Jump to content

hpslugga

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3287
  • Joined

Posts posted by hpslugga

  1. 1 minute ago, PencilPusher said:

    Not surprising the ratings are like this - Sugar/Rose on New Years Day - good ratings. Other Bowls not on New Years Day - not as good. That will likely not change so either the CFP has to strong arm the Rose/Sugar games into moving (fat chance) or just deal with it.

    Yup. And this is just another reason to expand the playoff: rather than fiddle-fuck around for nearly a month and having the semis just shy of New Year's and the NC game well after, use the December Void to have the pre-title rounds and play the NC game exactly on the time slot that Texas' Sugar Bowl just took on 1/1. The bowls suck and they've been the single largest impediment to CFB's evolution, but the New Year's tradition does provide a good tool for them to use and they're just wholly trying to re-invent the wheel. 

    1 minute ago, PencilPusher said:

    LA and PHX should be the only West host cities and given where college football is stronger, these should likely be the majority host cities for this game: Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Houston, Miami, New Orleans, Tampa. Travel needs to be a big consideration for this if they want ticket sales.

    Yeah I never understood the North Cal. Area in general either. There's a reason that there was a 31-year gap between Super Bowls hosted there, and it would have been longer were it not for the fact that the first one had a fucking local team in it.

    • Like 2
  2. 1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

    Ah, good point. Forgot about that, but of course as you note it only makes the onside kick more obviously the right call.

    Yeah, those announcers were complete jackasses in their ridiculous rendering of judgment on that call. You'll notice that Todd in specific said that Texas should have just booted it through the end zone. Even if you accept the premise that the onside kick was a bad call, booting it for the TB isn't the best option anyways. Wanna know what is, sans the onside? It's screaming it on the ground, aka the squib kick. The squib has a similar effect of a pooch kick in that it usually forces a player other than the returners to field the ball, but the receiving team can't fair catch it since it had previously hit the turf, so you still have a chance of pinning them behind (maybe even significantly so) the 25. Booming it through the end zone is a net 25 yard kick in that scenario. That's not a huge reward, and adding 15 yards to the receiving team's favor isn't a huge punishment either.

    • Like 1
  3. 1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Trump's base isn't as monolithic as you think. 

    1. the Cult 45 members that will never be swayed, I'd put them at 15-20%. 

    2.  the 401k Trumpers that don't care what Trump does as long as the portfolio is earning (5-10%).

    3.  the team Republican Trumpers that are supportive because of the R by his name.  They don't like the tweets, the lying, or even the agenda but they will tolerate it up to a certain point because they're Republicans. (10-20%)

    Just need to start chipping away at two and three. 

    You can’t chip away at 3 for the same reason I just illustrated: no possible, available evidence could ever move them to change their position. Yeah it could be that they dislike Trump, but the R next to his name compels them either to defend it or stay silent, and that’s just as bad.

    You say “up to a certain point,” but i guarantee you that republicans who are against him were already so. Bill Kristol, for example, isn’t a reformed Trumpanzee: he was against him from the start. Now, Kristol and his ilk come with their own baggage, and they’d even go as far as supporting impeachment for that reason, but again, they’ve taken that position from the start and you don’t need to waste time trying to convince them of anything.

    The difference between them and you is that while you both support impeachment, they’re salivating over the prospect of President Pence.

  4. 42 minutes ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

    She's white knighted Trump. Any evidence of his wrongdoing is proof that the Deep State wants him eliminated as a message to all citizens: obey or be destroyed.

    See and that’s how you know it’s religious in nature: its unfalsifiability. 

    “There’s evidence against Trump? DEEP STATE!!!” 

    “Spicer said something about the inauguration that wasn’t true? ALTERNATIVE FACTS!!!“

    ”The media presented definitive evidence that the Wall is a total fraud at every level? FAKE NEWS”

    It’s all about these stupid two-word phrases that they think are loaded with intelligence, but all they really do is reflect how massively idiotic they really are. Of course they can’t accept that, yet they’re the ones calling other people “snowflakes!”

    • Like 1
  5. 1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    I think the democrats should focus on the goal of swaying public opinion (Republicans) towards the idea of removing Trump.  

    They should outline a slow methodical path in exposing Trump’s corruption that resonates with the American public. 

    Start calling witnesses that have already been interviewed by the Mueller team for obstruction or Russia ties.  That way they can’t get away with lying so easily.

    I know the Briskets will say none of this matters but it’s worth a shot. 

    Dude, you don’t understand.

    Trump’s following isn’t rooted in politics. A political following has an element of combustibility, meaning it could all break down and explode given the right circumstances and no politician is above that.

    Trump? His following is based in faith, which is the most dishonest root of a position that is possible to take. His defenders will defensively defend him by 1) asserting claims that are completely without evidence and 2) argue entirely in spite of evidence. They have a name for that in religious circles. It’s called “apologetics.” How does one get involved in apologetics? Simple: become hopelessly indoctrinated towards such a ridiculous cause. No amount of evidence Robert Mueller can show will convince trump’s base that this is anything other than a “witch hunt.”

