Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Rirruto

Members
  • Content Count

    1,612
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,134 Excellent

About Rirruto

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,205 profile views
  1. That might end up happening, but I think it's been reported on so much that it's actually overrated. Like a draft guy being so hyped as underrated he becomes over valued. If you take RCP's electoral map, Biden has a 232-125 lead in states that are basically uncontested at this point. I think the only quibble anyone might have is that they have MI to Biden in the easy victory column. 538 gives Biden a 95% chance of a win, so I'm comfortable including it. The Washington Post expects that Florida, NC, and Arizona will have their votes counted on election night. PA is the laggard, and it's generally seen as the most important state this year, so it makes sense that people put a lot of focus on it. But if Florida is called for Biden (65% chance according to 538), then it's over. That gets Biden to 262, and Trump has to win everywhere except he can lose one of Iowa or Nevada (Biden is at 90% to win Nevada at 538). Similarly, most of AZ and MN will be counted before election day. If you give Biden AZ, MN, and NV (66%, 94%, and 90%), he is at 259 including the states he won't lose. That's also probably an impossible hill to climb for Trump. We might also see that there was a 5-8% polling error, and Trump is romping his way to victory. I doubt we know every state next Tuesday, but I'd sig bet that 538/NYTimes/Washington Post/NPR/WSJ have called it one way or another even factoring in how conservative I expect them to be. Link to Washington Post's updated FAQs about election night/what states are doing what.
  2. Not me. I didn't vote last time or the time before, and I hope to god I don't have to vote next time. But I'll wait in line to cast my Biden vote this week. I want to go back to not caring about politics. I'm not smart enough to know what tax rates should be or how health care should be fixed. Everyone is just rooting for their team. That's how we get a Trump. Basically all of the elected Republicans hated Trump even in October of 2016, but then they fell in line because he was what their team is now. The issues I care about aren't getting any play from either party. I think the issues most people are voting on are either eye-rollingly stupid or so complicated that the people casting their vote don't know what's best and the people they're voting for have zero clue what to do with those issues. If anything, I hope we get a 15 point Biden win so each party will nominate hyper-competent moderates who will hire super smart experts to run their agencies and departments, which is basically what I expect from Biden. Give me an Obama/Romney choice every time. I'm trying to think of a major party presidential candidate I wouldn't be fine with in the last 30-40 years that's not Trump. Carter did a bad job. Gore would have been much better for the environment than Bush and might not have gone into Iraq. Everyone else is fine. Trump is just so amazingly bad at everything.
  3. And you're just supposed to hear people coming and announce that you're in there? There's no knocking policy?
  4. Definitely not. Here's the 538 breakdown for 2016. It can't be apples to apples obviously, but Clinton was at 78% chance to win 4 years ago. She spiked way up after the Access Hollywood tapes, which were released on October 7. Trump closed a ton of ground after the Comey announcement on October 28. There's still basically a lifetime to go at this point.
  5. If I were a senator who lost an election, I would feel uncomfortable making a decision like this after my constituents said they didn't want me anymore. Especially considering that in this hypothetical, you'd have to think my vote would be a huge campaign issue. Certainly, there's nothing stopping anybody from voting. Their term isn't over yet. I think there's a difference in "can" and "should." I think there's a big difference in dedicating a post office or whatever and voting for a SCOTUS justice. As usual, there's a really good episode of the West Wing that's directly on point. I think it's an "awful look," and I sort of expect that McConnell is going to try to get this voted on before the election. All it takes is a couple Republican losers to feel the way I do, even if my take is unreasonable/bad/dumb. Edit: that's what I expect McConnell to do if he think he has the votes before the election. If he hears that he won't have the votes, I expect he pretends to be magnanimous and won't hold the vote to be consistent. At least that's what I'd do.
  6. Biggest issue for the country: what happens if, as expected, there's a contested election that is ultimately decided by SCOTUS? What happens if there's a 4-4 vote? That's probably a worser case than Trump nominating someone who ends up casting the deciding vote to award him the election. I'm leftish of center, but I really respect Chief Justice Roberts. It will be super interesting to see how he deals with this. He's probably the "swing" vote, although I hate that term. It really speaks to how conservative the Court is that he's in that position. Biggest issue for Trump/McConnell: holding the caucus together. This is basically McConnell's issue because he knows how to do it, but he's going to have to manage the president. All the talk of nominating a sitting senator is dumb. You can't lose any votes. There are guys/gals who hate the president (Romney) and several in tight re-elections. You basically can't lose anybody. I think if the Republicans are going to do this, and they're certainly going to try, you have to hold the vote before the election. Having lame duck senators voting on this in December is going to be an awful look.
