Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

apalmer

Members
  • Content Count

    9,257
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,978 Excellent

About apalmer

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Pittsburgh Steelers

Recent Profile Visitors

10,749 profile views
  1. He's going to need to steal a lot more than $2-300 to qualify for that path to freedom.
  2. And, if you make a case against Trump, it's clear that you NEVER really loved or supported him, even if you may have contributed $1 Million to his campaign before he appointed you to be an ambassador. Deep State, you know.
  3. Do the jurors who have a MAGA cap at home have an affirmative obligation to disclose that?
  4. IIRC, he had already missed 2 questions in the category, so it certainly wasn't a strong subject for him. I would agree with the strategy of betting big IF it was earlier in the game or if you can feel confident in a category. But to risk going to 0 betting on a subject you have demonstrated is not a strong one with less than a minute left instead of hanging onto a lead going into FJ? Still seems shaky to me (although, I admit that the fact that the other DD was still on the board does mitigate it).
  5. I have no idea how some of these people pass the test. ETA: And who bets everything on a DD when you have a $2000+ lead with under a minute left in the game? A last-second Hail Mary guess is all the kept him from being called "Cliffy" for the rest of his life.
  6. While I do appreciate the votes I've received, the answer is Elvis.
  7. That's pretty much what he was doing. If only the DOJ had a rule that he couldn't be prosecuted if he was "thinking of running"...
  8. I believe the technical legal term for this investigation is Nothingburger.
  9. Probably pays better than advising seniors with the same disabilities who are in nursing homes.
  10. Fun Fact: A guy who wasn't on the ballot didn't win!
  11. What dictator should I have used as a comparison? If someone wants to make nonsense arguments, I tend to think that providing factual proof of the nonsense is the best way to respond. It's pretty tough to respond to "Dictators don't do that" without referencing dictators who do it. On the other hand, it's much easier to respond as you do, putting up strawman arguments and ignoring actual facts. Good job on doubling down on your own nonsense.
  12. That's "President" Trump to you, guy.
  13. I never said that, you did.. Congratulations on ignoring the point of the post to construct your own strawman to attack. Let me lay it out for you: You: Dictators don't fire people, they kill them. Me: Really? Here's the truth about one of the worst dictators in history firing people, not killing them. You: So you're saying Trump is Hitler. NO, I'M SAYING DICTATORS DO FIRE PEOPLE AND YOUR ARGUMENT THAT THEY DON'T IS NONSENSE!
  14. BUT he thought it would help get him re-elected, so it was good for the US, so none of it is illegal enough to matter.