Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,074 Excellent

About prefontaine

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

7,454 profile views
  1. I had no dog in this but have to root for Sheffield after that
  2. Lot to unpack here. Not sure if this belongs in this thread and maybe we should create a new one on this topic but Religion is IMO more ingrained but you make a good point. Changing your mind is not something that is easy to do once you have publicly declared a tribe. I think this in practice actually argues against your thesis. In areas with one dominant religion, history has shown that things don't go well. From the pogroms to the Huguenots to the ME today, areas with highly concentrated religions leads to conflict when other religions move in. The US, built on liberal religious freedoms ,has had some conflict as various religions get integrated, but overall, the divides are absolutely nothing like other parts of the world. But the NFL wants fanaticism and they (and other sports leagues) take steps specifically designed to foster it. A dispassionate fanbase is counter to the NFL's interests (which is why they fought fantasy football for a while and have always fought sports gambling). I think you make interesting points, but we should aspire to an engaged and informed citizenry,, rather than a fanatical citizenry.
  3. Fair point. Easy for me because like 75% of the country, my Presidential vote doesn't matter.
  4. One problem in a two-party system is there is a "good" tribe and a "bad" tribe. When faced with the choice of abandoning your tribe, the only choice is to join the diametrically opposed tribe. In a state where there are shades of grey, 40% will never tenaciously back a tribe. Tribes are not so hard edged (theoretically) and smaller swathes of the electorate would define themselves by their tribe. The tribes would also have less divisions as they would work together to form coalitions around issues. All of this reduces the barriers to changing tribes.
  5. Melania probably thinks it's in her best interests to stay Anonymous
  6. I haven't been excited about the field, mostly because it's winnowing in a way I dislike. But I'm not seeing what Bloomberg has to offer here.
  7. Have only voted Democrat once, in 08. I say it's quite likely in 20 but Dems are working pretty hard to make sure I vote Amash.
  8. Yep. Sondland better scurry to get out of the way of the oncoming bus.
  9. Opening Statement of Lieutenant Colonel Alexander S. Vindman
  10. He says he's not. And the whistleblower stated he/she did not have direct knowledge. But Vindman is almost certainly a source of the whistleblower.
  11. He's likely the source for a number of these. Also, he's going to name names as to who was also a witness on the 25th as well as the 21st. And this isn't about Republican Senators. It never has been. It's about public opinion. When it shifts, the GOP will follow but those Senators won't lead the way. And having an active duty, decorated serviceman stand up and say it's his duty to report malfeasance is quite a bit different optically to the general public than a politician (even a former paratrooper like Taylor).
  12. It has seemed like a matter of time on this sort of witness. Too many people are witnesses here and some of them have no loyalty to Trump or political career aspirations. This takes guts though because he's going to get raked over the coals until others come forward. I imagine the release of this NYT story is going to turn his world upside down.