throne, whether the males were born first or not. This may be a reference to the British law {{w|Succession to the Crown Act 2013}}, which changed the order of the throne from male-preference primogeniture to absolute primogeniture. This act allows {{w|Princess Charlotte of Cambridge|Princess Charlotte}} to retain her place in line before {{w|Prince Louis of Cambridge|Prince Louis}}.

At the time of publication, Pullman's immediate descendants consisted of three children, with Maesa Pullman being the oldest at age 29. Thus all but Bill Pullman himself were too young for the presidency.
|-
|18
|The entire line of succession to the British throne
|Secretary of Veterans Affairs
|According to the Constitution, only a natural-born citizen of the United States can become President, which means that at least most of the line of succession to the British throne is ineligible. However, it is possible that someone in the line of succession to the British throne either is a dual citizen or is not British (a person from outside of Britain can become King; for example, some, including George I, were from what is now Germany).

The first 59 names on the list are {{w|Succession_to_the_British_throne#Current_line_of_succession|here}}. [https://lineofsuccession.co.uk/?date=2018-06-06 British Line of Succession on 6 June 2018] shows the list as it was at the comic's publication. American citizens [http://articles.latimes.com/1988-02-11/news/vw-42233_1_royal-house have, at times] been on the list, but no natural-born Americans were on the list when the comic was published. However, after this comic was published {{w|Archie Mountbatten-Windsor}} was born on May 6, 2019; he is currently seventh in the line of succession to the British throne and has US citizenship through his mother {{w|Meghan, Duchess of Sussex}}. As with Mark Foale, though, whether that qualifies as natural-born has not be tested (leaving aside his age and the fact that many royals in his position have historically relinquished their birthright US citizenship voluntarily, which he may choose to do once he reaches age 16). In theory, the full British succession list includes [http://www.wargs.com/essays/succession/2011.html several thousand people] (living descendants of {{w|Sophia of Hanover}} who are not Roman Catholic or otherwise disqualified), and it is possible that one or more such people would also be eligible to be President of the United States beyond Master Archie.

The humor here derives from the fact that the United States was established by declaring independence from the United Kingdom, with rejection of the British monarchy being a basic founding principle, and a core principle of US governance. To appoint the British monarchy to the American presidency would contradict the basic goals of American independence. Alternatively, it may reference the recent wedding of {{w|Prince Harry}} to {{w|Meghan Markle}}, although she is not in the order of succession. A similar sequence of events was the plotline of the comedy film ''{{w|King Ralph}}'', which saw an American become the British monarch after the death of the royal family.
|-
|19
|The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
|Secretary of Homeland Security
|The {{w|Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest}} is an annual American hot dog competitive eating competition sponsored by {{w|Nathan's Famous}} held on July 4th. As of the time of publication, the most recent men's winner was {{w|Joey Chestnut}} and the women's winner was {{w|Miki Sudo}}. At the time of publication, neither was old enough to assume the office.

The comic does not specify whether the men's or women's winner should take office, creating a tie that would be broken by distance from Europa at birth. Had they both been eligible, [https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29132/was-earth-closer-to-europa-on-1983-11-25-or-1985-07-22 Sudo would have won] by between 0.125 and 4 {{w|Astronomical unit}}s.
|-
|20
|All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament
|''None''
|Effective for a population up to 536,870,912 individuals (2^29) which would be enough to cover the entire US population (estimated at around 325 million at time of publication), although additional rounds can be added should the population grow further.

This is probably a reference to the {{w|Matter of Britain}} (e.g., {{w|The Sword in the Stone (film)|The Sword in the Stone}}), where, after the death of Uther Pendragon, with no known successor to the throne of England for years, it is decided that the winner of a jousting tournament shall be crowned. However, Arthur, the Wart, pulls the Sword from the Stone.
|}

===List of specific individuals===
Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the date the comic was published'''.
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Jim Mattis}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Kirstjen Nielsen}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}})
#{{w|Jeff Sessions}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Sessions.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Jerry Brown}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Rick Scott}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|Bruce Rauner}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|John Kasich}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Rick Snyder}} (Governor of Michigan)
#{{w|Nathan Deal}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Haslam}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Scott Walker (politician)|Scott Walker}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Mark Dayton}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|John Hickenlooper}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Matt Bevin}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Mary Fallin}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Dannel Malloy}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Phil Bryant}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Jeff Colyer}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Brian Sandoval}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Susana Martinez}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Butch Otter}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Paul LePage}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Dennis Daugaard}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Bill Walker (U.S. politician)|Bill Walker}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Matt Mead}} (Governor of Wyoming) Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. Kate McKinnon was only 34 years 5 months old at the time the comic was released, making her unavailable.
#{{w|Luis Fonsi}} (Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2017, #2 artist) Fonsi is the only eligible individual under the Billboard criterion.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} Serena's place on this list assumes that you do not count her withdrawal against Maria Sharapova as a ''loss''; if that counts as a loss, then subsequent entries move up one position (as Sharapova is ineligible).
#{{w|Tom Brady}} ({{w|National Football League Most Valuable Player Award|NFL MVP}}) The MVPs of all other listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of his children are old enough to become President at this time.
#''line of succession to the British throne'' Assumes that no eligible member of the British order of succession exists due to citizenship issues. The Nathan's Hot Dog Eating champions were too young to hold the office.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament)

Based on the comic's defined criteria for the order of succession, these are the specific individuals in that order, including only people who are otherwise eligible to be the President of United States (35 year old and natural born US citizens who lived in US for last 14 years) '''as of the current date'''. (Last updated on 15 April 2020)
#{{w|Donald Trump}} ({{w|President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pence}} ({{w|Vice President of the United States}})
#{{w|Mike Pompeo}} ({{w|United States Secretary of State}})
#{{w|Mark Esper}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Defense}})
#{{w|Chad Wolf}} ({{w|United States Secretary of Homeland Security}}) Wolf is currently the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. It's unclear whether this proposal would include acting officers.
#{{w|William Barr}} ({{w|United States Attorney General}}) As Donald Trump did not appoint anyone to fill position #7 on Randall's line of succession, Hanks immediately follows after Barr.
#{{w|Tom Hanks}} (Tom Hanks)
#{{w|Gavin Newsom}} (Governor of California)
#{{w|Greg Abbott}} (Governor of Texas)
#{{w|Andrew Cuomo}} (Governor of New York)
#{{w|Ron DeSantis}} (Governor of Florida)
#{{w|J. B. Pritzker}} (Governor of Illinois)
#{{w|Tom Wolf}} (Governor of Pennsylvania)
#{{w|Mike DeWine}} (Governor of Ohio)
#{{w|Gretchen Whitmer}} (Governor of Michigan) Notably, the first woman on this list.
#{{w|Brian Kemp}} (Governor of Georgia)
#{{w|Roy Cooper}} (Governor of North Carolina)
#{{w|Phil Murphy}} (Governor of New Jersey)
#{{w|Ralph Northam}} (Governor of Virginia)
#{{w|Jay Inslee}} (Governor of Washington)
#{{w|Charlie Baker}} (Governor of Massachusetts)
#{{w|Eric Holcomb}} (Governor of Indiana)
#{{w|Doug Ducey}} (Governor of Arizona)
#{{w|Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)|Bill Lee}} (Governor of Tennessee)
#{{w|Mike Parson}} (Governor of Missouri)
#{{w|Larry Hogan}} (Governor of Maryland)
#{{w|Tony Evers}} (Governor of Wisconsin)
#{{w|Tim Walz}} (Governor of Minnesota)
#{{w|Jared Polis}} (Governor of Colorado)
#{{w|Kay Ivey}} (Governor of Alabama)
#{{w|Henry McMaster}} (Governor of South Carolina)
#{{w|John Bel Edwards}} (Governor of Louisiana)
#{{w|Andy Beshear}} (Governor of Kentucky)
#{{w|Kate Brown}} (Governor of Oregon) Born in Spain to a member of the US Air Force, should be considered a natural-born citizen until proven otherwise.
#{{w|Kevin Stitt}} (Governor of Oklahoma)
#{{w|Ned Lamont}} (Governor of Connecticut)
#{{w|Kim Reynolds}} (Governor of Iowa)
#{{w|Tate Reeves}} (Governor of Mississippi)
#{{w|Asa Hutchinson}} (Governor of Arkansas)
#{{w|Laura Kelly}} (Governor of Kansas)
#{{w|Gary Herbert}} (Governor of Utah)
#{{w|Steve Sisolak}} (Governor of Nevada)
#{{w|Michelle Lujan Grisham}} (Governor of New Mexico)
#{{w|Jim Justice}} (Governor of West Virginia)
#{{w|Pete Ricketts}} (Governor of Nebraska)
#{{w|Brad Little}} (Governor of Idaho)
#{{w|David Ige}} (Governor of Hawaii)
#{{w|Janet Mills}} (Governor of Maine)
#{{w|Chris Sununu}} (Governor of New Hampshire)
#{{w|Gina Raimondo}} (Governor of Rhode Island)
#{{w|Steve Bullock (American politician)|Steve Bullock}} (Governor of Montana)
#{{w|John Carney (politician)|John Carney}} (Governor of Delaware)
#{{w|Kristi Noem}} (Governor of South Dakota)
#{{w|Mike Dunleavy (politician)|Mike Dunleavy}} (Governor of Alaska)
#{{w|Doug Burgum}} (Governor of North Dakota)
#{{w|Phil Scott (politician)|Phil Scott}} (Governor of Vermont)
#{{w|Mark Gordon (politician)|Mark Gordon}} (Governor of Wyoming)
#{{w|Kate McKinnon}} (Kate McKinnon) If she is available. Entries 10 and 11 on Randall's list have no eligible living members. All artists from the {{w|Billboard Year-End Hot 100 singles of 2019}} were under 35.
#{{w|Peggy Whitson}} (Astronaut, 665 days in space)
#{{w|Jeffrey Williams (astronaut)|Jeff Williams}} (Astronaut, 534 days in space)
#{{w|Scott Kelly}} (Astronaut, 520 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Fincke}} (Astronaut, 382 days in space)
#{{w|Mike Foale}} (Astronaut, 374 days in space) Foale was born in the UK but his mother is an American, and he holds dual citizenship with both countries. It isn't clear legally whether this situation would qualify him as being a "natural-born" citizen as US courts have never definitively ruled on what the term means, so similar to Governor Kate Brown his name is included in the list until further notice.
#{{w|Bill Pullman}} (Bill Pullman) None of Bill Pullman's children are old enough to become President at this time.
#{{w|Serena Williams}} (most recent match: win against {{w|Anastasija Sevastova}}, Fed Cup QLS R1) The MVPs of all listed sports leagues are ineligible for the office due to age or nationality.
#''line of succession to the British throne''
#{{w|Joey Chestnut}} (Men's champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest) {{w|Miki Sudo}}, the women's champion, is ineligible due to age.
#''everyone else'' (Jousting tournament) Assumes that the number of eligible US Citizens does not exceed 536,870,912.

==Transcript==
: A proposal for a new presidential line of succession
: Current politics aside, most experts agree the existing process is flawed. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 is probably unconstitutional on several counts, and there are many practical issues with the system as well.
: (For more, see the surprisingly gripping ''Second Report of the Continuity of Government Commission'', June 2009.)
: Proposed line of succession:
:# President
:# Vice president
:# Secretary of State
:# Secretary of Defense
:# Secretary of Homeland Security
:# Attorney General
:# Five people who do not live in Washington DC, nominated at the start of the president's term and confirmed by the Senate
:# Tom Hanks
:# State Governors, in descending order of state population at last census
:# Anyone who won an Oscar for playing a governor
:# Anyone who won a Governor's award for playing someone named Oscar
:# Kate McKinnon, if available
:# Billboard year-end Hot 100 singles artists #1 through #10 (for groups, whoever is credited first in name, liner notes, etc)
:# The top 5 US astronauts in descending order of total spaceflight time
:# Serena Williams (or, if she lost her most recent match, whoever beat her)
:# The most recent season NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL MVPs
:# Bull Pullman and his descendants by absolute primogeniture
:# The entire line of succession to the British throne
:# The current champion of the Nathan's Hot Dog Eating contest
:# All other US citizens, chosen by a 29-round single-elimination Jousting tournament

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Politics]]

Talk:1238: Enlightenment

2020-09-09T16:06:45Z

162.158.75.160:

I can't help but feel he toadaly missed out on "herd"!
Should this make me feel icky? Please help!
Monteletourneau [[User:Monteletourneau|Monteletourneau]] ([[User talk:Monteletourneau|talk]]) 05:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Did anyone else notice the (most likely intentional) typos in that sentence they told her to type? "... and THEIR DEFINATELY good" (they're definitely) {{unsigned ip|‎115.30.33.36}}
:http://imgur.com/3Gpey 13:21, 6 April 2016 (UTC)~

Didn't you notice "you're" and "idea's" as well. I would assume it is highly improbable that these were not intentional. [[Special:Contributions/74.125.16.2|74.125.16.2]] 04:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)GusGold

Of course those were intentional. That was the joke. The exercise for INTERNET enlightenment and getting rid of insecurities is to make typos and grammatical errors freely. You may also notice them saying on the last panel "wasnt" and "its", instead of "wasn't" and "it's".
Megan just wasn't able to do this task of making intentional mistakes, which would result in people online thinking she's dumb (insecurities), so she broke the laptop and left. [[Special:Contributions/95.35.58.179|95.35.58.179]] 05:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:Why do we think she broke the laptop and left? What's the circle on the ground for? (Looks like a StarTrek Transporter pad. And the pedestal just appeared as needed, must be virtual. Rather, I think she got UN-enlightened and zapped away into nothing-ness. [[Special:Contributions/12.234.99.131|12.234.99.131]] 16:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Zake

There's a huge difference between accepting others' misspellings and repeating them yourself...not commenting on someone typing "definately" is completely different than being told to spell it that way yourself. [[User:Wotpsycho|Wotpsycho]] ([[User talk:Wotpsycho|talk]])

I read you're explanation's and their definately helpful! --[[Special:Contributions/129.187.90.96|129.187.90.96]] 09:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Having your ideas "approved" by someone who can't even spell might feel much worse than having them simply shot down.{{unsigned ip|89.31.118.161}}

Does anyone else think Ponytail appears to be levitating? --[[User:DanB|DanB]] ([[User talk:DanB|talk]]) 16:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Someone deleted my edit, so I'm bringing it up here on the discussion page. The sentence contains more than just common misspellings; it also contains a common grammatical error. "I read your ideas and they're definitely good" is a run-on sentence. Joining two independent clauses requires BOTH a comma and a coordinating conjunction ("I read your ideas, and they're definitely good"). The sentence omits the comma. While certain style guides allow the comma to be left out when the two clauses are short enough, Megan's obstinate grammar-nazism is the entire point of the comic. It is unlikely she would let it slide. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 16:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:"they're" refers to "ideas", the sentences are not independent.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 17:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::That's not what an independent clause means. Can they be separated into two sentences? "I read your ideas. They're definitely good." Yes - it still makes sense as two sentences, thus the two clauses are independent. (An example of a dependent clause would be "I read your ideas while I was driving home." "While I was driving home" cannot stand on its own as a sentence, so it is not an independent clause.)[[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 18:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not a native English speaker, and I have learned only British English at school. But your statement makes sense. My first sentence is correct?--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:59, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Yep, your first sentence is fine. I'm going to add the note about run-on sentences back into the Explanation; I hope nobody has any more objections. [[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 19:35, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
:::"...''whilst'' I was driving home"? ;) (And bear in mind as well that "while" can more commonly mean "until", instead of "during", in certain English-speaking dialects. Ok, I'm being picky, now.) [[Special:Contributions/178.98.50.23|178.98.50.23]] 05:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Gr8 example of Internet forum tangental one-upmanship! [[Special:Contributions/12.234.99.131|12.234.99.131]] 16:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Zake
:This explanation makes a lot of sense. It helped me to stop being angry at the sentence they wanted her to type, and to pay attention to the bigger picture, especially when combined with the alt-text. Randall, I heard you're idea's and their definately good. (Also, I'm assuming that Internet Enlightenment allows me to be disgusted with myself for writing that, as long as I was willing to do so.) [[Special:Contributions/68.231.138.149|68.231.138.149]] 04:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::It is perfectly correct to join two independent clauses with a coordinating conjunction and no comma. In fact it is often considered bad style (if not actually incorrect) to include both a comma and a conjunction when joining only two clauses.[[Special:Contributions/129.22.117.158|129.22.117.158]] 17:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not native English, as I explained before, but please give some more background information and not only a statement of your mind. And consider: This is American English, there are some odd commas. I'm still not sure what's correct.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
::::I'm not native either. What I've found on several sites [http://pages.uoregon.edu/munno/Writing/ClausesandCommas.html], [http://www.ego4u.com/en/cram-up/writing/comma?09] is ''two independent clauses connected by "and" or "but" are separated by a comma''—basically, because you would make a little pause at that point when used in speech. Contradicting this on {{w|simple:Run-on sentence}} I currently see ''"I looked over the hill and I saw the bear." is a complete sentence.'' (not two independent clauses—although grammatically possible), so simple-wikipedia could be wrong, or there is some tolerance, when two clauses are actually connected. In the end, I'd say this comma is not really worth that discussion, and I would suggest making some kind of neutral statement, e.g. ''and there might be a {{w|Run-on sentence|comma}} missing''. --[[User:Chtz|Chtz]] ([[User talk:Chtz|talk]]) 22:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
:::It is not perfectly correct to omit the comma. Chtz cited two sources above, here are a few more: [http://www.towson.edu/ows/conjunctions.htm], [http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm], [http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/020204WhenCommaBfAnd.htm]. There is a little leeway for stylistic reasons, but as I mentioned above, the entire point of the comic is that Megan does not give leeway when it comes to grammar nazism. The corrected sentence in the explanation should be actually correct, not mostly-correct-but-given-a-little-stylistic-leeway.[[Special:Contributions/193.67.17.36|193.67.17.36]] 18:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
::::I (poster from 129.22.117.158 above) have looked into things more and stand corrected. I heard all you're ideas, and their definately good.[[Special:Contributions/209.152.196.210|209.152.196.210]] 13:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if there's an additional level of meaning here. To me, the most striking thing about the sentence Megan won't type is not the bad spelling, but the fact that it involves agreeing with someone. On the Internet, people are always arguing with other (as in, for example, http://xkcd.com/386/). Maybe what Megan had to do to become "enlightened" was not just to ignore the rules of spelling, but actually to agree with someone for a change?{{unsigned ip|134.226.254.178}}
:Well, that's why I wrote the third paragraph, about how important agreement can be. Do you have any suggestions as to how we could emphasize this point more? [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 22:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Be associated with bad grammar, Yoda would not. [[User:Alcatraz ii|Alcatraz ii]] ([[User talk:Alcatraz ii|talk]]) 08:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
;Incomplete or not?
I did add the tag again because there are too many edits at this page and also the discussion is still not clear. I would like to see the grammar issue solved by more explain, even when it's not easy.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning any more comparisons, but I'd put it don't here at least: It reminds me of Schindler's List when Schindler tries to convince Amon Goeth, a commander of a Nazi concentration camp, that true power is when you have the power (and justification) to kill someone, but you spare them. This is an attempt to change the behaviour of Amon, who has a habit of killing random camp internees (and _believes_ he has the right to do so).{{unsigned ip|Svend}}
:Hey, you compared something to the Nazis! I invoke Godwin's Law! http://xkcd.com/261/{{unsigned ip|134.226.254.178}}

Note I have removed a misguided rant from Dgbrt regarding Svend's thoughtful post. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.88|199.27.128.88]] 09:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

This xkcd is all about how hard it is not to be a grammar nazi. --[[Special:Contributions/84.60.134.161|84.60.134.161]] 02:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

:Ah! So sweet and succinct! That line should be in the explanation. Perhaps with the words "for some people" added, but yeah. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.134|108.162.225.134]] 05:29, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with Randall and this comic, that making grammar errors and appearing uneducated is OK, and anyone who doesn't want to make themselves sound stupid is insecure (no, I want to communicate clearly and present ideas using proper and consistent language conventions). [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 08:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I had a completely different reaction to this comic. I interpreted the circle as a trap door. I interpreted it as Megan failed to notice the typos in the sentence, and typed it out exactly as shown. The test was to see if she would type it correctly. She failed the test and fell through the trap door, knocking over the laptop on the way down.

== OVerComplete? ==

Not 2 happy with There is also a double meaning - not writing anything at all is in fact "saying nothing". 
While "good enough" Zen, this reading is a bit beyond the obvious' of the rest. 
BTW, I would hold that, to subvert the comic, we need to keep the discussion going and correct each other in a most pedantic but loving way. Moreso, I intend to use this comic widely as I go around correcting the internet. [[User:Yamaplos|Yamaplos]] ([[User talk:Yamaplos|talk]]) 14:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

1066: Laundry

2020-08-22T20:49:54Z

162.158.75.160: Have been through college myself. Can confirm it is simple laziness as laundry is not work-intensive and involves periods of waiting that can easily be used to work on assignments.

{{comic
| number = 1066
| date = June 8, 2012
| title = Laundry
| image = laundry.png
| titletext = During the second semester, the path is briefly routed through the dishwasher.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is all about college laundry habits and how as time goes by, you end up just throwing clothes on the floor and then wearing them again.

In the first week, the student undertakes a proper laundry routine. However, due to increasing laziness, by the second week they have abandoned folding their clothes, and by the third week no longer bother hanging them in the closet. By the second month dirty clothes are no longer stored in a laundry hamper and are just dumped on the floor, and by the end of the semester clothes are not washed at all.

The title text seems to indicate that the student has a brainwave sometime later, to wash their clothes in the dishwasher along with the dishes, presumably as a timesaver. The experiment was brief because dishwashers aren't actually any good at washing clothes{{Citation needed}} as they wouldn't move the clothes about.

==Transcript==
:'''College Laundry Habits'''

:[Panel labeled "First Week". 5 ovals arranged in a rough circle, with a clockwise path connecting them: "Dresser & Closet", "On Body", "Hamper", "Washer & Dryer", "Folding Area" (and back to the first). The area outside the ovals is labeled "Floor."]

