cle23

I disagree. Mayfield was never going to be a top tier QB, but he could have been middle of the road, decent starter. Hell, he's going to be a starter again this year. Constant change in offense and coaches isn't good for anyone.

Could be just to keep everything loosened up, like MLB pitchers do. Throwing a football isn't a "natural" motion, and it can be hard on your joints, ligaments, and muscles.

That, and when he couldn't scramble, he threw jump balls to Mike Evans.

Nagy isn't and never was the play caller in KC either. It's always been Reid.

I am not arguing that it's not possible. My issue is a very biased website pushing out articles based on "research" that links things with no direct evidence provided. Are the side effects caused by the vaccine? It's possible. But the article says they are linked, and then just says that A and B happened and makes the assumption that they are linked.

Your own article doesn't actually link anything. They claim by going through insurance data that they can link the vaccine to still births. But it is simply guessing based on when the vaccine went live, and 9 months later. No other supporting data is given. And, from the article itself: "That makes COVID-19 vaccine-induced spontaneous abortion the most plausible hypothesis for the drop in birth rates — because the same number of women were becoming pregnant, but fewer of them were carrying their pregnancies to term." The author of the article is a political writer from a political website created by RFK Jr., and supporting his anti vaccine book at every turn. I am not saying that these absolutely couldn't be linked, but the article just gathers a bunch of random data and then claims they must be linked without actually linking any of it directly.

Do you hold Trump to the same standard of lying? Is he also a phony?

i Do I think that there are different set of rules and situations for the wealthy, and those in the higher ups up politics? Absolutely. Do I think there is a national and worldwide conglomerate that secretly plots any and all major events in the world? I do not. And if there was, I think Trump would be the last person to try to stand up to them. Trump is as ME first as it gets, so he would look to benefit off of it as much as the next guy. He used his presidency and campaign to line his families' pockets. He or his advisors have figured out that if he makes himself out as some champion of the "people", he can use it as a source of vast income. For a billionaire, all he ever does as ask others to fund all of his legal and politic ambitions. Politicians have always done that, but not the the extent that Trump is doing it in all manner of things. He has a history of campaign and charity fraud going back years. And again, let's say there IS a Deep State. What has Trump done, in actions, to dismantle or attack it? He' talked to no end about doing it. But what has he actually done? Actions, not words.

For the record, what did Trump do to destroy the "Deep State" in his first term? How much "dismantling" did he do?

It's just as shady to use this as "breaking news" and then put out a pure speculation piece. Hunter Biden is shady as can be, and more than likely deserves prison time for any of a number of reasons, but to put out "Breaking News" and then literally start the the discussion with "They probably" is straight up dishonest reporting. The dude has zero evidence of anything other than he dislikes Biden.

The dude was dumb for lying about it, but he bought a couple of already committed recruits some burgers. Crazy that this is such a major issue.

But the Raiders can also rescind the tag anytime before he would sign. I highly doubt he would do that, but given the RB market right now, the franchise tag is a decent amount of money comparatively. Once he signs, the contract is guaranteed, but he also would be subject to fines. At that point, it would be Cook and Harris taking touches from Jacobs. Jacobs is far and away better than either of them. But either way, I doubt a trade like that happens anyway.

Right, and a ton of the right's argument is always how biased certain parts of the government are, and how corrupt they are towards the left. Sot he statement was just to throw that aspect of the argument out the window.

I mean, it's a pretty simple thing to verify. Not a lot of confusion on who appointed judges.

As far as what he says about Federal spending, he is correct. If you total all tax revenue received, it is much less than government spending, hence the $32T national debt. But the statement that many more red states receive more money than they pay in, and many blue states pay more in than they receive is also true. I am not sure what his reasoning is on high state taxes "justification". The only sense I can make of his statement is that blue states tend to pay more of their own programs because they have higher taxes and budgets and red states get more help from the federal government because their state budgets are lower due to lower taxes, then that is exactly what subsidizing would be. Edit - I read it again and I suppose he is saying that the money they receive is just new debt, and not from any particular "state", but most of the country's debt is defense spending. Over half of our annual budget is "defense" spending. That should in theory be spread out evenly, so no state or citizen is more responsible than another. Defense spending is 54% of our budget, with no other single category being higher than 6%. If a state receives more federal dollars than it's citizens pay in, it is being subsidized one way or the other.

This just in. Trump and a Republican Congress approved more COVID money than Biden did.

The simple fact that you write off 7 million deaths as nothing, that says a lot about you. I understand that in terms of global population, the percentage is very low, but that is still millions of families effected. Also, the fact that China reports 121,000 deaths, when they were very recently wrong about their our total population by almost 100 million people, shows that their numbers are likely extremely low. Asia as a whole seems way off. 60% of the world's population and "only" 806,000 reported deaths? That seems extremely unlikely, especially when that was the epicenter.

Those are the most populus states as well. If you don't break it down per capita the information is completely pointless. Obviously, states with huge populations are going to receive more money, but per capita, most of those states are in the negative.

I am not comparing the 2. Just saying, if you're going to make the "I guess we freed them so they can shoot each other" statement, then let's just keep making stupid statements. I know you didn't make the statement, but the statement was made.

I guess we send kids to school so they can be shot too? I mean, if you're going to make stupid posts, make fully stupid posts.

Trump never tried to deliver. He is all talk. He always has been. It's the same with Mexico paying for the wall, having a better healthcare plan, tax breaks, etc. Trump did some good things, but his major campaign points were essentially ignored.

I vote, but not for either of the major parties.

Trump claimed all this garbage the first time, and he literally did none of it. It's all a ploy to try to get elected. He is a corrupt and deviant as the rest of DC, but somehow everyone believes he is there to "clear the swamp."

This works both ways, right? Kushner and Ivanka Trump received a $2 BILLION dollar investment from the Saudis within months of leaving office and somehow Republicans don't seem to care at all. The parties are the same. They have been for years and years now. The issue at this point is everyone is so stupidly arguing against each other that they ignore the blatant and rampant corruption on both sides because they are too busy pointing fingers.

As we have discussed previously, I do think the trans movement is going to far, especially with treatment for young children. What people decide to do as an adult is their business, but young children shouldn't be making those kinds of permanent decisions, with or without their parents. That being said, just because these kinds of groups try to include themselves in the LGBTQ community does not mean that they are supported by LBGTQ. I am sure there are some outliers, but a few years ago MAPS (minor attracted persons, ie pedophiles) tried to include themselves and were for the most part pushed away. Right now there is a tiny group of people who somehow think it is ok to come out and admit they are pedophiles, and then they try to include themselves in larger acceptance groups, but that doesn't mean they are accepted by the groups. The difference between LGBTQ and pedophiles is all about consent and harm. Minors cannot consent to sexual acts, and therefore the acts can do them harm. As long as the acts are between consenting adults, it's not our business.