Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

zftcg

Members
  • Posts

    7,288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by zftcg

  1. My God. There aren't enough GIFs on the Internet to properly express my reaction to this idea.
  2. Short-term I generally agree with you. Medium- to long-term, we need to get caseloads way down, implement widespread testing and contact tracing, allocate money to schools, and ensure that they can reopen safely. The only reason we're facing this Sophie's Choice is because we've spent the past six months screwing our virus response up so badly. Other countries have done all these things despite not having a vaccine. It's not impossible.
  3. Joe Biden has selected his running mate, revealing to top advisers on Tuesday the woman he will invite to join his ticket, according to two people familiar with the matter. Biden is poised to make the announcement as early as today.
  4. Fingers crossed. I am generally hopeful that this fall will be much different from the spring, not only in terms of quality but also in terms of consistency. My younger son was in a pre-K class with an absolutely wonderful teacher, but she was in her 60s and simply couldn't adapt to the new technological reality. For the first month, she barely did anything, and when she finally did put together some Zooms, they tended to be of the "Can everyone please mute themselves?" variety. I don't blame her, but it was frustrating. I hope that teachers like her will be getting a lot more support this fall.
  5. Also, I saw first-hand last spring the opposite risk with my then-9 year old. He's incredibly smart, but I think all the teachers were encouraged to go lowest common denominator and make sure they didn't try to overwhelm the struggling kids. So he did fine with distance learning, but I'm worried we may not be pushing him as much as he needs.
  6. Dude is almost 96 years old. I know if only has to be virtual, but maybe he's just not up for it? I do kind of agree with you about Bill. I had wondered in the past if he would be PNGd for the convention. I'm guessing that if Tara Read were still a topic of conversation the Biden campaign might have come to a different conclusion.
  7. Former presidents almost always speak (although I don't believe George W has appeared at a single convention since 2004). Past nominees also often speak.
  8. To be fair, one of the biggest problems with distance learning is that it exacerbates inequality. Well-off, highly educated parents -- the type that would be able to set up their own home-schooling program -- should do fine with distance learning. Low-income families -- who may not have reliable devices or Internet connections, and whose parents may not be at home because they work essential jobs -- could fall farther behind. Also, special needs children of all income levels could have particular troubles. So I don't think we should dismiss the costs of schools moving fully virtual. We just have to balance them against the health risks to students, teachers, staff and the broader community of keeping schools open. And we should also be angry that politicians have failed us by putting us in this position.
  9. Supposedly Rice has taken the top spot on the betting markets because Harris was listed as a convention speaker and she wasn't. Which should really tell you more about the betting markets than about Biden's choice.
  10. Sounds like they might be related to the folks running my office who think it's a good idea to continue doing potlucks in the conference room
  11. Yeah, you may be right. I think I'm just a little underwhelmed by Pete. I'm not totally sold on AOC as the future of the party, but IMO she's way more likely to lead a movement than he is, and seems to genuinely represent something new. Of course, her profile is already pretty high with or without a convention speech. I guess if she really knocks her opportunity out of the park it may vault her to another level.
  12. Also worth pointing out that, while everyone is always on the lookout for the "next Obama", I can't think of a ton of other cases where a person's profile was raised, usually because it's hard for those speeches to exceed expectations the way Obama did. I remember how Julian Castro was supposed to be the Chosen One in '12; his speech was fine, he's done fine for himself since then, but nothing amazing. Only other example that's coming to mind was Ann Richards tearing George HW Bush a new one in '88 ("Poor George, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth") and then winning the governor's race two years later.
  13. Could be, though I hope not. I don't have strong feelings either way about him, but I feel like the party can do better in terms of the face of its future. Also, his path to statewide office seems to be mostly blocked, so not sure how much good it would do to raise his profile.
  14. Worth remembering that there are really only 1-2 featured speeches a night. First night will be Michelle and Bernie, second night is Jill and Bill, third night is Obama and the VP, fourth night is Joe. Everyone else is likely to give a relatively short speech that may not even be carried by the broadcast networks. One thing I'd love to see (and just because it's not on this list doesn't mean it won't be added later): a keynote by a party up-and-comer a la Obama in '04. I could see Stacey Abrams or someone like that giving a really strong speech and raising their profile. (Then again, with purely virtual speeches we're not likely to see a lot of stemwinders.)
  15. Not sure if it was that one in particular that I heard about. Might have been Clinton-Booker.