:[Panel labeled "Second Week". The path has been modified so that it does not go through "Folding Area" - only through the other 4 ovals.]

:[Panel labeled "Third Week". The path has been modified so that it does not go through "Dresser & Closet". Only "On Body", "Hamper", and "Washer & Dryer" remain.]

:[Panel labeled "Second Month". The path no longer passes through "Hamper" - only "On Body" and "Washer & Dryer".]

:[Panel labeled "End of Semester". The path no longer goes to "Washer & Dryer", instead just looping back around from "On Body" to "On Body" again after passing through the "Floor."]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Flowcharts]]

1878: Earth Orbital Diagram

2017-08-19T18:48:36Z

162.158.75.160: /* Labels and Their Astronomical Meanings */ Improved Astral Plane explanation

{{comic
| number = 1878
| date = August 18, 2017
| title = Earth Orbital Diagram
| image = earth_orbital_diagram.png
| titletext = You shouldn't look directly at a partial eclipse because of the damage that can be caused by improperly aligning the solar-lunar orbital plane with the orbital bones around your eye.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is the third consecutive comic published in the week before the {{w|solar eclipse}} occurring on Monday, {{w|Solar eclipse of August 21, 2017|August 21, 2017}} which is a total solar eclipse and visible in totality within a band across the {{w|contiguous United States}} from west to east. The other comics are [[1876: Eclipse Searches]] and [[1877: Eclipse Science]].

The comic claims that the reason that eclipses don't happen every month is simple to understand by looking at an orbital diagram. Ironically, the cartoon has so many parts and labels that it is far more difficult to understand than is implied. While the graph itself is based on {{w|Orbital elements|astronomical definitions}} all the labels are nonsense in this context. In effect, the comic is a parody of a common joke in which a person asks a scientist a question, the scientist begins by saying "It's really quite simple", then proceeds to give a very lengthy and highly technical explanation that non-scientists would not be expected to understand.

All of the labels in the diagram are complicated words or phrases. Some are related to orbital mechanics (e.g. "equinox" and "perihelion"), while others are wholly unrelated or even made up. Each label is nonsensical in its place in the diagram. Compare/contrast with the standard {{w|Kepler orbit|Kepler Orbit}} diagram.

The title text references warnings to not look directly into the sun, but parodies those warnings by referring to 'orbit', the anatomical term for the eye socket.

===Labels and Their Astronomical Meanings===

;Arctangent
*{{w|Arctangent}} is the inverse function of the tangent function of trigonometry. You can determine a non-right angle of a right triangle by taking the arctangent of the length of the opposite side divided by the length of the adjacent side.
*The angle shown in the comic has no astronomical meaning.

;Astral plane
*The {{w|Astral plane}} is a plane of existence in various esoteric theories. It features prominently in Dungeons and Dragons cosmology, connecting the various other planes of existence.
*The picture shows the {{w|Orbit_of_the_Moon|lunar orbital plane}}, the plane in which the Moon orbits the Earth, tilted about 5.1 degrees from the ecliptic.

;Declension
*{{w|Declension}} is the inflection of nouns in a language.
*In astronomy, the {{w|Declination|declination}} is one of the two angles that locate a point on the celestial sphere in the equatorial coordinate system. It is measured north or south of the celestial equator, like the geographical latitude on Earth. But in the picture the label is at the angle for the axial tilt of the Earth.

;Determinant of the date of Easter
*In Western Christianity {{w|Easter}} always falls on the first Sunday after the first ecclesiastical full moon after the beginning of spring (equinox). The ecclesiastical full moon is determined by a calendar that approximates the actual time of the full moon, Thus the date of easter is defined by a combination of a solar and a moon calendar. The position of that angle isn't that bad but it should be not more than 30 degrees (slightly more than one month.)
*In mathematics, the determinant is a function of numerical matrices. In this context, however, it apparently refers to something that directly determines the date of Easter.

;Dimples of Venus
*The {{w|Dimples of Venus}} are indentations sometimes visible on the human lower back.
*In astronomy the {{w|Belt of Venus}} is a shadow cast by the Earth visible in its atmosphere.

;Enceliopsis
*{{w|Enceliopsis}} are small genus of flowering plants in the daisy family, appropriately known as "sunrays".
*In astronomy this point has also no specific meaning. But {{w|Enceladus}} is a moon around {{w|Saturn}}.

;Equinox / Solstice
{{w|Equinox}} and {{w|Solstice}} have very different meanings:
*An Equinox is one of two instants in the year when the sun is exactly over the equator; the length of day and night are very nearly equal that day at all locations on the planet, and (in the United States) it is the first day of Spring or Autumn, depending on the time of year.
*A Solstice is one of two instants in the year when the sun's angle is maximally far from Earth's equator; when one occurs, the length of the day or night is shortest or longest (depending on whether one is in the northern or southern hemisphere), and (in the United States) it marks the first day of summer or winter.

Both types occur because the Earth's rotation axis is tilted (at 23.4 degrees) from its orbital plane (ecliptic) about the Sun.

Jokingly insisting that two different terms are American/British variants of the same word has been the topic of [[1677: Contrails]].

;Hypothecate
*{{w|Hypothecate}} is a legal verb that means something similar to "make a mortgage".
*The depicted angle has no meaning, but a {{w|Hypotenuse}} is the longest side of a right-angled triangle. Here it is the shortest side on a non right-angled triangle.

;Obsequity
*Obsequity means the state of being obsequious (showing an indecorous willingness to obey or serve, or "sucking up").
*In astronomy the correct word is {{w|Obliquity}}, meaning an axial tilt.

;Perihelix
*This is a portmanteau of helix and perihelion.
*The {{w|perihelion}} is the point in a elliptical solar orbit that is closest to the Sun.

;Prolapse
*A {{w|Prolapse}} is a medical condition in which an internal organ is slipped forward or down.
*{{w|Retrograde and prograde motion}} are terms used to describe the apparent motion of celestial objects through the sky.

;Sagittal plane
*The {{w|Sagittal plane}} is an anatomical plane, dividing the body in left and right.
*The correct label in the picture would be the {{w|Ecliptic plane}}. The plane the Earth orbits the Sun.
*{{w|Sagittarius (constellation)|Sagittarius}} is one of the stellar constellations of the Zodiac. The center of the Milky Way lies in this constellation.

;Solar plexus
*The {{w|Solar plexus}} is a network of nerves located in the abdomen. It was the name of [[64: Solar Plexus]].
*{{w|Solar}} is an adjective referring to the Sun, the star in our solar system.

;Tropopause
*The {{w|Tropopause}} is the boundary in our atmosphere between the troposphere and stratosphere, defined as the boundary where air ceases to cool with increasing elevation. It is 9-17 km above sea level, not the thousands of kilometers as depicted here.

;Angle between the Astral and the Sagittal Planes
* The angle depicted is the inclination of the moon orbit. The planes are marked with greeks letter, the angle is marked with a symbol resembling the greek ''phi'' (ϕ).

;Errata
* Errata are corrections in a published text (e.g. a newspaper article) issued after the publication.
* The angle depicted as errata is half the angular size of the sun, which has to match the lunar angular size to cause a solar total eclipse.

==Explanation for "Why isn't there a (solar) eclipse every month?"==

If the plane of where the Earth orbits the Sun and where the Moon orbits the Earth were completely aligned, then there would be a solar eclipse at every new moon (once every {{w|Orbit_of_the_Moon#Lunar_periods| 29.5 days}}) and a lunar eclipse at every full moon (half a lunar period about 14.7 days after a New Moon). However, the plane in which the Moon orbits the Earth is tilted with an inclination of 5 degrees relative to that of the ecliptic plane (the plane defined by the Earth's orbit around the Sun). Eclipses are only possible during two eclipse seasons each year (half a year apart) where for a period of 31 to 37 days the Sun is nearly aligned with the two points in the tilted Earth-Moon plane where the Moon crosses the ecliptic plane. During an eclipse season at the time of a new moon there will be solar eclipses visible from certain locations and during full moons there will be lunar eclipses.

[[Image:Eclipse_Diagram.jpg]]

The real explanation of eclipses is evident from this xkcd comic, but is labeled with a fictional character similar to a Greek phi but with two vertical lines; the remaining labels also do not contribute to this explanation and exist only to distract or misinform the reader.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[An orbital map of the Earth is shown. The Sun is in the center, the Earth is at the right bottom, and the Moon is left below the Earth.]
:'''Why isn't there an eclipse every month?'''
:This is a common question! The answer is made clear by a quick look at the Earth's orbital diagram:

:[Label Sun:]
:Solar plexus

:[Label on the Earth's plane:]
:Sagittal plane

:[Labels on Earth's orbit (beginning at the Earth counterclockwise):]
:Perihelix, Declension, Obsequity, Hypothecate, Enceliopsis, Equinox (''Solstice'' in British English)

:[Two angles in the plane are labeled as:]
:Determinant of the date of Easter, Arctangent

:[The plane of the Moon is pictured in a small angle to the Earth's plane and named Astral Plane. The angle is presented between two lines (Greek Nu or Gamma and a double Greek Chi) and identified by a "Game Of Thrones" 'O' (a character that looks similar to a Greek Phi but with two vertical lines).]
:[The labels at the Moon's path are:]
:Tropopause, Prolapse, Errata.

:[An arrow points to the Earth at the zero meridian on the equator. The label reads:]
:Dimples of Venus

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Astronomy]]

Talk:1800: Chess Notation

2017-02-19T20:39:22Z

162.158.75.160: white hat, black hat

So... This is just a really excellent pun? "Drawn" conversation?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.22|162.158.75.22]] 15:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:The pun gets better when you think about drawn '''and''' stalemated conversations, both of which will be scored 0.5 - 0.5. A stalemate occurs when no legal moves are possible, but the opponent isn't in check.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.82|162.158.150.82]] 16:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I have 2 questions does Randall know about this wiki and if there is an "incomplete" comic and I complete the explanation or other issue can I delete the incomplete notification thingy or does an admin have to do that?[[User:XFez|XFez]] ([[User talk:XFez|talk]]) 17:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:Anyone can remove the incomplete tag. Likewise, anyone can add it back again if they feel the explanation can be improved. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.225|162.158.62.225]] 18:37, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
::My answer at the last comic:
::Hi [[User:XFez|XFez]], sorry for the late reply but this was hard to find. I don't know if Randall knows..., but maybe he does. But he does NOT support this wiki in any way -- like he does not here: [http://forums.xkcd.com http://forums.xkcd.com] (while everything is now on https that board isn't ;) ). So there is no final explanation and he says 100 points! To your second question: You are allowed to remove the "incomplete tag". But the given criteria is not enough, often that simple text covers not all. Please check also the discussion page. So, when you are not sure just change the criteria text and mention it at the discussion page. And for older comics you probably should talk to someone else here because nobody checks every comic every day.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:19, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:::Randall knows of this page for sure. How often he goes here for a laugh is hard to say, but I would guess he would never comment on anything. But who knows if he checks here to see if has made a mistake. Sometimes errors are corrected after they get mentioned here. Often very early in Randall's time zone. Who knows if he sees this here. He has given a 100 % proof that he knows about this page in his official transcript. He actually made a direct link to Explain xkcd for a better transcript than his own. Alas there was not transcript until this year, where I made it: See this [[Payloads#Trivia|trivia]] under [[Payloads]], that I added earlier in 2017. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Isn't the mouseover text saying that it was a blunder to tell white hat that he is scoring it because that will cause white hat to actively compete, instead of simply losing because he didn't know there was a game? [a guest and fan]{{unsigned ip|141.101.107.12}}

Why is the figure on the left not wearing a beret? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.208|162.158.78.208]] 21:14, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:Because [[Beret Guy]] would never do something like this, which is basically degrading to other humans. It could have been [[Hairy]], or White Hat himself that ha d said it though. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:49, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Under the "Chess games and conversations" section, "differences" subsection, it says that "people's statements sometimes last an eternity or even longer". Eternity = infinite time, duration without beginning or end. It's impossible for a person to make a statement lasting longer than his or her lifespan, and realistically for someone to continue speaking for more than an hour or so is extremely rare (someone giving a speech or presentation, for example, which isn't the type of "conversation" we're dealing with). Is the word "eternity" being used in a hyperbolic sense? If so, I'm not sure I understand exactly what this sentence is trying to say.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.46.11|172.68.46.11]] 04:19, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

How did the conversation end in a draw? Was it by agreement? Was it actually "drawn" as mentioned below?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.185|162.158.79.185]] 20:17, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:"Fine." "Fine." Agreement. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.202|108.162.210.202]] 23:18, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

The move to score conversations itself was probably a blunder, but it seems that, since the sentence is copied verbatim, that the move to declare your scoring of conversations to somebody else is a blunder. Because that's weird and nobody wants to hear about it. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.50.72|173.245.50.72]] 18:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello all. Just pointing out that stalemate it's not one of the most common ways to draw a chess game. It's quite rare in fact. Agreement, threefold repetition, perpetual check (and maybe even insufficent material) are statisticaly more usual. Keep up the great job, Albi.--[[Special:Contributions/188.114.102.52|188.114.102.52]] 09:16, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

The last part of the first section, Chess notation (and annotation), says that Cueball would score a conversation "1-0" whether he won it or lost it (depending upon who started the conversation). That is totally ambiguous; he would need more annotation to show whether he started the conversation and won it or the opposite. If I were scoring it - but I'm not a chess player - I would just score it as if I were always white, and it would be clear whether I won or not. What's the point of scoring the conversation if you can't read the score later on? He didn't say he was ''recording'' and scoring his conversations, he just said he was scoring them.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226|108.162.237.226]] 21:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

HOLY CRAP HOW MUCH OF THIS PAGE IS ''ACTUALLY NECESSARY'' TO EXPLAIN THE JOKE --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.226|108.162.245.226]] 22:13, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
:I came here to say just that. [[User:SuperSupermario24|Just some random derp]] 18:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

The cartoon should have had Cueball talking to Black Hat, not White Hat. Since Cueball makes the first move in the conversation, by chess rules he would have been playing as White. Having Black Hat play as Black in chess would not only be more color-coordinated, it would be more appropriate for him to say "I don't know or care what that means" than it would be for Black Hat. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 20:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

1796: Focus Knob

2017-02-08T13:10:05Z

162.158.75.160: /* Explanation */ Calling out the absurdity of the concept and thus the source of actual humor (aside from all that psychology stuff)

{{comic
| number = 1796
| date = February 8, 2017
| title = Focus Knob
| image = focus_knob.png
| titletext = Maybe if I spin it back and forth really fast I can do some kind of pulse-width modulation.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT then edited by a human, I think.}}
The image is of a rotary {{w|control knob}} used for adjusting parameters in instruments, such as the visual focus of a camera or display. Apparently this one is for adjusting [[Randall]]'s personal focus level, with the extremes of focus being towards small details and big picture respectively. However, humans do not usually have control knobs to adjust personal parameters; thus, the absurdity of the concept -- having direct, immediate control of mental/emotional focus -- drives the humor of this strip. Some may see this as desirable, but it could also be manipulated by others against one's will.

While performing any task, it is easy to get so lost in the details that you forget the big picture. It is also equally easy to think much about the big picture and make vague plans while missing out on the details.

One can get lost doing small tasks that might increase efficiency for long projects (e.g. fiddling with email settings), but these might make one lose track of the big picture.

The healthy balance, Randall suggests, is focusing mostly towards the big picture, while keeping an eye on the details. Focusing too much on the big picture can ensure nothing gets done, leading to panic and existential crises.

In the title text, Randall imagines spinning the dial to and fro, causing {{w|Pulse-width modulation}} (a technique often used to encode data in waves). This techniques consists of shifting between a set of fixed values (often 2) so that the average is the expected output. For exemple switching back and forth between 0 and 1, spending half the time in each position will lead to a mean value of 0.5. To code 0.7, you have to spend more time in the 1 position (70% of the time). One feature of this modulation is that the expected value is not actually reached by the signal before applying the low-pass filter (averaging), so using a PWM-like method would mean alternating between being too much and too little attention to detail to have an average on the healthy balance, but never actually reach it. As cool as the idea may sound, it is probably not very healthy.

Many people having a project to complete will usually cycle through the various available settings, often going directly from fiddling the email to panic and existential crisis in a matter of minutes. Maintaining a healthy balance throughout the project is difficult, because it occupies such a small place on the knob.

Of course, not everyone is knob-headed, so some people can panic and have an existential crisis while simultaneously fiddling with email settings.

==Transcript==
:Personal Focus

:[A gray rotary control knob with the range of options divided into 36 equal sections. The knob points at the 12th line from left extreme. The clockwise order of the labeled settings are:]
:[Left extreme:]
:Detail-Oriented
:[First 23 sections:]
:Fiddling with email settings
:[One narrow section:]
:Healthy balance
:[Last 12 sections:]
:Panic and existential paralysis
:[Right extreme:]
:Big Picture

{{comic discussion}}

1792: Bird/Plane/Superman

2017-01-30T17:24:00Z

162.158.75.160: /* Explanation */ A very loose first definition at what the comic is about, and a couple specific comments

{{comic
| number = 1792
| date = January 30, 2017
| title = Bird/Plane/Superman
| image = bird_plane_superman.png
| titletext = You can apply special translucent films to your windows to help keep birds/Superman from accidentally flying into them.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page.}}

This comic is a logical comparison of observations to resolve the classic comic book trope of: "Look, up in the sky... It's a bird!... It's a plane!... It's Superman!" Taking the random citizens' declarations at face value -- a quite exaggerated position -- this comic aims to help such clueless folks identify the airborne object.

The observations compared range from the mundane to the bizarre.

=== Notes ===

*Mid-air sex involving planes is usually involving passengers (and potentially air crew), not the plane itself.
*Some planes may be able to intentionally purge their septic tanks mid-flight, depending on the design of the waste interlocks, especially assuming the controls are inside the cockpit or cabin. As the TV show ''MythBusters'' has shown, a leaky septic disposal system can unintentionally lose liquid waste and cause a "blue ice" sighting on the ground.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript}}

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:1756: I'm With Her

2017-01-12T08:51:59Z

162.158.75.160:

The "I'm with her" and H with an arrow are CLEARLY the respective campaign slogan and campaign logo for Hillary Clinton, not some vagueness having to do with bringing a significant other. {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.78}}
:I see it more as him endorsing voting regardless of who you vote for (as evidenced by half the comic is about "Here's how you vote" without any mention of candidates or issues) and the endorsing Clinton part is an add-on as if to say "This is how I'm voting; vote for her if you agree with me." [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 18:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:If you're so insecure about your political beliefs that you abandon a comic you've followed for years just because they have a different opinion to you then maybe you should stop using the internet because you're just going to lose all your hobbies. {{unsigned ip|148.197.114.136}}
:I am not insecure about my political beliefs. I am just upset at the continued and active support of our two party system and the suppression of anyone not in those parties.. It ought to make everyone here very angry (even if you support Hillary). Most Americans would rather have Bernie than Hillary. Most Americans would rather have Kasich than Trump. Insult me all you want, I will not put up with this complacency any more.--[[User:Dayfall|Dayfall]] ([[User talk:Dayfall|talk]]) 21:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Blocking it from their router? Have they ever heard of the concept of... you know, just not visiting websites they dislike? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 19:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Has Randall endorsed a presidential candidate before? --[[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 17:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:He supported Obama on his blog in '08, not in the comic though. {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.230}}

He could have said any number of clever things about the election, and all he did was put up a campaign sign. Disappointing. [[User:Gmcgath|Gmcgath]] ([[User talk:Gmcgath|talk]]) 17:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm hoping Wednesday will be a newspaper saying "American immigration continues north" and below, "40% of the population move to Canada", but only if Trump wins.{{unsigned|Jacky720}}

what a cuck --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.63|172.68.51.63]] 17:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: leaving aside the most ridiculous slur of the past few years, I don't know what else did you expect from Randall. I guess you must have stumbled upon this wiki by chance and have never heard of xkcd before.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 17:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: AHAHAHAHA. *Ahem.* Hooray for pejorative misappropriation of a kink. /s [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.55|108.162.246.55]] 19:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the first time I still don't get the joke even after reading the explainxkcd page [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.123|108.162.219.123]] 18:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:It isn't a joke. [[Randall]] is simply encouraging people to vote. [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:55, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

:¬I Ummmmmmmmm..... It's Randall's comic strip. He can endorse whomever he wants without getting anyone's permission first. To those who disagree with this endorsement - sowhat? Grow up. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.42}}

;Bit disappointing...

