TBayXXXVII

Shohei Choketoni had a rough series. Good thing Freeman stepped up.

You have the right to vote because you're paying for it. Whether I have kids or not, if I'm paying, I should have a vote. I have no problem surrendering my right to vote if I have no kids in the system and I don't have to pay.

Voting is a right and every state has the responsibility to make that right easy to exercise. If they don't, it's up to the citizens to either make noise or change who they vote for. It's not a R vs D issue. As I said, NJ is dark blue up north and voting up there is rather simple. Can you see who you voted for or do you just get a confirmation that the town received it? Two follow-ups, 1) If you can confirm that it's yours by seeing who you voted for (on that website), what makes you think no one else can see it? 2) If all you get is a confirmation that they received your ballot, how do you know that your ballot is being counted as per your actual vote? To answer your pending question... No, I don't trust ANY government official. I used to think voting online was a good idea. I'm not so sure anymore as everything is hackable. I also don't like the fact that it takes away anonymity. No, I don't trust ANY government agency either.

Agreed. I just thought it was interesting that you thought that only backwoods, nowhere places, had easy voting. NJ is a Democrat cesspool up north, and those elections run smoothly. Same with cities that are more conservative in South Jersey. I just don't understand why a state like CA would have a town with 250k people (probably 150k register voters), would only have 12 polling locations. It's almost like they want to make it inconvenient to vote on purpose. Wonder why they'd want that?

Elderly? LOL, where do you live? Everyone I see at every polling location ranges between 30 and mid 50's. I lived up in Hoboken for 3 years... I never saw a person at a polling location that was in their 60's. Like I said, maybe you need to have better people in charge.

Heck, when I was 18, the town I lived in was 3 square miles (7 really, but 4 were in the Pinelands and people couldn't build), that had 2k registered voters and had FOUR polling locations. If the little town I lived in could have 1 polling location per 500 eligible voters, I'd think a larger city would be able to find like 50. Jersey City is one of the most densely populated cities in the country, and they have about 160k registered voters and they have 36 locations. Maybe if your state was smarter and better run, they'd have more polling stations. Seems like common sense to think that the bigger cities would have much easier access to polling locations based on the amount of government buildings they would have.

I was making fun of liberals. I suggested online before... not here, but to someone who's now running for county commissioner (in my county). He didn't like it. He said that takes away the anonymity to voting. I mean, he is right.

Because that would be racist. The Democrats said that requiring ID's to vote is racist because black people don't have them. They also think black people are too poor to have the internet. Just ask Joe Biden, he'll tell you. Black people are poor (even though they're just as smart as white people... apparently). He'll also tell you that Obama is the first intelligent and well spoken black man. So, if you vote online, you'd need the internet and an ID to verify you are who you say you are. This is probably why Biden wrote the Crime Bill to put black people in prison for smoking pot. All that means is that black people can't vote, and thus, it's racist.

So you're saying Bezos isn't a leftist? I'll give the LA Times guy a pass, because I don't know him too well. Didn't realize he just bought the paper recently. Wait, the people who quit, are upset that the paper is politicizing their politicization?

Because they're the ones who are the corruptors.

I agree with you... "It’s the owners of the papers." That specific part is not what I was laughing at. The idea that you think that the owners aren't leftists, is absurd. What is equally absurd is that you think the people who quit, would've stayed, had the newspaper endorsed Trump. Those people's decision to quit is 100% due to the non-endorsement of Harris.

I have no issue with any person applying for a mail-in ballot. You apply, you fill it out, you mail it in. I do not approve of official ballots being arbitrarily mailed out to everyone, to be filled out.

LOL

Just shows you just how far left the Democrat party is pushing... even the leftists are saying they're too far left.

Yeah, let's go with that. LOL

OR... maybe they don't think there's a better candidate and your feelings are hurt. I know you won't read this, but that's because you're not very smart and why I'm on ignore.

I mean, I don't know how to respond to this. I just posted what the editorial section does and you ignored it and gave your own interpretation. LOL You do you bud.

Honestly, I had no idea what the purpose of an Editorial section of a newspaper was until this came about. I never read the newspaper. Found this... Seems to me that this is exactly what the owner asked them to do, and they didn't do it. Makes sense that he wouldn't then endorse a candidate. Garza was upset that he blocked them from endorsing Harris, so no, it's not that she's mad that no endorsement was made, but that the one they wanted, wasn't made. "Soon-Shiong reportedly blocked plans for the newspaper’s editorial arm (which operates independently from the newsroom) to endorse Kamala Harris for president over Donald Trump, as reported by Semafor earlier this week." Further: "It makes us look craven and hypocritical, maybe even a bit sexist and racist,” reads Garza’s resignation letter" Again, she's clearly mad that Harris wasn't being endorsed, and not that an endorsement wasn't being made. As the initial article said, other endorsements were made, so clearly it was only this one that had Garza up in arms, and it's clear that it's because they didn't endorse Harris.

I think he meant all types of elections, such as Senate, HoR, DA, stuff like that. Not every presidential election since their inception. I could be wrong though.

Well done (getting the girl).

They won championship in '94-'95 with Rizotti. They went 4 years without winning again and during that times, he had backed off that practice (not totally eliminating it, but scaling down a lot). After winning with Sue Bird in the '99-00 season, they asked Auriemma what he thought the reason was, that they got over the hump after falling short so many years in a row. He told them that the biggest factor was going back to practicing with guys regularly. He said his girls got better because of the competition level. He kept doing it and they kept winning. Sue Bird's season was the first of 10 championships over 15 years.

Then doubt away bud. I'm taking Auriemma's word for it.

LOL, the first time I linked the wrong one. But, to the point, Rizzotti was there in '94. The link is from 2011 with Maya Moore... meaning, the practice continued and still does. There is no stock of D2 (or JUCO in your estimation), players every year on college campuses. Auriemma has said in interviews that he goes to the gym looking for guys playing pick up games and asks them to practice with their team. It's not a mystery.

That's what he did back then, he's been using kids ever since. Go listen to an interview. The original article I linked a few posts prior says that it's common in women's sports in general. I don't know what the big secret is or why it's even bad. I think it's a great idea. Here's another one with UConn: https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/UCONN-WOMEN-A-few-good-men-helping-Huskies-11552793.php "Welcome to the world of the male practice players, 15 UConn students finding an outlet to extend their basketball playing days. The concept of using former high school boys' players enrolled at the school to push the powerhouse women's team was an idea hatched in the 1994-95 season, when starting point guard Jen Rizzotti asked if her future husband, a fellow UConn student, could take part in practice with some of his friends." Rizzotti's idea was the catalyist for the trend. Auriemma has been doing it ever since, especially when they have a short roster. It's been going on for 30 years, that wasn't a one off. Again, these are generally just students that they recruit on campus. There's no scholarships, there's no pay, there's no credits, there's nothing. These guys just volunteer.

It's common knowledge really, but here's one that took 3 seconds to find. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/UCONN-WOMEN-A-few-good-men-helping-Huskies-11552793.php In the article there's a comment that Geno realized it's value before the '95 season.