Survivor Pearl Islands Jury segment part 2

Рет қаралды 15,051

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 24

@kwekuivanvassall4536 3 жыл бұрын

Sandra is really a master at telling the Jury what they want to hear. She did that both times. Even if she knew Rupert was out soon she would never own up to that, years later I think that was a burn vote to ensure she didnt tie a vote to protect Rupert (weird thought lol)

@3amDayDreamer 3 жыл бұрын

I have watched both Pearl island and Heroes vs Villains just to get Sandra, and this woman is brilliant! Her social game is so underrated. It’s amazing how she was able to fly under the radar especially in Pearl Islands. It’s the little things that counted for Sandra. It’s funny that the boldest strategic player and quietest strategic player won Survivor twice. Tony was so bold and out front while Sandra play from the bottom and stay under the radar. Both of them convinced two goats to take them to the end and won. Sandra was able to take the anti-hero role for the heroes but still played hard for the villains. I don’t know if Sandra really cared to help the heroes but it came across that way and the heroes ate it up. And that’s the thing about Sandra, you never know if she really cares about these people but she is good making it seem that way.

@58twright 2 жыл бұрын

& Russell once sat up there & said I’m not going to tell you what you want to hear that’s not how you get the jury to vote for you

@persona5305 Жыл бұрын

I've noticed that for sure. Her tongue is her asset. no matter how good you are in a game, if you choose to bring Sandra with you to the top? you're gonna lose. Sandra can sell a sand in a desert. The kind of Seller you want in your team😅

@TheJayCoconut 5 жыл бұрын

0:18 Edit: I am back here 3 years later (10-14-2023) to watch this again. Sandra being able to make the jury laugh is a masterclass. One thing I always say is that the best players are able to make the jury laugh.

@AD-cc6nv 4 жыл бұрын

Wow it’s funny how things have changed being responsible for putting the people on the jury should be a good thing

@daniboy7126 4 жыл бұрын

Yea, but this was the era of bitter jurors. If you were responsible for voting them out, they would not give you the vote. However, I think Sandra meant that Lill just voted along the majority without trying to be in charge of the moves

@maxcogswell4201 4 жыл бұрын

No you guys got it all wrong. People reward authenticity and Lill was a hypocrite who portrayed herself like Rupert and then acted like Johnny Fairplay all while still thinking she had integrity. She needed to own her decisions, stop hiding behind her uniform and clinging to ideals she no longer represents and then she would have beaten Sandra. It was her lack of humility and self awareness that sealed her fate. You can be a villain in survivor and win, but NEVER if you believe you are the hero and try and convince the jury when they know damn well your not.

@kwekuivanvassall4536 3 жыл бұрын

Lil's only problem was that she didn't own her game. She prob would have gotten more votes if she wasnt so apologetic about how she played and stated her case with a spine, like Sandra did. Lil didnt have to claim that she was playing w integrity all along, and high ideals. That's why the jury probably understood her position but didnt respect her hypocrisy. If JOn was there he wouldve won bc he wouldve been a showman and owned his moves.

@bigbuffguy9589 3 жыл бұрын

Depends on the jury. It's up to the finalists to figure that out.

@seirrasky3581 3 жыл бұрын

@@kwekuivanvassall4536 I agree!