Tywin et al.

Members
  • Content count

    5,218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tywin et al.

  • Rank
    I got all this stuff twirling around in my head

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Purifying in the Waters of Lake Minnetonka

Recent Profile Visitors

4,814 profile views
  1. I want to say on the front end that you made some valid points in the part of your post that I snipped, but I’m trying to raise a basic question. In conservative parts of the country where a liberal Democrat stands no chance of winning, is the party not better off if it runs a conservative Democrat who may not be in line with the liberal wing of the party, regardless of what the issue is within a reasonable standard? Staying on abortion and reproductive rights, I would not support running a anti-choice candidate that wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and do things like defund Planned Parenthood or close abortion clinics, but I could support a candidate who would use their position of power to not expand abortion rights if they couldn’t support it morally or for whatever reason. I think that’s a fair compromise to pick up a seat that might help lead to universal healthcare, for example.
  2. Superteam is too strong, unless you’re using the term to highlight the combining of the three teams. Sure you could build a good defense with the three rosters, and you’d have some alright skill position guys too, but the QB situation would still be a nightmare. I doubt the team would win more than 6 games.
  3. In general I agree with you, but with one caveat. I think individuals running for executive offices should absolutely be held to this standard, but there should be some wiggle room for people running for a seat in a legislature. They’re less likely to have any impact when it comes to abortion rights, and their votes in other areas, assuming they’re an otherwise lockstep Democrat, would be really useful.
  4. The Wasteland WarBoyz are in the hizzie!
  5. How can you back the candidacy of a guy with so little self respect that he roots vigorously for a team with an owner who refuses to change their racist name? At least I have the dignity to root for a team that’s owned by a pair of slum lord brothers who blacked mailed the city and state for hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium that has killed all the birds in said city. #priorities
  6. I just heard a funny concept on the radio. How good would the Jacksonville Brown Jets be, and who would be their starting QB?
  7. Yeah, it really failed Obama.........and every Democratic nominee for the last forty years. Democrats have won the popular vote 7 out of 11 times by nominating people who are relatively moderate. The last time they nominated a true bleeding heart liberal they suffered one of the biggest electoral landslides in history.
  8. No, I just acknowledged that it might be wise to run a younger candidate, but not someone who is younger than @Jaime L. I’m not saying that Democrats should nominate the most boring individual alive, but it would be a mistake to nominate a super liberal individual.
  9. Kennedy is simply too young. He won't turn 40 until a month before the election. Although Trump would be an ideal person for a younger candidate to run against. Another name to keep in mind is Representative Tim Ryan. He checks off almost all the boxes for what Democrats should be looking for if you want to play it relatively safe.
  10. Only way to get better is play. Auction isn't that much harder, you just have to look at it a little differently.
  11. We should have bought the cloud insurance!
  12. I wouldn’t compare 2008 with 2016. It’s not a good indicator for the past election or future elections. There were too many anomalies.
  13. I'm shocked shocked well not that shocked: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/21/exclusive-secret-service-out-of-money-to-pay-agents-because-of-trumps-frequent-travel-large-family.html
  14. I'll take part in the inaugural Pony Bowl.
  15. Well it's supposed to storm all day here. So much for the eclipse.