Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Kansas Democratic Party announced some changes to previous primary format for 2020.  Dumping the caucus in favor of a voting primary using Ranked Choice Voting.  Voters can rank up five choices. 

I got Bloomberg by two points over anyone else, and I'm questioning my entire existence.

12 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Well, when folks like yourself also do it and misrepresent them it doesn’t really help.  But I’m already bored with the D 2020 primary - like I said before, wake me up when it’s over and I’ll vote for whoever it is over the orange doofus.

Sounds exactly like what many said about Hillary Clinton.  And we got Trump.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Well, when folks like yourself also do it and misrepresent them it doesn’t really help.  

I don’t think I misrepresent anyone. I listen to AOC and Warren and, as much as I like them in many areas, I hear a hostility to business and corporate America that is very troubling to me. I heard it from Bernie supporters in 2016 (less so from the man himself) and I’m hearing it now. 

The old mantra of the Democratic Party used to be that corporations were naturally greedy because they were mainly  interested in the bottom line; however they could also be sources for good if steered in the right direction and subject to certain reasonable restrictions. The new mantra seems to be that corporations are evil, the enemy of working people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Check out the echo chamber thread.  They aren't liberals or they claim not to be anyway.

I think that’s part of my point - I’ve never been called a liberal until Trump came along.  There’s people that will call IK or Yankee a liberal if they vote for the Democratic candidate.  I’m saying Trump and the Republican Party is making “liberals” out lots of people who never were before.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

I beg to differ.

Hillary is why we have Trump. She was unlikable and unable to sell herself to the American public as a better alternative than Donald Trump. That's epic failure and the buck stops with her. 

Hillary didn't run a good campaign, but you can't blame 60 million people actually thinking Donald Trump is fit to be President entirely on her.

She was the incredibly obvious choice any way you slice it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AAABatteries said:

I think that’s part of my point - I’ve never been called a liberal until Trump came along.  There’s people that will call IK or Yankee a liberal if they vote for the Democratic candidate.  I’m saying Trump and the Republican Party is making “liberals” out lots of people who never were before.

Yeah I agree with that.  I don't see how Trump wins again but didn't really believe he could win until election night last time.  I guess it will be depend on many of those you describe (in the swing states) vote for the Dem candidate or sit out the election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, saintfool said:

No offense but Cilliza is *terrible*. I wouldn't hire him for Gawker.  I think Biden is the only joker in the deck. Candidates right now are just jockeying for positioning and staking claims to different constituencies. At this point, it's like when a NFL coach scripts his first 15-20 plays to engineer a score to open the game. I agree Harris is at the top of "power rankings" but see Klobouchar and Warren as just below. Others like Booker and Gillenbrand are a rung below. They're just trying to stay ahead of Castro, Gabbard, and even Bernie.

Not to hijack, but why does this ###-clown have a job, much less a front-page-of-cnn-every-day kind of job?  His "articles" read as though they were written by a junior high school kid, complete with lots of exclamation points!  He is only worse when speaking.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

I beg to differ.

Hillary is why we have Trump. She was unlikable and unable to sell herself to the American public as a better alternative than Donald Trump. That's epic failure and the buck stops with her. 

She still received 3 million more votes than Trump.  She lost by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, OH, and MI. That's why she lost. Yes, she did a bad job campaigning and should have made more appearances in those states, but a large portion of Bernie's bitter base staying home is why we have a dictator now.  I hope that base learned something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Commish said:

"The right" will try to paint ANY Dem politician this way.  They will all be labeled "socialist" and be portrayed as individuals wanting to come and take all your stuff.  It's the one trick pony nature of the current GOP.

You mean like labeling any Republican as tacitly racist?  One trick pony indeed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JuniorNB said:

She still received 3 million more votes than Trump.  She lost by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, OH, and MI. That's why she lost. Yes, she did a bad job campaigning and should have made more appearances in those states, but a large portion of Bernie's bitter base staying home is why we have a dictator now.  I hope that base learned something.

She also lost because the Democratic party has ignored the working class for the better part of two decades.  As their standard of living has been on a steady decline.  The Republican party had lost their way with this demographic as well, it's why and how Trump caught them completely off guard.