I was hoping for a comic today. oh well. Interesting to see how he's planning to vote, though - it's a shame that there are no candidates this year in favor of strong encryption. {{unsigned ip|172.68.55.80}}

Funny how females outdo males in this 'comic' but in terms of frequency and of elevation. Oh well. xkcd has long been overrepresenting females, it was to be expected. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:Seriously? You're whinging 'what about the men?' in a geek web comic?! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.212|108.162.215.212]] 18:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::And there are 11 characters and they are split 5 to 6, and if Blondie represents Clinton then there are 5 to 5 M vs W supporters. ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:"Overrepresenting"?! If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think xkcd is supposed to represent, but as soon as Randall draws 'too many women' you whinge about the oppression of men. First off, even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray. Second, there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.118.191|172.68.118.191]] 00:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think
:: You are literally a priori accusing me of bias regarding what I would have done in a comparable situation.
:: >you think xkcd is supposed to represent
:: xkcd's focus is exceedingly well-defined. It is often narrowed down to a particular academic field. It is not subjective.
:: >you whinge about the oppression of men
:: Please refrain from putting such words in my mouth. Overrepresentation is a numerical fact -- 'oppression' is a charged term which I doubt has a valid definition.
:: >even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray
:: You seem to be implying that my mention of overrepresentation pertains to overrepresentation with respect to viewership rather than with respect of gender balance in scientific fields Randall depicts.
:: >there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power
:: Again, you are seeing claims of 'oppression' that are not there. I do not use this word -- I am talking strictly about gender quantity. In other words, I don't object to 'oppression', but to distortion of truth. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::Oh shit, you're not joking. I don't think Randall cared in the slightest how many of each gender there were, or where they were placed. You are creating a problem which isn't there, and missing what the comic is actually trying to say. It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 09:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Almost every comic depicting a scientific (academic, laboratory, engineering) context contains a female. As a matter of fact, I looked up the last 20 or so comics in the Science category. Where applicable, the gender proportion is:
:::::f = 4, m = 0
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 0
:::::f = 0, m = 2
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 0, m = 1
:::::f = 3, m = 1
:::::total: f = 17, = 10
:::: It is even more glaring that I had thought.
::::>It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it.
::::You are making it hard not to conclude that you are not quite able to speak otherwise than in irrelevant falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::::Like I said, Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented, and more on what the comic is about. Randall uses whatever fits best in each comic. Also, please refrian from using nowiki on "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>" as your signature. It is against the rules, because technically your comment ends in "</nowiki>". It is also pointless, because your IP is recorded in edit history anyway. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 12:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::: 'Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented' -- it is quite remarkable for you to say so when the balance is significantly more than 1.5 : 1. As for my signature, 'my comment ending in </nowiki>' is literally false and, again, my choice of it is not intended to obscure my identity, but to signify irrelevance of it in discussion. <nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152 }}
:::::::Your trolling is out of hand. It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion, you have to sign your comments. If you feel so strongly about it, just stop reading Randall's comics. I don't think he'll care if you stop. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::::: So this is your reaction to the hypocrisy of a comic majorly about science distorting truth (literally -- the female overrepresentation is not, contrary to how another poster presented it, in service to humour/plot, it is just there): 'just don't read it if you don't like it'. This is not tenable. You could 'justify' any wrongdoing this way: 'just don't react, what does it concern you'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::::::::You cannot justify anything with that, only things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way. Randall is using his right to freedom of speech, and you have no right trying to stop that. And before you argue that I am trying to stop you, realise that I am only giving my opinion in the hopes yours will change. Also, you ''still'' haven't addressed why you don't sign your comments properly. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 11:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
: As for my signature, I have addressed it -- you just ignored my explanation, beside implying that it was I who brought its subject in the first place rather than you ('It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion').
: >things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way
: 'Not any significant' is a subjective claim rather than objective quantification such as the one I made to point out Randall's gender bias. xkcd has vast readership. In fact, it is *the first result* for the keyword >webcomic in Google.
: >Randall is using his right to freedom of speech.
: This is completely bizarre. You are appealing to free speech to justify *telling falsehoods*.
: >and you have no right trying to stop that
: This is completely bizarre as well. What kind of 'right' are you talking about that I lack? Are you saying that people have no right to point out, condemn, and demand rectification of falsehoods? This is surreal. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::The guy was clearly referring to your earlier statement that you were, quote, "signifying irrelevance it in discussion." Also, as the admin who's been having to clean up after your refusal to write a signature without nowiki tags, I'm getting really sick of this. The signature tag is not there for you to disregard it to make an artistic statement about metadata in forums, it's there to mark time, ownership and the boundaries between comments. You're making extra work for me for a trivial excuse. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: 'Time' and 'ownership' are never relevant. All they can ever conceivably serve for is pointing out misattributions of contributions from one poster to another, which holds precisely zero weight for the argument. If your point stands, it stands. If it doesn't, it doesn't. This -- validity of the point -- is the only consideration in discussion, the purpose of which is conveying knowledge. I'm sorry to hear that you feel that it is the form of the argument (such as who made which comment) that matters rather than its substance. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::::I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful, so let's put this a different way. I didn't put up three different signs around the talk page box so that someone could try to be clever and make me do the work anyway by signing off slightly wrong. You and I both know why the messages tell you to sign off with four tildes. Typing the four tildes without the nowiki tags takes strictly less time than adding the nowiki tags. There is no discussion being suppressed because of the metadata. I've wasted five minutes of my life typing out the unsigned comment template multiple times when it was clear to me that you knew how to sign and wilfully weren't. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: >I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful
::::: Metadata is obviously meaningful for statistical/record-keeping purposes, and guess what, that is provided by the edit history. In direct discussion view, it is actively damaging, in all senses, from visual distraction (cluttering the page) to topical distraction (distracting into discussion of particular posters, including chaff such as squabbling over who said what).
::::: >make me do the work anyway
::::: I am not going to validate a misconception that is harmful to discussion only so to spare you the effort you impose on yourself by erroneously clinging to it. It would be irresponsible towards this community. I tried my best to explain your mistake to you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.141}}
::::::In case you didn't get the subtext from my last comment, I'm invoking site rules that are littered in multiple places around the edit window. Browsing edit logs to find ownership of a comment is incredibly time consuming, and signatures take a fraction of a line to display the information inline. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: So basically what you are saying is 'I am not wrong on account of having codified my being wrong into a rule'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
::::::::No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it. Less than a hundred characters of timestamp and attribution serves to mark out who actually said what and the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what far outweigh the character count delta between completed signatures and your intentionally un-rendered tildes. The rule is not a suggestion, and the only thing stopping me from temporarily blocking you to enforce the rule is that I know your IP address is changing between sessions. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::: >No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it.
::::::::: ...What? You literally said that signing is a rule here, and I literally agreed and pointed out that that rule is based on a misunderstanding.
::::::::: >the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what
::::::::: ...facilitate nothing but petty squabbles over authorship of contributions rather than focusing on points therein. The only one of the three benefits to signing you gave at one point that is valid is separation of comments, except that isn't even provided by signing, but by indentation/semi-indentation of colons/quotation marks, respectively, to which signing is, guess what, completely unrelated. If anything, my refusal to sign 'properly' has helped my detractors, giving them an opportunity to attempt to undermine my credibility by repeatedly asking me 'why are you not signing properly?' as if I hadn't explained that two if not three times already. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::What you literally did was put a statement in quotation marks that featured me saying I was wrong and using a tautological rule to to justify it. You believe that identity is irrelevant to discussion, which is disputed in discussions of community management and {{w|Wikipedia:Signatures#Purpose_of_signatures|wikipedia itself}} as the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page. The furthest point of this would be mandatory account creation to edit pages, which I've fought against in the past and don't want to have to instate if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::::: >using a tautological rule to to justify it
::::::::::: >which is disputed in discussions of community management and wikipedia itself
::::::::::: So you are calling my 100 % verifiable points regarding consequences of presence/absence of signing on poster behaviour tautological, while yourself appealing to authority to Wikipedia ('Wikipedia requires signing, therefore I do too') in lieu of an argument? You have some fucking nerve as well.
::::::::::: >if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate
::::::::::: This sounds curiously like preemption, 'let's keep him from posting in case he should offend'.
::::::::::: >the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page
::::::::::: You mean those containing such examples of signing posters' civility as referring to me as 'finding problems with everything', having a 'twisted mind', saying that 'xkcd is as bad as KKK', 'horrible person', 'afraid of women', 'belonging in 18th century', and 'afraid to sign properly'? I agree, civility such as that is quite effective at rendering a picture of effectiveness of signing on discussion quality. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::::I'm not actually making a living off this. I'm not willing to keep making points that you'll brush off as false and state your own claims as true, then still have to clean up after you and the other anonymous users with changing IPs on this page. I should have known this comic was going to be a moderation nightmare when it went up. I have work to do, this talk page is now locked for anonymous users. If you want to continue ignoring site rules, you and the other people on this talk page who I can't seem to manage can make accounts to do so. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:53, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::It's not telling a falsehood if it's an opinion. There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion. He is not saying that this is what the real world is like. And it is objectively not significant, because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different. There are far worse problems on the internet. Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: >it is objectively not significant
::: I have taken note that you have shifted from asserting existence of high and low significance ('in any significant way', implying gradation) to asserting existence of categorical absolute insignificance ('objectively not significant').
::: >There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion.
::: Where the hell are you people getting this kind of nonsense from? Depicting a fictitious state of matters is an opinion?
::: >He is not saying that this is what the real world is like.
::: Literally false. There is no indication whatsoever that the overrepresentation of females has a humorous or otherwise irreal or optative dimension. The females are depicted as being self-obviously natural at their positions.
::: >There are far worse problems on the internet.
::: This is not relevant in addition to being a subjective opinion (speaking of dispensing which).
::: >because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different
::: I am honestly bewildered by your repeated reliance on this clearly morally untenable nonsense. 'If something is wrong, just stop watching.' It's stunning.
::: >Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex?
::: Randall does depict the latter conviction in the comic AS WELL (search the page for my 'Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender.'). <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
::::There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind. You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd. That was not intended to say anything about xkcd, but something about yourself. You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism. You won't see anything wrong with what you're saying until you see what you are doing now. Also, I redid your table, looking at the past 20 comics in the science section.
::::{| {{table}}
| style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Number'''||1736||1732||1717||1679||1666||1664||1643||1637||1633||1621||1611||1606||1605||1594||1592||1591||1584||1574||1561||1531||style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Total'''
|-
| style="background:#c0c0f0;"|M||1||0||2||0||1||1||1||1||0||0||0||0||1||0||2||1||8||0||0||0||style="background:#c0c0f0;"|'''19'''
|-
| style="background:#f0c0f0;"|F||2||0||1||0||1||2||0||3||0||0||3||0||1||2||0||1||3||0||0||1||style="background:#f0c0f0;"|'''20'''
|-
|
|}
::::Tell me, how did you do your calculations? This seems like an accurate depiction of real life figures, seeing as there are slightly more women than men in most countries.
::::I'm starting to see how you think, you see only what confirms what you think. My table is objective, and does not account for people in the background (which were mostly men, by the way). Yours only includes comics that confirm that you are right, except for one.
::::Now, even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter. Xkcd isn't about being real. Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can. He is '''not''' saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is? And please, sign your comments. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 03:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

::::: >There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind.
::::: 'There being less men than women in contexts which by definition exact intellectual capacity does not signify in any way that women have more intellectual capacity than men, except in your twisted mind.'
::::: >even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter.
::::: >Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can.
::::: It is, what, third time that you stress people's freedom to do wrong in lieu of providing a counterargument? Fourth?
::::: >He is not saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is?
::::: Obviously because it is conveyance of truth that is the core and assumed function of communication, not artistic expression. When we see an arrow and a figurative scene etched in a rock on a foreign trip, we don't assume that it is conveying some indigene's artistic fancy about an imaginary situation -- we assume that it was used for communicating some fact. Accordingly, everything, even in a webcomic, that does not stand out as false/artistic is assumed true / the factual background of the fiction. If female scientists are depicted casually, people won't question their presence. Randall's gender bias is ill-integrated, but integrated seamlessly enough to slip under the radar of most people it appears.
::::: >You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism.
::::: >You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd.
::::: Yes, this continues being subjective (let me remind you in case you forgot that it was you who first appealed to 'why do you care, it's not that important' way back in your comment at 11:00 -- I at no point at all referenced subjective importances and instead wholly focused on inherent qualities of the problem) and, more importantly, glaringly demonstrative of your desire to hush criticism. Almost any any wrongdoing can be rendered 'slight' and dismissed by comparing it to lynching. It's fucking cowardly.
::::: Finally,
::::: >I redid your table [...]
::::: your error, which might or might not have been intentional, is that you're counting comics which have no literal academic/scientific context, which my point has from the very beginning been about. xkcd doesn't categorize comics, and this wiki is quite overcategorizing them. When I looked up comics about sex, included was '721: Flatland' just because the mention of the word 'orgy' in the title text and '1253: Exoplanet Names' just because of some raunchy ones! This is misleading in itself, but the point is, comics like '1637: Salt Mine' are clearly too outlandishly fictional to convincingly connote gender equality. I only included those comics in my table in which people explicitly partake in scientific situations or discussions, which can actually sway perceptions. Accusing me of confirmation bias is like accusing a researcher of bias for refusing to include cooking recipes in a study measuring nations' programming output. And 1584, which yields the crux of your numbers (and, amusingly, after excluding which your numbers differ from mine by exactly just one), is just fucking hypocrisy. Three of the 'men' in it are children (I take it that your generous exclusion of 'people in the background' refers to audiences as in 1736), the fourth doesn't even say anything, and Randall had the nerve to 'totally jokingly' attribute Darwin's insight to his wife because 'you can't prove she wasn't responsible for it'.
::::: (Also, I forgot to mention that my final line in my previous comment does not mean that there isn't a superior gender (or race). There obviously is. It was understood throughout my argument on this page, but I should probably make this clear.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::Ok then. I thought your argument was that men are being represented as worse than women when they're actually roughly equivelant. But no, you're the kind of person who believes that there is a superior gender ''and'' race. You are a horrible person, and no amount of reasoning would get through to you. Can you please just go away? Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 08:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: >no amount of reasoning would get through to you
::::::: By reasoning which I am incapable of understanding, do you mean things such as positing existence of increasingly minute 'microagressions', 'microsexisms' and 'microracisms' using which to explain racial and gender achievement gaps as an environmental factor after environmental factor is controlled for and proven not to affect achievement in any meaningful degree? Or showcasing the purported importance of 'stimulating upbringing' while failing to account for the fact that relationship between stimulating upbringing on the parent's side and accomplishment on the child's side is simply owing to the shared cause of innate high capacity underlying both outcomes (by proxy of heritability of capacity from parent to child in case of the latter)? Because it can't be something as crude as correlation/causation of 'women underperform because they are being stereotyped rather than are being stereotyped because they underperform'... can it.
::::::: >Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you.
::::::: I _just_ think that there might be some delicious irony in how you somehow found it necessary to appeal to majority as well as if your assertion of 'you're wrong' had been a bit too bare. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}

:I will tell my children and grandchildren that in the election of 2016, there was a guy so afraid of women that he complained that a webcomic about the election had "females outdo males...in terms of...of elevation". This is some 18th century stuff. It is the consummate combination of unawareness of self and of others. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.47|108.162.246.47]]
04:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >there was a guy so afraid of women
:: I regret to see you rely on such tactics.
:: >This is some 18th century stuff.
:: This is not relevant. It is possible for a society to err away from its prior true notions. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}

The only disappointing this are comments like those two above. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 18:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Females being overrepresented in comics like xkcd (but also other ones) with respect to their controlled interest in science in reality is a fact. Therefore, you are calling facts disappointing. How geeky of you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:: So, your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures, yes? Also, why are you afraid to "un-nowiki" your signature...? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::: No. Allow me to repeat my point as you had apparently misunderstood: 'females being overrepresented'. This is something else than 'females being represented'. The more you know, the less chance there is for you to accidentally twist another person's words as misogyny/sexism. Also, identity is not relevant to discussion. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:::: I understood you perfectly fine. My point still stands: You don't like Randall's preference for female stick figures. I never said you're being misogynic/sexist, so please don't imply I did. Thing with your "hidden" identity is that it's plain visible in the history of this page, so there's really no need to nowiki the signature, that's all. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: You are extremely skilled at saying things that are false and asserting that they're true. First you confused objecting to female overrepresentation (over-presence) with objecting to female representation (presence) ('your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures'). Then you moved to confusing objecting to female overrepresentation with objecting to *Randall's* female overrepresentation. My objection does not pertain to who is doing overrepresenting, but to the mere fact of it. I would have objected identically to any other writer. Also, your attributing of opposition to female presence in comics (after doing which which you proceeded to asserting my being personally hostile to Randall) is accusing of sexism/misogyny by definition. Also, I am obviously aware of edit history; my use my signature constitutes a reminder that identity is, as I said, irrelevant in discussion. It does not serve to obscure anything. You have a remarkable record of falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
::::::This is the most persistent troll I have seen in a long while. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 14:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: I regret that this is your reaction to my pointing out your false claims. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
::::::::I didn't make any false claims for you to point out. My comment about your trolling was the first comment I made. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 15:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm confused. Are you merely making an observation about the number of female stick figures vs male stick figures in these comics or are you saying that there is a problem that needs to be solved? If so, what is the problem and potential solution? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 21:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:: The problem is giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity. The solution is Randall ceasing to overrepresent females. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::First, you say that giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity is a problem, but have given nothing to show why it is a problem. I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is, and as an artistic endeavor, I don't believe it necessarily should. Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place. Second, where is the harm being done? Lastly, I reject the premise of your argument. I have studied these comics very hard and can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female. If we are going based on gender, you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other. If those are not available, then you are simply applying your heteronormative bias and assumptions onto these stick figures unfairly. Until you address these claims, this discussion is over as its very basis is proven unknowable. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 16:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:::: >you [...] have given nothing to show why it is a problem
:::: >where is the harm being done
:::: If you are asking for proof that truth is preferable over falsehood, I suggest that you give your priorities a look.
:::: >I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is
:::: Again (see the other subthread of this discussion which I'm replying in), the problem is that Randall gives zero indication that the female overrepresentation is just artistic licence or even representation of his wish how matters be. He depicts it as natural.
:::: >Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place.
:::: Agreed. Except, similarly to objections to this very comic # 1756, what Randall does with respect to female representation is not art -- it is just furthering a certain conviction regarding female capacity. It's no more art than product placement is.
:::: >can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female
:::: Right, two characters engaging in sex in supine position (598, 940), one of which has hair and one hasn't, are clearly lesbians one of whom is shaven.
:::: >you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other
:::: This is ridiculous noise. <nowiki>~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:Randall is in the unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is, but as it we hope it one day will be. Imagine how many women and girls can encounter these comics in their classrooms or read them online, and have the chance to see all sorts of female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields. The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon. For scientific progress, for the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM, it is amazing that Randall presents - without fanfare, without emphasis, and, most importantly, without implication of a degradation of men - a world in which women play a significant role in science. It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.125|173.245.52.125]] 03:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:: Your sentimental prose is rendered irrelevant by a simple brief fact: motivation must never rely on distortion of truth.
:: >The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science.
:: This is literally false.
:: >female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields
:: Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations.
:: >the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM
:: Desirability of diversity assumes that all members of the diversity are equally capable and focused on the subject in the first place.
:: >Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon.
:: There is nothing to 'remedy', because there is nothing wrong in the first place. Gender equality is not some sort of inherent state that has been deviated from. There is nothing wrong with wanting female membership in anything to equal males, or even exceed them -- but it is wrong to imply that the reason for failures of such attempts is 'bias'.
:: >unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is
:: Reread this sentence until you appreciate what you just wrote.
:: >It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.
:: Motivation must never happen at the expense of truth. By all means say 'I want more women in science' -- it's fine. But saying 'women's absence from science results from environmental prejudice' is false. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
:: Also, regarding 'most importantly [!], without implication of a degradation of men' -- this is literally false as well. In most comics containing discussion between a woman and a man, it is the man that asks a question/listens and the woman that elaborates / gives facts / corrects him. Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender. Quantifying that is necessarily somewhat imprecise, but I browsed comics 1423-1483 (the numbers are arbitrary) and the proportion of comics depicting the man as having less clue than the woman is 11 : 3. (See comics 1430, 1513, 1586, 1605 for example of what I mean.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::: "Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations." - Wow. Just wow. David, this guy is insistent that women are innately less good at science than men - not that they are given less opportunities, but that they are given equal opportunities and encouragement, but still are just too stupid to do proper science. Expressing opinions like that, it's no great surprise that he (he's definitely a he) wishes to remain anonymous.
::: To be honest, I don't think he's trolling - trolls don't have this much commitment. I think he's expressing his actual, genuine beliefs. Scary.
::: To the anonymous coward - SIGN YOUR POSTS, or leave this comic. Go write your own blog post on the nature of signatures, if you like, or make your own wiki with your own rules. The message about the comic doesn't contain signatures, because there, the message is the only important thing. This is the discussion section, and these are the rules. I disagree with you very strongly, but I'm perfectly happy to have a civil discussion with you here IF you stick to the basic rules. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 11:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

A little disappointing to have a normally lighthearted comic dive seriously into politics, if even for one strip. Not really a fan of either candidate, but would like to see stuff like this stay above the fray. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.100}}
:Completely agreed. [[User:SeanAhern|SeanAhern]] ([[User talk:SeanAhern|talk]]) 18:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Completely agreed 2. At first I though it's some kind of a romance statement ("be with her"). And from explainxkcd I have learnt that it's an US campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.150|162.158.202.150]] 22:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::Lighthearted? Try to read the comics in the [[:Category:Politics]] and [[:Category:Climate change]]. Also there are many other comics that are not at all light hearted. You must have mistaken this with some other web comic? :) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Yes, lighthearted. Even the earlier political and climate change strips had a bit of humor in them (the only ones that really didn't have at least an attempt at humor were the cancer strips, understandably), this is just a straight up political ad. And while it's Randall's strip and he can do whatever he wants with it, it's just a little disappointing that he dove straight in to political ads. If nothing else, something like Black Hat trolling by voting for himself.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.100|162.158.69.100]] 12:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Well at least the I'm with her, could be interpreted like the "I'm with stupid"... :-) She is just less stupid than the alternative. Guess he seriously hopes this comic could make a difference and that he is afraid to do nothing. He reaches many people so who knows if this comic might swing an important state. You never know in a tight race. And although {{w|Nate Silver}} ([[:Category:Comics featuring Nate Silver|often referred to]] by Randall in the past) says that it's a [http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clinton-gains-and-the-polls-magically-converge/ 70% chance Hillary wins] then he is also not certain it will be her. So Randall does his best to avoid Trump as the big chief... He is even willing to loose some fans, although I think the majority of his readers prefers a world without a President Trump! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::I don't think he thought this through. Most likely most of the people this comic would have reached were those already going to vote for Clinton, but the small fraction that were undecided/ leaning-Trump probably were actually motivated by this to vote against her. I know I was pushed that way by the persistent media pro-Clinton coverage, not just in news network, but in other stuff that I usually enjoy, like the recent Big Bang Theory episode, basically celebrity that exists and now xkcd. I go to these places to go away from politics, but if you all want to force it down my throat everywhere I go, then fuck you all. That doesn't mean that I won't come back here or to any of the other places I visit, but to me at least this is no longer a haven where I can escape from politics, and that does mean something. {{unsigned ip|162.158.178.8}}
::::::I get what you're saying, and I appreciate the sentiment. I'm also glad that you won't let this deter you from the comic. May I point out that this is the first explicitly politically-partisan comic in nearly 2000 of them, and takes place at the end of a historically bitter election campaign; but let's be honest, even if this is not a one-off but repeated once every four years, it's still only about 1 comic in 500. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 12:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