    • Like 9
    • Fuck You 1
  6. 3 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    Is anyone else rooting for him to crater the economy? It feels rather strange hoping he causes extreme financial pain for most Americans, myself included, but I feel like it’s the surest way to end this madness and sink the GOP for decades.

    Decades? That fucking clown show needs to be categorically euthanized. If they had ever done anything worth a shit in the post WWII era (heightened emphasis on the post-Vietnam era), I would either have remembered it or read about it. 

  7. 4 hours ago, HenryJames said:

    Caravan 2: Boogaloo Electrico

    They’re gonna cut off that $400 million “gravy train???” Think of all those people who depend on one fucking dozen eggs for that whole year!!!

  8. 38 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

    US is projected to decrease education spending by 3 billion next year, and increase defense spending by a cool 70+ billion.

    70 billion is more than our entire education budget.

    Purposely making Americans as ignorant as possible is working.

    The sad part is that there are enough useful idiots who 1) will go to pathetic lengths to rationalize that sort of disparity and 2) stand not to benefit in any way from same.

    • Like 1
  9. 23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Xmas gifts from my racist FIL just showed up. My daughter got a card with a $100 check. She just donated the whole thing to Annunciation House in El Paso to help with emergency housing for the 500 people being dropped at the bus station today.
    Kind of enjoyed that irony, seems fitting.
    Wife and I just did the same with the check he sent us.

    If you're planning on telling him this, might I suggest that you do so in the form of a family photo card with y'all dressed in sombreros and ponchos with a caption that says "Gracias por el dinero que enviamos para ayudar a los inmigrantes." Trust me, those types love those.

    • Like 5
    • Haha 1
  10. 1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

    I donated $10 to the church offering plate on Christmas Eve towards some outfit in the valley feeding refugees. I have done my part to help these people 

    Ha

  11. 4 hours ago, horn4life said:

    Policy is based on Principles. Currently the Republican party has no Principles, so how can they have actual policy?

    Their entire platform is "do what a dick would do, and always oppose Democrats."

    • Like 2
  12. 2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

    Exactly, this money has had little effect, so will billions more.

    Little money will inevitably yield little effect.

    Quote

    They’re mired in corruption

    Why do you think that is? They don’t have a government that speaks for them and when they try to pursue that endeavor, we crush them for it. 

    Quote

    and more money will only serve to make matters worse.

    There’s no reason to believe that as there’s no evidence to support it. That’s just you and your little feelings at work again.

    Quote

    It’s better to completely cut off funding and solidify our border with a wall, etc.

    See above. No reason at all to believe in this fairy tale.

    Quote

    We need to get out of the nation building business and soon. 

    Reparations and nation building are totally separate concepts. 

    Look, I’ve already told you exactly and precisely how to curb illegal immigration. It’s perfectly within our grasp, it’s 100% based in reality, but you refuse to divorce yourself from this Make Believe and Pretend universe in which you opt to live in lieu of reality. Failing that, you’re never going to understand this.

  13. 5 hours ago, Chrispy said:

    I’m sorry, but the funding is specifically for the Northern Triangle. Here’s another link for you. 

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/central-america-battles-corruption-violence-despite-billions-in-us-aid

    From the article you posted:

    "Over the past decade, U.S. taxpayers have provided $1.5 billion in aid to El Salvador, $1.4 billion to Guatemala and $1.1 billion to Honduras, according to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)." That's 1.5, 1.4, 1.1 in total over a ten-year period, not per year.

    From what I posted earlier:

    "By the State Department's own admission, we transmitted $2.6 billion to Central America over a 4-year period." The period, in question, was 2015-2018.

    1.5 billion over 10 years=$150 million per year
    1.4 billion over 10 years=$140 million per year
    1.1 billion over 10 years=$110 million per year

    Added up, that amounts to $400 million per year

    2.6 billion over 4 years=$650 million per year. Why the disparity? I already told you. The State Dept. numbers include Nicaragua, Panama, Belize and Costa Rica.

    So yeah, those numbers that the Fox article reported confirms pretty much exactly what I said. We give a paltry amount to those countries, and considering the volume of damage we've done to them (well not Costa Rica or Belize, but you get the idea), it isn't nearly enough to sustain them. Again, we attacked them over long periods, claimed a horrific number of lives, did untold amounts worth of property damage, absolutely wrecked their economies with the dictators/juntas we installed, and those societies have yet to recover. As long as they don't recover, there are going to be people who flee seeking political asylum. That's just how the game works regardless of how little you truly understand this.

    • Like 1
  14. 11 hours ago, hookem48 said:

    Hard to believe Shadow Creek was undefeated running this vanilla offense, 2 foot tall qb sitting in the pocket can't be how they got here.

    Speaks more to who they had to beat to get there than anything else. They were kinda like Marshall in 2005 except a little better.

