Talk:Douche and Turd

Turd Sandwich

Was Stan's vote for Turd Sandwich a subtle endorsement of Bush?

Was the win for Giant Douche a belief that Kerry would win, or merely an ironic twist, or perhaps a reference to California where the show's producers reside?

jucifer 02:59, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Banishment

In the episode Stan is banished from the town because of not voting for a mascot. He is brought out of town by a horse and an angry mob of town people watches. Is there somewhere in America REALLY a law that says someone has to be treated like that for a crime?

---KingKane 14:05 02.Sep 2005 (talk)

Are you asking if there is a place in American that punishes its citizens for not voting or are you asking is there such a punishment as spitting, tying a person to a horse, and then banishing them from the area? I believe either answer is a solid no in the USA. The parody of this episode is that so much emphasize is placed on voting, especially to the younger generation which is generally less informed. Therefore, they are trying to show that it is acceptable to not show an interest in an election when both candidates hold no real interest in your personal opinions or views. However, in the spirit of South Park with its usual "let's make fun of both sides" attitude, it quickly comes back to say that no matter the election, it always comes down to the same two basic candidates (in which case you must vote for the lesser of two evils).

--HumanZoom 07:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Turd = Kerry?

If I were given the option, I would probably agree that the giant douche would represent Kerry and the turd sandwich would be Bush. But the show doesn't make it explicit and the article simply assumes as such. What specifically about Kerry is douche-like and how is Bush a turd? These are things that should be explored in the article rather than glossed over. AEuSoes1 23:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything explicitly concrete about which mascot represents which Presidential candidate. Seeing how the "Turd Sandwich '04" sign that Cartman and Butters have on their bike is a parody of the "Bush Cheney '04" signs I would have to say Turd = Bush. Furthermore, Cartman has always been portrayed in an ultra-Conservative type stance, so one would be led to believe that again Turd = Bush. However, at the end of the episode, the Giant Douche wins the election by an overwhelming vote which would hint that the douche = Bush (seeing how Bush won the '04 election). I could go on and on however, this is all original research and my opinion so I think none of it should be added to the article. Unless there is a statement from Trey Parker or Matt Stone explicitly saying which mascot represented who, I think it is best to leave the article how it stands. -HumanZoom 15:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems rather pointless and in the context of an encyclopaedia article, inappropriate to try to figure out which presidential candidate the two mascots represented especially considering the fact that the whole point of making both of the mascots something indisputably unpleasant and undesirable is to underscore that there is essentially no difference between the two as both are something negative. It is interesting and fun to try to come up with reasons about who may be represented as a Turd or Douche but still completely moot. Perhaps a section devoted to this with reasons given such as those discussed above would give a more objective stance on the issue whilst still allowing discourse on it, though really, it just doesn't seem important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.226.100 (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Stan's t-shirt

When the people of South Park rip of part of Stan's t-shirt, there is a shot of him from the front with two pieces of his shirt missing. Looks like another reference to the 2004 elections, because the left part looks like Texas (where George Bush is from), but what is the other one? It doesn't look like an American state. I can post a picture if needed... -- Sander 20:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Possible anti-PETA reference?

I was reading a study recently on PETA and how they tend to use religion, and one of the things they mentioned was that during one campaign claiming that Jesus was a "vegetarian," they tried using one image of Jesus but were sued for copyright infringement. Then they tried using the "South Park" image of Jesus, claiming that Trey and Matt wouldn't mind (although it turned out that Comedy Central had a problem with it and announced plans to sue them over it). It may be an off-chance, but do you think this might be a small reference to that incident? -- ScullyToo

Most likely not. Parker and stone aren't all that protective of intellectual property. -- Anarchy_Balsac

They seemed pretty pissed off at Micheal Moore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.249.95.247 (talk) 01:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Because Michael Moore deliberately put a cartoon that resembled South Park right after he had the interview with Matt Stone in Bowling For Columbine, leading people to believe he and Trey had made the cartoon, when in fact neither Matt nor Trey had anything to do with the cartoon. So yes, they were pretty pissed off at Michael Moore.Voltair3 (talk) 21:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Puffy

I never understood why he got so angry about it. I mean, given the way they spoof other celebrities, Trey and Matt were downright flattering. They made him look like DA MAN...he lays down the law, and you don't mess with him. Got the entourage, the authorit-ay, the wheels...fine, they made fun of his voting crusade, but they could have done it in a far more insulting way.

