Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Commish

Members
  • Content Count

    65,167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

The Commish last won the day on April 9

The Commish had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

12,710 Excellent

About The Commish

  • Rank
    Footballguy
  • Birthday August 28

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Debary, Florida

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Carolina Panthers

Recent Profile Visitors

46,273 profile views
  1. I fully accept I may be too naive but I think accepting other views is part of a bigger approach including some of the other points he listed. It's not just accepting opposing views. It's being rational. It's trying to understand the "other" side. It's making it less aggressive. It's a lot of things. But nearly all of them involve some effort. Where just being a tool and slamming everything is easy. I am hoping you guys really mean "nobody agrees with opposing views here"....I think that's what you mean or maybe "people aren't comfortable having opposing views". Accepting a POV means it's something you buy into. It's no longer "opposing". If SW was trying to say one of the other things, then I agree and for those people it's an issue but I'd remove the "nobody". I understand many of the opposing positions of mine...many of them I've held myself at times and because of life experiences or new information I have changed my mind. There are some, however, I'll never understand.
  2. I find it comical this administration and it's supporters thought that a story about a "October surprise" involving Rudy and a laptop told to this admin a year ago by the FBI in an effort to forewarn of outside interference, was going to move any needles when it actually showed up.
  3. Of course they do....for example, in my view, there was nothing left to "interpret" there. It's clear his words were from 2016. That's the problem I generally have and this specific sort of incident I raised in the other thread as part of the problem we have as a community here. I'm all for interpretation where there is vague comments made, people ask for clarification and none is provided. Interpretation is all that's left. What I'm not in favor of is people intentionally reading things into words that were clear because they had some other interaction on some other topic. That's a problem IMO and that has nothing to do with difference in interpretation. That's just bad faith interaction I was talking with jm192 about in the other thread.
  4. sure..you can interpret however you like
  5. Nevermind...not worth it....people need to learn to read what's written.
  6. With the numbers it has to be more than "shy Trump voters" though....It has to be "shy Trump voters lying and saying they are voting for Biden" and if the stats are to be believed, it would have to be double the number that supposedly did this last time. And, of course, the polls would have to be using the exact same assumptions they did last time.
  7. How it changes will be largely dependent on how people vote. If you think Republican politicians vying for your vote aren't completely focused on what's going on, you're fooling yourself. However, you are NEVER going to see them admit publicly what they are observing. You're missing the forest for the trees here IMO.
  8. I don't know why my response to you was deleted...hopefully you got to read it before it died. I'm not going to repost it because I don't know why it was deleted. I'll just say I thought we were having good dialogue and I've always had good encounters with jm192 here. I'll just say that these sorts of things you bring up here aren't what I had in mind with my comments above. We agree 100% on these kinds of comments. Whether it's "why do you like to kill babies?" or "Why do you hate the poor?"...those kinds of things are nonsense regardless of who they are coming from.
  9. Who cares? If one wants to be "man, if only we didn't have the bad breaks and all those turnovers and the other team wasn't better and we scored more points, we'd have won" guy, let them. There's no question his approval was in the crapper....it has been from the very beginning. He couldn't afford to alienate anyone. There's no question he's alienated people with his handling of COVID from average "do the right thing and unify the country" people to seniors who feel like he's brushed them to the side. I can easily see him winning again where people are fat dumb and happy because their pocketbooks are full and there is far less enthusiasm to vote.
  10. The ONLY way I can see an issue is if a state broadcasts to their electorate something that isn't on the books. If your laws say they have to be there by Nov 3 and you keep telling everyone you can mail them in until Nov 10 (hypothetical) then that's on the state and I can see why people would be late. However, at this point, if you want your vote to count you should be taking your ballots to drop off boxes or elections offices IN PERSON. I wouldn't be relying on the mail and/or this administration at this point.
  11. You should read the whole thread....there's A LOT missing from it. As one who contends that there are literally thousands of factors that make the markets go up/down, I"m merely here for the entertainment in "when it goes up Trump is awesome and when it goes down it's someone else's fault" shtick. Occasionally there is a productive back and forth..not often. There's no question that the markets will continue to dip as the world is forced to shut things down because of the virus, but apparently to some, that terrible news and lack of confidence coming from that news isn't a major factor in our confidence based markets rather it's that the markets are just realizing (after 6 months of Biden being the frontrunner) that Biden is the front runner and they are simply adjusting to the terrible policies he hasn't enacted yet. At least that's the latest talking point it seems.
  12. This is what's unique about now that's never been true in the time I've been here. We have a President who loves to make EVERYTHING about himself. The self promotion angle is his thing. He speaks about all the topics of the day in terms of himself. As such, the moral aspect always oozes into the conversation. It also enters the conversation because his moral compass is different than any modern era President. So, when we attempt to have a policy discussion and the policy is so obviously misguided and really indefensible, people still feel the need to argue/defend so it goes to morals. Great example is immigration reform. We could argue all day/night about the pros/cons of policy, only we don't have tangible policy to talk about. We have the actions of this administration to talk about. So, I agree 100% that we need immigration reform. We need more people at the border to process immigrants (lawyers/judges etc). We need to upgrade our points of entry etc etc. But what do we get? We get separating kids from their parents as an attempt to deter people from coming here. So the actions take over completely because, well, they aren't theoretical and they aren't policy proposals. They are real things that are happening. Now, of course, very few (I've learned not to say "no one") will want to argue that this is the correct approach, because morally, most of us know it isn't. But in this world of "deny a win at any cost" people go down that path anyway and deflect, "whatabout" and whatnot just to avoid giving the other "side" a win. What then comes from that is this notion of "well, if he's gonna defend it, he must approve of it" which isn't illogical on it's face and then the pissing match between two individuals who probably both agree that separating the kids from their parents isn't a good step to take.
  13. You're gonna be disappointed...many of the resident Christians on this board have said almost everything he says in the video