Moiraine

Actually, no one has said or meant either of these things except maybe sarcastically Negative Like Count said, some people's reading comprehension sucks.

Actually, no one has said or meant either of these things except maybe sarcastically

There isn't one. You have to live with the embarrassment until a mod rescues you from your shame. Bury your head.

I don't put a lot of blame on millennials for not knowing who those leaders are. I remember my High School history courses. I believe I had 1 semester, maybe 2, on something other than American history. Basically every year from 3rd grade on we learned American history. I barely had an inkling of who Mao was until I took an Asian history course in college. I knew China's communist history and Russia's but nothing in detail. The non-American history we learned was almost exclusively about Germany. I knew Stalin killed a lot of people, but only as a way to compare him to Hitler, and not a lot else until I lived with a former Soviet.

Y'all have the worst ideas ever.

I think you're explaining too... thoroughly. Let me see if I understand it. If the average total offense for the entire country is 200/game, and Akron is averaging 200/game, Akron's total offense "score" would be a 0? So anyone with > 200 yards/game has a "score" of more than 0? When you write "p.p.s. - I've updated the post to reflect the stats as of today." could you put a date on it? I can throw up a quit graph if you want.

If his 2nd round was crap it's because he's a micro-manager. He doesn't trust the coaches to do their jobs, so he just hires yes-men. He's a good coordinator. I don't think he'll ever be a great head coach.

That's pretty spot on, Bility. I actually don't agree with this... things have been severely divided for years and years now. This year has worsened it in my opinion. I think it will stay bad.

If Hillary is like chemo, I would sooner die from cancer than take her kind of poison. I really don't like Trump, but I REALLY don't like Hillary. I don't like the "vote for Hillary because I feel she is the lesser of two evils" approach. Although I disagree completely... good response. That out of the way, people who say she's the most corrupt politician ever are full of beans. She's the norm. The norm needs to change, but people need to stop being fooled. The accusers are likely just as bad or worse than Clinton.

IMO it's an act of war to block a president's nominee for 4 years. It trashes the whole system and how it's supposed to work.

I'd be afraid to do that. I'd probably run out of money within a week. Edit: I clicked through and it lets you set a daily limit

There are murderers and rapists who will vote for Clinton and murderers and rapists who will vote for Trump. So I don't like the argument that because the KKK supports Trump he's a bad candidate. There are dozens of other reasons he's a bad person and candidate. As for Clinton/Byrd, Byrd endorsed Obama. He apologized for his idiotic early life. Of course a large part of that may have been for political reasons, but he did it. IMO neither of these things means a lot.

I see Trump supporters and Trump voters as a different demographic. Obviously all of the Trump supporters are Trump voters, but not all of the Trump voters are Trump supporters. What you're talking about in this post is the voters.

I'm aware of the lawsuit from the 70's, but what's annoying is liberals and the hardcore supporters of Hillary Clinton will bring up all of that to make him look worse, but if Trump does the same that's water under the bridge and not a big deal. Really??? Because what's good for the goose is good for the gander right? Nope, not in this case. What's fair is fair, they both suck, we all know this, and to act like either one of these people are unicorn fairies that are going to sprinkle goodness wherever they go is simply impossible for me. My issues come from the unfairness in which Trump gets attacked, but not Clinton, she might be qualified to do the job, but that doesn't mean she's not an evil person. You've got a millionaire and a billionaire trying to relate to the middle class and lower class folks, like they have a clue where we're coming from. Look at LOMS post, people that support Trump need to give an explanation? Uh, no they don't, that's who they support, that's their right, why do they need to explain it to you? I get calls of people stealing Trump signs out of people's yards. Guarantee you that isn't Trump supporters stealing those signs. So I get a huge laugh when people start talking about the violence at his rally's. I've seen plenty of videos of Trump supporters getting assaulted and screamed at as well. These are the things that are driving the Trump supporters to stick with him. I imagine myself stealing them, but never do

It's not really a possibility unless 1/4 of likely GOP voters decide not to vote. The Democrats will gain some seats though. Unless something's done about the gerrymandering the GOP will gain a lot in 2018.

Hypothetically if Clinton becomes President, I wonder if she'll try to push Obama's nominee through or she'll try to pick someone more liberal to get revenge for the 1 year delay. She will likely have better numbers in the Senate than Obama had. I'm just reading up on the details of how it works. 51 votes are all that are needed after it gets to the senate, but 60 votes are needed to stop a filibuster. The Democrats will probably have that 51 after the election.

I don't think he cares about straight White men, other than that they will give him votes. He only cares about himself and maybe his children.

I found these e-mails to be pretty telling.

Hey Moiraine, I mean this comment in earnest - There is a book you can check out at most public libraries called Bad Pharma. If you have a genuine interest in learning more about the concerns that some very intelligent, research-based folks have on how pharmaceutical companies are allowed to essentially self-approve their own drug trials, read that one. You probably won't come out convinced that "vaccines are evil," (I don't believe that myself), but I can essentially guarantee that you'll understand that although there are some 'woo woo' hippies out there that haven't ever cracked a book on the topic but still open their mouths, there are a lot of people who have done the research and have genuine concern over: 1. Adjunct particles in vaccines. 2. The vaccine schedule for infants, as it relates to giving multiples at the same time. Hoping this post doesn't derail this thread though. I don't trust drug companies. But I've read lots of the research done on vaccines, and every negative article I've ever read was either published in a non reputable publication (for instance I saw one that thought HIV doesn't cause AIDs) or use a biased source of data like VAERS. I have seen nothing that connects vaccines with autism. I'm not against neutral parties testing out negative effects of vaccines but the research I've seen so far has either been conducted by people who are stupid and don't know what they're doing and/or people who have some hidden agenda.

Winning the national championship would be ideal. 11 wins would be a good season.

Sometimes I understand giving a team the benefit of the doubt when they're a big good team that has been good for a long time and had a great season the previous year. For Iowa, it was a blip on the radar and they didn't beat a single team all season that was really good. So Iowa's blip wasn't even a great season. They also lost their last 2 games. So putting them ahead of Nebraska right now is weird.

Relax you guys. f***in is not a troll and he has a damn good name. He just got o** on the wrong foot. Although, is there really a preferable foot to get o** on? I'm really starting to rethink this saying.

No. She won't.

Wonder how many of those 4 have a dedicated ST coach