Announcement

Collapse
1 of 2 < >

Please update your bookmarks!!

If you use a bookmark as a way of getting to this site, please update it. The new link should include https:// before the rest of the URL. If you are having difficulty logging in, this is likely the cause.

Thanks and happy football season!
2 of 2 < >

FORUM POSTING RULES - Read before posting

Forum Rules.

(1) The guiding principle for posting in this forum is moderate yourselves.

(2) Don't write a post that attacks, impugns or denigrates another poster's character. There's an obvious difference between the language of humor and hateful, debased language. Know the difference and post accordingly.

(3) This is a Michigan sports forum. The forum welcomes posts from M's sports rivals. Talking smack, posting sass is what college sports rivalries are all about. Rules (1) and (2) above apply. If you don't want to view the posts of a rival talking smack or sassing, use the ignore feature in User Controls.

(4) This forum is about sharing thoughts, ideas and viewpoints about all sports, any number of subjects and issues, learning stuff from other posters and having fun. There are threads by subject matter within the forum for doing this. Keep the threads on point.

NB: The rules above are not intended to build a case to ban a poster. There are consequences for rule breaking as specified below. That's as far as it should go. Only the most egregious and persistent rule breaking would cause the moderators to consider a ban.

Due Process.

(1) The forum has 6 moderators. Jeff Buchanan, Jon, JD, Hannibal, Oracle, Entropy. None of them want to moderate adult posters who should know better. There may be posts that break the rules.

(2) Posters who, at the sole discretion of a moderator, break a rule will be given a warning post that will site one of the rules listed above as the reason for the deletion.

(3) If the rule breaking behavior continues, a moderator can remove an offending post and any ensuing post that whines about that action. If a moderator removes a post(s) the reason for the removal(s) will be posted with the removal notice that appears in the thread. This should be the end of it. Man up, take responsibility for breaking the rules. The forum moves on. If not, see below.

(4) A poster who has had a warning or a post(s) removed can certify a question by PM to any moderator about that action. Do not complain about the action or attempt to make your case in the forum/threads. Moderators shall do their best to address the question within 72h. At the end of 72h the majority opinion of the moderators responding will be the answer.

(5) Banning a poster for egregious and repeated rule breaking requires a unanimous vote to ban from all 6 moderators. We don't anticipate this will ever happen.
See more
See less

Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hanibal nailed it.

    I'd add that the Dems are running campaigns in which policy discussions are absolutely non-existent. I said that during the Presidential election about Hillary's vapid campaign, and it happened again in GA6. Hatred of Trump is not enough.

    What do Democrats stand FOR? I'd really appreciate a list from some of you Dems here. Be specific. "fight racism..." is not specific enough, because that term is now applied to anyone who is a Republican.

    And once you have your list, take it to a coffee shop or somewhere you guys congregate with ordinary Americans (if you do, heh) and ask them what they think of the list. You will find, as Hanni says, that the D party is way far to the left of where ordinary people are.

    I've been meaning to say this for probably three months. I watched a FOX info-babe questioning a group of about 250 Trump supporters:

    "For how many of you is building the wall a primary reason for voting for Trump?" 1
    "For how many...replace Obamacare?" 3-4
    "For how many tax reform and reduction?" all the rest 240+

    The animating issue for Republicans is taxes. Working folks pay a lot of taxes, and they see those taxes being used to buttress a government leviathan where 50% of the people are receiving money from the other 50% who pay.

    IMO, the animating factor for Dems is "social justice" which is simply code for income redistribution.

    It is not much more complicated than that. Makers v. Takers.

    Comment


    • One thing that Nate Silver pointed out last night was that of the 4 elections, the best results for Democrats were directly inverted to how much money and attention it received: Kansas, South Carolina, Montana and Georgia.

      Comment


      • 1. If the Democrat base stays energized like they have for these 4 special elections, they should be in good shape in 2018. That if should be bold and in 28 point font.
        0-4

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Da Geezer View Post
          0-4
          That is correct and my point still stands.

          Comment


          • Tom Price won his last three re-elections by 30+ points every time. Handel just won by 4

            I guess a lot of deadbeats and welfare queens must've moved to the GA-6 in the past 6 months!