  16. Yeah, I was maybe being a little generous with the word "scoop". As I recall, the guy made his post before the pick had been announced, but it's not like that was definitive. These days speculation like that would be all over Twitter, but at the time it was probably only known by hard-core political junkies. Also, campaigns have been known to print up fake posters (eg, "Obama-Bayh") with the intent of throwing out disinformation and making people distrust any rumors they hear. Worth recalling that 2004 was the year that the New York Post infamously got it wrong and reported that Kerry had picked Gephardt.
  17. As I recall, the John Edwards scoop in '04 was broken by a random employee at an airport who saw them stenciling "Kerry-Edwards" on the campaign plane and posted on an aviation message board.
  18. Ah, gotcha. Yeah, it would be a big deal if any of the big names didn't speak. The whole point of a convention is to showcase party unity, so any cracks in that unity are going to present a problem. And yes, particularly if it seems like the leading VP candidate is angry about not being picked. But no way I see that happening. Whatever else she is, Harris is a loyal soldier. Even if she feels like Dodd, Rendell and the Old Boys Network submarined her chances, she's not going to blow things up on her way out the door.
  19. One more point about this: I might feel more reassured about the lesser relative danger to children if there were any proven scientific explanations for it. Instead everything I've read involves a lot of hypotheses about T-cells and kids being exposed to other coronaviruses and such. Or, as @acarey50 says, it may just be because we've done a better job of socially distancing our kids. The point is, we don't really know, and until we do we should proceed carefully and not jump to conclusions. I was reading something recently about how, in previous epidemics such as the Philadelphia yellow-fever outbreak of 1793, there was a mistaken belief that African Americans were somehow less affected by the disease. As a result they were recruited as caregivers for sick white patients, with disastrous results. Obviously, this is not the exact same thing, but one common thread that worries me is the potential for motivated reasoning. Benjamin Rush wanted to believe blacks were immune because he desperately needed nurses to care for patients; by the same token, we should make sure we're not convincing ourselves that children are safe just because we're so eager to have schools reopen. To be fair, the opposite can also be true. We shouldn't seize on every data point indicating that children can get sick as "proof" that schools should remain closed forever. The difference, though, is that it makes more sense to err on the side of caution. I honestly don't know how much risk I would be putting on my kids to send them to in-person schooling, and while I'm open to whatever the data may ultimately show, in the meantime I'm not looking to play Russian Roulette with their health (or mine).
  20. Candidates who ran in the primary almost always speak at the convention, which is why Pete, Booker and Warren are all on that list (within reason, of course. Not sure we'll be seeing much of Marianne Williamson or Joe Sestak next week). If Harris didn't speak it would be shocking for reasons having nothing to do with her VP chances.
  21. It says these schedules aren't set in stone and can be changed if necessary
  22. It was confirmed by me months ago that Pete wasn’t going to be VP, so yeah. As for the Duckworth theory, there is a long history of campaigns using less trafficked airports to throw reporters off the scent, but if you wanted to do that here, wouldn’t it make more sense to avoid Wilmington? Just stick Duckworth on a Chicago-Philly flight and no one is the wiser
  23. I fully acknowledge that this kind of speculation is stupid, but there’s apparently a chartered plane flying from South Bend, IN to Wilmington. “Mayor Pete” is trending on Twitter, but that’s obviously not what’s going on. Could be Duckworth flying from a nearby airport, or could be absolutely nothing. We don’t even know for sure that Biden and his VP will be appearing together
  24. First of all, great thread, and thanks to Trip for starting it. I really do think it's important for everyone to understand why other people think differently from you, and not just dismiss their views out of hand. One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet in this thread: I don't personally find this argument convincing, but I do know some of my fellow Jews who are voting for Trump because of his positions on Israel. He has given the country, and in particular the Netanyahu government, just about everything it could have asked for: recognition of Jerusalem as its capital, getting out of the Iran deal, preparing to recognize Israeli annexation of the West Bank, etc. Now as a liberal Zionist, I think a lot of these moves are actually not in Israel's long-term interests, and more broadly I think aligning yourself with Trump never seems to work out well for anyone, but I can at least appreciate the importance of the issue for some people. (It is worth pointing out that there's no evidence American Jews will be shifting their traditional allegiances from Democrats to Republicans.) Also, I know this isn't a "say something nice about Trump" thread, but I will say that, while I think he could have handled the Jerusalem issue better, in the end I can't say I'm unhappy with the reality. I understand that in diplomacy, sometimes it's necessary to soft-pedal obvious truths, but when you step back it's weird that the world has spent the past 70 years pretending that Israel's capital is a different city from the one the Israelis actually use.
  25. Yeah, the aforementioned friend from my previous post was saying, “If they’re only doing half the work, they should only get half their pay.” As if it’s laziness that’s making them reluctant to teach in a classroom
×
  • Create New...