>Maybe people would be upset if it took place in the Obama years. The idea of the world falling apart in his tenure is too much for some people.
>
>
>
>The idea of the government being unprepared, turning corrupt and killing innocent people seems to more acceptable if it took place in an era where Republicans ruled such as the Bush era.
...it's not that deep, dude.
At no point in the show does it even remotely make the implication that the pandemic got out of control or FEDRA started killing people because George Bush was in office. Maybe I could understand your gripe if there was a scene with Donald Rumsfeld talking about "known unknowns" at a press conference before being attacked by infected, but that's clearly not the case.
ValjeanHadItComing t1_j7otzv7 wrote
Reply to In the Last of Us TV show, why does the infection start in 2003 ? by [deleted]
>Maybe people would be upset if it took place in the Obama years. The idea of the world falling apart in his tenure is too much for some people.
>
>
>
>The idea of the government being unprepared, turning corrupt and killing innocent people seems to more acceptable if it took place in an era where Republicans ruled such as the Bush era.
...it's not that deep, dude.
At no point in the show does it even remotely make the implication that the pandemic got out of control or FEDRA started killing people because George Bush was in office. Maybe I could understand your gripe if there was a scene with Donald Rumsfeld talking about "known unknowns" at a press conference before being attacked by infected, but that's clearly not the case.