OCinBuffalo

We'll see. Do you have any idea how many times MSNBC has been "on the comeback trail"? Only to go straight back down again? Do you remember the first quarter of 2015(right after the 2014 R landslide)? When Maddow was losing to Red Eye(on at 3 am) in the ratings? Sorry, but one qtr doesn't erase 20 years. And, if the 20 year trend holds? They will be back in the dumpster soon.

IF the choice is between full familiarization with the proposed tax reform measures... ....and completing a project that's about to land(which takes you out of all life as you might know it) ....and dealing with your sick child ....and whatevertheFelse because there are other things people prioritize over said familiarity? We can merely say: those are all choices. It's not conditioning. Choices are the opposite of conditioning. Where the real problem lies: when people choose stupidity. It's one thing to knowingly choose to be ignorant on a topic, because you have other things to do. It's quite another to chose to comment on a topic, if you haven't made the previous choice to educate yourself about it first. At best that's gambling, at worst: it's the definition of stupidity. Worst of all is Tiberius: who digs his heels in after his stupidity has been proven. As I said: they are literally creating the campaign ads that will defeat them as we speak. And, they are doing it for free!

2 problems in addition to what you said: 1. Some people honestly don't have time to do the work. So, they turn on a "duke it out" show that presents both sides quickly and succinctly. This is why FOX dominates the ratings and why MSNBC and CNN do not. Fox puts the best the left has on the air, the others do the opposite. People want summarized info, for both sides to get the point, so they can make up their minds. FOX has always understood this. The others have hosts who are too chickenshit to deal with people from the right who can fight back. Or, they want to have people from the right who hate Trump too...see: George Will hired by CNN. Hate to invoke Alaska_Darin, but people want Hot-Pockets. 2. Other people just wanna see the fight. Tucker Carlson is eating everybody's lunch in the ratings...because he's F'ing hilarious. Barely a day goes by when I don't see RCP touting one of Carlson's beat-downs. Of all the talking heads, he's the only one who could last more than a week here. Maddow couldn't last a single thread without calling us names. Pigheaded people, on both sides, don't care as long as somebody gets their ass kicked.

Every time you think Democrats can't be more stupid: they surprise you. As if there isn't 10 page list of anti-Comey quotes from the very people filling the chamber. And, as if there won't be campaign ads in 2018 showing these clowns standing in the chamber today, with their hate-filled quotes directed at Comey running alongside. They are literally creating the ads that will defeat them, and making the production of those ads cost nothing.

You know when the media was ahead of the curve? When the Bernie Sanders supporters at the NYT broke the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal. That was the last time they were ahead on anything. They were all behind Catherine Herridge on Benghazi. They had to be dragged, kicking and screaming into covering that story. Just like they have been dragged, kicking and screaming into covering the only real story about Russia: somebody spied on a US citizen for political motivation, and then leaked the classified information they created, by doing the spying in the first place.

You made a claim about the media being ahead of the curve...I refuted that, and instead of dealing with said refutation, you change the subject. What ever happened the "NYT being ahead of the curve"? And better: why did you delete your post?

Yeah, let's speculate.... ...instead of going with the most likely scenario. A guy gets a new job, and, in order to impress his boss, he does it quickly and competently. So competently(by asking multiple former DOJ lifers and ex-AGs for their guidance), that he produces a quality deliverable that must be acted on immediately, or the bosses risk looking like fools. That's what happened here. Again I ask: what happens if this letter was delivered, and Trump did nothing with it? Again I say: The NYT would be telling us that Trump was protecting Comey because Comey promised to do nothing on the Russia investigation AND, that Trump was paying him back for informing Congress 10 days before the election. The simple fact is: Comey had to go, but, Trump didn't fall into the trap of firing him immediately....and the left is just pissed that its poorly constructed trap failed miserably.

Trump won the election, when the NYT gave him a 1.2% chance of winning it...and you call that: ahead of the curve?