This is a first... comics 500 and 1130 (possibly 1131 too) were related to the election, but didn't endorse a candidate. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 18:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I think Randall is pretty much just saying '''OH GOD PLEASE DONT VOTE FOR TRUMP''' [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If Randall was saying that, he'd also be bringing up third party candidates (honestly surprised he didn't endorse Jill Stein considering she's more pro-science than Hillary. And before anyone says "anti-vax", check snopes. Jill Stein is so pro-vax [she's volunteered time vaccinated children and is on record saying she wants to increase vaccination rates], pro-addressing-climate[she's green party who has that as a primary platform], and wants to replace the people with business degrees on the panels of the FDA with people with science degrees. Jill is so pro-science and that it makes Hillary look like a flat-earther.) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.42|108.162.246.42]] 21:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Jill Stein's stance on nuclear energy is an unscientific as it gets. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.196|108.162.210.196]] 23:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Hillary Clinton's ideas on encryption are in denial of science. Clinton's stance on coal is unscientific, she's pretty abysmal on fracking and natural gas too. Stein could be a lot better, but if Stein is tofu sarah palin, clinton is just palin with a college degree [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 03:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Likewise her position on GMOs. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}
::::No no no. If Randal just wish that Trump should not become president there is only one way to achieve this and that is by making Hillary win. This is not even saying that he likes her, he just dislikes the alternative more. Voting for anyone else might just help Trump. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, it looks like minutephysics has done a similar thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDeL4LGuBx4 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 00:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I came here to see what the tone of the comments were going to be. I was half expecting to find an all-out flamewar in progress. I was happy to see that the comments have not devolved into the kind of attacks that one would expect to find pretty much anywhere else on the Internet. Geeks are the best people. :) [[User:Mwburden|mwburden]] ([[User talk:Mwburden|talk]]) 18:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm very dissappointed. Randall never took sides before and - be it as it may - this comic is not a comic but plain out political campaign. Up until now I held xkcd in EXTREMELY high esteem - this comic put a serious dent in that opinion..
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.60|162.158.91.60]] 18:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: I'm really torn about this one. On the one hand I feel that you HAVE to take sides in this one, if your only other option is Donald Trump... on the other hand, I never liked when web comics express political opinions. It will always end in a flame war and almost never have anything to do with the web comic itself. Randall should've just put up a "go vote becaues it's important" sign without taking sides. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I'm sure there are other comics out there that would agree with your ideology. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Randall should do whatever Randall thinks he should do. Should he put up "go read about global warming" comics instead of take the side of AGW? If you think this example is an inappropriate one to use in contrasting this comic with the current political election cycle then you've completely ignored the stances of the two popular candidates. But back to the original point: if you don't like XKCD anymore because of this one comic then go find another comic or start your own. All of art is an expression of the person. Randall knew not everyone would like his beliefs when he pushed this out to the world and is obviously prepared to deal with any consequences of taking a stand on his website. I, for one, applaud him for doing so {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.19}}
:: Randall did a comic about global warming a while back, which was very interesting. Because I heard the "earth has warmed up before" argument before and even used it myself at least once. The difference about the global warming comic is that he backed it up with scientific facts, which is well within the scope of this comic. Political opinions aren't (or did the slogan change to ''A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language and politics''?). Yes, of course he can do with his web comic whatever he wants to. But readers can express their opinions about what he does with it. It's called "freedom of speech", you know?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::[[1357|There's a comic for that.]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.230|162.158.214.230]] 21:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Randall has endorsee Obama in 2008 and it is his comic and he can use it to endorse anyone he likes. I'm pretty sure he believes that he will only loose a few real fans of xkcd over this comic, because those who really enjoys all his comics in spite of for instance climate comics would really not like to see Trump as president. And would thus be happy if this comic helped in any way to avoid that. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you help list all the characters in the transcript? From left to right; they're Joanna (ponytail with EMP cannon) from [[322]]; Black Hat; unknown with kite; White Hat; possibly Miss Lenhart (but his hair is somewhat different from [[1519]]); unknown possibly Megan; cueball; unknown woman with glasses; Hairbun; Beret Guy; Cueball with toy sword from [[303]]. [[User:B jonas|B jonas]] ([[User talk:B jonas|talk]]) 19:10, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Not Miss Lenhart. Blondie. They are listed now. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Good for Randal. I had been noticing how many Hillary leaning artists had been pulling their punches this election, likely out of fear of trolling or loss of revenue. You want to know what courage looks like? This is is. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Title text hasn't been explained yet. Is it a reference to the German chancellor Angela Merkel's phrase "Wir schaffen das!'? Don't know if Clinton has a slogan like Obama's "Yes, we can!". {{unsigned ip|162.158.91.36}}
: That's the same I thought. But I'm not sure how well known this phrase is outside of Germany. However "Wir schaffen das!" always had a bitter taste - even considered ironic or sarcastic by some - (which e.g. "Yes, we can!" didn't), so I interpreted "We can do this!" as voting for Clinton is simply the lesser evil. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I find (linking to )this civicinnovation website rather questionable. They want to audit peoples address books based on who the names in there might vote for? That sounds like Erich Mielkes wildest dreams come true. Even German newspapers (where i'm from), which are 100% anti-Trump, have in the last days noted concern about the methods of Clintons supporters bullying the other side, and this is a disquieting new piece in that picture. I'll hope this is just a ploy to step up with Trump on the ''bad manners'' side. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.160|162.158.91.160]] 19:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Not all comics have to be humorous

From [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics#Etymology]
:The English term ''comics'' derives from the humorous (or "[[wikt:comic|comic]]") work which predominated in early American newspaper comic strips; usage of the term has become standard for non-humorous works as well. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.57}}

:The problem is that this isn't a comic, this is a campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.38|162.158.238.38]] 20:32, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Could we please just NOT get politics involved in the comments, guys?

Just... please? [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 20:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Are you serious. What had you expected :-) This is the most loaded comic of all time. It will even take down [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]], even though [[388:_Fuck_Grapefruit#Controversy|it beat his blog]] about his Obama endorsement. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall has taken a side in a political Argument before: Not counting the near-invisible easter egg, comic 1005 consists solely of Randall taking a stance on something political and providing links to show how you can help. That wasn't too long ago, but no one freaked out about a serious, political strip back then.
[[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 20:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Policy to candidates is not an apples to apples comparison. People get much more up in arms when the topic is either a candidate or policy that goes against religious text or teachings. SOPA and PIPA were neither (well, unless you count GNU as some kind of internet religion). [[User:Zernin|Zernin]] ([[User talk:Zernin|talk]]) 21:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

It's sad to see a guy who is so smart in some areas, yet can not see Hillary Clinton for the terrible president she would be. (Granted, part of the reason we only have a few other choices is because of our messed up voting system.) {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.177}}
:I agree with you that Hillary may be worse than almost any one else from the Democrats. But Trump is sooo much further out on a limp, and I'm sure this might be the only reason Randall makes this comic. He is seriously afraid of what woudl happen to the US and the rest of the world if Trump wins --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:38, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Instead of comic, post contained a political statement. I am not amused. I want a refund. I don't vote, and I don't even live anywhere near USA. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.102|141.101.96.102]] 18:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:A refund? For what? You pay to read this comic? [[User:Zorlax the Mighty|Zorlax the Mighty'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:Zorlax the Mighty|talk]]) 21:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Darn right you better be with her. If you say anything else, you will "commit suicide". Just ask Vince Foster or Seth Rich if you think I'm crazy.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.77|173.245.48.77]] 21:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

What, Randy does not say "Bernie or Bust"? I feel cheated now. :P --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.228|162.158.150.228]] 22:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Poor Bernie. Poor America. Poor world. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 23:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Just good luck America (and the rest of the world where I belong), whatever happens tomorrow. But I'm hoping Randall can help his candidate win! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm with her... unfortunately : (. I just didn't think it made sense to donate to a billionaire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.106|162.158.74.106]] 00:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Don't get political in the comments? The fucking "comic" is a fucking political ad. We're going to call this fucker out on his cuckery. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.27|162.158.74.27]] 01:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't give a damn. Sure, I might not agree with his political leanings (hell, I don't want either of them in the WH), but it's just 1 comic. On Wednesday, he'll probably go back to the same stuff he's been doing for 1755 other strips. This will be nothing special. Just one comic. Sure, it might be politically fueled, but just because a person lets their leanings known doesn't mean you should be allowed to call them a "cuck" or cause a talk page for a popular comic, or a Reddit for a popular comic, devolve into the equivalent of monkeys flinging crap at walls. So just please deal with it and move on.
Yours truly, [[User:GranadalandDreamer|GranadalandDreamer]] ([[User talk:GranadalandDreamer|talk]]) 01:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's with *her*? good to know that randall considers arab life worthless/supports financiers over single African-american mothers/refuses to understand encryption/would rather spend public money on coal than retrain miners/loves trade deals that will hurt the poorest, increase inequality, damage the environment, homogenize culture, allow private corporations to sue elected governments/can't make his mind up over the Dakota Access pipeline/changes his accent depending on which state he is stumping in/was late to supporting gay marriage/lied repeatedly about coming under sniper fire in bosnia/has had to repeatedly plead incompetence or rely on bureaucratic politics to evade formal breach of contract or charges of criminality. Iowa, Utah and Wisconsin may have Gloria la Riva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on the ballot, if you want a candidate who isn't an elitist. And if you didn't want splitters, you should have voted for Bernie. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 02:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I mean it's not like Trump is going to be a whole lot better for Arab people, Black people, gay people, or pretty much anyone who's not a straight white dude. It's quite possible he voted for Bernie, but at this point it's a little late for him to be asking others to support Sanders. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.71}}

:No, but that doesn't mean we should settle for clinton. It is not late to be asking for people to support Sanders, if anyone was doing that, because if the senate swings to the democrats he ends up in charge of the budget committee. Oh and I forgot one: randall is apparently also planning to disappoint all of us, even those who loathe him, within 100 days. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 05:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

: Trump would be a whole lot better for all Americans, not just "straight white dudes". He won't be better for people in other countries looking to illegally enter the United States, but why shouldn't an American President be like this? You're just throwing demographic categories around thinking you're making an argument against Trump. Only those who buy into the leftist narrative will believe you. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

Looks like the Trumpettes are getting rather triggered over a web comic. Wasn't there a candidate in this election that was preaching against this whole getting easily offended by words thing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.43|108.162.238.43]] 03:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

This just makes me... sad... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.117|108.162.215.117]] 03:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is a webcomic about "romance, sarcasm, language, and math" taking a political stance and telling me who to vote for? Randall can have his own opinion, but this isn't okay. I've read this comic since ... gosh, since the low 200s-300s, so probably over 5 or 6 years and... I think I'm done. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.55|108.162.241.55]] 04:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:''Of course'' it's okay. It's his comic, which he gives us for free. He can use it to entertain us, to draw random pictures of extradimensional red spiders, or to advocate for a political candidate and inform people how to vote, especially people who may have a more difficult time doing so (like the disabled and elderly). However, I really ''must'' thank you... you claiming that this "isn't okay", and all the others here with ruffled feathers over it, makes a previously boring comic one of the most hilarious xkcds in a good long while. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 10:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm surprised this wiki doesn't have a category for 'serious'/'no joke' comics, and least not that I spotted. There should be, and this should be in it. [[User:Teleksterling|Teleksterling]] ([[User talk:Teleksterling|talk]]) 04:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Am I the only one who sees Guy Fawkes in the logo? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.48|108.162.245.48]] 04:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the only other time Randall generated that much controversy here in comments was when suggested that all beer tastes bad. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.93|141.101.80.93]] 06:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)rw

* The title text ''may'' be quoting - directly or indirectly - Angela Merkel's slogan ("We can do this", or in German "Wir schaffen das"), but I don't know why unless it's just an appropriate slogan. [[User:Schroduck|Schroduck]] ([[User talk:Schroduck|talk]]) 08:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hej. I think it was the right thing to do, and if you read some of the older XKCDs (just think about the one about free speech - they just show you the door, and some others) you could have expected that this is his position. even through i would take the vote for stein on my part. I'm sorry for the situation of the citizens of the USA right now. Greetings from Oversea - and good luck today! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.174|162.158.89.174]] 10:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Way to alienate half of your readership, Randall. Well, now we know that Randall is a socialist communist who hates America. {{unsigned ip|162.158.79.235}}
* If you are so repulsed by seeing someone post something that you disagree with that you have to regress to early-teen insults, then I suggest you turn off all your electronic devices and start living in a cave. Engaging with people that we disagree with makes us smarter and better-informed. That said, it's Randall's comic that he provides to us at no charge - and if you stop reading today, you're automatically eligible for a full refund! [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 12:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Given that a big chunk of his readers must be non-US, and we don't really give a rat's arse which arse you elect, it is a bit disappointing there wasn't even something a little witty here. Other web-comic authors have often put things like this as an extra one between the others - and given that he missed a comic today, I don't see why he didn't do that. Anyway, have fun you lot and please try not to start any more wars.{{unsigned ip|141.101.98.217}}

Oh we non-USers do care!! I guess Randall just thinks today is too important to not make his position clear. Which is an admirable decision. I'm also shocked and surprised to find there may be Trumpers lurking on xkcd. Glad to hear so many of you are leaving, folks. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.134|172.68.34.134]] 16:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If you don't know any Trump supporters amongst your personal circle, you're part of the problem. Expand your worldview. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

;Hairbun with glasses
I wonder if she is meant to represent [[wikipedia:Susan B. Anthony|Susan B. Anthony]]. SBA did have a bun (most photos) and glasses (later in life), and she is the most obvious person to be placed at the same prominent level as HRC.[[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 14:42, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Well maybe, but Randall has drwan [[Hairbun]] with glasses like this several times before as also mentioned in the gallery. So I do not think any of the characters represents real persons except maybe the only one looking out at us, [[Blondie]] which would be how to draw Hillary in xkcd. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Is that final reminder, about being in line before the polls close true in all 50 states? I believe that Indiana nominally has a different law, that you must be inside the polling building when the polls close in order to vote, which is not quite the same thing. although in practice, it's usually enforced as "be in line" instead [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.45|162.158.75.45]] 15:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Frankly, The Hillary Logo isn't particularly egregious. He has two elements suggesting to vote for Hillary (the logo, and the "her"), and 5 elements about increasing general voter turnout. I don't like Clinton, but the comic is mostly about voting, nor voting for Clinton. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.47|108.162.238.47]] 17:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's fiance/wife has been diagnosed with cancer, hasn't she (per xkcd 1141: "Two Years")? So if/when President Trump repeals ObamaCare --- and in particular repeals the provisions in regard to "pre-existing conditions" --- then his wife loses her healthcare coverage, doesn't she? This is ample reason for Randall (and his wife, and all cancer patients and their families) to oppose Trump, isn't it? [[User:PNWoldguy|PNWoldguy]] ([[User talk:PNWoldguy|talk]]) 18:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

An ad for Hillary? Well, I just removed Thing Explainer and What If from my whistlist. I gave Thing Explainer as a gift last year. I now regret that. Oh, and a coworker's husband blacklisted XKCD from their router. Great idea. {{unsigned|Dayfall}}

Hmmmm...given how this election polarizes (look e.g. in the "Scientific American" for a clear anti-Trump statement which is rather unprecedented for them; dunno about "Science") this is a rather mildly pro-Clinton comic. So what? Other celebs took their stance too. (Eagerly still awaiting NSFWComix's comment :-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 23:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Definitely not a Trump supporter here... But on the topic of political propaganda on a nerd comic... And the "free speech" comic about free speech "not existing on discussion forums"... The purpose of discussions is to have your beliefs challenged, so you can distinguish good and bad reasoning, refine your beliefs, and alter them due to evidence. Unpopular opinions should be refuted (if faulty premises), or discussed so everyone can decide for themselves. Banning members for unpopular opinions is not a debate, it's an echo chamber. And I mean this for both sides of a discussion, not just supporting one ideology in particular. [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, I'm a bit disappointed that this comic is a Clinton campaign sign (although nowhere near as much as I would be if this comic was a Trump sign). [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Explanation needs, somewhere on it, the interesting fact that citizens don't receive fines or criminal charges for not voting. I didn't realise that this was so in the U.S., and many other non-U.S. readers might not realise that it's legal to not vote in the U.S. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.121|108.162.249.121]] 01:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
*Most of the world doesn't have compulsory voting. I'm guessing you may be in Australia which does have compulsory voting, but New Zealand doesn't, nor do Canada, UK, Ireland, South Africa, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Russia, Japan, China, Nigeria, Finland, Pakistan, Denmark ... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Seriously,don't get heated about it. I agree that:

*This is just expressing Randall's opinion.
*Even if it wasn't, he deserves a comic off from jokes.
*The campaign is going o end before I wake up at 6 tomorrow.

Also, could you fucking watch your language? Jacky720 (talk) 03:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw the two forward facing figures as Clinton and Kaine. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 03:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Encouraging people to vote, and helping to know how, great. But I was disappointed that he stooped to campaigning for a specific candidate right in his comic, as opposed to his blag. This is a sad day for XKCD. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.43}}

*I wonder if Randall realized that his "get a ride to the polls" link would only work for residents in one district of Nebraska -- less than 0.25% of his U.S. readership. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Hilarious comic as always! Hillary as president, lol. Good one, Randall :^) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 21:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is the discussion 3/4th of the page with only 1/4 being related to the explanation? And most of the comments being replied to are ones on Women or Sexism, which is bad. Instead they should bitch about Donald Trump, he is the most sexist and racist here.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.50.35|162.158.50.35]] 12:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

;Found the joke

It turns out that this comic was funny in hindsight. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 08:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1756: I'm With Her

2017-01-12T08:50:50Z

162.158.75.160: /* Found the joke */ new section

The "I'm with her" and H with an arrow are CLEARLY the respective campaign slogan and campaign logo for Hillary Clinton, not some vagueness having to do with bringing a significant other. {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.78}}
:I see it more as him endorsing voting regardless of who you vote for (as evidenced by half the comic is about "Here's how you vote" without any mention of candidates or issues) and the endorsing Clinton part is an add-on as if to say "This is how I'm voting; vote for her if you agree with me." [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 18:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:If you're so insecure about your political beliefs that you abandon a comic you've followed for years just because they have a different opinion to you then maybe you should stop using the internet because you're just going to lose all your hobbies. {{unsigned ip|148.197.114.136}}
:I am not insecure about my political beliefs. I am just upset at the continued and active support of our two party system and the suppression of anyone not in those parties.. It ought to make everyone here very angry (even if you support Hillary). Most Americans would rather have Bernie than Hillary. Most Americans would rather have Kasich than Trump. Insult me all you want, I will not put up with this complacency any more.--[[User:Dayfall|Dayfall]] ([[User talk:Dayfall|talk]]) 21:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Blocking it from their router? Have they ever heard of the concept of... you know, just not visiting websites they dislike? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 19:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Has Randall endorsed a presidential candidate before? --[[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 17:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:He supported Obama on his blog in '08, not in the comic though. {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.230}}

He could have said any number of clever things about the election, and all he did was put up a campaign sign. Disappointing. [[User:Gmcgath|Gmcgath]] ([[User talk:Gmcgath|talk]]) 17:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm hoping Wednesday will be a newspaper saying "American immigration continues north" and below, "40% of the population move to Canada", but only if Trump wins.{{unsigned|Jacky720}}

what a cuck --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.63|172.68.51.63]] 17:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: leaving aside the most ridiculous slur of the past few years, I don't know what else did you expect from Randall. I guess you must have stumbled upon this wiki by chance and have never heard of xkcd before.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 17:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: AHAHAHAHA. *Ahem.* Hooray for pejorative misappropriation of a kink. /s [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.55|108.162.246.55]] 19:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the first time I still don't get the joke even after reading the explainxkcd page [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.123|108.162.219.123]] 18:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:It isn't a joke. [[Randall]] is simply encouraging people to vote. [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:55, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

:¬I Ummmmmmmmm..... It's Randall's comic strip. He can endorse whomever he wants without getting anyone's permission first. To those who disagree with this endorsement - sowhat? Grow up. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.42}}

;Bit disappointing...

