bad_teammate

Pete being gay isn't the problem. Pete looking like a tiny chipmunk nerd is the massive, massive problem. It's probably better for him that he's gay, actually. He needs to butch up. - weight-gainer - creatine - Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe - Jack3d original banned formula - Pantera - beard - operator shades - tank tops

I think it always just baffles up that guys in his position are as hard up/down bad as the rest of the guys their age. Also, we never fail to find the amusement in watching that which is undefeated stay undefeated.

I don't think the refs are getting worse or anything, it's just that it's so easy to find all of their errors since we're watching multi-angle 4k. The vast majority of their mistakes are completely understandable because the game moves fucking fast and it's a lot of judgment. The only actual fix is going to be more booth reviews (making everything reviewable) and the eventual march of "AI"/tech into the sport.

Left Behind Schools: "At least we got rid of that classless, arrogant University of Texas!" Utah: "Hold my low-ABV beer."

Mayor Pete didn't sit in the first row in class while in school, he made the teacher carry him around in a little papoose because the first row wasn't close enough.

It's a big club, and you ain't in it.

To you: To any Democrats wanting to run for president in 2028:

We're talking tens of millions of people, so this just doesn't make sense. I have no interest in arguing any counterfactuals about Kamala's campaign specifically, but there is zero reason to not jump at the chance to do Rogan unless you're a sociopath who can't talk to people like a human or your head is so far up your own ass that you think you're too good for it. It's not even a question that the Democrats need someone who can do that. Anyone who doesn't take advantage of Rogan and Rogan-like opportunities is a waste of our time in terms of major candidates going forward. He is there to set up softball questions and get to know people. He doesn't challenge or try to play hardball. There's not going to be a different Rogan audience in the future. It's going to be the same one.

Right. What we can do is make ourselves attractive to voters on our own terms and not simply by building up how bad Trump is. First of all because it doesn't work, and second of all because Trump is now a lame duck and won't even be running in 2028. I'm stunned. I didn't know until yesterday this was a thing they did. All the neocon shit aside... why? What was the point? Is there a contingent of voters out there who care about Liz Cheney? WHO EVEN KNOWS WHO LIZ CHENEY IS!?!? No Joe Rogan, though. Nope. Not tens of millions of persuadable dudebros who fucking looooved Bernard and would pat themselves on the back for listening to a whole 3 hours of Kamala awkwardly laughing or whatever it is she did on the trail.

This, also, does not matter and will not hurt him.

No hold on Banks, he was letting go once the defender changed direction.

The world may never know.

I really try not to just live in the world of laughing at how stupid people like Sack are, but "my billionaire friends are going to break the necks of the elite" is pretty fun. I gotta admit it. That's a good time right there.

Me: "replace 'Bernie Sanders' with 'a Democrat whose core desire is to advocate for the economic betterment of the poor and working classes while talking like a non-robot (like Biden/Trump and unlike Harris/Vance)'" You: "You’ve said that 'populism is Bernie Sanders and that’s the solution.'" This is what I meant by thanking you for either reminding me of your style or making it obvious to me for the first time. It lets me know things I need to know regarding how to respond or whether to respond. That kind of purposeful and intentional dishonesty is instructive and helps me figure out whether or not you are someone who is wanting to converse honestly (a useful thing) or if I should just respond to you in a Socratic way where I'm actually talking to the larger audience because that's the useful thing.

We are all salty as fuck right now lol

I've been disconnected from this whole thing for so long I either forgot your whole deal or this is actually new to me. Thanks for educating me.

In terms of how to perform it for voters: Bernie Sanders on Joe Rogan I mean that both specifically (watch/listen so you can hear what 202x American populism can sound like) and generally (replace "Bernie Sanders" with "a Democrat whose core desire is to advocate for the economic betterment of the poor and working classes while talking like a non-robot (like Biden/Trump and unlike Harris/Vance)" and replace "Joe Rogan" with "any major platform where millions and millions of reachable voters will pay attention regardless of whether or not that venue is socially acceptable"). I am someone who believes there should not be such a thing as a billionaire, but I don't even care about having any political party or politician advocate for what I believe. In terms of a policy: "Every American should have free healthcare" Not access to preferred advantage plan shopping opportunities via a friendly and easy-to-use app. You're alive in America and you need a thing, you get the thing. When health insurance industry stooges step in to try and design some laughable plan that involves pre-tax income withholdings you, as the politicians, point at those corporations and you name them and you tell the people that those corporations, by name, are OK with them dying so they can make profit. And that's important because the people already KNOW these private health insurance corporations are OK with them dying so long as they can stand in the middle and siphon off mountains of cash. You're not telling them anything they don't already experience and know. We, as Americans, live it every single day and DC actively encourages it. So be the guy who will speak the truth on behalf of the people in the face of power.

Populism and pluralism are not in necessary conflict, especially when the population in question is massive and diverse, as ours is. All I'm seeing is extremely vague fear-mongering. What, specifically, is your worry when someone advocates a larger populism within the Democratic party? Death camps for Christians? Slightly higher taxation on billionaires? If what you're interested in here is just kind of a higher level discussion of populism and pluralism in a non-specific sense that isn't directly applied to the 202x political situation in America then that's not really of any interest at all to me.

This is a great example of just saying a lot of words without saying anything. What are you even talking about? What do you think "populism" is?

"I may not be Dale Earnhardt, but I smashed into the fucking wall because I couldn't turn left!"

The good old days.

It is both true that Americans have never had it so good in general and that this fact should never be wielded as a political cudgel. There's not actually a disagreement there.

A thread in which monied whites laugh at the misfortunte of minorities and the poor. Cool.