That's the elephant in the room that the Dems better figure out real fast...giving the right ammunition with pro immigration banter and self described forms of socialism rhetoric is a one way ticket to losing that all important demographic once again.

The Dems seriously don't get it or they are ignoring it.  Either way, they will deserve to lose if its not addressed appropriately.

Edited by TripItUp
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, unckeyherb said:

You mean like labeling any Republican as tacitly racist?  One trick pony indeed.  

I think you're mixing up "any Republican" with "Trump and Trump supporters."   

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TripItUp said:

She also lost because the Democratic party has ignored the working class for the better part of two decades.  As their standard of living has been on a steady decline.  The Republican party had lost their way with this demographic as well, it's why and how he caught them completely off guard.

That's the elephant in the room that the Dems better figure out real fast...giving the right ammunition with pro immigration banter and self described forms of socialism rhetoric is a one way ticket to losing that all important demographic once again.

The Dems seriously don't get it or they are ignoring it.  Either way, they will deserve to lose if its not addressed appropriately.

Are you the guy I previously pointed out was ignoring basically everything the Democrats have done since 2016 including their successful messaging during the mid-term campaign? Or are you a new guy who is ignoring basically everything the Democrats have done since 2016 including their successful messaging during the mid-term campaign?

In my defense, it's hard to keep track of all the posters who ignore basically everything the Democrats have done since 2016 including their successful messaging during the mid-term campaign.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:
15 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Check out the echo chamber thread.  They aren't liberals or they claim not to be anyway.

I think that’s part of my point - I’ve never been called a liberal until Trump came along.  There’s people that will call IK or Yankee a liberal if they vote for the Democratic candidate.  I’m saying Trump and the Republican Party is making “liberals” out lots of people who never were before.

:goodposting:

Bingo....it's quite amazing.  Never in a million years would I have thought a fiscal conservative/socially moderate individual be labeled "liberal".  It's a matter of perspective.  The problem is, the people running far to the right claim they are standing still which is odd, because they've run so far to the right we have nothing in common anymore.  The government taking your land is ok now.  What happened to the rule of law? I can't say that the GOP has ever been genuine in their claim of fiscal responsibility, but at least it was on the table allegedly.  That's completely gone.  But somehow, because I don't agree with the government taking land I'm a liberal.  Because I think the President isn't above the law, I am liberal.  Because I think our government should be protecting us in the global market, I am a liberal.  It's baffling really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

 

In my defense, it's hard to keep track of all the posters who ignore basically everything the Democrats have done since 2016 including their successful messaging during the mid-term campaign.

Why are we concluding that the midterm Dem messaging was successful again?  Last I checked, that Blue Wave never came despite the liberal media's hopes and dreams.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I like Bernie and think he does a great job of starting important conversations, I think a lot of the success and momentum he had in 2016 was a result of Democrats that didn't like Hillary.   With her out of the picture and several other viable candidates sharing some of his core ideas, I don't think a 77-year old man that comes off kind of nutty is going to have what it takes to be the front-runner this time around.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, -fish- said:

Although I like Bernie and think he does a great job of starting important conversations, I think a lot of the success and momentum he had in 2016 was a result of Democrats that didn't like Hillary.   With her out of the picture and several other viable candidates sharing some of his core ideas, I don't think a 77-year old man that comes off kind of nutty is going to have what it takes to be the front-runner this time around.  

I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:
4 hours ago, The Commish said:

"The right" will try to paint ANY Dem politician this way.  They will all be labeled "socialist" and be portrayed as individuals wanting to come and take all your stuff.  It's the one trick pony nature of the current GOP.

You mean like labeling any Republican as tacitly racist?  One trick pony indeed.  

Sure...that sort of person is no better than their GOP counterpart.  And I do appreciate the use of the word tacitly here as it allows for those broad brushes the :hophead: are so famous for.  And it allows those who are complicit in their silence towards the actions of this administration a rock to hide behind to avoid the reality of their silence.  Of course, the arguments here aren't even in that category.  There is no way around the reality that those actively supporting this president, at MINIMUM, put racism down their list of things that are important to them.  They may not be racist, but they tolerate racism to get something else they want.  That's not the huge distinction some want it to be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TripItUp said:

Why are we concluding that the midterm Dem messaging was successful again?  Last I checked, that Blue Wave never came despite the liberal media's hopes and dreams.  

