jrober38

LMAO Such a hypocrite.

When did I say that? There was tons of wrong doing by Clinton. She should have never been the nominee. The system was rigged in her favour to cover for a completely flawed candidate with excessive baggage. I'm also pointing out that if you think Clinton should have been locked up, you're a hypocrite if you continue on as a Trump supporter. You can't have it both ways (which is all anyone seems to try and do in politics anymore) and preach "rule of law" regarding Clinton and ignore the "rule of law for Trump. They're both crooks.

Not at all. Trump supporters screaming "lock her up" on the campaign trail now defending this crook is the definition of hypocrisy.

Yet they preach the "rule of law". It's hysterical.

I'm pretty close. He's been playing great lately. Yesterday was probably his best game as a pro (I said the same thing the week before). He looks completely in command of the offense and the change in personnel having 3 receivers on the field more often seems to have shaken the shackles loose.

A+ He was exceptional yesterday. Was clutch on 3rd downs with a few beautiful passes to Beasley. Never put the ball in harms way. Put points on the board, moving up and down the field against a quality defense on the road. He's been playing some really good football over the last month or so (minus the Browns game). I wanted Allen to finish the season with a QB Rating above 90 for me to believe. Right now he's at 88, and it's been consistently trending the right way. If he continues playing well he should finish above that mark.

Sounds like a complete psycho.

The Thompson was around in 1913?

I disagree. There are almost 400 million firearms in the US. 100+ years ago firearms were still somewhat primitive. Rifles, some revolvers, no AR-15s, not semi automatic high capacity hand guns, etc. If you slashed policing in half, America would be a disaster. Criminals wouldn't be opposed, and to combat them I imagine there would be a rise in local militias, and as I said the country would operate similar to the wild west in the late 1800s and early 1900s when the frontier operated in this manor. The US is much more connected than it was 100 years ago. The highways, airports, ports are all crucial parts of the country and would need maintenance. Key trade routes might be taken care of, but anywhere there isn't a factory or distribution network would likely see it's access points fall into disrepair. The US had any hardly standing army before WW1. Having that military might not be necessary but getting rid of it would result in millions of unemployed, either directly through the military or indirectly through the communities that service its bases. Things may recover eventually and I'd love if your ideas were realistic, but I think the short term effect of laying off millions of people and gutting the military and police forces and removing the ability to enforce the rule of law would result in the downfall of American society. Too many people, too many guns, too much existing poverty, and way too many people who rely on the government either as a job or through assistance. Pulling the carpet out from under all that would be a complete disaster.

I totally agree, I just think the notion that the public will step in and cover the cost of all the social programs and services that would be gutted is ridiculous. American society would fall apart without income taxes. EDIT: I understand all the arguments against income taxes, I'm strictly speaking about short term effects if they were eliminated. I also understand this is ultimately a reason social programs are so challenging to remove once they're in place.

Fine. I don't disagree. But the result in this lack of spending on social services, bridges, roads, etc, will be the loss of millions of jobs. There will be no enforcement of laws because police forces will be gutted, there will be no rule of law because the courts will be gutted, and ultimately there will be no one to incarcerate criminals who are convicted because the prison system will be gutted. Society will resemble the wild west. The economy would likely also collapse.

I'm not just talking about the poor. Consider the US Military. It spent almost $700 billion this year. That's over $2000 per person in the US. Do you honestly think 330 million people will each spend $2000 per person? The average family of 4 living in a democrat controlled urban city is going to shell out $8500? Not a chance. I imagine military spending would be cut in half if not more. As would be the case for pretty much every public service.

This is a total pipe dream in 2019. Social services would be completely gutted to the point where they'd be useless.

How do you pay for any social services without taxes? Who builds the roads and bridges? Who pays the fire department and police? Who pays the military? Who builds and maintains sewers and waste removal?

Lots of people pay lots of taxes for things they don't use or don't believe in. That's just part of living in a civilized country.

Most Scandinavian Countries. Maybe a few other European countries. As for why, that's an extremely complicated answer. The US is unique in a variety of reasons (guns, healthcare, military spending, etc). Many staples of the US identity aren't found in most parts of the developed world.

I agree with what you're saying. I'm just pointing out that there are plenty of developed countries around the world where elites don't hold as much power as they do in the US.

If the electorate was smarter, it wouldn't let it happen. The only candidates who would actually shake up the system are Sanders and Warren. I don't agree with much of what they're saying, but I think they'd do their best to smash the hold the political elites have over federal politics.

In my opinion, US politicians work for their donors and not their constituents. That's a major problem. Poor education results in fewer people getting engaged in politics because they don't understand it. As you said their awareness about the issues and candidates is extremely poor.

This is what happens when you don't invest in education. In a system where everyone can directly vote for the leader of the country, there is no reason voter turnout should be so low. I disagree with your last sentence. Democracy does not do that in most places around the world. However when you allow corporations and the elite to buy elections and influence politicians through lobbying, everyone but the top 1% gets completely screwed over.

Unfortunately this is what happens when almost 50% of the electorate doesn't vote.

I understand it could happen, I just think it's very unlikely. I'd much rather take care of business against Dallas and get to 9-3, vs risk sliding to 8-5 heading into Pittsburgh as a must win game. All I'm saying is I want them to take care of business now.

I can't see any world where the Bills beat the Ravens. They look like far and away the best team in football. The Cowboys is winnable, which is why we need to win it.

I'm very nervous about the Ravens. They look like the best team in football and are blowing out everyone they play. The Cowboys game is setting up as a must win game. Need to get that 9th win on the books before the Ravens game.

I feel like this is a must win game. The Ravens look like the best team in football, and I don't want to head into Pittsburgh desperate for a win after dropping two in a row.