  7. Not exactly. The NBAPA and NBA agreed on a list of terms/words/phrases that could go on the jerseys. If Chris Paul or LeBron or someone in the commissioners office had insisted on "Free Hong Kong" or "No concentration camps for Uyghurs", we're probably all smart enough to realize what would have happened.
  8. More bad news for the NBA about China. For all the talk about how Silver is "pitching a perfect game" or whatever, he's going to be judged very, very, very poorly when we look back on how he's handled this entanglement. Edit: And I hope this isn't construed politically. Count me as being embarrassed to be on the side of Josh Hawley and Clay Travis.
  9. There'd be no better way to honor my life than with a lap dance + chicken wings. I might write it into my will.
  10. Paulie, Bayleigh, and Josh are three of the worst HGs ever. If they can squeeze in Da'vonne, as rumored, they have 4 of the most hateable people in America. That's AS in a way. I'm sure they were stuck with who was available, and I'm happy to have anything. But, yeesh. A stinkfest of personality.
  11. Have enjoyed your posts for 20 years or whatever. If there's a way we can help out, let us know. We're your tribe.
  12. Ultimately, I'm not going anywhere. If I had one of those cool jobs you could do anywhere in the world, it would be fun to think about. We have Trump, and his general awfulness. I was going to type a litany of the bad, but it's really too long and has been hashed and re-hashed. Plus the general anti-science/smart person of the far right. But we also have a movement trying to radically cut funding for police departments. Without taking a position on the mechanics of that policy or the reasoning behind it (it's super complex and doesn't really have anything to do with this topic), it's my belief that it will have the opposite effect of what the people pushing for it want. It's like if we cut funding for schools and magically hoped for better teachers. (I'm going to leave out any discussion of White Nationalism or Black athletes and entertainers posting racist stuff that's been getting amplified lately because I believe that it's a small number of dum dums and is getting amplified by people and foreign government with a stake a weaker, more divided US. But I'd be lying if racism wasn't also a reason to think about getting away). But also we're in the middle of a pandemic with a truly all-time bad leader. Civil unrest, recession, etc. is really to be expected. I think we'll make it through all of this just fine.
  13. Maybe, but we're not there with just this opinion. Part of Oklahoma's defense was that the Creek had sold or transferred all of this land (I'm going to hand wave a butt load of history, but anyone interested can google "allotment period" or Dawes Act and start from there), but the Court drew an analogy to western lands in the US. A lot of that land was transferred by the federal government to homesteaders, but no one makes a straight-faced argument that the feds wanted to give up sovereignty. I think what you could see is a sales tax or property tax or something that would be in addition to state or federal taxes. Like what you see in many cities. But that has a huge hole because I don't think there's any precedent for state taxes on the rez. Although that's getting out of the area where I know anything about what I'm talking about. So, the tl;dr is that this case sets a framework for how the Creek and other tribes would try to exercise more control, but I don't think it gets anywhere close to handing them the keys. The political ramifications are fascinating. I think a few years ago you could have gotten some sort of act of Congress to "fix" this opinion (the majority calls for it several times.) But it would be political suicide to even discuss bringing something like that up now that would "re-steal" this land in the eyes of a very vocal many. Edit: as to your second question, there's zero chance that they can evict basically anyone. This land was either sold or transferred by individual Creeks after the allotment era. Other land was bought for 30 cents an acre by the US gov't or was otherwise taken back by act of Congress, but the Court says the land in those two categories don't count as rez land for purposes of the decision today.
  14. I don't think we're there yet. My read of the opinion is pretty narrowly tailored to the Major Crimes Act. However, a further development of case law could get us to where you're at. If I'm on the legislative body of the Creek Nation, I'm proposing our sales tax over all of that land, including much of Tulsa, at the next meeting.
  15. I feel like Jerry when Whatley converted to Judaism for the jokes, and Jerry was offended as a comedian. This offends me as a lawyer. If you can't find some reason, some policy, some fact in the matter at hand, some case from some podunk jurisdiction to justify doing just about anything, maybe you should turn in your bar card. It doesn't have to be on point or right, we're talking about covering asses here. Jesus ####### christ. "I was afraid of the President" should get you fired for being unimaginative if nothing else.