You know one of the things that I've been doing here for 10 years is demanding alternatives from Liberals. It's almost gotten boring. But, here we go again: Hey clowns: what is the alternative to firing him after a newly confirmed(94-6) Deputy Secretary of State completes his first assignment quickly(for once in government) and recommends immediate termination? What is the alternative solution for Trump? Not firing him? Delaying firing him? Oh, I'm so sure that if Trump delayed firing him after getting the letter, THAT would "prove"(to you idiots) Trump is trying to buy Comey off to not find the Russian collusion. Better: You are (hilariously) arguing that if Trump had fired Comey on day 1.... ...that you WOULDN'T be talking about the Russian investigation as the "real reason he was fired"? :lol: If Trump fired Comey 3 months from now...you'd STILL be claiming it was because of the Russia investigation. Trump could promote Comey to General of the Armies...and you'd say it was because Trump was trying to buy him off to avoid the Russia investigation. Hey clowns: it's been literally forever, and unlike Clinton/Podesta, we have no evidence in hand for any Russian collusion. With the amount of leaking that has gone on? If there was something, you'd have heard it on CNN, months ago. This is why PPP has become too easy, and I have become disinterested: you people don't even try to come up with good arguments anymore.

basically, this entire board wanted Russell Wilson in the 3rd( ) and not TJ Graham. Again, I don't know any poster here who would have called you crazy for that. Prescott is a meh. We'll see... Cousins is hit and miss. Rather have Tyrod, given a coach that knows how to use him properly.

Here's a set of words that represent the last time we traded down:: EJ Manuel/Kiko Alonso/Marquise Goodwin/7th round TE for Tayvon Austin/JAG safety who can't play half of next year == We get Shady McCoy. The Redskins pissed away picks to the Rams, who pissed them away to us, while we did pretty good with them.... ...but who the F cares...because Shady is worth every player above and then some. When they made that trade earlier, on NFL network some Chiefs guy was wiping his hands on his butt, and actually pulled his butt-cheeks apart for a second. I said "Yep, get used to that, because the Rams and Redskins had to". And they, are laughing at us? EDIT: Apparently few have learned the RG3 lesson. Moreover, even fewer have learned the "NFL will change because college does spread offense, and therefore starting rookie QBs == auto-SB", is utter BS, lesson. Statistical anomalies are exactly that: Johnny Manziel anyone? I have Shady McCoy on my team because of a trade down. Anybody laughing at that?

Fine. So we agree that the RG3 trade was absolutely retarded, as I said when it happened, not only because it didn't come close to following the chart, but, it was a Dan Snynder deal. See, that's the one situation where I know the chart is right, but meaningless, because Dan Snyder is an unmitigated moron. The chart has no relation to his idiocy. There could be a gypsie who can tell him exactly who will make the Pro-Bowl 4 years from now, and he'd still ignore them, and draft others, because he knows better, and, just to spite the gypsie(kinda like the people who "knew' what was gonna happen this past election) Somehow the DVC got thrown overboard...because the RG3 trade was "genius". Here's what really happened: big media will say anything to get clicks, and if that includes lying, stealing, or cheating so be it. Telling us all that the RG3 trade was awesome? No. Telling a massive media market in the DC area...exactly what they want to hear == big money. At some point people are going to realize that the media is now 100% in the bag for clicks/supporting themselves via supporting policy/work product that benefits them/their agenda. Actually, we have empirical results that prove it's already started. See: EPSN laying off 100 on-air talent people.

Anything other than sticking with Taylor, whether it's $, talent, or potential? Is a reach. Mike Glennon: $45 M/3 years...and the Bears go draft his replacement by trading up? WTF is that? The entire Tyrod issue revolves around the word "should". Unfortunately for those people making that argument? Should means nothing. Should is a cop out for those who have identified(or deluded themselves into identifying) a problem. Yet, they have no rational solution. So, they go around saying things like "the Bills should get rid of Tyrod" and "The world should strive for peace via the UN". This isn't an argument for Tyrod. No. This is an argument against the non-solutions to Tyrod: see Glennon/Bears fiasco. People can B word about Tyrod, but, whenever they get done with that? Unless they have a superior solution, they are simply talking for talking's sake. And no, throwing away draft value on a QB, because the "Bills should draft a QB, because...I said so. I have a crystal ball, that I used to predict the RG3 trade as awesome(which caused us, not the Rams or the Redskins, to get a pro-bowl player in McCoy), and, that Andrew Luck would win 10 SBS in a row!". I remember the "Who cares, draft a young QB because the game has changed" idiot arguments from 3-5 years ago. FAIL!. Colin Kaepernick says hello.

