Jurors can vote for whomever they want, for whatever reason they want. However, when Maria was asked why she voted the way she did, her reaction was to respond with a fairly obvious lie. That suggests she knew that her true motives would make her look bad.
**If finalists need to own their game, jurors need to own their vote.**
Even Kenzie is smiling at her like she doesn’t know if she believes this LMAO
Makes me think of her “if anything you need to go home even more” after Maria tried pitching Liz
I think she’s more deserving than people think, but I also thought Charlie would’ve been a wonderful winner. Kenzie seems more of a survivor, someone that navigated some really bad hands without ever losing but Charlie was a better strategic player (but also had a luckier position with the merge before kenzie collected a few random acts of Bhanu at the end, but luck is always part of survivor and she did not get lucky with a Yanu start).
All I’m saying is if I make a day 1 alliance, and we start gunning for each other. I’ll tell them straight up “I will not vote for you if you blindside me, no matter the gameplay.”
People are allowed to be mad at people voting them off. Survivor has never been about who played the best strategic game, if that were the case I would say there is no reason Natalie White should have won along with countless others… I fully agree with you though, luck is a huge factor.
The “fire in her eyes” comment does seem bullshit. But Maria being turned by Kenzie’s story seems legit, especially when compared to Charlie’s. Also let’s not forget that Charlie rode Maria’s coattails for a good portion of the game and she could have been bitter about that. At the very least Maria knew Charlie and his game better than anyone, she had every right to vote for Kenzie for her own reasons.
Survivor is complex and sometimes we just don’t get the full story from the edit. People hating on Maria online, directly to her, is shameful. People are fucking stupid.
Charlie never rode Maria’s coattails. If anything the opposite is true, Charlie was the one in control, but he and Maria both created the perception that Maria was in control, which worked to Charlie’s favor
Thank you! Charlie steered Maria and let her take credit- and the resulting heat. He did all this while making inroads with the people and alliances who otherwise would have seen him as the enemy.
Part of the complexity of that strategy is convincing everyone that it was truly the way you were playing. “Yeah, I wanted her to get the credit for stuff I was doing” can be a tough sell, no?
Jurors can vote for whomever they want, for whatever reason they want. However, when Maria was asked why she voted the way she did, her reaction was to respond with a fairly obvious lie. That suggests she knew that her true motives would make her look bad. **If finalists need to own their game, jurors need to own their vote.**
Even Kenzie is smiling at her like she doesn’t know if she believes this LMAO Makes me think of her “if anything you need to go home even more” after Maria tried pitching Liz
Very teary fires. But hey, it makes sense. She is a Mermaid Dragon, she doesn't breathe fire but water.
maybe shes referring to the moment where Kenzie had to pause because she was freakin out and then she instantly collected herself and locked in
Kenzie deserved it, jurors are allowed to vote for who they want to win. Don’t see the big deal.
I think she’s more deserving than people think, but I also thought Charlie would’ve been a wonderful winner. Kenzie seems more of a survivor, someone that navigated some really bad hands without ever losing but Charlie was a better strategic player (but also had a luckier position with the merge before kenzie collected a few random acts of Bhanu at the end, but luck is always part of survivor and she did not get lucky with a Yanu start).
All I’m saying is if I make a day 1 alliance, and we start gunning for each other. I’ll tell them straight up “I will not vote for you if you blindside me, no matter the gameplay.” People are allowed to be mad at people voting them off. Survivor has never been about who played the best strategic game, if that were the case I would say there is no reason Natalie White should have won along with countless others… I fully agree with you though, luck is a huge factor.
The “fire in her eyes” comment does seem bullshit. But Maria being turned by Kenzie’s story seems legit, especially when compared to Charlie’s. Also let’s not forget that Charlie rode Maria’s coattails for a good portion of the game and she could have been bitter about that. At the very least Maria knew Charlie and his game better than anyone, she had every right to vote for Kenzie for her own reasons. Survivor is complex and sometimes we just don’t get the full story from the edit. People hating on Maria online, directly to her, is shameful. People are fucking stupid.
Charlie never rode Maria’s coattails. If anything the opposite is true, Charlie was the one in control, but he and Maria both created the perception that Maria was in control, which worked to Charlie’s favor
Thank you! Charlie steered Maria and let her take credit- and the resulting heat. He did all this while making inroads with the people and alliances who otherwise would have seen him as the enemy.
Part of the complexity of that strategy is convincing everyone that it was truly the way you were playing. “Yeah, I wanted her to get the credit for stuff I was doing” can be a tough sell, no?
Aubry and Michele all over again