Obvious

This show is obviously about the liberal special interest groups that were were saying "go vote" when clearly they wanted people to vote for Kerry. The only reason that isn't expressed in the article is because of the rampant liberal bias within Wikipedia. Haizum 23:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Seeing how South Park made no explicit distinction between which mascot was which candidate and the fact that Stan was ostracized for not wanting to vote for either candidate, I would have to say it has nothing to do with Wikipedia's "liberal" bias. I'm not even sure where the special interest groups were implying to vote for Kerry in the election anyway. The way I interpreted it was they just wanted the younger generation to think voting was cool. And to make voting seem cool, they came up with all these wacky gimmicks, which was over exaggerated and poked fun at in this episode. Maybe I just missed the point of their campaign. Besides, have you read the George W. Bush talk page? They claim Wikipedia has an ultra-conservative bias. -HumanZoom 15:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Hazium. The show is actually a constant political commentary from a libertarian perspective (that of the creators) and therefore critcizes aspects of both poles. This was clearly a critcism of certain aspects of the leftist alignment, though the bias here would never embrace that. The internet-user demographic in general is absolutely left-biased, and young people, (whom primarily edit Wikipedia) have a heavy left bias. When you intersect the two the bias is pretty obviously implied. 68.38.196.212 18:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Old topic, but oh-my-goodness, that is so true. I agree with Hazium as well. 129.107.81.12 (talk) 08:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Really? I thought it was pretty clearly about filibustering, and how if you give up on filibustering, you goals will not be reached. Because they needed him to vote to proceed, all he had to do was say "I'm not voting until a viable candidate is presented." He could have filibustered basically indeterminately.75.168.93.112 (talk) 06:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Presidential debates

"The Giant Douche thanking everybody before any remarks is a parody of what John Kerry did at the 2004 Presidential Debates."

Don't most American presidential candidates do that at presidential debates? Isn't it a parody of most of these candidates? Or was Kerry's introduction(s) at the 2004 debates exceptional in that way? --Liberlogos 05:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Personal Analysis

"The subtle commentary you could infer from the characters' support of candidates (though this is conjecture):

Kyle: Jewish, intelligent. Both Jews and people with higher education tend Democratic.

Cartman: Self-serving, unprincipled. Perhaps a comment at some of the Republicans who look out solely for their own financial interests.

Butters: Naive, innocent, generally moral. Quickly manipulated by Cartman. Represents the masses of Christian voters who are swayed into voting Republican by their churches and/or peers.

Kenny: Poor, trashy. Though many poor whites generally vote Republican, those who would protect their own interests (as well as lower middle class minorities) generally vote Democratic.

Stan: Sensible, everyman. Wishes not to vote for either candidate, but is so pressured by both sides that his refusal leads to his exile from South Park. Eventually votes for Turd, signalling ... who knows? That the Average Joe, when pressured, would vote for Bush?

Jimmy: the Undecided voter contingent, who, even up to the day of the election, were impossible to pin down in the polls, even though they could well have been the deciding factor."

How come someone can come here and say all that? Jesus! This was totally stupid. And yes, PETA IS THAT EXTREME, filled with hipocrisy and violence. They're just saying that PETA sucksass. Why is it that hard to understand? Just 'cause you like PETA or something?

Whoever wrote this is an idiot

PeTA VS. pETA

could the notation pETA be a reference to the terror organisation ETA as Mrs. Garrison also calls them eco-terrorist? -- Hahih 11:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Uncited material

Cite and return to the main article;

• The credits are played to a takeoff of the Rock the Vote theme, suitably reworded:
• During the 2004 US presidential election, music mogul Diddy's "get out the vote" slogan really was "Vote or Die!".
• The debate between Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich is moderated by Jim Lehrer. The real-life first debate between John Kerry and George W. Bush was also moderated by him. Some of the tactics used during this debate are parodies of actual tactics used by both candidates in that year's debates.

Alastairward (talk) 14:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Questionable sentence

P. Diddy shows up at the camp to kill Stan, but is distracted by a PETA member who throws a bucket of red paint on his fur coat.

So, this wasn't blood the PETA member was throwing on Puff Daddy's coat? I'm trying to figure out how PETA, who (in the episode) lives so far out there in the boondocks to really have access to it, has a full bucket of red paint to throw over P. Diddy. Animal blood just seems so much more likely. Could be wrong, though. —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 22:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen the episode in a while, but I think it's paint. The point is that it looks like blood (on his fur coat), but if they love animals so much, where would they get that much blood? Unless that's the satire...? Maybe it's best to say red liquid. l'aquatique |✡| talk 04:08, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

No, I see your point, I just thought that was the whole satirical thing with PETA and the bestiality. It probably is paint, though. Thanks. —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 21:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Trust me, it's paint. PETA always uses red paint, and for T. Parker and M. Stone to have it be anything else would just be diverting too far from the point. 129.107.81.12 (talk) 08:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Cultural references

I think that this episode contains several cultural references, such as the ostrich begging Puff Daddy to end his life: the same as the way the failed clone from Alien Resurrection begs Ripley to end her life. There could be a lot more of those things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.75.109.153 (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Douche and Turd. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070901034507/http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/book.asp?ref=9781405161602&site=1 to http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/book.asp?ref=9781405161602&site=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:07, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Zoophilia is not bestiality

I noticed while reading that there's a phrase in the text "practicing zoophilia". That doesn't make any sense as zoophilia is an attraction, not an action. I highly suggest replacing it with bestiality or zooerasty. Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.216.213.35 (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)