While we are at it: DOES SOMEBODY STILL WANT TO TELL ME THAT THE VALUE CHART IS NOT USED? Depending on chart, the Bears trade, which I agree is awful, is STILL based on the value chart, to an average(grabbed 4 value charts and did a regression) precision of ~50 pts. For literally years: one excuse after the next at draft time has been based on the "fact" that nobody uses DVCs anymore. Well, horseschit. Every trade this evening was within 1 standard deviation of the value chart. I can't wait until I hear all the excuses for why the the DVC is "obsolete" yet, validated, again, this year.

This is why I refuse to use facebook or twitter. I'd end up responding to idiocy, and I'd have to do it in 140 characters No. When I take somebody down, I make sure they can't get up. I write long posts for 1 reason alone: to cut off all escape routes, so that they have to just stand there when the bombs fall. I know damn well Sullivan criticized the Sammy trade...which is why I posted in the shout and in the thread that "if you hated the Sammy Trade, you don't get to b!tch about this trade" As per normal Sullivan pretends we forgot what he wrote about "Giving up 2 #1s for Sammy". Beyond being inaccurate, as, we were going to spend 1 #1 anyway, the clown suggested that it was going to cost us for years. OK. By that logic, we are going to benefit, for years, by trading down for a #1. This isn't just "Fake News" this is "Hypocrisy News".

My favorite tenet of the weak: "Leaders are made, not born". They say that because they want you to think that them being in charge is because they've earned it/they have degrees/daddy says so...but it's all BS. A real leader never concerns themselves with how they got where they are, and you and everybody else knows from day 1 who the leader is. Unfortunately for us, we knew, since pre-K, we'd be right where we are today. Why? Because when Susie doesn't like what Kimmy does, even though you are a boy, they come to you and expect you to solve their problem...over who gets the starry, nap-time rug. 13 years later you end up going to the prom with 3 girls...because: diplomacy. I am literally watching, from way afar, my Godson go through this as a 3 year old. 20 tykes in the room, and everybody, parent and child, is watching him to see what he does/how he handles whatever the F is going on. There are 5 year-olds who defer to him. I would feel bad for him, but I don't. I can't. This is the burden of leadership. Any real leader knows they've been one for as long as they can remember. Is that now-ATL guy a leader? Probably not. I don't care. I'd love to lead him, because I know that when I said "go" he'd either be the first one over the wall, or, the first guy I dumped.

I don't know...as a coach? That's a guy that fits what I want: attitude and hustle. I can do the rest. In fact it's my job to do the rest. When it's hot and it sucks, because I've made sure it's hot and it sucks, all I have to say is: Grandma. Either he is full of it, or, he bears down, and I get to know that within 4 days of camp. If it's the latter, I have a guy who will run through walls for the team, and that is highly contagious. I've seen it. If it's the former, he's done, and we both know why. While I agree that's a hell of a risk to take? Only somebody who's led something important would understand that: a guy who's willing to drop an F bomb in the draft is the safest bet there is. Tells me it's quite possible he doesn't see, and therefore, doesn't care, about the glory. He lives for the kill. I know I can lead guys/girls like that into and out of: anything, because I have. When everything sucks, a leader in a stress environment needs a SSGT or 2. Somebody who is willing to put the project/operation's needs ahead of their own. They are the ones that lead by example. Why? Because leading by example is not the leader's job. The leader, or coach, by definition has a different job. They drop the F bombs...we act like we disapprove. But, yeah, keep telling yourselves that this isn't about winning/combat/huge $ on the line. People that say $/winning isn't everything, never had any real $/wins, and tell themselves their kids are their real wins.

