Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

SinbadTheSailor

Members
  • Content Count

    478
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

SinbadTheSailor last won the day on February 6 2018

SinbadTheSailor had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

716 Excellent

About SinbadTheSailor

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Recent Profile Visitors

628 profile views
  1. It's tough being a leader. Constantly second-guessed, exponentially when you don't succeed. It takes a really strong person to continue to push forward in spite of it all, and there are few folks in public life with as much strength as McCain. In my opinion, he chose the wrong path quite a few times, but even while disagreeing with him I always felt like he was doing what he felt was best for America.
  2. I think most of the folks republicans/tea party folks put in power were put there specifically not to get things done. I'd rather have folks removed, and be sure to replace them with folks who can work with others across the aisle and who want to put grievances behind them.
  3. Focusing on our differences instead of on what we have in common is a theme wrapped up in identity politics. This thread, I thought, was discussing why the democratic party needed a reboot. There are elements in the party that are good, but there are certainly some, like identity politics, which are problematic and despite not being legislation, definitely affect the party's ability to connect with folks across america and actually get enough power to deliver policies that help folks.
  4. It might have been a bad slogan and it was definitely dumb as hell to say the deplorables comment but neither of those are extreme liberal things. They have nothing to do with liberal/conservative politics. It's a bad slogan because it is identity politics, and that is a problem with liberal politics. Her campaign, through the slogan, elevated her minority status and put it front and center because minority status, as part of identity politics, is a huge deal for those on the left. It's a problem.
  5. You roll a 6-sided die. A 6 has a 16.7% chance of being rolled. You roll a 6. Were the 16.7% odds wrong? The next time you roll it, are you sure you're not going to roll another 6? Since you're waiting for the 83.3% of everything else? After you roll the 6, the odds that a 6 was rolled is 100% which is much higher than 16.7%. You silly liberals and your math and logic and facts and stuff. I've been away a while, sorry, my irony meter isn't working too well. I'm in agreement with you...was being sarcastic with my first reply.
  6. What do you think 20% of something happening means? It means the other 80% has yet to happen.
  7. Her "I'm with her" slogan was a big mistake. It focused the attention on her minority status, and elevated it, rather than a message focused on the country. It's emblematic of many of the problems with the rhetoric of the democratic party and the left in general. Her comment about deplorables was also particularly unhelpful. Just to name a couple. Not looking for my comments to be a referendum on Hillary, but I put her up there because she was the figurehead of the democratic party in the last election, and the consequences of the failure of that brand of politics gave us Trump and the legislation we face now, both of which being terrible for our country.
  8. HRC was the democratic nominee in 2016. Her rhetoric represented that of the party. Because she failed to sufficiently connect with enough americans to win the presidency, her party didn't gain enough power to enact legislation. However, her failed rhetoric did result directly in the successful legislation of her opponent. Her rhetoric was specifically identity based. Her appeal to America was fragmented, focused on her minority status, and deeply unable to connect to middle America. She believed she could win anyway, and she was wrong. This type of thinking, this type of approach extends beyond HRC. It's common among progressives. Folks still discount red America. Folks still discount those who support Trump. They still play up identity politics, and are more likely to encounter similar problems if they try the same approach again. So no, legislation alone doesn't matter. You have to have power to enact legislation, and if your rhetoric continually causes you problems getting power, perhaps it's time to focus on the rhetoric.
  9. But what if the coin had an 80% chance of heads and a 20% chance of tails, and the coin came up tails. Doesn't that prove odds are wrong?
  10. Do you think the Democratic party, or any political party, connects with its members in terms of legislation, or rhetoric? In other words, convince my why we should throw away rhetoric and only focus on legislation when determining whether a political party has lost its way.
  11. I worry that the dems have gone too far down the identity politics rabbit hole. I worry that demonization of the corporations has gone too far (although I agree with much of it). I worry they're way off base with their stance on immigration and terrorists/islam. I worry that Dems represent a group of folks in America that have been more likely to demonize folks who are more conservative when those folks don't go along with their progressive plans. And at the very least, the Democratic party needs a large reset of leadership. The folks in power have been in power for a long time, are battle scarred, and have been suffering from trench warfare with Republicans for so long that their ability to speak to the public on things that matter is poor. Pelosi, whatever good she's done, needs to be gone. Same for many other Democratic leaders who can't get in front of a camera and speak clearly about what needs to be done, without blaming a Republican for where we are. What we really need is to clean house with congressional leadership insofar as we maintain the functions of congress, but sweep out all the folks who have been part of the status quo of not getting things done. Democrats have been a part of this, even if Republicans have been the ringleaders. We need a return to functioning government and fast, and the remnants of both political parties really just represent the scorched earth, trench warfare past.
  12. The shark move is to fire Rosenstein, and replace him with someone who will curtail the Mueller investigation, but not outright fire Mueller. He's made the most public comments about Sessions and how annoyed he is that he recused himself and had he known he'd have gone with someone else. I just see that he's laid the most groundwork for Sessions, and someone is going to take the fall. Rosenstein is too close to Mueller.