TtownBillsFan

I've been lurking here (and posting infrequently, and 'thumbs-upping/downing stuff since the sanctioned Bills board died). I LIKED this place, and had a LONG ignore list. I REALLY wish EVERYONE could learn who to ignore, and who not to (as I didn't want this to become an echo-chamber). BUT, I honestly looked most forward to DR's posts, as he broke open so many things 3-4 years ago, he was never the first to start a fight, but I wish he put several others on ignore, too. HOWEVER, responding to trash shouldn't get just ONE banned, when we've seen these turds goading, daily, many times a day. Why so many of the instigators are in this thread speaks volumes about the moderation that's going on, and I won't stick around for that, Bills fan or not. If someone finds a fairly moderated (or even, a board that was mostly ignored like this one was, until the trolls arrived), please PM me, as I'll join. I'll continue to get my BILLS stuff on the main board here, but done down here. The moderators have let their lib-leaning ways show, and that always tends toward silencing dissenting views. We know where that leads, and I'm not down with that. Shame - this was a good 'basement' for years before I was here, and the several years I got to enjoy this place.

You're a flipping idiot, aren't you. Yes, yes you are. Good god, I'm done with this place. Idiots are as idiots do. I thought I had most of them on ignore, but they come out of the woodwork. I just can't, I'm done.

Why were all of the people in the top photo so hateful-looking? They KNEW they couldn't stay there another four years, right? Why all the smug, arms-crossed, someone-pissed-in-my-post-tosties faces? In addition to the other 'thumbs-up' type emogies I've asked for in the past, how about one that is just 'uh-huh', or 'yep'.

Ugh, I just HAD to click that link, as I didn't know what Proud Boys was (I wanted to read their own definition). Now I'm on a list somewhere! Thanks, Rob's House I don't disagree with MOST of the stuff they have on there, but enough is anti-PC enough that my wife would raise an eyebrow about it, which gives me pause. I don't even want to re-open the site to quote stuff, but I'm thinking the thing that bugged me most was the 'pro-western/we created it' stuff. We all moved over here from somewhere, and while I think our mode of government is better than anywhere else on the planet (it's what gives us our rights and freedoms - that, alone, is what makes us 'special'), the language they use can make it seem that it's 'white-related', where I don't think it is. Like I said, it's the form of government that makes us 'special'. I'm mixed-race, but don't feel any differently about our country. I think we're great because of the representative form of government we have. We can't be beholden to our forbearers to how we got here; not fairly, anyway. We can only be held to what we do with it.

Doc Brown - we all know you're lefty. No one knows me, but I'm pretty righty. And I'm always interested in how people see things, as it's pretty incredible how people can see the very same thing, and see them so differently. It's common, expected; as we all have our biases. But I find it incredibly interesting and informative. I'm also reading a book about how to better listen and hear what people are saying (and empathically understand, and no, not mind-reading, lol!), so I WANT to understand how the 'other side' saw things.) My dad and grandma are also 'from the left'. And I respect my Gma more than any other living person. And we share the SAME common, core values. So it always interests me how people of the same mind can see things so differently. I agree that interruptions shouldn't be a part of any of the other debates. We'll see if that happens. And I outlined above what I thought would make for more fair debates (as I viewed Wallace as a lefty, and I think he showed it, but I'm guessing you didn't see him giving un-fair advantages). What would you see as fair for the next two (or more) that need to happen?

It was, on all sides, Doc. I'm sure you'd agree. I want both people to be able to make their points, but the moderation (which is what you're talking about) was an embarrassment. They REALLY need to make it known that no one speaks while the other is speaking, that goes BOTH ways. And the sounds and head bobs and everything that the cameras are looking for, that needs not to be part of it either. BUT, I want one moderated fairly. Chris Wallace is not a journalist, nor fair moderator. You Need, like I said, an O'reilley or some similar (journalist by name, but you know which way they lean) to even it out for the second, then for the third, even they get all questions by a line that forms at the back, and people line up and ask questions, or it needs to come from someone like Trey Parker, whose proven to be very fair, up the middle, and won't hesitate to throw a zinger to either.