Screw that. Catharsis.

Just doing my job here.... Yeah, except that the entire argument against Sammy was giving up next year's #1. Nobody was making your argument. Everybody was talking solely about the cost of the next year's #1. Try again. We'll see. Don't forget: Trading down to draft EJ...got us EJ. But, it also got us Kiko Alonso, which got us Shady. And, that was a Doug Whaley move. Surprise! ??? So, let's look at ALL the facts, which, given these times, seems difficult, I know, but, not looking at all the facts is directly responsible for "surprise" outcomes. There was a major "surprise" this past November. It's a direct outcome of only hearing/listening/reading what makes one feel good, rather than doing the hard work of striving for objectivity. Yeah...I know all about "nobody is truly objective". Great. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to see more than our navel. I love it when a plan comes together.

This is a Hypocrisy Alert. The National Hypocrisy Service is warning you that if you hated giving away a 1st for Sammy, you don't get to hate getting one now.

Mondale.

Whatever. Even if we accept the approval number, given the low approval of the D party as a whole, these polls only say one thing: people are as pissed off at DC as they were in November. Which, is pretty much right where Trump wants them.

I wonder if any of these "pro-science" people are aware of the Dunning-Kruger Effect? Probably not. But in essence B-Man, CNN is a prime example of it. For a long time people have thought that CNN is following some sort of master plan. That is largely due to the fact that when Ted Turner was in charge, they did. Turner would routinely go on the set of CNN and tell anchors what to say, or pass them little pieces of paper and demand that they read them on air. Captain Planet! But that was a long time ago. Today, CNN is run by people who don't seem to know any better(or, only care about the bottom line). How many fake news fails will it take, before they learn? They will never learn. Due to the Dunning Effect, they simply don't have the skills. It's only when the money stops coming in, that the accountants will take over and start demanding a better product, or CNN will be sold, again. The fact that the Ds have learned nothing from the failures of Obama just goes to show that they are actually stupid people. They got bamboozled by Obama, then got shredded in election after election since. You'd have to be stupid, given the last 10 years, to still be supporting far-left socialism/race-baiting/Global Warming as the solution to your losing elections problem. Yet, there they are, marching as if they are in the majority? Trying to gin up "energy"? Yeah, the next election is 20 months off. We'll see how much "energy" is left in 2018. A year where they are defending 25 Senate seats, with less money, and less turnout.

This is insane. They are wrong, and you are an unmitigated moron. Yes, let's be mightily obtuse by ignoring the act itself, and concentrate on what to call it instead, because doing the former might just indicate the massive inferiority of another culture, when compared to ours. "Cutting" sounds like all that is happening is what various peoples in the world do to make patterns on themselves. Yes, and we all live permanently in Intro to Anthropology class, thus, we can never judge another culture as demonstrably inferior, right? Whether that is the intent of this NYT editor is irrelevant: that is the outcome. I know! Instead of "Genital Cutting" we should use "Clit-Clipping". What? That's an Americanized term for it, is it not? If we use "Clit-Clipping", we never have to fear using any "culturally loaded" terms, since this term is derived from our culture. Since all cultures are equal, ours is too, and thus, "Clit-Clipping" is a valid term for American use. In fact, "Clit-Clipping" is "culturally calibrated" precisely for us. (EDIT: See? I can put a word after "culturally" and make idiocy sound reasonable, too. It's an easy trick to learn.) Let's just agree to use "Clit-Clipping" to describe this act, then we can congratulate ourselves on our sensitivity and erudition, which is much more fun.

Well, if the Daily Kos is on the job, the average D House candidate will have...exactly half the money the R candidate does. Or, they will ensure that every D candidate gets the same $, not matter how unlikely they are to win, which means millions will be wasted, and, the backlash that they create will ensure an R House in 2018, 2020 and beyond. But, remember Napoleon: "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake".