jerryskids

I used to be for the death penalty, but now I oppose it. Cases like this are part of the reason, although Rolling Stone is so Leftie, it's hard to tell how accurate it is. But in the general sense, I don't think the government should be in the business of killing it's citizens, especially in the larger sense that I believe the government is generally incompetent at most things.

Agreed. I'd have gone with 96. Just below average. Much more believable That being said, it's hard to tell how intelligent someone is. I'm confident, though, in saying that her mental acuity, or processing speed, is quite low. She clearly can't think well on her feet. That's not inherently a bad thing, depending on the job. For POTUS, it is a bad thing. Some of you might recall that I used to measure this for a living, so I'm somewhat qualified to make this observation.

Sweet Jeebus my team shat the bed. Who knew I should have started Odunze, Michael Wilson, Lazard, and/or Kalil Shakir over Conner, Achane, Aiyuk Also LaPorta can lick my dirty taint. I guess it bodes well for my bench and options, but it's shaping up to be quite a management challenge. I like when clear starters emerge and I can just plug them in.

The Left: Three pages of denigrating Melania Trump. The Right: Kamala slept with Willie Brown to get her career started. The Left: Misogynist!

I don't think so. Here is how a list experiment works: https://www.gradientmetrics.com/resource-old/list-experiments Pretty interesting; I wasn't familiar with these. I can see how it works. It sounds to me like they asked different questions through this technique, including wishing if he was hit. Here is what I think happened: - 30% of Democrats wish he was hit. - Other questions were asked to identify political affiliation, like "white republicans are racist," which are attributable to hard-left opinions [my guess here]. - Math ensues, and he comes up with his number of hard-lefties who wanted him hit. -

Figures. I was at the Cards/Lions game and only tracking my players online, not the other games.

You calling me a shell of my former self is great irony. You used to be one of the best; now you respond with "wow" and yet another Eeyore gun throw.

It's not misogyny, it's recognizing that there is a difference in the way men and women think. Girlios like you two hate the indisputable science on this topic. How much estrogen do you guys have, anyway?

Exhibit A. You are like a woman who says, why do men do [insert manly behavior]? It's so stupid$#@! Maybe you should go vacuum or something, boyo. Get in touch with your inner woman.

That's fascinating. It could explain why conservatives see the threats from our lying MSM, censorship, etc., while liberals don't see them, and say "muh conspiracy!"

Kaiser Soze

Snake Pliskin

He's killing my team in the Geek Balls league. Jeebus, he can't crack 10 pts PPR? Is there even another WR playing for SF?

This site shows an excellent graph of which states "lose" votes and which "gain" based on representation in Congress vs. population: https://usafacts.org/visualizations/electoral-college-states-representation/ Because every state gets 2 for Senators, the smallest states all get 3 EC votes vs. just 1. But Cali still gets 55 (albeit instead of 65). So yes, your vote counts "less," but not too much less. Also, looking at that chart, it seems to me fairly distributed between Red and Blue as to which states lose votes vs. which gain. If you read that otherwise, let me know. Finally, I'm not sure why you would pick AZ as your example. You'll note from the graph that AZ is on the losing (larger) side as well. Plus it is one of the fastest growing states, in large part because people from your shiot hole keep moving here in droves, bringing the same liberal policies that are destroying Cali. Thanks for nothing.

California and South Dakota have the same number of EC votes?

Well, that's sorta a Kamala word salad. Are you voting for her? My spiritual journey is personal, and is not ultimately one of choice, but of revelation. The election is one of choice, and happening in less than 50 days. Who is your choice, if you are a man?

Weepaws spamming this thread. Who are you voting for? Be a man, make a tough choice.

You obviously did a google search and just posted links you didn't read, boyo. None of them are polls. One of them is a collection of opinions. I never said Trump aced it, or even did well. Back in the thread about the debate, I was clear that I didn't think he did well. I explained why Trump said nice things about the last debate, and why his team is more concerned about debating a live person with CNN. You did not respond to that.

Then why did you ask for three things? Those were all solid answers. I'll give you a 4th you won't believe: improved world peace. The answer to my question is that you have severe TDS.

My point, boyo, is that Trump felt good after that first debate because there was no way he could have felt otherwise. He and his team know it will be different on CNN with a live opponent. Every independent did not say he was awful, that's your feelz. If I had said that, you would keep quoting it for weeks.

He faced a dead guy in the CNN one. And Vox told you he got humiliated. Independents seem less impressed with her word salads.

No, he was throwing out a red herring about Trump's infidelity in a discussion about Kamala being a tyrannical boss.

Kamala banged her way into her career. Her husband shtupped the nanny while married to his first wife.

He turned down a CNN debate? What, was HuffPo not available? Kamala doesn't have the guts to face Trump on a neutral field. She is tough though -- she'll shoot intruders, and world tyrants fear her.