Ah, I see where you're coming from now.

Apologies to the rest of the message board for taking this poster remotely seriously. Like I said it's hard to keep track.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

Sure...that sort of person is no better than their GOP counterpart.  And I do appreciate the use of the word tacitly here as it allows for those broad brushes the :hophead: are so famous for.  And it allows those who are complicit in their silence towards the actions of this administration a rock to hide behind to avoid the reality of their silence.  Of course, the arguments here aren't even in that category.  There is no way around the reality that those actively supporting this president, at MINIMUM, put racism down their list of things that are important to them.  They may not be racist, but they tolerate racism to get something else they want.  That's not the huge distinction some want it to be.

That's an important distinction.  Being racist and not prioritizing racial inequality are two very different things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TobiasFunke said:

Ah, I see where you're coming from now.

Apologies to the rest of the message board for taking this poster remotely seriously. Like I said it's hard to keep track.

 

Ah yes, more competent political forum banter.   Cool response bro.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TripItUp said:

That's an important distinction.  Being racist and not prioritizing racial inequality are two very different things.

This distinction is made here all the time yet people whine about being called racist when the later is what is actually said.  Regardless, I don't see them as "very different" things.  One is the person acting, the other is enabling the action.  Either way, they are both complicit in the racism the racist is trying to spread and normalize :shrug: 

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

This distinction is made here all the time yet people whine about being called racist when the later is what is actually said.  Regardless, I don't see them as "very different" things.  One is the person acting, the other is enabling the action.  Either way, they are both complicit in the racism the racist is trying to spread and normalize :shrug: 

Not taking action is enabling?  Voting for or supporting racist ideas is enabling.  Not prioritizing somebody else's priorities is not enabling.

 

I disagree with your premise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TripItUp said:

Ah yes, more competent political forum banter.   Cool response bro.

Sorry, am I supposed to take you seriously after you suggested that the Dems were unsuccessful in an election in which they won 41 seats in the House, and had the largest midterm raw vote margin ever, and also won six senate races in states Trump won two years earlier without losing a single senate race in a Trump-won state?  A sentiment which you topped off with the standard nonsense about the "liberal media's hopes and dreams" for a big Dem win? Nah. Your post got a far kinder response than it deserved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, TripItUp said:

Why are we concluding that the midterm Dem messaging was successful again?  Last I checked, that Blue Wave never came despite the liberal media's hopes and dreams.  

Wait. What??   And I actually engaged you in conversation? Wow.  Just wow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TripItUp said:
12 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This distinction is made here all the time yet people whine about being called racist when the later is what is actually said.  Regardless, I don't see them as "very different" things.  One is the person acting, the other is enabling the action.  Either way, they are both complicit in the racism the racist is trying to spread and normalize :shrug: 

Not taking action is enabling?  Voting for or supporting racist ideas is enabling.  Not prioritizing somebody else's priorities is not enabling.

 

I disagree with your premise.

That's fine.  When you know a racist is doing racist things and your response is "That racist stuff is on him.  I'm still voting for him because I like his ideas on infrastructure", you're saying racism is a lower priority for me than infrastructure.  You spin that however you want to justify it, but there's no changing that reality.  I've said a million times here that there is no way in hell that I would ever knowingly vote for a racist even if he/she agreed with me 100% politically and wanted to do exactly the same things I wanted them to do.  It won't happen :shrug: 

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:

go to the liberal echo chamber thread.  

I went to that thread, and I see pretty much exactly what I see here.  People are saying that Trump is racist, which should not be controversial. Some even saying the party is racist, which IMO is a reasonable position given Trump's role as the party's unquestioned leader and his GOP subordinates' willingness to abandon its previous policy positions in service of the racist's policy preferences. But nobody is saying that "all republicans" are anything.

Edited by TobiasFunke
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

She still received 3 million more votes than Trump.  She lost by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, OH, and MI. That's why she lost. Yes, she did a bad job campaigning and should have made more appearances in those states, but a large portion of Bernie's bitter base staying home is why we have a dictator now.  I hope that base learned something.

In 2016, 4% of Bernie primary voters stayed home and 18% voted for a candidate other than Clinton. In total, 78% of Bernie’s primary voters supported her.

In 2008, 5% of Hillary primary voters stayed home and 25% voted for a candidate other than Obama. In total, 70% of Clinton’s primary voters supported him.

I think it’s easy to point fingers when an election is decided by 70k votes, but the sour grapes phenomenon is not unique to Bernie supporters nor was it historically large in 2016. Candidates have to win in spite of those defectors every single election.

 

 

Edited by caustic
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Commish said:

That's fine.  When you know a racist is doing racist things and your response is "That racist stuff is on him.  I'm still voting for him because I like his ideas on infrastructure", you're saying racism is a lower priority for me than infrastructure.  You spin that however you want to justify it, but there's no changing that reality.  I've said a million times here that there is no way in hell that I would ever knowingly vote for a racist even if he/she agreed with me 100% politically and wanted to do exactly the same things I wanted them to do.  It won't happen :shrug: 

What if you aren't a racist and in fact voted for a black guy previously.  And what if you don't believe the guy you are voting for is actually a racist?  And what if instead of his ideas on infrastructure, you are concerned about your job.  Or an economy that has left you behind?  Or you realize that the middle class is going extinct?  Regardless of whether pulling for this guy ACTUALLY worked out for you, you did so with the best intentions of *hopefully* seeing a brighter future.  

Do you have the same disdain and judgement for that guy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TobiasFunke said:

I went to that thread, and I see pretty much exactly what I see here.  People are saying that Trump is racist. Some even saying the party is racist, which IMO is a reasonable position given Trump's role as the party unquestioned leader and his GOP subordinates' willingness to abandon its previous policy positions in service of the racist's policy preferences. But nobody is saying that "all republicans" are anything.

The Party.  The GOP.  For the purposes of what I referred to (response to someone saying all the GOP has is "they (democrats) are all socialists" the point applies.  

ETA. This is not a reasonable position.

Edited by unckeyherb
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, unckeyherb said:

What if you aren't a racist and in fact voted for a black guy previously.  And what if you don't believe the guy you are voting for is actually a racist?  And what if instead of his ideas on infrastructure, you are concerned about your job.  Or an economy that has left you behind?  Or you realize that the middle class is going extinct?  Regardless of whether pulling for this guy ACTUALLY worked out for you, you did so with the best intentions of *hopefully* seeing a brighter future.  

Do you have the same disdain and judgement for that guy?

Can't speak for anyone else but I am 100% comfortable passing judgment on anyone who took a look a man who has spent his entire lifetime being a bigot and scamming struggling middle class people for his own benefit (including two huge stories that broke during the campaign) and reached the conclusions you describe here.

I wouldn't necessarily call it disdain, but the judgment isn't a positive one to say the least.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:

The Party.  The GOP.  For the purposes of what I referred to (response to someone saying all the GOP has is "they (democrats) are all socialists" the point applies.  

ETA. This is not a reasonable position.

You're trying really hard, but not making a very good argument. Trump came down the steps to announce his candidacy by taking stabs at Mexicans. And trying to make the public fear all Muslims. He calls black female reporters 'low IQ'. He's been sued for not renting to blacks. Said the central park five should be put to death. Said the Nazi's had very fine people. STARTED THE BIRTHER THING!  His entire candidacy and first term has been centered around racism and bigotry. That can not be denied. If he's getting 90% approval within the party, then that party should not be complaining when someone makes a broad brush statement about it supporting racism.

If a person that's deemed a socialist ever ends up winning the presidency, and is clearly a socialist, then you may call the Democratic party one of socialists. But that hasn't happened.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JuniorNB said:

She still received 3 million more votes than Trump.  She lost by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, OH, and MI. That's why she lost. Yes, she did a bad job campaigning and should have made more appearances in those states, but a large portion of Bernie's bitter base staying home is why we have a dictator now.  I hope that base learned something.

I have a hard time believing that. I think Trump just did a good job with a little help from his Russian friends in turning out the wingnuts by running hard on fear and hate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Can't speak for anyone else but I am 100% comfortable passing judgment on anyone who took a look a man who has spent his entire lifetime being a bigot and scamming struggling middle class people for his own benefit (including two huge stories that broke during the campaign) and reached the conclusions you describe here.