I was hoping for a comic today. oh well. Interesting to see how he's planning to vote, though - it's a shame that there are no candidates this year in favor of strong encryption. {{unsigned ip|172.68.55.80}}

Funny how females outdo males in this 'comic' but in terms of frequency and of elevation. Oh well. xkcd has long been overrepresenting females, it was to be expected. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:Seriously? You're whinging 'what about the men?' in a geek web comic?! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.212|108.162.215.212]] 18:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::And there are 11 characters and they are split 5 to 6, and if Blondie represents Clinton then there are 5 to 5 M vs W supporters. ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:"Overrepresenting"?! If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think xkcd is supposed to represent, but as soon as Randall draws 'too many women' you whinge about the oppression of men. First off, even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray. Second, there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.118.191|172.68.118.191]] 00:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think
:: You are literally a priori accusing me of bias regarding what I would have done in a comparable situation.
:: >you think xkcd is supposed to represent
:: xkcd's focus is exceedingly well-defined. It is often narrowed down to a particular academic field. It is not subjective.
:: >you whinge about the oppression of men
:: Please refrain from putting such words in my mouth. Overrepresentation is a numerical fact -- 'oppression' is a charged term which I doubt has a valid definition.
:: >even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray
:: You seem to be implying that my mention of overrepresentation pertains to overrepresentation with respect to viewership rather than with respect of gender balance in scientific fields Randall depicts.
:: >there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power
:: Again, you are seeing claims of 'oppression' that are not there. I do not use this word -- I am talking strictly about gender quantity. In other words, I don't object to 'oppression', but to distortion of truth. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::Oh shit, you're not joking. I don't think Randall cared in the slightest how many of each gender there were, or where they were placed. You are creating a problem which isn't there, and missing what the comic is actually trying to say. It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 09:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Almost every comic depicting a scientific (academic, laboratory, engineering) context contains a female. As a matter of fact, I looked up the last 20 or so comics in the Science category. Where applicable, the gender proportion is:
:::::f = 4, m = 0
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 0
:::::f = 0, m = 2
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 0, m = 1
:::::f = 3, m = 1
:::::total: f = 17, = 10
:::: It is even more glaring that I had thought.
::::>It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it.
::::You are making it hard not to conclude that you are not quite able to speak otherwise than in irrelevant falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::::Like I said, Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented, and more on what the comic is about. Randall uses whatever fits best in each comic. Also, please refrian from using nowiki on "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>" as your signature. It is against the rules, because technically your comment ends in "</nowiki>". It is also pointless, because your IP is recorded in edit history anyway. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 12:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::: 'Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented' -- it is quite remarkable for you to say so when the balance is significantly more than 1.5 : 1. As for my signature, 'my comment ending in </nowiki>' is literally false and, again, my choice of it is not intended to obscure my identity, but to signify irrelevance of it in discussion. <nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152 }}
:::::::Your trolling is out of hand. It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion, you have to sign your comments. If you feel so strongly about it, just stop reading Randall's comics. I don't think he'll care if you stop. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::::: So this is your reaction to the hypocrisy of a comic majorly about science distorting truth (literally -- the female overrepresentation is not, contrary to how another poster presented it, in service to humour/plot, it is just there): 'just don't read it if you don't like it'. This is not tenable. You could 'justify' any wrongdoing this way: 'just don't react, what does it concern you'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::::::::You cannot justify anything with that, only things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way. Randall is using his right to freedom of speech, and you have no right trying to stop that. And before you argue that I am trying to stop you, realise that I am only giving my opinion in the hopes yours will change. Also, you ''still'' haven't addressed why you don't sign your comments properly. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 11:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
: As for my signature, I have addressed it -- you just ignored my explanation, beside implying that it was I who brought its subject in the first place rather than you ('It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion').
: >things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way
: 'Not any significant' is a subjective claim rather than objective quantification such as the one I made to point out Randall's gender bias. xkcd has vast readership. In fact, it is *the first result* for the keyword >webcomic in Google.
: >Randall is using his right to freedom of speech.
: This is completely bizarre. You are appealing to free speech to justify *telling falsehoods*.
: >and you have no right trying to stop that
: This is completely bizarre as well. What kind of 'right' are you talking about that I lack? Are you saying that people have no right to point out, condemn, and demand rectification of falsehoods? This is surreal. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::The guy was clearly referring to your earlier statement that you were, quote, "signifying irrelevance it in discussion." Also, as the admin who's been having to clean up after your refusal to write a signature without nowiki tags, I'm getting really sick of this. The signature tag is not there for you to disregard it to make an artistic statement about metadata in forums, it's there to mark time, ownership and the boundaries between comments. You're making extra work for me for a trivial excuse. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: 'Time' and 'ownership' are never relevant. All they can ever conceivably serve for is pointing out misattributions of contributions from one poster to another, which holds precisely zero weight for the argument. If your point stands, it stands. If it doesn't, it doesn't. This -- validity of the point -- is the only consideration in discussion, the purpose of which is conveying knowledge. I'm sorry to hear that you feel that it is the form of the argument (such as who made which comment) that matters rather than its substance. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::::I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful, so let's put this a different way. I didn't put up three different signs around the talk page box so that someone could try to be clever and make me do the work anyway by signing off slightly wrong. You and I both know why the messages tell you to sign off with four tildes. Typing the four tildes without the nowiki tags takes strictly less time than adding the nowiki tags. There is no discussion being suppressed because of the metadata. I've wasted five minutes of my life typing out the unsigned comment template multiple times when it was clear to me that you knew how to sign and wilfully weren't. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: >I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful
::::: Metadata is obviously meaningful for statistical/record-keeping purposes, and guess what, that is provided by the edit history. In direct discussion view, it is actively damaging, in all senses, from visual distraction (cluttering the page) to topical distraction (distracting into discussion of particular posters, including chaff such as squabbling over who said what).
::::: >make me do the work anyway
::::: I am not going to validate a misconception that is harmful to discussion only so to spare you the effort you impose on yourself by erroneously clinging to it. It would be irresponsible towards this community. I tried my best to explain your mistake to you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.141}}
::::::In case you didn't get the subtext from my last comment, I'm invoking site rules that are littered in multiple places around the edit window. Browsing edit logs to find ownership of a comment is incredibly time consuming, and signatures take a fraction of a line to display the information inline. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: So basically what you are saying is 'I am not wrong on account of having codified my being wrong into a rule'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
::::::::No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it. Less than a hundred characters of timestamp and attribution serves to mark out who actually said what and the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what far outweigh the character count delta between completed signatures and your intentionally un-rendered tildes. The rule is not a suggestion, and the only thing stopping me from temporarily blocking you to enforce the rule is that I know your IP address is changing between sessions. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::: >No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it.
::::::::: ...What? You literally said that signing is a rule here, and I literally agreed and pointed out that that rule is based on a misunderstanding.
::::::::: >the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what
::::::::: ...facilitate nothing but petty squabbles over authorship of contributions rather than focusing on points therein. The only one of the three benefits to signing you gave at one point that is valid is separation of comments, except that isn't even provided by signing, but by indentation/semi-indentation of colons/quotation marks, respectively, to which signing is, guess what, completely unrelated. If anything, my refusal to sign 'properly' has helped my detractors, giving them an opportunity to attempt to undermine my credibility by repeatedly asking me 'why are you not signing properly?' as if I hadn't explained that two if not three times already. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::What you literally did was put a statement in quotation marks that featured me saying I was wrong and using a tautological rule to to justify it. You believe that identity is irrelevant to discussion, which is disputed in discussions of community management and {{w|Wikipedia:Signatures#Purpose_of_signatures|wikipedia itself}} as the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page. The furthest point of this would be mandatory account creation to edit pages, which I've fought against in the past and don't want to have to instate if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::::: >using a tautological rule to to justify it
::::::::::: >which is disputed in discussions of community management and wikipedia itself
::::::::::: So you are calling my 100 % verifiable points regarding consequences of presence/absence of signing on poster behaviour tautological, while yourself appealing to authority to Wikipedia ('Wikipedia requires signing, therefore I do too') in lieu of an argument? You have some fucking nerve as well.
::::::::::: >if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate
::::::::::: This sounds curiously like preemption, 'let's keep him from posting in case he should offend'.
::::::::::: >the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page
::::::::::: You mean those containing such examples of signing posters' civility as referring to me as 'finding problems with everything', having a 'twisted mind', saying that 'xkcd is as bad as KKK', 'horrible person', 'afraid of women', 'belonging in 18th century', and 'afraid to sign properly'? I agree, civility such as that is quite effective at rendering a picture of effectiveness of signing on discussion quality. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::::I'm not actually making a living off this. I'm not willing to keep making points that you'll brush off as false and state your own claims as true, then still have to clean up after you and the other anonymous users with changing IPs on this page. I should have known this comic was going to be a moderation nightmare when it went up. I have work to do, this talk page is now locked for anonymous users. If you want to continue ignoring site rules, you and the other people on this talk page who I can't seem to manage can make accounts to do so. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:53, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::It's not telling a falsehood if it's an opinion. There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion. He is not saying that this is what the real world is like. And it is objectively not significant, because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different. There are far worse problems on the internet. Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: >it is objectively not significant
::: I have taken note that you have shifted from asserting existence of high and low significance ('in any significant way', implying gradation) to asserting existence of categorical absolute insignificance ('objectively not significant').
::: >There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion.
::: Where the hell are you people getting this kind of nonsense from? Depicting a fictitious state of matters is an opinion?
::: >He is not saying that this is what the real world is like.
::: Literally false. There is no indication whatsoever that the overrepresentation of females has a humorous or otherwise irreal or optative dimension. The females are depicted as being self-obviously natural at their positions.
::: >There are far worse problems on the internet.
::: This is not relevant in addition to being a subjective opinion (speaking of dispensing which).
::: >because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different
::: I am honestly bewildered by your repeated reliance on this clearly morally untenable nonsense. 'If something is wrong, just stop watching.' It's stunning.
::: >Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex?
::: Randall does depict the latter conviction in the comic AS WELL (search the page for my 'Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender.'). <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
::::There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind. You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd. That was not intended to say anything about xkcd, but something about yourself. You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism. You won't see anything wrong with what you're saying until you see what you are doing now. Also, I redid your table, looking at the past 20 comics in the science section.
::::{| {{table}}
| style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Number'''||1736||1732||1717||1679||1666||1664||1643||1637||1633||1621||1611||1606||1605||1594||1592||1591||1584||1574||1561||1531||style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Total'''
|-
| style="background:#c0c0f0;"|M||1||0||2||0||1||1||1||1||0||0||0||0||1||0||2||1||8||0||0||0||style="background:#c0c0f0;"|'''19'''
|-
| style="background:#f0c0f0;"|F||2||0||1||0||1||2||0||3||0||0||3||0||1||2||0||1||3||0||0||1||style="background:#f0c0f0;"|'''20'''
|-
|
|}
::::Tell me, how did you do your calculations? This seems like an accurate depiction of real life figures, seeing as there are slightly more women than men in most countries.
::::I'm starting to see how you think, you see only what confirms what you think. My table is objective, and does not account for people in the background (which were mostly men, by the way). Yours only includes comics that confirm that you are right, except for one.
::::Now, even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter. Xkcd isn't about being real. Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can. He is '''not''' saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is? And please, sign your comments. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 03:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

::::: >There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind.
::::: 'There being less men than women in contexts which by definition exact intellectual capacity does not signify in any way that women have more intellectual capacity than men, except in your twisted mind.'
::::: >even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter.
::::: >Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can.
::::: It is, what, third time that you stress people's freedom to do wrong in lieu of providing a counterargument? Fourth?
::::: >He is not saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is?
::::: Obviously because it is conveyance of truth that is the core and assumed function of communication, not artistic expression. When we see an arrow and a figurative scene etched in a rock on a foreign trip, we don't assume that it is conveying some indigene's artistic fancy about an imaginary situation -- we assume that it was used for communicating some fact. Accordingly, everything, even in a webcomic, that does not stand out as false/artistic is assumed true / the factual background of the fiction. If female scientists are depicted casually, people won't question their presence. Randall's gender bias is ill-integrated, but integrated seamlessly enough to slip under the radar of most people it appears.
::::: >You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism.
::::: >You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd.
::::: Yes, this continues being subjective (let me remind you in case you forgot that it was you who first appealed to 'why do you care, it's not that important' way back in your comment at 11:00 -- I at no point at all referenced subjective importances and instead wholly focused on inherent qualities of the problem) and, more importantly, glaringly demonstrative of your desire to hush criticism. Almost any any wrongdoing can be rendered 'slight' and dismissed by comparing it to lynching. It's fucking cowardly.
::::: Finally,
::::: >I redid your table [...]
::::: your error, which might or might not have been intentional, is that you're counting comics which have no literal academic/scientific context, which my point has from the very beginning been about. xkcd doesn't categorize comics, and this wiki is quite overcategorizing them. When I looked up comics about sex, included was '721: Flatland' just because the mention of the word 'orgy' in the title text and '1253: Exoplanet Names' just because of some raunchy ones! This is misleading in itself, but the point is, comics like '1637: Salt Mine' are clearly too outlandishly fictional to convincingly connote gender equality. I only included those comics in my table in which people explicitly partake in scientific situations or discussions, which can actually sway perceptions. Accusing me of confirmation bias is like accusing a researcher of bias for refusing to include cooking recipes in a study measuring nations' programming output. And 1584, which yields the crux of your numbers (and, amusingly, after excluding which your numbers differ from mine by exactly just one), is just fucking hypocrisy. Three of the 'men' in it are children (I take it that your generous exclusion of 'people in the background' refers to audiences as in 1736), the fourth doesn't even say anything, and Randall had the nerve to 'totally jokingly' attribute Darwin's insight to his wife because 'you can't prove she wasn't responsible for it'.
::::: (Also, I forgot to mention that my final line in my previous comment does not mean that there isn't a superior gender (or race). There obviously is. It was understood throughout my argument on this page, but I should probably make this clear.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::Ok then. I thought your argument was that men are being represented as worse than women when they're actually roughly equivelant. But no, you're the kind of person who believes that there is a superior gender ''and'' race. You are a horrible person, and no amount of reasoning would get through to you. Can you please just go away? Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 08:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: >no amount of reasoning would get through to you
::::::: By reasoning which I am incapable of understanding, do you mean things such as positing existence of increasingly minute 'microagressions', 'microsexisms' and 'microracisms' using which to explain racial and gender achievement gaps as an environmental factor after environmental factor is controlled for and proven not to affect achievement in any meaningful degree? Or showcasing the purported importance of 'stimulating upbringing' while failing to account for the fact that relationship between stimulating upbringing on the parent's side and accomplishment on the child's side is simply owing to the shared cause of innate high capacity underlying both outcomes (by proxy of heritability of capacity from parent to child in case of the latter)? Because it can't be something as crude as correlation/causation of 'women underperform because they are being stereotyped rather than are being stereotyped because they underperform'... can it.
::::::: >Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you.
::::::: I _just_ think that there might be some delicious irony in how you somehow found it necessary to appeal to majority as well as if your assertion of 'you're wrong' had been a bit too bare. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}

:I will tell my children and grandchildren that in the election of 2016, there was a guy so afraid of women that he complained that a webcomic about the election had "females outdo males...in terms of...of elevation". This is some 18th century stuff. It is the consummate combination of unawareness of self and of others. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.47|108.162.246.47]]
04:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >there was a guy so afraid of women
:: I regret to see you rely on such tactics.
:: >This is some 18th century stuff.
:: This is not relevant. It is possible for a society to err away from its prior true notions. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}

The only disappointing this are comments like those two above. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 18:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Females being overrepresented in comics like xkcd (but also other ones) with respect to their controlled interest in science in reality is a fact. Therefore, you are calling facts disappointing. How geeky of you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:: So, your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures, yes? Also, why are you afraid to "un-nowiki" your signature...? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::: No. Allow me to repeat my point as you had apparently misunderstood: 'females being overrepresented'. This is something else than 'females being represented'. The more you know, the less chance there is for you to accidentally twist another person's words as misogyny/sexism. Also, identity is not relevant to discussion. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:::: I understood you perfectly fine. My point still stands: You don't like Randall's preference for female stick figures. I never said you're being misogynic/sexist, so please don't imply I did. Thing with your "hidden" identity is that it's plain visible in the history of this page, so there's really no need to nowiki the signature, that's all. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: You are extremely skilled at saying things that are false and asserting that they're true. First you confused objecting to female overrepresentation (over-presence) with objecting to female representation (presence) ('your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures'). Then you moved to confusing objecting to female overrepresentation with objecting to *Randall's* female overrepresentation. My objection does not pertain to who is doing overrepresenting, but to the mere fact of it. I would have objected identically to any other writer. Also, your attributing of opposition to female presence in comics (after doing which which you proceeded to asserting my being personally hostile to Randall) is accusing of sexism/misogyny by definition. Also, I am obviously aware of edit history; my use my signature constitutes a reminder that identity is, as I said, irrelevant in discussion. It does not serve to obscure anything. You have a remarkable record of falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
::::::This is the most persistent troll I have seen in a long while. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 14:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: I regret that this is your reaction to my pointing out your false claims. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
::::::::I didn't make any false claims for you to point out. My comment about your trolling was the first comment I made. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 15:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm confused. Are you merely making an observation about the number of female stick figures vs male stick figures in these comics or are you saying that there is a problem that needs to be solved? If so, what is the problem and potential solution? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 21:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:: The problem is giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity. The solution is Randall ceasing to overrepresent females. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::First, you say that giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity is a problem, but have given nothing to show why it is a problem. I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is, and as an artistic endeavor, I don't believe it necessarily should. Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place. Second, where is the harm being done? Lastly, I reject the premise of your argument. I have studied these comics very hard and can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female. If we are going based on gender, you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other. If those are not available, then you are simply applying your heteronormative bias and assumptions onto these stick figures unfairly. Until you address these claims, this discussion is over as its very basis is proven unknowable. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 16:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:::: >you [...] have given nothing to show why it is a problem
:::: >where is the harm being done
:::: If you are asking for proof that truth is preferable over falsehood, I suggest that you give your priorities a look.
:::: >I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is
:::: Again (see the other subthread of this discussion which I'm replying in), the problem is that Randall gives zero indication that the female overrepresentation is just artistic licence or even representation of his wish how matters be. He depicts it as natural.
:::: >Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place.
:::: Agreed. Except, similarly to objections to this very comic # 1756, what Randall does with respect to female representation is not art -- it is just furthering a certain conviction regarding female capacity. It's no more art than product placement is.
:::: >can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female
:::: Right, two characters engaging in sex in supine position (598, 940), one of which has hair and one hasn't, are clearly lesbians one of whom is shaven.
:::: >you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other
:::: This is ridiculous noise. <nowiki>~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:Randall is in the unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is, but as it we hope it one day will be. Imagine how many women and girls can encounter these comics in their classrooms or read them online, and have the chance to see all sorts of female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields. The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon. For scientific progress, for the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM, it is amazing that Randall presents - without fanfare, without emphasis, and, most importantly, without implication of a degradation of men - a world in which women play a significant role in science. It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.125|173.245.52.125]] 03:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:: Your sentimental prose is rendered irrelevant by a simple brief fact: motivation must never rely on distortion of truth.
:: >The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science.
:: This is literally false.
:: >female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields
:: Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations.
:: >the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM
:: Desirability of diversity assumes that all members of the diversity are equally capable and focused on the subject in the first place.
:: >Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon.
:: There is nothing to 'remedy', because there is nothing wrong in the first place. Gender equality is not some sort of inherent state that has been deviated from. There is nothing wrong with wanting female membership in anything to equal males, or even exceed them -- but it is wrong to imply that the reason for failures of such attempts is 'bias'.
:: >unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is
:: Reread this sentence until you appreciate what you just wrote.
:: >It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.
:: Motivation must never happen at the expense of truth. By all means say 'I want more women in science' -- it's fine. But saying 'women's absence from science results from environmental prejudice' is false. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
:: Also, regarding 'most importantly [!], without implication of a degradation of men' -- this is literally false as well. In most comics containing discussion between a woman and a man, it is the man that asks a question/listens and the woman that elaborates / gives facts / corrects him. Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender. Quantifying that is necessarily somewhat imprecise, but I browsed comics 1423-1483 (the numbers are arbitrary) and the proportion of comics depicting the man as having less clue than the woman is 11 : 3. (See comics 1430, 1513, 1586, 1605 for example of what I mean.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::: "Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations." - Wow. Just wow. David, this guy is insistent that women are innately less good at science than men - not that they are given less opportunities, but that they are given equal opportunities and encouragement, but still are just too stupid to do proper science. Expressing opinions like that, it's no great surprise that he (he's definitely a he) wishes to remain anonymous.
::: To be honest, I don't think he's trolling - trolls don't have this much commitment. I think he's expressing his actual, genuine beliefs. Scary.
::: To the anonymous coward - SIGN YOUR POSTS, or leave this comic. Go write your own blog post on the nature of signatures, if you like, or make your own wiki with your own rules. The message about the comic doesn't contain signatures, because there, the message is the only important thing. This is the discussion section, and these are the rules. I disagree with you very strongly, but I'm perfectly happy to have a civil discussion with you here IF you stick to the basic rules. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 11:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

A little disappointing to have a normally lighthearted comic dive seriously into politics, if even for one strip. Not really a fan of either candidate, but would like to see stuff like this stay above the fray. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.100}}
:Completely agreed. [[User:SeanAhern|SeanAhern]] ([[User talk:SeanAhern|talk]]) 18:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Completely agreed 2. At first I though it's some kind of a romance statement ("be with her"). And from explainxkcd I have learnt that it's an US campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.150|162.158.202.150]] 22:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::Lighthearted? Try to read the comics in the [[:Category:Politics]] and [[:Category:Climate change]]. Also there are many other comics that are not at all light hearted. You must have mistaken this with some other web comic? :) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Yes, lighthearted. Even the earlier political and climate change strips had a bit of humor in them (the only ones that really didn't have at least an attempt at humor were the cancer strips, understandably), this is just a straight up political ad. And while it's Randall's strip and he can do whatever he wants with it, it's just a little disappointing that he dove straight in to political ads. If nothing else, something like Black Hat trolling by voting for himself.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.100|162.158.69.100]] 12:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Well at least the I'm with her, could be interpreted like the "I'm with stupid"... :-) She is just less stupid than the alternative. Guess he seriously hopes this comic could make a difference and that he is afraid to do nothing. He reaches many people so who knows if this comic might swing an important state. You never know in a tight race. And although {{w|Nate Silver}} ([[:Category:Comics featuring Nate Silver|often referred to]] by Randall in the past) says that it's a [http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clinton-gains-and-the-polls-magically-converge/ 70% chance Hillary wins] then he is also not certain it will be her. So Randall does his best to avoid Trump as the big chief... He is even willing to loose some fans, although I think the majority of his readers prefers a world without a President Trump! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::I don't think he thought this through. Most likely most of the people this comic would have reached were those already going to vote for Clinton, but the small fraction that were undecided/ leaning-Trump probably were actually motivated by this to vote against her. I know I was pushed that way by the persistent media pro-Clinton coverage, not just in news network, but in other stuff that I usually enjoy, like the recent Big Bang Theory episode, basically celebrity that exists and now xkcd. I go to these places to go away from politics, but if you all want to force it down my throat everywhere I go, then fuck you all. That doesn't mean that I won't come back here or to any of the other places I visit, but to me at least this is no longer a haven where I can escape from politics, and that does mean something. {{unsigned ip|162.158.178.8}}
::::::I get what you're saying, and I appreciate the sentiment. I'm also glad that you won't let this deter you from the comic. May I point out that this is the first explicitly politically-partisan comic in nearly 2000 of them, and takes place at the end of a historically bitter election campaign; but let's be honest, even if this is not a one-off but repeated once every four years, it's still only about 1 comic in 500. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 12:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

