Lorewarn

At the very least, if you want to claim that democrats want open borders, you can't use ending something that's only existed for two years during an unprecedented global event as evidence.

This is the rub for me. I was pretty unsettled when I heard this and didn't feel good about it. Then I realized that the photos could be and in my estimation are likely, the only feasible way of letting people know that their loved ones have died. If it's a claim, and you live inside the insulated Russian propaganda state, there's no way you'd believe it without proof. Still not sure that I "support" it, but I think there is absolutely a justifiable reason for doing it. Certainly not thankful, god no. But our invasions of all those places were evil, and I would not hold it against the governments or citizens of any of those places for letting us know that.

We know little about his background I don't live there I'm not involved in races out of state I don't care to spend much time looking into it You offer so many disclaimers in regards to the R candidate and nothing but confidence against the D one.

https://www.newsweek.com/greg-abbott-has-figured-out-we-can-stop-trade-along-texas-border-ken-paxton-1698290?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

This isn't even remotely true. Like, not even in the same universe close. You're right, it's not. They weren't banned, they were suspended for 12 hours starting after the removal of a tweet that went against their TOS. They're the ones that decided not to capitulate.

If everyone is constantly misinterpreting what you're trying to say, you're the problem.

My brother is a high up manager at Mediacom in Des Moines. He said 90% of their new customer base is people getting internet - very very few are starting from a position of wanting the tv, but they can be upsold.

I'm not that sure. DirecTV's cheapest base package is $107/mo (and I don't think that includes renting the box). Here's a theoretical equivalent/alternative: $35 - Sling TV Blue, gets you most of the basic/base channels you'd watch $10 - HBOMax $15 - Disney+/ESPN+/Hulu Bundle $10 - Netflix $5 - AppleTV+ That gets you probably 90% of what DirecTV would offer, plus massive amounts of original content you couldn't get on there (Every original movie/series on Disney, Netflix, HBO, Apple), plus sports.

Anyone else get the feeling that we're trying to be too creative and cutting edge with this stuff? A&M showed how to do it, and it's not complicated. Now I'm not happy about the current wild west landscape of it, but it's here and we have to adjust if we want to stay competitive. Maybe things like this will help, but I'm a bit skeptical.

My assumption is that you are already convinced of the following: He can't be any worse than Warnock policy-wise Despite there being very little evidence he is capable, qualified, or mentally stable enough to govern, he needs to win against Warnock

Speak for yourself I disagree with plenty of his bulls#!t whacky points

No. I'm just encouraging you to stop propping up potential strawmen every time you post. You've done it again. I don't know if he would or not. Personally I doubt anyone in the Senate would be anything other than an awful role model, so if he wins, I would lean towards no, but sure if it is shown he has learned how to deal with his disorder in a healthy way he would be a good role model. I'd prefer we see the evidence of that made clear before considering voting for someone like that. How do you define 'deserves'? Just based on whether or not he gets the vote? Because you don't seem to be in a 'wait and see' mode in your evaluations of Walker. You tell us, you're the one making the assumption.

No, and nobody is suggesting that. 'Society' and 'being an elected representative in the United States Senate' are also wildly different things. People say the same s#!t when pastors come back after sex scandals - "Isn't there forgiveness in Christ? They should be able to be forgiven and move forward". Forgiveness doesn't mean they ever need to be a pastor again. Big assumption. Another big assumption. Sounds good, don't think anyone's doing anything close to that either.

The view from the top of East Stadium is incredible. In fact it's significantly better than the view from the first 30 or so rows on the lower bowls of East and West.

Since when did whether or not you mock someone be determined by whether or not they have thick skin for it?

Ohio State's stadium is also beneath the water table and they're replacing their turf this season. Once again, you just have no clue what you're saying. I'm not even pro team turf - I think having grass would be amazing. It's just that you have the s#!ttiest nonsense arguments.

Every playoff team in history: Oregon - Turf Florida State - Grass Ohio State - Turf Alabama - Grass Notre Dame - Turf Clemson - Grass Washington - Turf Michigan State - Grass LSU - Turf/Grass hybrid Michigan - Turf Cincinnati - Turf Georgia - Grass

Oh I see, so you just want to make the outside look uglier than it is, and also have no room for concourses and concessions for the people in the top deck of the endzones.

How do you propose getting up to the 2nd decks on the North and South sides without............ new buildings?

Curious what reasons you have for that?

Oh right - the spiky room that drove Steve Buscemi even more mad than normal I was mostly right, just the wrong Michael Bay film.

What are some examples?

#2 is The Island I believe.

Correct!

Did my best to not make these super easy giveaways