Hmm, wire, or a cheap thread on a likely expensive suit. Everyone questioning will always be considered conspiracy (especially if posted by Hedge, LOL!), but looks like it could be a wire to me

52-47, in the EC, will win you every time. Not sure which school of math you're trying to push here. But EC 51+ wins! Pop the corks, release the doves and balloons, gave over Or, I'm guessing you were at Hill-dog's watch-party four years ago

I really hate that I used to think you were a good poster on the other board. You're an ass-clown, and if you're that far-removed from reality, it makes me feel bad I ever agreed with any football takes you ever had. WOW!

Or, he didn't give a F to answer a non-question about a really non-existent congtingent of society. It'd be like asking, Mr. President, do you care to respond to the people that contend we didn't land on the moon? It's a ludicrous question, aimed at a very small, very small, very small (I'll say again), very small, ignorant, segment of society.

Probably three times by now!

Agree completely on all points you made. Trump could have interrupted to say he doesn't support KKK (he doesn't, and that's a really bad lie that we all know the context), the voting by mail issue is an easy one, that he was trying to explain, but was interrupted in the middle of (we're not against mail-in, but against un-requested), and the GND thing, I honestly don't remember what that was. But the other two were just so UCK, if any fair moderator would have been employed, they could have really brought out the points of those issues, as none of us are in favor of KKK (or any race for or against another), and the voting thing is easy to understand, if you understand requested ballot versus mass-mailing.

I wish Trump would say it right, it's FAUXahontas. He keeps mispronouncing that one. I do wish he'd get that one right. But that wasn't anything about Biden.

I do kinda get what you're saying here. I heard myself yell at Trump to shut up and let Joe hang himself a couple times. But when you're fighting two-vs-one, sometimes you have to fight harder. I really do hope they figure out a couple fair debates for the two remaining (and that'd be one held by someone like O'Reilly (to be the right-side of the 'fair' side), and then someone completely a-political, likely maybe one of the South Park guys, to host the third.

It's likely that he's not quite the Billionaire that he's been made out to be. I don't hear TRUMP out there saying he's a Billionaire; but I don't hear him correcting many, either. Likely, he's not nearly-close to the Billion on paper, but he doesn't want to correct any of the financial rags that say so, for many number of reasons. None of which are in any way illegal, nor even shady. If you think I smell like roses, and I don't always, who am I to correct you Just my guess.

Oh boy, you're asking general morons to understand how paying taxes work, if they don't get a refund because their employer over-held for them. Don't expect good response from this post. But yes; people that care about their money know it's better to owe 'at-the-end-of-the-year', meaning you didn't over-pay, giving the government an intrest-free-loan.

And I'm sorry, but the same way that my car can't be covered after being in an accident, or my roof can't be covered after being in a tornado, I'll say it where others can't, IF IT'S INSURANCE, you CANNOT INCLUDE PRE-EXISTING conditions. THIS coming from a colon-cancer patient/survivor/whatever you call people these days. It's just NOT fair to EVERYONE ELSE that gets on insurance before or after. It's called insurance, because you're paying to insure against it not happening/or in case it does. It's NOT "insurance" if you can buy in after it happened! UGH, and read the first two sentences of his 'quote' on the website. Is there not a bigger jumbly-gobblity-***** of words? The words mean nothing at all! Good grief, it hurts my head to read nonsense-words and phrases like that! I'm mean, FFS, "the US urgently needs to embrace greater ambition", that already made my head hurt, the rest is definitely no better!