This is a first... comics 500 and 1130 (possibly 1131 too) were related to the election, but didn't endorse a candidate. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 18:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I think Randall is pretty much just saying '''OH GOD PLEASE DONT VOTE FOR TRUMP''' [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If Randall was saying that, he'd also be bringing up third party candidates (honestly surprised he didn't endorse Jill Stein considering she's more pro-science than Hillary. And before anyone says "anti-vax", check snopes. Jill Stein is so pro-vax [she's volunteered time vaccinated children and is on record saying she wants to increase vaccination rates], pro-addressing-climate[she's green party who has that as a primary platform], and wants to replace the people with business degrees on the panels of the FDA with people with science degrees. Jill is so pro-science and that it makes Hillary look like a flat-earther.) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.42|108.162.246.42]] 21:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Jill Stein's stance on nuclear energy is an unscientific as it gets. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.196|108.162.210.196]] 23:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Hillary Clinton's ideas on encryption are in denial of science. Clinton's stance on coal is unscientific, she's pretty abysmal on fracking and natural gas too. Stein could be a lot better, but if Stein is tofu sarah palin, clinton is just palin with a college degree [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 03:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Likewise her position on GMOs. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}
::::No no no. If Randal just wish that Trump should not become president there is only one way to achieve this and that is by making Hillary win. This is not even saying that he likes her, he just dislikes the alternative more. Voting for anyone else might just help Trump. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, it looks like minutephysics has done a similar thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDeL4LGuBx4 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 00:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I came here to see what the tone of the comments were going to be. I was half expecting to find an all-out flamewar in progress. I was happy to see that the comments have not devolved into the kind of attacks that one would expect to find pretty much anywhere else on the Internet. Geeks are the best people. :) [[User:Mwburden|mwburden]] ([[User talk:Mwburden|talk]]) 18:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm very dissappointed. Randall never took sides before and - be it as it may - this comic is not a comic but plain out political campaign. Up until now I held xkcd in EXTREMELY high esteem - this comic put a serious dent in that opinion..
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.60|162.158.91.60]] 18:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: I'm really torn about this one. On the one hand I feel that you HAVE to take sides in this one, if your only other option is Donald Trump... on the other hand, I never liked when web comics express political opinions. It will always end in a flame war and almost never have anything to do with the web comic itself. Randall should've just put up a "go vote becaues it's important" sign without taking sides. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I'm sure there are other comics out there that would agree with your ideology. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Randall should do whatever Randall thinks he should do. Should he put up "go read about global warming" comics instead of take the side of AGW? If you think this example is an inappropriate one to use in contrasting this comic with the current political election cycle then you've completely ignored the stances of the two popular candidates. But back to the original point: if you don't like XKCD anymore because of this one comic then go find another comic or start your own. All of art is an expression of the person. Randall knew not everyone would like his beliefs when he pushed this out to the world and is obviously prepared to deal with any consequences of taking a stand on his website. I, for one, applaud him for doing so {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.19}}
:: Randall did a comic about global warming a while back, which was very interesting. Because I heard the "earth has warmed up before" argument before and even used it myself at least once. The difference about the global warming comic is that he backed it up with scientific facts, which is well within the scope of this comic. Political opinions aren't (or did the slogan change to ''A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language and politics''?). Yes, of course he can do with his web comic whatever he wants to. But readers can express their opinions about what he does with it. It's called "freedom of speech", you know?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::[[1357|There's a comic for that.]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.230|162.158.214.230]] 21:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Randall has endorsee Obama in 2008 and it is his comic and he can use it to endorse anyone he likes. I'm pretty sure he believes that he will only loose a few real fans of xkcd over this comic, because those who really enjoys all his comics in spite of for instance climate comics would really not like to see Trump as president. And would thus be happy if this comic helped in any way to avoid that. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you help list all the characters in the transcript? From left to right; they're Joanna (ponytail with EMP cannon) from [[322]]; Black Hat; unknown with kite; White Hat; possibly Miss Lenhart (but his hair is somewhat different from [[1519]]); unknown possibly Megan; cueball; unknown woman with glasses; Hairbun; Beret Guy; Cueball with toy sword from [[303]]. [[User:B jonas|B jonas]] ([[User talk:B jonas|talk]]) 19:10, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Not Miss Lenhart. Blondie. They are listed now. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Good for Randal. I had been noticing how many Hillary leaning artists had been pulling their punches this election, likely out of fear of trolling or loss of revenue. You want to know what courage looks like? This is is. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Title text hasn't been explained yet. Is it a reference to the German chancellor Angela Merkel's phrase "Wir schaffen das!'? Don't know if Clinton has a slogan like Obama's "Yes, we can!". {{unsigned ip|162.158.91.36}}
: That's the same I thought. But I'm not sure how well known this phrase is outside of Germany. However "Wir schaffen das!" always had a bitter taste - even considered ironic or sarcastic by some - (which e.g. "Yes, we can!" didn't), so I interpreted "We can do this!" as voting for Clinton is simply the lesser evil. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I find (linking to )this civicinnovation website rather questionable. They want to audit peoples address books based on who the names in there might vote for? That sounds like Erich Mielkes wildest dreams come true. Even German newspapers (where i'm from), which are 100% anti-Trump, have in the last days noted concern about the methods of Clintons supporters bullying the other side, and this is a disquieting new piece in that picture. I'll hope this is just a ploy to step up with Trump on the ''bad manners'' side. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.160|162.158.91.160]] 19:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Not all comics have to be humorous

From [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics#Etymology]
:The English term ''comics'' derives from the humorous (or "[[wikt:comic|comic]]") work which predominated in early American newspaper comic strips; usage of the term has become standard for non-humorous works as well. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.57}}

:The problem is that this isn't a comic, this is a campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.38|162.158.238.38]] 20:32, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Could we please just NOT get politics involved in the comments, guys?

Just... please? [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 20:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Are you serious. What had you expected :-) This is the most loaded comic of all time. It will even take down [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]], even though [[388:_Fuck_Grapefruit#Controversy|it beat his blog]] about his Obama endorsement. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall has taken a side in a political Argument before: Not counting the near-invisible easter egg, comic 1005 consists solely of Randall taking a stance on something political and providing links to show how you can help. That wasn't too long ago, but no one freaked out about a serious, political strip back then.
[[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 20:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Policy to candidates is not an apples to apples comparison. People get much more up in arms when the topic is either a candidate or policy that goes against religious text or teachings. SOPA and PIPA were neither (well, unless you count GNU as some kind of internet religion). [[User:Zernin|Zernin]] ([[User talk:Zernin|talk]]) 21:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

It's sad to see a guy who is so smart in some areas, yet can not see Hillary Clinton for the terrible president she would be. (Granted, part of the reason we only have a few other choices is because of our messed up voting system.) {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.177}}
:I agree with you that Hillary may be worse than almost any one else from the Democrats. But Trump is sooo much further out on a limp, and I'm sure this might be the only reason Randall makes this comic. He is seriously afraid of what woudl happen to the US and the rest of the world if Trump wins --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:38, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Instead of comic, post contained a political statement. I am not amused. I want a refund. I don't vote, and I don't even live anywhere near USA. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.102|141.101.96.102]] 18:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:A refund? For what? You pay to read this comic? [[User:Zorlax the Mighty|Zorlax the Mighty'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:Zorlax the Mighty|talk]]) 21:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Darn right you better be with her. If you say anything else, you will "commit suicide". Just ask Vince Foster or Seth Rich if you think I'm crazy.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.77|173.245.48.77]] 21:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

What, Randy does not say "Bernie or Bust"? I feel cheated now. :P --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.228|162.158.150.228]] 22:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Poor Bernie. Poor America. Poor world. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 23:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Just good luck America (and the rest of the world where I belong), whatever happens tomorrow. But I'm hoping Randall can help his candidate win! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm with her... unfortunately : (. I just didn't think it made sense to donate to a billionaire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.106|162.158.74.106]] 00:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Don't get political in the comments? The fucking "comic" is a fucking political ad. We're going to call this fucker out on his cuckery. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.27|162.158.74.27]] 01:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't give a damn. Sure, I might not agree with his political leanings (hell, I don't want either of them in the WH), but it's just 1 comic. On Wednesday, he'll probably go back to the same stuff he's been doing for 1755 other strips. This will be nothing special. Just one comic. Sure, it might be politically fueled, but just because a person lets their leanings known doesn't mean you should be allowed to call them a "cuck" or cause a talk page for a popular comic, or a Reddit for a popular comic, devolve into the equivalent of monkeys flinging crap at walls. So just please deal with it and move on.
Yours truly, [[User:GranadalandDreamer|GranadalandDreamer]] ([[User talk:GranadalandDreamer|talk]]) 01:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's with *her*? good to know that randall considers arab life worthless/supports financiers over single African-american mothers/refuses to understand encryption/would rather spend public money on coal than retrain miners/loves trade deals that will hurt the poorest, increase inequality, damage the environment, homogenize culture, allow private corporations to sue elected governments/can't make his mind up over the Dakota Access pipeline/changes his accent depending on which state he is stumping in/was late to supporting gay marriage/lied repeatedly about coming under sniper fire in bosnia/has had to repeatedly plead incompetence or rely on bureaucratic politics to evade formal breach of contract or charges of criminality. Iowa, Utah and Wisconsin may have Gloria la Riva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on the ballot, if you want a candidate who isn't an elitist. And if you didn't want splitters, you should have voted for Bernie. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 02:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I mean it's not like Trump is going to be a whole lot better for Arab people, Black people, gay people, or pretty much anyone who's not a straight white dude. It's quite possible he voted for Bernie, but at this point it's a little late for him to be asking others to support Sanders. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.71}}

:No, but that doesn't mean we should settle for clinton. It is not late to be asking for people to support Sanders, if anyone was doing that, because if the senate swings to the democrats he ends up in charge of the budget committee. Oh and I forgot one: randall is apparently also planning to disappoint all of us, even those who loathe him, within 100 days. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 05:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

: Trump would be a whole lot better for all Americans, not just "straight white dudes". He won't be better for people in other countries looking to illegally enter the United States, but why shouldn't an American President be like this? You're just throwing demographic categories around thinking you're making an argument against Trump. Only those who buy into the leftist narrative will believe you. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

Looks like the Trumpettes are getting rather triggered over a web comic. Wasn't there a candidate in this election that was preaching against this whole getting easily offended by words thing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.43|108.162.238.43]] 03:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

This just makes me... sad... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.117|108.162.215.117]] 03:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is a webcomic about "romance, sarcasm, language, and math" taking a political stance and telling me who to vote for? Randall can have his own opinion, but this isn't okay. I've read this comic since ... gosh, since the low 200s-300s, so probably over 5 or 6 years and... I think I'm done. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.55|108.162.241.55]] 04:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:''Of course'' it's okay. It's his comic, which he gives us for free. He can use it to entertain us, to draw random pictures of extradimensional red spiders, or to advocate for a political candidate and inform people how to vote, especially people who may have a more difficult time doing so (like the disabled and elderly). However, I really ''must'' thank you... you claiming that this "isn't okay", and all the others here with ruffled feathers over it, makes a previously boring comic one of the most hilarious xkcds in a good long while. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 10:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm surprised this wiki doesn't have a category for 'serious'/'no joke' comics, and least not that I spotted. There should be, and this should be in it. [[User:Teleksterling|Teleksterling]] ([[User talk:Teleksterling|talk]]) 04:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Am I the only one who sees Guy Fawkes in the logo? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.48|108.162.245.48]] 04:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the only other time Randall generated that much controversy here in comments was when suggested that all beer tastes bad. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.93|141.101.80.93]] 06:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)rw

* The title text ''may'' be quoting - directly or indirectly - Angela Merkel's slogan ("We can do this", or in German "Wir schaffen das"), but I don't know why unless it's just an appropriate slogan. [[User:Schroduck|Schroduck]] ([[User talk:Schroduck|talk]]) 08:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hej. I think it was the right thing to do, and if you read some of the older XKCDs (just think about the one about free speech - they just show you the door, and some others) you could have expected that this is his position. even through i would take the vote for stein on my part. I'm sorry for the situation of the citizens of the USA right now. Greetings from Oversea - and good luck today! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.174|162.158.89.174]] 10:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Way to alienate half of your readership, Randall. Well, now we know that Randall is a socialist communist who hates America. {{unsigned ip|162.158.79.235}}
* If you are so repulsed by seeing someone post something that you disagree with that you have to regress to early-teen insults, then I suggest you turn off all your electronic devices and start living in a cave. Engaging with people that we disagree with makes us smarter and better-informed. That said, it's Randall's comic that he provides to us at no charge - and if you stop reading today, you're automatically eligible for a full refund! [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 12:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Given that a big chunk of his readers must be non-US, and we don't really give a rat's arse which arse you elect, it is a bit disappointing there wasn't even something a little witty here. Other web-comic authors have often put things like this as an extra one between the others - and given that he missed a comic today, I don't see why he didn't do that. Anyway, have fun you lot and please try not to start any more wars.{{unsigned ip|141.101.98.217}}

Oh we non-USers do care!! I guess Randall just thinks today is too important to not make his position clear. Which is an admirable decision. I'm also shocked and surprised to find there may be Trumpers lurking on xkcd. Glad to hear so many of you are leaving, folks. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.134|172.68.34.134]] 16:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If you don't know any Trump supporters amongst your personal circle, you're part of the problem. Expand your worldview. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

;Hairbun with glasses
I wonder if she is meant to represent [[wikipedia:Susan B. Anthony|Susan B. Anthony]]. SBA did have a bun (most photos) and glasses (later in life), and she is the most obvious person to be placed at the same prominent level as HRC.[[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 14:42, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Well maybe, but Randall has drwan [[Hairbun]] with glasses like this several times before as also mentioned in the gallery. So I do not think any of the characters represents real persons except maybe the only one looking out at us, [[Blondie]] which would be how to draw Hillary in xkcd. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Is that final reminder, about being in line before the polls close true in all 50 states? I believe that Indiana nominally has a different law, that you must be inside the polling building when the polls close in order to vote, which is not quite the same thing. although in practice, it's usually enforced as "be in line" instead [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.45|162.158.75.45]] 15:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Frankly, The Hillary Logo isn't particularly egregious. He has two elements suggesting to vote for Hillary (the logo, and the "her"), and 5 elements about increasing general voter turnout. I don't like Clinton, but the comic is mostly about voting, nor voting for Clinton. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.47|108.162.238.47]] 17:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's fiance/wife has been diagnosed with cancer, hasn't she (per xkcd 1141: "Two Years")? So if/when President Trump repeals ObamaCare --- and in particular repeals the provisions in regard to "pre-existing conditions" --- then his wife loses her healthcare coverage, doesn't she? This is ample reason for Randall (and his wife, and all cancer patients and their families) to oppose Trump, isn't it? [[User:PNWoldguy|PNWoldguy]] ([[User talk:PNWoldguy|talk]]) 18:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

An ad for Hillary? Well, I just removed Thing Explainer and What If from my whistlist. I gave Thing Explainer as a gift last year. I now regret that. Oh, and a coworker's husband blacklisted XKCD from their router. Great idea. {{unsigned|Dayfall}}

Hmmmm...given how this election polarizes (look e.g. in the "Scientific American" for a clear anti-Trump statement which is rather unprecedented for them; dunno about "Science") this is a rather mildly pro-Clinton comic. So what? Other celebs took their stance too. (Eagerly still awaiting NSFWComix's comment :-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 23:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Definitely not a Trump supporter here... But on the topic of political propaganda on a nerd comic... And the "free speech" comic about free speech "not existing on discussion forums"... The purpose of discussions is to have your beliefs challenged, so you can distinguish good and bad reasoning, refine your beliefs, and alter them due to evidence. Unpopular opinions should be refuted (if faulty premises), or discussed so everyone can decide for themselves. Banning members for unpopular opinions is not a debate, it's an echo chamber. And I mean this for both sides of a discussion, not just supporting one ideology in particular. [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, I'm a bit disappointed that this comic is a Clinton campaign sign (although nowhere near as much as I would be if this comic was a Trump sign). [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Explanation needs, somewhere on it, the interesting fact that citizens don't receive fines or criminal charges for not voting. I didn't realise that this was so in the U.S., and many other non-U.S. readers might not realise that it's legal to not vote in the U.S. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.121|108.162.249.121]] 01:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
*Most of the world doesn't have compulsory voting. I'm guessing you may be in Australia which does have compulsory voting, but New Zealand doesn't, nor do Canada, UK, Ireland, South Africa, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Russia, Japan, China, Nigeria, Finland, Pakistan, Denmark ... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Seriously,don't get heated about it. I agree that:

*This is just expressing Randall's opinion.
*Even if it wasn't, he deserves a comic off from jokes.
*The campaign is going o end before I wake up at 6 tomorrow.

Also, could you fucking watch your language? Jacky720 (talk) 03:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw the two forward facing figures as Clinton and Kaine. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 03:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Encouraging people to vote, and helping to know how, great. But I was disappointed that he stooped to campaigning for a specific candidate right in his comic, as opposed to his blag. This is a sad day for XKCD. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.43}}

*I wonder if Randall realized that his "get a ride to the polls" link would only work for residents in one district of Nebraska -- less than 0.25% of his U.S. readership. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Hilarious comic as always! Hillary as president, lol. Good one, Randall :^) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 21:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is the discussion 3/4th of the page with only 1/4 being related to the explanation? And most of the comments being replied to are ones on Women or Sexism, which is bad. Instead they should bitch about Donald Trump, he is the most sexist and racist here.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.50.35|162.158.50.35]] 12:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

== Found the joke ==

It turns out that this comic was funny in hindsight. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 08:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

== Found the joke ==

It turns out that this comic was funny in hindsight. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 08:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1756: I'm With Her

2017-01-12T08:50:01Z

162.158.75.160: /* Found the joke */ new section

The "I'm with her" and H with an arrow are CLEARLY the respective campaign slogan and campaign logo for Hillary Clinton, not some vagueness having to do with bringing a significant other. {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.78}}
:I see it more as him endorsing voting regardless of who you vote for (as evidenced by half the comic is about "Here's how you vote" without any mention of candidates or issues) and the endorsing Clinton part is an add-on as if to say "This is how I'm voting; vote for her if you agree with me." [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 18:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:If you're so insecure about your political beliefs that you abandon a comic you've followed for years just because they have a different opinion to you then maybe you should stop using the internet because you're just going to lose all your hobbies. {{unsigned ip|148.197.114.136}}
:I am not insecure about my political beliefs. I am just upset at the continued and active support of our two party system and the suppression of anyone not in those parties.. It ought to make everyone here very angry (even if you support Hillary). Most Americans would rather have Bernie than Hillary. Most Americans would rather have Kasich than Trump. Insult me all you want, I will not put up with this complacency any more.--[[User:Dayfall|Dayfall]] ([[User talk:Dayfall|talk]]) 21:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Blocking it from their router? Have they ever heard of the concept of... you know, just not visiting websites they dislike? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 19:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Has Randall endorsed a presidential candidate before? --[[User:Dfeuer|Dfeuer]] ([[User talk:Dfeuer|talk]]) 17:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:He supported Obama on his blog in '08, not in the comic though. {{unsigned ip|162.158.214.230}}

He could have said any number of clever things about the election, and all he did was put up a campaign sign. Disappointing. [[User:Gmcgath|Gmcgath]] ([[User talk:Gmcgath|talk]]) 17:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm hoping Wednesday will be a newspaper saying "American immigration continues north" and below, "40% of the population move to Canada", but only if Trump wins.{{unsigned|Jacky720}}

what a cuck --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.63|172.68.51.63]] 17:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: leaving aside the most ridiculous slur of the past few years, I don't know what else did you expect from Randall. I guess you must have stumbled upon this wiki by chance and have never heard of xkcd before.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 17:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: AHAHAHAHA. *Ahem.* Hooray for pejorative misappropriation of a kink. /s [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.55|108.162.246.55]] 19:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the first time I still don't get the joke even after reading the explainxkcd page [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.123|108.162.219.123]] 18:09, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:It isn't a joke. [[Randall]] is simply encouraging people to vote. [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:55, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

:¬I Ummmmmmmmm..... It's Randall's comic strip. He can endorse whomever he wants without getting anyone's permission first. To those who disagree with this endorsement - sowhat? Grow up. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.42}}

;Bit disappointing...