            Comment


            • Indeed

              What was the GOP' record in 2009 special elections prior to their 2010 wave election?

              Comment


              • You're surely not comparing the results of a long-time incumbent to the results of a special election in which the Ds spent massive amounts of money?

                I'm not taking much away from this, but, if any D wants to think this is a good sign, then LOL.
                Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
                Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.

                Comment


                • What was the GOP' record in 2009 special elections prior to their 2010 wave election?
                  Well, the Rs did pick up a Senate seat....in fucking MASSACHUSETTS. But, that was in January of 2010, so crafty wording on the 2009 qualifier!
                  Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
                  Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by iam416 View Post
                    You're surely not comparing the results of a long-time incumbent to the results of a special election in which the Ds spent massive amounts of money?

                    I'm not taking much away from this, but, if any D wants to think this is a good sign, then LOL.
                    The Democrats didn't even field a candidate when Price was first elected in 2004. His first reelection he took 72% of the vote.

                    Would you argue that if a Dem had run in 2004 it would've looked like yesterday's vote?

                    BTW do you think Ossoff losing was somehow a loss for the Prog wing of the Dem Party? Dude was everything you've wanted Dems to be: centrist, moderate, milquetoast, don't talk about Trump

                    Comment


                    • The Democrats did spend massively on that race but they were nearly equalled by the other side. 60 million total with the Democrats side spending 2 million more according to the AJC.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by iam416 View Post
                        Well, the Rs did pick up a Senate seat....in fucking MASSACHUSETTS. But, that was in January of 2010, so crafty wording on the 2009 qualifier!
                        True, but they were 0-5 in the special elections in 2009 and they lost a seat in that process, does that not matter. Geezer is the one bringing up 0-4, I'm merely pointing out similar circumstances, if you think that comparison is worthless then fine. The Scott Brown election was big, but it was a year later and it was Senate seat. I'm not sure if it is the same as a House special election, you do.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post

                          BTW do you think Ossoff losing was somehow a loss for the Prog wing of the Dem Party? Dude was everything you've wanted Dems to be: centrist, moderate, milquetoast, don't talk about Trump
                          Exactly

                          Comment


                          • The Democrats didn't even field a candidate when Price was first elected in 2004. His first reelection he took 72% of the vote.

                            Would you argue that if a Dem had run in 2004 it would've looked like yesterday's vote?

                            BTW do you think Ossoff losing was somehow a loss for the Prog wing of the Dem Party? Dude was everything you've wanted Dems to be: centrist, moderate, milquetoast, don't talk about Trump
                            I doubt the election would have looked like it did yesterday if Price was running. So, if this were held in 2004 with Price running, no. Duh.

                            Ossoff was an ideal "middle America"/"suburban" district candidate -- and he STILL lost. And he lost, in part, because he was saddled with Pelosi and the prog wing. To win an R district I think you have to really, really assure voters you're not going to be a Pelosi-yes-man. I think that's a tough case to make.

                            The Ds have a very real messaging problem to districts like this -- as I said earlier -- because the party as a whole doesn't strike me as particularly interested in moving to the center or even putting the brakes on their prog march. I think this election maybe swings the other way if Tim Ryan is Speaker (lol...indulge the impossible for a sec).

                            In any event, if I were the R Leadership then I'd take nothing from this election other than running hard against the hardest left might be still have strong currency in certain districts. I'd certainly be cautious as in other districts I'm quite sure anti-DJT sentiment probably outstrips anti-prog sentiment

                            If I were a D then I wouldn't take it as a positive. I'll reiterate -- LOL. If you disagree, then ok. Congrats on another in a long of line of awesome moral victories.
                            Last edited by iam416; June 21st, 2017, 12:25 PM.
                            Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
                            Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.

                            Comment


                            • The Scott Brown election was big, but it was a year later and it was Senate seat
                              It was less than six months later in the calendar than this election. And I think a statewide election is way more significant than a Rep election.
                              Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
                              Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.

                              Comment


                              • I'm not the oy one crafty with dates, LOL.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X