    9 hours ago, Vic Mackey said:

    Funny how they moved up to 6A where they belong and got their ass whipped then fudged the numbers to move back down to beat up on 5A teams. They are not a true 5A team any longer but they feel safe there because they will be exposed in the classification they belong. They know how to play the system.

    Those two seasons of 6A ball weren't any different than any other pair of seasons that we've had since Allen's been at the helm. Seriously, if I typed down all the seasons they've had since 1999, posted the win-loss records and the PF/PA's next to said records, scrambled them around and took out the years, you wouldn't know where to find them.

  15. 16 hours ago, Chrispy said:

    I’m not trying to be rude, but these points you’re raising have been beaten to death at this point and I’ve had this same discussion with other posters, it just grows tiresome.

    I'm not interested in what you've discussed with other posters, and it's not my responsibility to take that into account. 

    Quote

    Maybe you mistook my brevity for an outright dismissal; I just find posts laced with insults lazy and it zaps the fun out of such a discussion. 

    There isn't a single comment that I've made towards you that's an "insult." I can back everything I've said. You cannot, and that's the biggest difference between the two of us. You just asserted, baselessly to be sure, that what I told you was "garbage," and now you're pretending to be indignant about "insults?" That's hypocrisy of the highest order. 

    Quote

    1.) Most are visa overstays: yes, so what? The guy that drunkenly kicked in my neighbor’s door in was not, as he had been deported 3 times. There’s still a lot of illegals that sneak across the border. 

    Immigration policy isn't made to avenge actions made by single individuals. And even with those illegal crossings, they're done in a variety of ways that could still circumvent a border wall. That's precisely what you and your ilk cannot understand. I mentioned before that drug runners use ramps and t-shirt canons to get around the fence. Do you know what they also use? Tunnels. And these things aren't done at border crossing towns like Laredo or Juarez, either. They're done in the relatively unpopulated areas where there's no one to stop them, and neither could a wall.

    I really don't think you understand that this wall that Trump is proposing is purely symbolic and functionally would do zilch regarding immigration. Again, there's only one reason that he's acting like such a petulant child at this moment w/r/t funding the wall: because he knows that he's fucking done as far as re-election is concerned if he shows up in November 2020 without even a hint of a wall, which was the cornerstone of his shit-for-brains candidacy, and he will not get that wall if this issue isn't voted on before January because there's no way in hell the new Democratic House would even for a moment consider it. His wanting the wall has absolutely nothing to do with immigration. Hell, nothing that he's proposed about immigration is about immigration. That you don't understand this is absolutely shocking.

    Quote

    2: Your second point is that we created this mess. I can get on board with a lot of what you said, but my claim was never that a wall would cure the entire problem. It’s a complex issue that’s going to require a multitude of solutions. Sending them billions of dollars obviously is not working, so we’re going to have to rethink that strategy. Letting them migrate here is not an option. 

    You're vastly overstating what we give them in aid. By the State Department's own admission, we transmitted $2.6 billion to Central America over a 4-year period.

    That's a paltry amount. Here's how that translates: 

    1) Their definition of "Central America" is very literal: El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Belize, Panama, Costa Rica.

    2) Those 7 countries have a combined population of just a little over 48 million people. 

    3) 2.6 billion in 4 years=650 million per year

    4) 650million/48million=$13.54 per person per year.

    So to you, sending each person in Central America just enough for a loaf of bread, a dozen eggs, and a carton of milk per year is a "strategy?" 

    The average American thinks that its government spends 26% of the total budget on foreign aid. Are you one of those people?

    Quote

    3. I agreed on your 3rd point. I think the influx of so many low skilled workers is not a positive development. I personally know individuals that employ illegals, as I’ve discussed on this thread before ad naseum. When I’ve raised the topic with them, they simply state that they can pay them very little, for which I don’t have a worthwhile rebuttal. I’m not turning my friend into the police, especially when these illegals can sneak back over with ease. 

    That's...handy. You're admitting that it gives them an incentive, but by your own admission, you don't want anything to be done to the person that gives the incentive. Well if you don't do that, how is that incentive supposed to disappear?

    Quote

    4. I’ve never said the wall will stop illegal drugs because most of the drugs pouring through are at our ports. I’ve suggested numerous times on this board to beef up our port security to stop the flow of fentanyl that is killing so many people. The drug war has been handled poorly thus far, but I find it a worthwhile endeavor. Other families that have lost a loved one to drugs feel the same.

    And they, like you, would be absolutely wrong if they were to make such a statement. 

    Quote

    Your 5th point is somewhat redundant, as my claim was never that it was a cure for all ills. It’s simply a tool that I feel we require, along with other solutions. 

    And again, you'd be wrong. This, just like the Drug War, isn't about "feelings." This is about showing what you know to be concordant with reality. If you can't show it, you don't know it. You've not demonstrated a single, meaningful factual observance that would in any way bolster the case for such a wall. You say it's something we "require," and you've not demonstrated one actual reason why. All you've done is lie, misdirect, misunderstand, project and emote. If you don't give me a reason to believe you, then I have no reason to believe you. 

     

    • Like 6
×
×
  • Create New...