I was hoping for a comic today. oh well. Interesting to see how he's planning to vote, though - it's a shame that there are no candidates this year in favor of strong encryption. {{unsigned ip|172.68.55.80}}

Funny how females outdo males in this 'comic' but in terms of frequency and of elevation. Oh well. xkcd has long been overrepresenting females, it was to be expected. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:Seriously? You're whinging 'what about the men?' in a geek web comic?! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.212|108.162.215.212]] 18:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::And there are 11 characters and they are split 5 to 6, and if Blondie represents Clinton then there are 5 to 5 M vs W supporters. ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:"Overrepresenting"?! If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think xkcd is supposed to represent, but as soon as Randall draws 'too many women' you whinge about the oppression of men. First off, even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray. Second, there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.118.191|172.68.118.191]] 00:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >If there were too many guys you wouldn't bat an eye because it's 'accurate' to whatever demographic you think
:: You are literally a priori accusing me of bias regarding what I would have done in a comparable situation.
:: >you think xkcd is supposed to represent
:: xkcd's focus is exceedingly well-defined. It is often narrowed down to a particular academic field. It is not subjective.
:: >you whinge about the oppression of men
:: Please refrain from putting such words in my mouth. Overrepresentation is a numerical fact -- 'oppression' is a charged term which I doubt has a valid definition.
:: >even if the readership is male-dominated, that doesn't have any impact on who the comic can portray
:: You seem to be implying that my mention of overrepresentation pertains to overrepresentation with respect to viewership rather than with respect of gender balance in scientific fields Randall depicts.
:: >there is nothing oppressive about seeing women portrayed in equal numbers or -heaven forbid- in positions of power
:: Again, you are seeing claims of 'oppression' that are not there. I do not use this word -- I am talking strictly about gender quantity. In other words, I don't object to 'oppression', but to distortion of truth. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::Oh shit, you're not joking. I don't think Randall cared in the slightest how many of each gender there were, or where they were placed. You are creating a problem which isn't there, and missing what the comic is actually trying to say. It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 09:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Almost every comic depicting a scientific (academic, laboratory, engineering) context contains a female. As a matter of fact, I looked up the last 20 or so comics in the Science category. Where applicable, the gender proportion is:
:::::f = 4, m = 0
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 0
:::::f = 0, m = 2
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 1, m = 1
:::::f = 2, m = 1
:::::f = 0, m = 1
:::::f = 3, m = 1
:::::total: f = 17, = 10
:::: It is even more glaring that I had thought.
::::>It appears that whatever Randall puts in a comic, you'll find a problem with it.
::::You are making it hard not to conclude that you are not quite able to speak otherwise than in irrelevant falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
:::::Like I said, Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented, and more on what the comic is about. Randall uses whatever fits best in each comic. Also, please refrian from using nowiki on "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>" as your signature. It is against the rules, because technically your comment ends in "</nowiki>". It is also pointless, because your IP is recorded in edit history anyway. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 12:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::: 'Randall doesn't seem to concentrate on how gender is represented' -- it is quite remarkable for you to say so when the balance is significantly more than 1.5 : 1. As for my signature, 'my comment ending in </nowiki>' is literally false and, again, my choice of it is not intended to obscure my identity, but to signify irrelevance of it in discussion. <nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152 }}
:::::::Your trolling is out of hand. It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion, you have to sign your comments. If you feel so strongly about it, just stop reading Randall's comics. I don't think he'll care if you stop. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::::: So this is your reaction to the hypocrisy of a comic majorly about science distorting truth (literally -- the female overrepresentation is not, contrary to how another poster presented it, in service to humour/plot, it is just there): 'just don't read it if you don't like it'. This is not tenable. You could 'justify' any wrongdoing this way: 'just don't react, what does it concern you'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::::::::You cannot justify anything with that, only things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way. Randall is using his right to freedom of speech, and you have no right trying to stop that. And before you argue that I am trying to stop you, realise that I am only giving my opinion in the hopes yours will change. Also, you ''still'' haven't addressed why you don't sign your comments properly. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 11:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
: As for my signature, I have addressed it -- you just ignored my explanation, beside implying that it was I who brought its subject in the first place rather than you ('It doesn't matter about relevance of your signature in discussion').
: >things that don't actually affect anyone in any significant way
: 'Not any significant' is a subjective claim rather than objective quantification such as the one I made to point out Randall's gender bias. xkcd has vast readership. In fact, it is *the first result* for the keyword >webcomic in Google.
: >Randall is using his right to freedom of speech.
: This is completely bizarre. You are appealing to free speech to justify *telling falsehoods*.
: >and you have no right trying to stop that
: This is completely bizarre as well. What kind of 'right' are you talking about that I lack? Are you saying that people have no right to point out, condemn, and demand rectification of falsehoods? This is surreal. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::The guy was clearly referring to your earlier statement that you were, quote, "signifying irrelevance it in discussion." Also, as the admin who's been having to clean up after your refusal to write a signature without nowiki tags, I'm getting really sick of this. The signature tag is not there for you to disregard it to make an artistic statement about metadata in forums, it's there to mark time, ownership and the boundaries between comments. You're making extra work for me for a trivial excuse. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: 'Time' and 'ownership' are never relevant. All they can ever conceivably serve for is pointing out misattributions of contributions from one poster to another, which holds precisely zero weight for the argument. If your point stands, it stands. If it doesn't, it doesn't. This -- validity of the point -- is the only consideration in discussion, the purpose of which is conveying knowledge. I'm sorry to hear that you feel that it is the form of the argument (such as who made which comment) that matters rather than its substance. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::::I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful, so let's put this a different way. I didn't put up three different signs around the talk page box so that someone could try to be clever and make me do the work anyway by signing off slightly wrong. You and I both know why the messages tell you to sign off with four tildes. Typing the four tildes without the nowiki tags takes strictly less time than adding the nowiki tags. There is no discussion being suppressed because of the metadata. I've wasted five minutes of my life typing out the unsigned comment template multiple times when it was clear to me that you knew how to sign and wilfully weren't. Sign your comments properly. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: >I'm not going to be able to convince you that the metadata is meaningful
::::: Metadata is obviously meaningful for statistical/record-keeping purposes, and guess what, that is provided by the edit history. In direct discussion view, it is actively damaging, in all senses, from visual distraction (cluttering the page) to topical distraction (distracting into discussion of particular posters, including chaff such as squabbling over who said what).
::::: >make me do the work anyway
::::: I am not going to validate a misconception that is harmful to discussion only so to spare you the effort you impose on yourself by erroneously clinging to it. It would be irresponsible towards this community. I tried my best to explain your mistake to you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.141}}
::::::In case you didn't get the subtext from my last comment, I'm invoking site rules that are littered in multiple places around the edit window. Browsing edit logs to find ownership of a comment is incredibly time consuming, and signatures take a fraction of a line to display the information inline. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: So basically what you are saying is 'I am not wrong on account of having codified my being wrong into a rule'. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
::::::::No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it. Less than a hundred characters of timestamp and attribution serves to mark out who actually said what and the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what far outweigh the character count delta between completed signatures and your intentionally un-rendered tildes. The rule is not a suggestion, and the only thing stopping me from temporarily blocking you to enforce the rule is that I know your IP address is changing between sessions. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::: >No, that is your opinion of a rule falsely inserted into a statement that sounds like I'm saying it.
::::::::: ...What? You literally said that signing is a rule here, and I literally agreed and pointed out that that rule is based on a misunderstanding.
::::::::: >the benefits to organisation and knowing who is actually saying what
::::::::: ...facilitate nothing but petty squabbles over authorship of contributions rather than focusing on points therein. The only one of the three benefits to signing you gave at one point that is valid is separation of comments, except that isn't even provided by signing, but by indentation/semi-indentation of colons/quotation marks, respectively, to which signing is, guess what, completely unrelated. If anything, my refusal to sign 'properly' has helped my detractors, giving them an opportunity to attempt to undermine my credibility by repeatedly asking me 'why are you not signing properly?' as if I hadn't explained that two if not three times already. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::What you literally did was put a statement in quotation marks that featured me saying I was wrong and using a tautological rule to to justify it. You believe that identity is irrelevant to discussion, which is disputed in discussions of community management and {{w|Wikipedia:Signatures#Purpose_of_signatures|wikipedia itself}} as the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page. The furthest point of this would be mandatory account creation to edit pages, which I've fought against in the past and don't want to have to instate if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::::::: >using a tautological rule to to justify it
::::::::::: >which is disputed in discussions of community management and wikipedia itself
::::::::::: So you are calling my 100 % verifiable points regarding consequences of presence/absence of signing on poster behaviour tautological, while yourself appealing to authority to Wikipedia ('Wikipedia requires signing, therefore I do too') in lieu of an argument? You have some fucking nerve as well.
::::::::::: >if anonymous users with changing IPs continue to be difficult to moderate
::::::::::: This sounds curiously like preemption, 'let's keep him from posting in case he should offend'.
::::::::::: >the forced ownership encourages a user to remain civil; and I can't help but notice that you are indeed involved in a number of spats on this page
::::::::::: You mean those containing such examples of signing posters' civility as referring to me as 'finding problems with everything', having a 'twisted mind', saying that 'xkcd is as bad as KKK', 'horrible person', 'afraid of women', 'belonging in 18th century', and 'afraid to sign properly'? I agree, civility such as that is quite effective at rendering a picture of effectiveness of signing on discussion quality. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::::::::I'm not actually making a living off this. I'm not willing to keep making points that you'll brush off as false and state your own claims as true, then still have to clean up after you and the other anonymous users with changing IPs on this page. I should have known this comic was going to be a moderation nightmare when it went up. I have work to do, this talk page is now locked for anonymous users. If you want to continue ignoring site rules, you and the other people on this talk page who I can't seem to manage can make accounts to do so. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:53, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::It's not telling a falsehood if it's an opinion. There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion. He is not saying that this is what the real world is like. And it is objectively not significant, because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different. There are far worse problems on the internet. Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.62|162.158.2.62]] 23:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
::: >it is objectively not significant
::: I have taken note that you have shifted from asserting existence of high and low significance ('in any significant way', implying gradation) to asserting existence of categorical absolute insignificance ('objectively not significant').
::: >There are more women than men in some of his recent comics, that's an opinion.
::: Where the hell are you people getting this kind of nonsense from? Depicting a fictitious state of matters is an opinion?
::: >He is not saying that this is what the real world is like.
::: Literally false. There is no indication whatsoever that the overrepresentation of females has a humorous or otherwise irreal or optative dimension. The females are depicted as being self-obviously natural at their positions.
::: >There are far worse problems on the internet.
::: This is not relevant in addition to being a subjective opinion (speaking of dispensing which).
::: >because it is easy to stop reading his comics, no one is forcing you to read them. Just because it is the first result on Google, doesn't mean that suddenly no other webcomics exist. You can look down a few pixels, and see something completely different
::: I am honestly bewildered by your repeated reliance on this clearly morally untenable nonsense. 'If something is wrong, just stop watching.' It's stunning.
::: >Why single out someone using women more than men, rather than someone who believes that there is a superior sex?
::: Randall does depict the latter conviction in the comic AS WELL (search the page for my 'Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender.'). <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
::::There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind. You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd. That was not intended to say anything about xkcd, but something about yourself. You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism. You won't see anything wrong with what you're saying until you see what you are doing now. Also, I redid your table, looking at the past 20 comics in the science section.
::::{| {{table}}
| style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Number'''||1736||1732||1717||1679||1666||1664||1643||1637||1633||1621||1611||1606||1605||1594||1592||1591||1584||1574||1561||1531||style="background:#c0c0c0;"|'''Total'''
|-
| style="background:#c0c0f0;"|M||1||0||2||0||1||1||1||1||0||0||0||0||1||0||2||1||8||0||0||0||style="background:#c0c0f0;"|'''19'''
|-
| style="background:#f0c0f0;"|F||2||0||1||0||1||2||0||3||0||0||3||0||1||2||0||1||3||0||0||1||style="background:#f0c0f0;"|'''20'''
|-
|
|}
::::Tell me, how did you do your calculations? This seems like an accurate depiction of real life figures, seeing as there are slightly more women than men in most countries.
::::I'm starting to see how you think, you see only what confirms what you think. My table is objective, and does not account for people in the background (which were mostly men, by the way). Yours only includes comics that confirm that you are right, except for one.
::::Now, even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter. Xkcd isn't about being real. Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can. He is '''not''' saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is? And please, sign your comments. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 03:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

::::: >There being less men than women in scientific comics does not signify in any way that women are smarter than men, except in your twisted mind.
::::: 'There being less men than women in contexts which by definition exact intellectual capacity does not signify in any way that women have more intellectual capacity than men, except in your twisted mind.'
::::: >even if there were far more women than men, it still wouldn't matter.
::::: >Randall does what he wants, and if he wants to put more women than men in comics, he can.
::::: It is, what, third time that you stress people's freedom to do wrong in lieu of providing a counterargument? Fourth?
::::: >He is not saying that his comic is exactly what the world is like, so why do you think he is?
::::: Obviously because it is conveyance of truth that is the core and assumed function of communication, not artistic expression. When we see an arrow and a figurative scene etched in a rock on a foreign trip, we don't assume that it is conveying some indigene's artistic fancy about an imaginary situation -- we assume that it was used for communicating some fact. Accordingly, everything, even in a webcomic, that does not stand out as false/artistic is assumed true / the factual background of the fiction. If female scientists are depicted casually, people won't question their presence. Randall's gender bias is ill-integrated, but integrated seamlessly enough to slip under the radar of most people it appears.
::::: >You choose to argue some possible slight sexism, rather than definite and horrible racism.
::::: >You say that "there are far worse things on the internet" is subjective, so I suppose the KKK is just as bad as xkcd.
::::: Yes, this continues being subjective (let me remind you in case you forgot that it was you who first appealed to 'why do you care, it's not that important' way back in your comment at 11:00 -- I at no point at all referenced subjective importances and instead wholly focused on inherent qualities of the problem) and, more importantly, glaringly demonstrative of your desire to hush criticism. Almost any any wrongdoing can be rendered 'slight' and dismissed by comparing it to lynching. It's fucking cowardly.
::::: Finally,
::::: >I redid your table [...]
::::: your error, which might or might not have been intentional, is that you're counting comics which have no literal academic/scientific context, which my point has from the very beginning been about. xkcd doesn't categorize comics, and this wiki is quite overcategorizing them. When I looked up comics about sex, included was '721: Flatland' just because the mention of the word 'orgy' in the title text and '1253: Exoplanet Names' just because of some raunchy ones! This is misleading in itself, but the point is, comics like '1637: Salt Mine' are clearly too outlandishly fictional to convincingly connote gender equality. I only included those comics in my table in which people explicitly partake in scientific situations or discussions, which can actually sway perceptions. Accusing me of confirmation bias is like accusing a researcher of bias for refusing to include cooking recipes in a study measuring nations' programming output. And 1584, which yields the crux of your numbers (and, amusingly, after excluding which your numbers differ from mine by exactly just one), is just fucking hypocrisy. Three of the 'men' in it are children (I take it that your generous exclusion of 'people in the background' refers to audiences as in 1736), the fourth doesn't even say anything, and Randall had the nerve to 'totally jokingly' attribute Darwin's insight to his wife because 'you can't prove she wasn't responsible for it'.
::::: (Also, I forgot to mention that my final line in my previous comment does not mean that there isn't a superior gender (or race). There obviously is. It was understood throughout my argument on this page, but I should probably make this clear.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}
::::::Ok then. I thought your argument was that men are being represented as worse than women when they're actually roughly equivelant. But no, you're the kind of person who believes that there is a superior gender ''and'' race. You are a horrible person, and no amount of reasoning would get through to you. Can you please just go away? Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.60|162.158.2.60]] 08:39, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: >no amount of reasoning would get through to you
::::::: By reasoning which I am incapable of understanding, do you mean things such as positing existence of increasingly minute 'microagressions', 'microsexisms' and 'microracisms' using which to explain racial and gender achievement gaps as an environmental factor after environmental factor is controlled for and proven not to affect achievement in any meaningful degree? Or showcasing the purported importance of 'stimulating upbringing' while failing to account for the fact that relationship between stimulating upbringing on the parent's side and accomplishment on the child's side is simply owing to the shared cause of innate high capacity underlying both outcomes (by proxy of heritability of capacity from parent to child in case of the latter)? Because it can't be something as crude as correlation/causation of 'women underperform because they are being stereotyped rather than are being stereotyped because they underperform'... can it.
::::::: >Your arguments are invalid, and everyone else on this website seems to disagree with you.
::::::: I _just_ think that there might be some delicious irony in how you somehow found it necessary to appeal to majority as well as if your assertion of 'you're wrong' had been a bit too bare. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|198.41.243.245}}

:I will tell my children and grandchildren that in the election of 2016, there was a guy so afraid of women that he complained that a webcomic about the election had "females outdo males...in terms of...of elevation". This is some 18th century stuff. It is the consummate combination of unawareness of self and of others. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.47|108.162.246.47]]
04:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: >there was a guy so afraid of women
:: I regret to see you rely on such tactics.
:: >This is some 18th century stuff.
:: This is not relevant. It is possible for a society to err away from its prior true notions. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}

The only disappointing this are comments like those two above. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 18:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Females being overrepresented in comics like xkcd (but also other ones) with respect to their controlled interest in science in reality is a fact. Therefore, you are calling facts disappointing. How geeky of you. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:: So, your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures, yes? Also, why are you afraid to "un-nowiki" your signature...? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::: No. Allow me to repeat my point as you had apparently misunderstood: 'females being overrepresented'. This is something else than 'females being represented'. The more you know, the less chance there is for you to accidentally twist another person's words as misogyny/sexism. Also, identity is not relevant to discussion. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
:::: I understood you perfectly fine. My point still stands: You don't like Randall's preference for female stick figures. I never said you're being misogynic/sexist, so please don't imply I did. Thing with your "hidden" identity is that it's plain visible in the history of this page, so there's really no need to nowiki the signature, that's all. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: You are extremely skilled at saying things that are false and asserting that they're true. First you confused objecting to female overrepresentation (over-presence) with objecting to female representation (presence) ('your real problem is that Randall likes using female stick figures'). Then you moved to confusing objecting to female overrepresentation with objecting to *Randall's* female overrepresentation. My objection does not pertain to who is doing overrepresenting, but to the mere fact of it. I would have objected identically to any other writer. Also, your attributing of opposition to female presence in comics (after doing which which you proceeded to asserting my being personally hostile to Randall) is accusing of sexism/misogyny by definition. Also, I am obviously aware of edit history; my use my signature constitutes a reminder that identity is, as I said, irrelevant in discussion. It does not serve to obscure anything. You have a remarkable record of falsehoods. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.90}}
::::::This is the most persistent troll I have seen in a long while. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 14:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::::: I regret that this is your reaction to my pointing out your false claims. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.203.152}}
::::::::I didn't make any false claims for you to point out. My comment about your trolling was the first comment I made. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.185|108.162.215.185]] 15:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:I'm confused. Are you merely making an observation about the number of female stick figures vs male stick figures in these comics or are you saying that there is a problem that needs to be solved? If so, what is the problem and potential solution? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 21:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:: The problem is giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity. The solution is Randall ceasing to overrepresent females. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:::First, you say that giving a false impression regarding female academic capacity is a problem, but have given nothing to show why it is a problem. I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is, and as an artistic endeavor, I don't believe it necessarily should. Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place. Second, where is the harm being done? Lastly, I reject the premise of your argument. I have studied these comics very hard and can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female. If we are going based on gender, you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other. If those are not available, then you are simply applying your heteronormative bias and assumptions onto these stick figures unfairly. Until you address these claims, this discussion is over as its very basis is proven unknowable. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.229|108.162.215.229]] 16:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)What?
:::: >you [...] have given nothing to show why it is a problem
:::: >where is the harm being done
:::: If you are asking for proof that truth is preferable over falsehood, I suggest that you give your priorities a look.
:::: >I don't think it's fair to say that this comic strives in all points to represent the world exactly as it is
:::: Again (see the other subthread of this discussion which I'm replying in), the problem is that Randall gives zero indication that the female overrepresentation is just artistic licence or even representation of his wish how matters be. He depicts it as natural.
:::: >Art allows the artist to express a world view different than reality in a safe place.
:::: Agreed. Except, similarly to objections to this very comic # 1756, what Randall does with respect to female representation is not art -- it is just furthering a certain conviction regarding female capacity. It's no more art than product placement is.
:::: >can find no discernible genitalia in which to classify the stick figures in question as either anatomically male or female
:::: Right, two characters engaging in sex in supine position (598, 940), one of which has hair and one hasn't, are clearly lesbians one of whom is shaven.
:::: >you would need each character presented to give declarative statements self-identifying as a certain gender in order to affirm them as female or male or other
:::: This is ridiculous noise. <nowiki>~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.78}}
:Randall is in the unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is, but as it we hope it one day will be. Imagine how many women and girls can encounter these comics in their classrooms or read them online, and have the chance to see all sorts of female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields. The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon. For scientific progress, for the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM, it is amazing that Randall presents - without fanfare, without emphasis, and, most importantly, without implication of a degradation of men - a world in which women play a significant role in science. It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.125|173.245.52.125]] 03:00, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:: Your sentimental prose is rendered irrelevant by a simple brief fact: motivation must never rely on distortion of truth.
:: >The only limit on "female academic capacity"is girls being shown and told that they have no place in science.
:: This is literally false.
:: >female rolemodels in the heavily underrepresented STEM fields
:: Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations.
:: >the unique views, backgrounds, and ways of thinking that a diversity of people can bring to STEM
:: Desirability of diversity assumes that all members of the diversity are equally capable and focused on the subject in the first place.
:: >Randall is playing an important role in remedying this phenomenon.
:: There is nothing to 'remedy', because there is nothing wrong in the first place. Gender equality is not some sort of inherent state that has been deviated from. There is nothing wrong with wanting female membership in anything to equal males, or even exceed them -- but it is wrong to imply that the reason for failures of such attempts is 'bias'.
:: >unique and incredible position to portray the world not as it is
:: Reread this sentence until you appreciate what you just wrote.
:: >It is depictions like these that may inspire the next generation of talented and diverse young scientists.
:: Motivation must never happen at the expense of truth. By all means say 'I want more women in science' -- it's fine. But saying 'women's absence from science results from environmental prejudice' is false. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>{{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
:: Also, regarding 'most importantly [!], without implication of a degradation of men' -- this is literally false as well. In most comics containing discussion between a woman and a man, it is the man that asks a question/listens and the woman that elaborates / gives facts / corrects him. Men in xkcd literally are presented as the less educated gender. Quantifying that is necessarily somewhat imprecise, but I browsed comics 1423-1483 (the numbers are arbitrary) and the proportion of comics depicting the man as having less clue than the woman is 11 : 3. (See comics 1430, 1513, 1586, 1605 for example of what I mean.) <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> {{unsigned ip|162.158.201.84}}
::: "Women are not underrepresented in STEM. The amount of their presence corresponds to their innate inclinations." - Wow. Just wow. David, this guy is insistent that women are innately less good at science than men - not that they are given less opportunities, but that they are given equal opportunities and encouragement, but still are just too stupid to do proper science. Expressing opinions like that, it's no great surprise that he (he's definitely a he) wishes to remain anonymous.
::: To be honest, I don't think he's trolling - trolls don't have this much commitment. I think he's expressing his actual, genuine beliefs. Scary.
::: To the anonymous coward - SIGN YOUR POSTS, or leave this comic. Go write your own blog post on the nature of signatures, if you like, or make your own wiki with your own rules. The message about the comic doesn't contain signatures, because there, the message is the only important thing. This is the discussion section, and these are the rules. I disagree with you very strongly, but I'm perfectly happy to have a civil discussion with you here IF you stick to the basic rules. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 11:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

