PJ becoming an elitist band?

drsluggo

Bravejamriot wrote:

So in 2008 they played in 10 cities... 5 are in "Red" States. This was before the 08 election so Virginia and Florida were Bush states.

Do some research before you spout ignorance.
http://electoralmap.net/2004.php

Bonaroo wasn't a PJ show, so toss that out. They went there for a big payday... they would never have gone there if it was only their show.

FL and VA were both big swing states and PJ pushed the 'get out the vote' stuff there a la 2004 VFC.

So SC was the only show in a 'deep red' state.

Now go back to 2006 and do your same stats there. Then look at the 2009 tour dates and do your stats there.

I won't say you are ignorant because that implies you don't know what you're doing. I'll just say you're a misleading cheerleader for the band's motives.

weenie

Let me clarify, by "elitist" I wasn't referring to politics. I was referring to the attitude that people with money can fly to a regional show to see the band. Everybody else is SOL. Again, I was NOT referring to their politics, I was referring to the fact that with the exception of a few festival dates, they are playing ONLY regional shows. :roll: I'm also NOT talking about the PAST. I'm talking about support of the upcoming release. Jesus, no need to insult me for asking a question.

benjs

RiotAct10 wrote:

benjs wrote:

I must have missed this, but where did they state that they have no plans for shows in 2010?

I think it came from an interview with Ed. But personally, if it was a written interview, I feel there is potential the interviewer messed up, and if it was recorded, I think it is possible Ed was confused. The statement came out in January of this year, and Ed said something to the effect of, they wouldn't be touring next year because someone in the band was having a baby. Again, this was in January, meaning if someone was to be having a baby next year, the baby had not been made at that time, and it just seemed odd to me at the time. Also, I completely respect wanting to be home with your wife and new-born, and it is great they are in a line of work where they can make their own schedule, but if someone does have a baby in say February, judging by how they did major tours in the past (month on, month off) I still think it is possible they would tour. I mean, not to get into personal details, but Matt has always had kids as long as he has been in the band, Ed's first kid came in 2004, and they have played plenty of shows since then, so I am not saying it isn't possible they play no shows next year, I just think maybe something got lost in translation as far as that goes.

Yeah, as far as I'm concerned, even interviews must be taken at face value - bands don't plan tours, management does (though they may have a say in it). Nothing's set in stone here 'til Kat, Sea, or Tim states it explicitly IMO.

weenie

RiotAct10 wrote:

benjs wrote:

I must have missed this, but where did they state that they have no plans for shows in 2010?

I think it came from an interview with Ed. But personally, if it was a written interview, I feel there is potential the interviewer messed up, and if it was recorded, I think it is possible Ed was confused. The statement came out in January of this year, and Ed said something to the effect of, they wouldn't be touring next year because someone in the band was having a baby. Again, this was in January, meaning if someone was to be having a baby next year, the baby had not been made at that time, and it just seemed odd to me at the time. Also, I completely respect wanting to be home with your wife and new-born, and it is great they are in a line of work where they can make their own schedule, but if someone does have a baby in say February, judging by how they did major tours in the past (month on, month off) I still think it is possible they would tour. I mean, not to get into personal details, but Matt has always had kids as long as he has been in the band, Ed's first kid came in 2004, and they have played plenty of shows since then, so I am not saying it isn't possible they play no shows next year, I just think maybe something got lost in translation as far as that goes.

I hope you're right. But I DO recall seeing it referred to in a thread here. Hopefully I'm wrong.

drsluggo

weenie wrote:

Jesus, no need to insult me for asking a question.

If you so much indirectly imply there's some motive for what they do you get assaulted.

If PJ ate babies on stage people here would rail on you for questioning it. :roll:

triphobz

drsluggo wrote:

weenie wrote:

Jesus, no need to insult me for asking a question.

If you so much indirectly imply there's some motive for what they do you get assaulted.

If PJ ate babies on stage people here would rail on you for questioning it. :roll:

lmfao

Bravejamriot

drsluggo wrote:

weenie wrote:

Jesus, no need to insult me for asking a question.

