I bet Mr Eastwood or John Voight don’t endorse that fudge packer.
Only reason I would worry about Buttgig is dumb asses wanting to prove to themselves their not homophobic, I'm afraid there would be a lot of "Homo guilt" votes, not to much unlike the "White guilt" votes Zero got.
I bet Mr Eastwood or John Voight don’t endorse that fudge packer.
Only reason I would worry about Buttgig is dumb asses wanting to prove to themselves their not homophobic, I'm afraid there would be a lot of "Homo guilt" votes, not to much unlike the "White guilt" votes Zero got.
Right on the money. It’s the only reason that someone with Barry’s “qualifications” could get elected.
I don’t know why anybody would be surprised that a Hollyweird liberal would want to elect a commie. I don’t know why Hollyweird liberals gotta open their big freakin mouths. I used to think a lot of Tom Hanks and De Nero. Now I think they’re pieces of dung. If I see a movie of theirs, it’s in spite of their part. Same as George Clooney and a host of others. Actors need to stick to acting. 7mm
I have never understood why anyone cares what Hollywood actors think. I just enjoy the movies and try not to look too hard at the gun handling. Because Costner is a great actor and Keanu sucks.
I have never understood why anyone cares what Hollywood actors think. I just enjoy the movies and try not to look too hard at the gun handling. Because Costner is a great actor and Keanu sucks.
Mel Gibson #1 ....... haha
Never understood why actors think we care what they think, but then I thought it through?
I guess when you have sycophants waiting on the Red Carpet for six hours, just to catch a glimpse of you and shout "WE LOVE YOU KEVIN", I suppose that could lead to a bloated sense of self worth.
I bet Mr Eastwood or John Voight don’t endorse that fudge packer.
Only reason I would worry about Buttgig is dumb asses wanting to prove to themselves their not homophobic, I'm afraid there would be a lot of "Homo guilt" votes, not to much unlike the "White guilt" votes Zero got.
This. Dead on. I'm sure DJs and gooshitt and Rollin blunder and la Roy and Northmam are ready and primed for him. I'm guessing Gayghost could go off half cocked.
I don't see him having any real shot at winning the Democrat primary. The only political office he's ever ran for and won was mayor and other candidates for political office he's worked on campaigns for lost. One position he was a candidate for he was loosing big and simply pulled out avoiding having another loss on his resume.
These Hollyweird pretenders are self-serving. What’s Costner getting for backing a looser? A large endorsement payment? Media exposure for a stale career? Just seems really dumb..........even for Costner.
Hollywierdos have no choice but to pander to these leftist fruitcakes. They are the only ones going to see their movies and listen to their crappy songs.
Costner has always been a lib. Don't know why this would surprise anyone. Of course, there are probably posters on here who thought he'd be supporting Tulsi.......lol.
Early in his life, Costner was a Republican. He was a supporter and good friend of Ronald Reagan, frequently playing golf with the former President. He later grew disillusioned with the direction of the party, eventually switching his affiliation in the early 1990s. Since 1992, Costner has financially supported a variety of Democratic politicians, including Al Gore and Tom Daschle, but also made contributions to Republican Phil Gramm as late as 1995.[46] He said publicly in 2008 that he has no ambition to run for political office, adding "I've lived quite a colorful life".[47]
In the final days before the 2008 election, Costner campaigned for Barack Obama, visiting various places in Colorado, where he has a home. In his speech, Costner stated the need for young voters to get to the polls, early and with enthusiasm. "We were going to change the world and we haven't", Costner said at a Colorado State University rally. "My generation didn't get it done, and we need you to help us".[48]
In October 2014, Costner sent a tribute to British troops serving around the world thanking them for their work.[49]
On December 22, 2019, Costner endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg at a rally in Indianola, Iowa.[50]
Quote
...Costner began his acting career with Sizzle Beach, U.S.A. (1981). Following a few minor supporting parts, he rose to prominence with his portrayal of Eliot Ness in The Untouchables (1987). This was followed by a successful period in his career with starring roles in No Way Out (1987), Bull Durham (1988), Field of Dreams (1989), Dances with Wolves (1990), for which he won two Academy Awards, JFK (1991), Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991), The Bodyguard (1992), and A Perfect World (1993). In 1995, Costner starred in and co-produced Waterworld. The most expensive film ever made at the time, it was a box office disappointment (which nonetheless made a small profit) that marked a downturn in his career.[1][2] His second directorial feature, The Postman, (1997) was another disappointment.[3] He has since starred in some somewhat unsuccessful films ...
The Postman was pretty good. I liked WaterWorld, as well.
Waterworld sucked!! And if I recall correctly it lost a TON of money...
ETA: I stand corrected, I guess it did make a little money. From Wikipedia:
Due to the runaway costs of the production and its expensive price tag, some critics dubbed it "Fishtar" and "Kevin's Gate", alluding to the flops Ishtar and Heaven's Gate, although the film debuted at the box office at #1. With a budget of $172 million (and a total outlay of $235 million once marketing and distribution costs are factored in), the film grossed $88 million at the North American box office. The film did better overseas, with $176 million at the foreign box office, for a worldwide total of $264 million. However, even though this figure surpasses the total costs spent by the studio, it does not take into account the percentage of box office gross that theaters retain, which is generally up to half; but after factoring in home video sales and TV broadcast rights among other revenue streams, Waterworld eventually became profitable.
The Postman was pretty good. I liked WaterWorld, as well.
Waterworld sucked!! And if I recall correctly it lost a TON of money...
ETA: I stand corrected, I guess it did make a little money. From Wikipedia:
Due to the runaway costs of the production and its expensive price tag, some critics dubbed it "Fishtar" and "Kevin's Gate", alluding to the flops Ishtar and Heaven's Gate, although the film debuted at the box office at #1. With a budget of $172 million (and a total outlay of $235 million once marketing and distribution costs are factored in), the film grossed $88 million at the North American box office. The film did better overseas, with $176 million at the foreign box office, for a worldwide total of $264 million. However, even though this figure surpasses the total costs spent by the studio, it does not take into account the percentage of box office gross that theaters retain, which is generally up to half; but after factoring in home video sales and TV broadcast rights among other revenue streams, Waterworld eventually became profitable.
You stand corrected about it sucking also, because it did not suck.
The Postman was pretty good. I liked WaterWorld, as well.
Waterworld sucked!! And if I recall correctly it lost a TON of money...
ETA: I stand corrected, I guess it did make a little money. From Wikipedia:
Due to the runaway costs of the production and its expensive price tag, some critics dubbed it "Fishtar" and "Kevin's Gate", alluding to the flops Ishtar and Heaven's Gate, although the film debuted at the box office at #1. With a budget of $172 million (and a total outlay of $235 million once marketing and distribution costs are factored in), the film grossed $88 million at the North American box office. The film did better overseas, with $176 million at the foreign box office, for a worldwide total of $264 million. However, even though this figure surpasses the total costs spent by the studio, it does not take into account the percentage of box office gross that theaters retain, which is generally up to half; but after factoring in home video sales and TV broadcast rights among other revenue streams, Waterworld eventually became profitable.
You stand corrected about it sucking also, because it did not suck.
Haha.... IMO it SUCKED... which means your taste must really SUCK!