A little disappointing to have a normally lighthearted comic dive seriously into politics, if even for one strip. Not really a fan of either candidate, but would like to see stuff like this stay above the fray. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.100}}
:Completely agreed. [[User:SeanAhern|SeanAhern]] ([[User talk:SeanAhern|talk]]) 18:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Completely agreed 2. At first I though it's some kind of a romance statement ("be with her"). And from explainxkcd I have learnt that it's an US campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.150|162.158.202.150]] 22:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::Lighthearted? Try to read the comics in the [[:Category:Politics]] and [[:Category:Climate change]]. Also there are many other comics that are not at all light hearted. You must have mistaken this with some other web comic? :) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Yes, lighthearted. Even the earlier political and climate change strips had a bit of humor in them (the only ones that really didn't have at least an attempt at humor were the cancer strips, understandably), this is just a straight up political ad. And while it's Randall's strip and he can do whatever he wants with it, it's just a little disappointing that he dove straight in to political ads. If nothing else, something like Black Hat trolling by voting for himself.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.69.100|162.158.69.100]] 12:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Well at least the I'm with her, could be interpreted like the "I'm with stupid"... :-) She is just less stupid than the alternative. Guess he seriously hopes this comic could make a difference and that he is afraid to do nothing. He reaches many people so who knows if this comic might swing an important state. You never know in a tight race. And although {{w|Nate Silver}} ([[:Category:Comics featuring Nate Silver|often referred to]] by Randall in the past) says that it's a [http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clinton-gains-and-the-polls-magically-converge/ 70% chance Hillary wins] then he is also not certain it will be her. So Randall does his best to avoid Trump as the big chief... He is even willing to loose some fans, although I think the majority of his readers prefers a world without a President Trump! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::I don't think he thought this through. Most likely most of the people this comic would have reached were those already going to vote for Clinton, but the small fraction that were undecided/ leaning-Trump probably were actually motivated by this to vote against her. I know I was pushed that way by the persistent media pro-Clinton coverage, not just in news network, but in other stuff that I usually enjoy, like the recent Big Bang Theory episode, basically celebrity that exists and now xkcd. I go to these places to go away from politics, but if you all want to force it down my throat everywhere I go, then fuck you all. That doesn't mean that I won't come back here or to any of the other places I visit, but to me at least this is no longer a haven where I can escape from politics, and that does mean something. {{unsigned ip|162.158.178.8}}
::::::I get what you're saying, and I appreciate the sentiment. I'm also glad that you won't let this deter you from the comic. May I point out that this is the first explicitly politically-partisan comic in nearly 2000 of them, and takes place at the end of a historically bitter election campaign; but let's be honest, even if this is not a one-off but repeated once every four years, it's still only about 1 comic in 500. [[User:Cosmogoblin|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin|talk]]) 12:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

This is a first... comics 500 and 1130 (possibly 1131 too) were related to the election, but didn't endorse a candidate. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 18:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:I think Randall is pretty much just saying '''OH GOD PLEASE DONT VOTE FOR TRUMP''' [[User:GizmoDude|GizmoDude]] ([[User talk:GizmoDude|talk]]) 20:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If Randall was saying that, he'd also be bringing up third party candidates (honestly surprised he didn't endorse Jill Stein considering she's more pro-science than Hillary. And before anyone says "anti-vax", check snopes. Jill Stein is so pro-vax [she's volunteered time vaccinated children and is on record saying she wants to increase vaccination rates], pro-addressing-climate[she's green party who has that as a primary platform], and wants to replace the people with business degrees on the panels of the FDA with people with science degrees. Jill is so pro-science and that it makes Hillary look like a flat-earther.) --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.246.42|108.162.246.42]] 21:30, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::Jill Stein's stance on nuclear energy is an unscientific as it gets. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.196|108.162.210.196]] 23:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Hillary Clinton's ideas on encryption are in denial of science. Clinton's stance on coal is unscientific, she's pretty abysmal on fracking and natural gas too. Stein could be a lot better, but if Stein is tofu sarah palin, clinton is just palin with a college degree [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 03:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:::: Likewise her position on GMOs. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}
::::No no no. If Randal just wish that Trump should not become president there is only one way to achieve this and that is by making Hillary win. This is not even saying that he likes her, he just dislikes the alternative more. Voting for anyone else might just help Trump. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, it looks like minutephysics has done a similar thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDeL4LGuBx4 [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.89|108.162.219.89]] 00:44, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I came here to see what the tone of the comments were going to be. I was half expecting to find an all-out flamewar in progress. I was happy to see that the comments have not devolved into the kind of attacks that one would expect to find pretty much anywhere else on the Internet. Geeks are the best people. :) [[User:Mwburden|mwburden]] ([[User talk:Mwburden|talk]]) 18:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm very dissappointed. Randall never took sides before and - be it as it may - this comic is not a comic but plain out political campaign. Up until now I held xkcd in EXTREMELY high esteem - this comic put a serious dent in that opinion..
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.60|162.158.91.60]] 18:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: I'm really torn about this one. On the one hand I feel that you HAVE to take sides in this one, if your only other option is Donald Trump... on the other hand, I never liked when web comics express political opinions. It will always end in a flame war and almost never have anything to do with the web comic itself. Randall should've just put up a "go vote becaues it's important" sign without taking sides. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 19:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
: Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I'm sure there are other comics out there that would agree with your ideology. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Randall should do whatever Randall thinks he should do. Should he put up "go read about global warming" comics instead of take the side of AGW? If you think this example is an inappropriate one to use in contrasting this comic with the current political election cycle then you've completely ignored the stances of the two popular candidates. But back to the original point: if you don't like XKCD anymore because of this one comic then go find another comic or start your own. All of art is an expression of the person. Randall knew not everyone would like his beliefs when he pushed this out to the world and is obviously prepared to deal with any consequences of taking a stand on his website. I, for one, applaud him for doing so {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.19}}
:: Randall did a comic about global warming a while back, which was very interesting. Because I heard the "earth has warmed up before" argument before and even used it myself at least once. The difference about the global warming comic is that he backed it up with scientific facts, which is well within the scope of this comic. Political opinions aren't (or did the slogan change to ''A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language and politics''?). Yes, of course he can do with his web comic whatever he wants to. But readers can express their opinions about what he does with it. It's called "freedom of speech", you know?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.201.96|162.158.201.96]] 20:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::[[1357|There's a comic for that.]] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.230|162.158.214.230]] 21:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Randall has endorsee Obama in 2008 and it is his comic and he can use it to endorse anyone he likes. I'm pretty sure he believes that he will only loose a few real fans of xkcd over this comic, because those who really enjoys all his comics in spite of for instance climate comics would really not like to see Trump as president. And would thus be happy if this comic helped in any way to avoid that. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you help list all the characters in the transcript? From left to right; they're Joanna (ponytail with EMP cannon) from [[322]]; Black Hat; unknown with kite; White Hat; possibly Miss Lenhart (but his hair is somewhat different from [[1519]]); unknown possibly Megan; cueball; unknown woman with glasses; Hairbun; Beret Guy; Cueball with toy sword from [[303]]. [[User:B jonas|B jonas]] ([[User talk:B jonas|talk]]) 19:10, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Not Miss Lenhart. Blondie. They are listed now. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Good for Randal. I had been noticing how many Hillary leaning artists had been pulling their punches this election, likely out of fear of trolling or loss of revenue. You want to know what courage looks like? This is is. [[User:Sturmovik|Sturmovik]] ([[User talk:Sturmovik|talk]]) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Title text hasn't been explained yet. Is it a reference to the German chancellor Angela Merkel's phrase "Wir schaffen das!'? Don't know if Clinton has a slogan like Obama's "Yes, we can!". {{unsigned ip|162.158.91.36}}
: That's the same I thought. But I'm not sure how well known this phrase is outside of Germany. However "Wir schaffen das!" always had a bitter taste - even considered ironic or sarcastic by some - (which e.g. "Yes, we can!" didn't), so I interpreted "We can do this!" as voting for Clinton is simply the lesser evil. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I find (linking to )this civicinnovation website rather questionable. They want to audit peoples address books based on who the names in there might vote for? That sounds like Erich Mielkes wildest dreams come true. Even German newspapers (where i'm from), which are 100% anti-Trump, have in the last days noted concern about the methods of Clintons supporters bullying the other side, and this is a disquieting new piece in that picture. I'll hope this is just a ploy to step up with Trump on the ''bad manners'' side. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.160|162.158.91.160]] 19:37, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Not all comics have to be humorous

From [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics#Etymology]
:The English term ''comics'' derives from the humorous (or "[[wikt:comic|comic]]") work which predominated in early American newspaper comic strips; usage of the term has become standard for non-humorous works as well. {{unsigned ip|162.158.69.57}}

:The problem is that this isn't a comic, this is a campaign ad. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.38|162.158.238.38]] 20:32, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

;Could we please just NOT get politics involved in the comments, guys?

Just... please? [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 20:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Are you serious. What had you expected :-) This is the most loaded comic of all time. It will even take down [[388: Fuck Grapefruit]], even though [[388:_Fuck_Grapefruit#Controversy|it beat his blog]] about his Obama endorsement. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall has taken a side in a political Argument before: Not counting the near-invisible easter egg, comic 1005 consists solely of Randall taking a stance on something political and providing links to show how you can help. That wasn't too long ago, but no one freaked out about a serious, political strip back then.
[[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 20:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Policy to candidates is not an apples to apples comparison. People get much more up in arms when the topic is either a candidate or policy that goes against religious text or teachings. SOPA and PIPA were neither (well, unless you count GNU as some kind of internet religion). [[User:Zernin|Zernin]] ([[User talk:Zernin|talk]]) 21:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

It's sad to see a guy who is so smart in some areas, yet can not see Hillary Clinton for the terrible president she would be. (Granted, part of the reason we only have a few other choices is because of our messed up voting system.) {{unsigned ip|108.162.221.177}}
:I agree with you that Hillary may be worse than almost any one else from the Democrats. But Trump is sooo much further out on a limp, and I'm sure this might be the only reason Randall makes this comic. He is seriously afraid of what woudl happen to the US and the rest of the world if Trump wins --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:38, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Instead of comic, post contained a political statement. I am not amused. I want a refund. I don't vote, and I don't even live anywhere near USA. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.102|141.101.96.102]] 18:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:A refund? For what? You pay to read this comic? [[User:Zorlax the Mighty|Zorlax the Mighty'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:Zorlax the Mighty|talk]]) 21:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Darn right you better be with her. If you say anything else, you will "commit suicide". Just ask Vince Foster or Seth Rich if you think I'm crazy.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.77|173.245.48.77]] 21:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

What, Randy does not say "Bernie or Bust"? I feel cheated now. :P --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.228|162.158.150.228]] 22:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:Poor Bernie. Poor America. Poor world. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.32|198.41.238.32]] 23:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Just good luck America (and the rest of the world where I belong), whatever happens tomorrow. But I'm hoping Randall can help his candidate win! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm with her... unfortunately : (. I just didn't think it made sense to donate to a billionaire. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.106|162.158.74.106]] 00:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Don't get political in the comments? The fucking "comic" is a fucking political ad. We're going to call this fucker out on his cuckery. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.27|162.158.74.27]] 01:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't give a damn. Sure, I might not agree with his political leanings (hell, I don't want either of them in the WH), but it's just 1 comic. On Wednesday, he'll probably go back to the same stuff he's been doing for 1755 other strips. This will be nothing special. Just one comic. Sure, it might be politically fueled, but just because a person lets their leanings known doesn't mean you should be allowed to call them a "cuck" or cause a talk page for a popular comic, or a Reddit for a popular comic, devolve into the equivalent of monkeys flinging crap at walls. So just please deal with it and move on.
Yours truly, [[User:GranadalandDreamer|GranadalandDreamer]] ([[User talk:GranadalandDreamer|talk]]) 01:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's with *her*? good to know that randall considers arab life worthless/supports financiers over single African-american mothers/refuses to understand encryption/would rather spend public money on coal than retrain miners/loves trade deals that will hurt the poorest, increase inequality, damage the environment, homogenize culture, allow private corporations to sue elected governments/can't make his mind up over the Dakota Access pipeline/changes his accent depending on which state he is stumping in/was late to supporting gay marriage/lied repeatedly about coming under sniper fire in bosnia/has had to repeatedly plead incompetence or rely on bureaucratic politics to evade formal breach of contract or charges of criminality. Iowa, Utah and Wisconsin may have Gloria la Riva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on the ballot, if you want a candidate who isn't an elitist. And if you didn't want splitters, you should have voted for Bernie. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 02:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I mean it's not like Trump is going to be a whole lot better for Arab people, Black people, gay people, or pretty much anyone who's not a straight white dude. It's quite possible he voted for Bernie, but at this point it's a little late for him to be asking others to support Sanders. {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.71}}

:No, but that doesn't mean we should settle for clinton. It is not late to be asking for people to support Sanders, if anyone was doing that, because if the senate swings to the democrats he ends up in charge of the budget committee. Oh and I forgot one: randall is apparently also planning to disappoint all of us, even those who loathe him, within 100 days. [[User:Cockhorse|Cockhorse]] ([[User talk:Cockhorse|talk]]) 05:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

: Trump would be a whole lot better for all Americans, not just "straight white dudes". He won't be better for people in other countries looking to illegally enter the United States, but why shouldn't an American President be like this? You're just throwing demographic categories around thinking you're making an argument against Trump. Only those who buy into the leftist narrative will believe you. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

Looks like the Trumpettes are getting rather triggered over a web comic. Wasn't there a candidate in this election that was preaching against this whole getting easily offended by words thing? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.43|108.162.238.43]] 03:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

This just makes me... sad... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.117|108.162.215.117]] 03:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is a webcomic about "romance, sarcasm, language, and math" taking a political stance and telling me who to vote for? Randall can have his own opinion, but this isn't okay. I've read this comic since ... gosh, since the low 200s-300s, so probably over 5 or 6 years and... I think I'm done. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.55|108.162.241.55]] 04:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:''Of course'' it's okay. It's his comic, which he gives us for free. He can use it to entertain us, to draw random pictures of extradimensional red spiders, or to advocate for a political candidate and inform people how to vote, especially people who may have a more difficult time doing so (like the disabled and elderly). However, I really ''must'' thank you... you claiming that this "isn't okay", and all the others here with ruffled feathers over it, makes a previously boring comic one of the most hilarious xkcds in a good long while. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.253|141.101.98.253.-730².♫.venus.🍅.Cthulu.♣️]] 10:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm surprised this wiki doesn't have a category for 'serious'/'no joke' comics, and least not that I spotted. There should be, and this should be in it. [[User:Teleksterling|Teleksterling]] ([[User talk:Teleksterling|talk]]) 04:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Am I the only one who sees Guy Fawkes in the logo? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.48|108.162.245.48]] 04:33, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the only other time Randall generated that much controversy here in comments was when suggested that all beer tastes bad. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.93|141.101.80.93]] 06:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)rw

* The title text ''may'' be quoting - directly or indirectly - Angela Merkel's slogan ("We can do this", or in German "Wir schaffen das"), but I don't know why unless it's just an appropriate slogan. [[User:Schroduck|Schroduck]] ([[User talk:Schroduck|talk]]) 08:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hej. I think it was the right thing to do, and if you read some of the older XKCDs (just think about the one about free speech - they just show you the door, and some others) you could have expected that this is his position. even through i would take the vote for stein on my part. I'm sorry for the situation of the citizens of the USA right now. Greetings from Oversea - and good luck today! --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.174|162.158.89.174]] 10:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Way to alienate half of your readership, Randall. Well, now we know that Randall is a socialist communist who hates America. {{unsigned ip|162.158.79.235}}
* If you are so repulsed by seeing someone post something that you disagree with that you have to regress to early-teen insults, then I suggest you turn off all your electronic devices and start living in a cave. Engaging with people that we disagree with makes us smarter and better-informed. That said, it's Randall's comic that he provides to us at no charge - and if you stop reading today, you're automatically eligible for a full refund! [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 12:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Given that a big chunk of his readers must be non-US, and we don't really give a rat's arse which arse you elect, it is a bit disappointing there wasn't even something a little witty here. Other web-comic authors have often put things like this as an extra one between the others - and given that he missed a comic today, I don't see why he didn't do that. Anyway, have fun you lot and please try not to start any more wars.{{unsigned ip|141.101.98.217}}

Oh we non-USers do care!! I guess Randall just thinks today is too important to not make his position clear. Which is an admirable decision. I'm also shocked and surprised to find there may be Trumpers lurking on xkcd. Glad to hear so many of you are leaving, folks. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.134|172.68.34.134]] 16:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:: If you don't know any Trump supporters amongst your personal circle, you're part of the problem. Expand your worldview. {{unsigned ip|108.162.241.57}}

;Hairbun with glasses
I wonder if she is meant to represent [[wikipedia:Susan B. Anthony|Susan B. Anthony]]. SBA did have a bun (most photos) and glasses (later in life), and she is the most obvious person to be placed at the same prominent level as HRC.[[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 14:42, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Well maybe, but Randall has drwan [[Hairbun]] with glasses like this several times before as also mentioned in the gallery. So I do not think any of the characters represents real persons except maybe the only one looking out at us, [[Blondie]] which would be how to draw Hillary in xkcd. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Is that final reminder, about being in line before the polls close true in all 50 states? I believe that Indiana nominally has a different law, that you must be inside the polling building when the polls close in order to vote, which is not quite the same thing. although in practice, it's usually enforced as "be in line" instead [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.45|162.158.75.45]] 15:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Frankly, The Hillary Logo isn't particularly egregious. He has two elements suggesting to vote for Hillary (the logo, and the "her"), and 5 elements about increasing general voter turnout. I don't like Clinton, but the comic is mostly about voting, nor voting for Clinton. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.47|108.162.238.47]] 17:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Randall's fiance/wife has been diagnosed with cancer, hasn't she (per xkcd 1141: "Two Years")? So if/when President Trump repeals ObamaCare --- and in particular repeals the provisions in regard to "pre-existing conditions" --- then his wife loses her healthcare coverage, doesn't she? This is ample reason for Randall (and his wife, and all cancer patients and their families) to oppose Trump, isn't it? [[User:PNWoldguy|PNWoldguy]] ([[User talk:PNWoldguy|talk]]) 18:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

An ad for Hillary? Well, I just removed Thing Explainer and What If from my whistlist. I gave Thing Explainer as a gift last year. I now regret that. Oh, and a coworker's husband blacklisted XKCD from their router. Great idea. {{unsigned|Dayfall}}

Hmmmm...given how this election polarizes (look e.g. in the "Scientific American" for a clear anti-Trump statement which is rather unprecedented for them; dunno about "Science") this is a rather mildly pro-Clinton comic. So what? Other celebs took their stance too. (Eagerly still awaiting NSFWComix's comment :-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 23:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Definitely not a Trump supporter here... But on the topic of political propaganda on a nerd comic... And the "free speech" comic about free speech "not existing on discussion forums"... The purpose of discussions is to have your beliefs challenged, so you can distinguish good and bad reasoning, refine your beliefs, and alter them due to evidence. Unpopular opinions should be refuted (if faulty premises), or discussed so everyone can decide for themselves. Banning members for unpopular opinions is not a debate, it's an echo chamber. And I mean this for both sides of a discussion, not just supporting one ideology in particular. [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
:Also, I'm a bit disappointed that this comic is a Clinton campaign sign (although nowhere near as much as I would be if this comic was a Trump sign). [[User:Jimbo1qaz|Jimbo1qaz]] ([[User talk:Jimbo1qaz|talk]]) 23:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Explanation needs, somewhere on it, the interesting fact that citizens don't receive fines or criminal charges for not voting. I didn't realise that this was so in the U.S., and many other non-U.S. readers might not realise that it's legal to not vote in the U.S. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.121|108.162.249.121]] 01:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
*Most of the world doesn't have compulsory voting. I'm guessing you may be in Australia which does have compulsory voting, but New Zealand doesn't, nor do Canada, UK, Ireland, South Africa, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Russia, Japan, China, Nigeria, Finland, Pakistan, Denmark ... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Seriously,don't get heated about it. I agree that:

*This is just expressing Randall's opinion.
*Even if it wasn't, he deserves a comic off from jokes.
*The campaign is going o end before I wake up at 6 tomorrow.

Also, could you fucking watch your language? Jacky720 (talk) 03:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I saw the two forward facing figures as Clinton and Kaine. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 03:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Encouraging people to vote, and helping to know how, great. But I was disappointed that he stooped to campaigning for a specific candidate right in his comic, as opposed to his blag. This is a sad day for XKCD. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.43}}

*I wonder if Randall realized that his "get a ride to the polls" link would only work for residents in one district of Nebraska -- less than 0.25% of his U.S. readership. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.127|108.162.216.127]] 17:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Hilarious comic as always! Hillary as president, lol. Good one, Randall :^) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.152|162.158.203.152]] 21:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is the discussion 3/4th of the page with only 1/4 being related to the explanation? And most of the comments being replied to are ones on Women or Sexism, which is bad. Instead they should bitch about Donald Trump, he is the most sexist and racist here.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.50.35|162.158.50.35]] 12:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

== Found the joke ==

It turns out that this comic was funny in hindsight. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 08:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:1779: 2017

2016-12-31T10:00:24Z

162.158.75.160:

Well, we're ending the year off with an optimistic XKCD comic. Here's to another year!
[[User:GranadalandDreamer|GranadalandDreamer]] ([[User talk:GranadalandDreamer|talk]]) 23:07, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

What is five thirty eight? From the context I get it's most likely a TV-Show, but I believe some background information would help here. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.46|162.158.92.46]] 07:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
:It's a website. You can click on the link to get more information about it as it links to FiveThirtyEight's Wikipedia article. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.160|162.158.75.160]] 10:00, 31 December 2016 (UTC)