If you so much indirectly imply there's some motive for what they do you get assaulted.

If PJ ate babies on stage people here would rail on you for questioning it. :roll:

I don't have a problem with weenie, just you drsluggo because you act like you know what your talking about, but couldn't take the time to look it up.

triphobz

This is better than watching Passions.

NEW ALBUM OUT SOON!! I"M Effin Excited!!

drsluggo

Bravejamriot wrote:

I don't have a problem with weenie, just you drsluggo because you act like you know what your talking about, but couldn't take the time to look it up.

The only reason you have a problem is because your own selected facts don't even backup your argument. You hand-picked the 10 shows in 2008 and ignored 2006, 2007, and 2009 and even then only had 1 state in there that would be considered a solid republican state.

Keep drinking that kool-aid though - I hear its delicious!

lebowski70

Ridiculous. If Pearl Jam is an elitist band, then I am a staunch republican. Not happening!!!!!!

jlew24asu

jimed14 wrote:

my thoughts EXACTLY. what a ridiculous question and thread. its pretty much become embarrassing to admit to being a Pearl Jam fan. and not because of the band but because of the fans.

Bravejamriot

drsluggo wrote:

Bravejamriot wrote:

I don't have a problem with weenie, just you drsluggo because you act like you know what your talking about, but couldn't take the time to look it up.

The only reason you have a problem is because your own selected facts don't even backup your argument. You hand-picked the 10 shows in 2008 and ignored 2006, 2007, and 2009 and even then only had 1 state in there that would be considered a solid republican state.

Keep drinking that kool-aid though - I hear its delicious!

So its pearl jam's fault that the Republicans became more extreme and lost states like Virginia and Florida?
Wow they are elitist!

J.

drsluggo wrote:

Bravejamriot wrote:

I don't have a problem with weenie, just you drsluggo because you act like you know what your talking about, but couldn't take the time to look it up.

The only reason you have a problem is because your own selected facts don't even backup your argument. You hand-picked the 10 shows in 2008 and ignored 2006, 2007, and 2009 and even then only had 1 state in there that would be considered a solid republican state.

Keep drinking that kool-aid though - I hear its delicious!

This shit kills me... Why are you so focused on this being some sort of political ploy or payback for non Dem states? WTF? I remember a while back someone mentioned something similar to this and someone broke it down and said that PJ tend to play where they sell the most records and get the most love, and that happens to not be the south.

Why you would actually sit on a PEARL JAM forum and spout this crap is just beyond me? Just to clarify I am not hopped up on that kool aid as you put it, I do not agree with everything that comes from them or Ed more specifically. I just can't believe that you would actually waste your time putting this theory together and then actually arguing and insulting others becasue of it. Holy shit! lol

The election is waaaay over, what would they gain from snubbing non dem states, beside thinner pockets? Please explain so I can get on the same page...please?

Stephen Flow

jimed14 wrote:

haha!

norm

jimed14 wrote:

yep!

people never cease to amaze me :roll:

jimed14

norm wrote:

jimed14 wrote:

...

yep!

people never cease to amaze me :roll:

I look at the front page of the porch, and I feel this pic could be posted in half the threads ...

maybe I'm an elitist.

benjs

jimed14 wrote:

norm wrote:

jimed14 wrote:

...

yep!

people never cease to amaze me :roll:

I look at the front page of the porch, and I feel this pic could be posted in half the threads ...

maybe I'm an elitist.

Nope. You're a realist.

triphobz

jlew24asu wrote:

jimed14 wrote:

my thoughts EXACTLY. what a ridiculous question and thread. its pretty much become embarrassing to admit to being a Pearl Jam fan. and not because of the band but because of the fans.

I could not agree more

hopethatuchoke

I don't think the band is elitist at all. I do however think a number of people around here and at the shows are. Particularly those with low numbers always in the front rows. And just look at the multiple "Eddie Concert Etiquette" threads.

norm

jimed14 wrote:

norm wrote:

jimed14 wrote:

...

yep!

people never cease to amaze me :roll:

I look at the front page of the porch, and I feel this pic could be posted in half the threads ...

maybe I'm an elitist.