TOTALLY disagree with this part. Trump made the point that he just lost the far left by saying Biden fumbled through an answer about that. It was more pointing out that the left is off the rails. The fact that Biden is even IN that party, I think, brings to focus that, if you even THOUGHT of voting for this guy, those are the things his party is going for right now. Because he couldn't say he favored it, in a debate, and be in favor of it, look at the puppet: if you put him in, THOSE are the things that are going to be initiated in his name. Probably not a personal attack, other than he said "shut up". Just my guess as to their count.

I told my wife as we were watching, so typical, 2v1, Trump versus a stacked deck. I hope we get one Trump-friendly moderator to off-set this, and then one, TRULY neutral moderator. Why they can't have THREE-NEUTRAL moderators (or one each for each debate), I DON"T KNOW. It shouldn't be slanted like it is. But thinking Wallace is anything but a talking-head that pretends to be a journalist, a 'fair' person, is fooling yourself. You don't need to watch more than a day of his coverage to see where he leans. Hell, give any random person a chance at it, or remove the single-moderator platform, and let people line up to ask them questions; Anything would be better than this slanted moderation we get. And it's NEVER FOR the right. It's ALWAYS SLANTED to help the left. Every single freaking time. The fact that the "Right" ever wins is a testament that the nation is NOT the left (thank the Lord!), and swings back and forth wildly.

Ditto on the man-crush 😉

I'd ask that you make it with these other ass-hats. But I understand it'd get really hard keeping up with them all, since they seem to each have 2-3 sock-puppets.

You're 100% correct, and in 2016, I did that opposite - I abstained from the presidential election, and voted only state/county in my district. I guess I was butt-hurt that my guy, Ted Cruz, didn't get the nomination, and I didn't like the way Trump treated a good guy. To top it off, I had my best friend telling me to vote for Trump, if for no other reason, than to get more conservative judges in some of these places. He was right, I was wrong, and I'm sorry I abstained. I won't abstain this time; I'll vote for Trump once. OR, if they do mail-in ballots, I may do it 3500 times, just to make sure I over-wright the left's efforts at the same (JOKING - I'm a law-and-order guy). I HATE it that my friend was right, and I was wrong. But I live in a state that I knew I could abstain, and we'd still 100% go for Trump. I just wanted it to be shown that, at THAT time, I was not for him. I'm now 100% for him, and hope he keeps fighting for US, and the US.

Thanks, Doc. It is a nightmare, as about half of them have treated this as freebie-time for them, knowing I have no 'teeth' to demand rent without eviction. I don't know what they think will happen when I'm finally able to go to court and make it happen, though.! As to the $600 vs $300 vs whatever amount, I agree the $600 was a good, quick-fix, when we were all initially shut down. HOWEVER, I think it's (I want to say ######ed, but know I can't say that) STUPID that we put out an additional $600-across-the-board, across all cities/states/, regardless of the situation. THAT was bad legislation. IF the goal was to make everyone the same as they were, then they should have just made it so unemployment insurance agencies at the state level paid 100% of what you made, in the last 6 or 8 or whatever it is now, weeks. I had to go on unemployment once in the last 20 years; right after 9/11 (had nothing to do with it, I just remember it because of what was going on). At that time, my unemployment paid, I think it was, 66% of the average of what I made, per week, over the last 8 weeks. So, I assume the insurance works the same way now. They could have just made it so that the insurance pays 100%, instead of the 66% (or whatever it is now). Point being, they should have NEVER made it a straight-dollar amount. It should have ALWAYS been a %, and should have paid you, if they wanted to get people through, 100% of what you were making. But NEVER should have paid more. That was ridiculous.

Good God, dude. You couldn't be more wrong on most everything you post down here, where I used to think you had some sense on the top-side. But, dude, really; you're supporting this Harris pick? You're LOSING yourself. There is NOTHING redeemable about that woman, and you know all the reasons. Keep hitching your saddle to these two turds. You're going to ride off into the sunset, with a new avatar (if you're a good enough person to live up to your word), saddled to a couple piles of DUNG. As delusional as you've been, you deserve no less, and I can't wait to watch it happen; IF you have any character, and will abide by it.