I wouldn't necessarily call it disdain, but the judgment isn't a positive one to say the least.

I think its obviously disdain, from you specifically and many others here.  I'm glad for you that your moral compass is as true as the day is long.  Your judgement of folks that looked past his many deficiencies and voted as a hail-mary, or maybe a warning shot to the system that is abandoning them, is shared by a lot of people in higher seats of power than you.  Those people cast their judgments daily on TV, in newspapers, on twitter and other social media. 

I don't think this is as clear-cut as you think it is, in fact I think you are very, very wrong.  I suspect that the ones you and others are judging are looking at your daily broadcast judgement and look forward to telling you to pound sand and then vote for another four years of this idiot.  I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

You're trying really hard, but not making a very good argument. Trump came down the steps to announce his candidacy by taking stabs at Mexicans. And trying to make the public fear all Muslims. He calls black female reporters 'low IQ'. He's been sued for not renting to blacks. Said the central park five should be put to death. Said the Nazi's had very fine people. STARTED THE BIRTHER THING!  His entire candidacy and first term has been centered around racism and bigotry. That can not be denied. If he's getting 90% approval within the party, then that party should not be complaining when someone makes a broad brush statement about it supporting racism.

If a person that's deemed a socialist ever ends up winning the presidency, and is clearly a socialist, then you may call the Democratic party one of socialists. But that hasn't happened.

I'm actually not trying very hard.  

I am not calling them the party of socialists.  You should understand the context of the conversation before throwing your hat into the ring in an effort to post about how terrible Trump is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:

What if you aren't a racist and in fact voted for a black guy previously.  And what if you don't believe the guy you are voting for is actually a racist?  And what if instead of his ideas on infrastructure, you are concerned about your job.  Or an economy that has left you behind?  Or you realize that the middle class is going extinct?  Regardless of whether pulling for this guy ACTUALLY worked out for you, you did so with the best intentions of *hopefully* seeing a brighter future.  

Do you have the same disdain and judgement for that guy?

I have neither disdain or judgement for anyone in any of these scenarios.  It's simply pointing out what you're doing.  To answer your question, you simply replace a couple words in the post you quoted.  In this scenario you are putting those other things above the guy's racism.  And I don't begrudge people for voting for Trump the first time.  Even I thought he was just :hophead: to every fringe group he could.  Never did I think he'd actually do the stupid #### he was saying he'd do.  At this point though you should be able to see that he is doing nothing meaningful to help with the economy and the middle class is continuing to go extinct.  Obviously, I don't know your personal circumstance on whether he's helped you with your job or not, so I won't comment there.  If he's helped you, I'm glad.  I would submit though that anecdotes aren't the best way to form policy and the best that can come of the situation you present here is that you've put your personal well being above the guy's racism which is impacting millions of people.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:
1 hour ago, JuniorNB said:

but a large portion of Bernie's bitter base staying home is why we have a dictator now.  I hope that base learned something.

This is utter nonsense.  

Pretty much....there'd be the smallest of points to be had here if she hadn't won the popular vote the way she did.  It continues to amaze me the lengths people will go to in order to ignore the monumental errosr the campaign made.  I group of Bernie supporters not voting for her in areas she easily won has to be pretty low on the "blame list".  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Commish said:

I have neither disdain or judgement for anyone in any of these scenarios.  It's simply pointing out what you're doing.  To answer your question, you simply replace a couple words in the post you quoted.  In this scenario you are putting those other things above the guy's racism.  And I don't begrudge people for voting for Trump the first time.  Even I thought he was just :hophead: to every fringe group he could.  Never did I think he'd actually do the stupid #### he was saying he'd do.  At this point though you should be able to see that he is doing nothing meaningful to help with the economy and the middle class is continuing to go extinct.  Obviously, I don't know your personal circumstance on whether he's helped you with your job or not, so I won't comment there.  If he's helped you, I'm glad.  I would submit though that anecdotes aren't the best way to form policy and the best that can come of the situation you present here is that you've put your personal well being above the guy's racism which is impacting millions of people.  

I'm not putting my personal well being above anyone's racism.  I'm not a Trump voter.  In fact, I'm the one that started a thread hoping that he gets primaried (a thread in which chief-judge Tobias compared my naivete for simply discussing a primary challenger to his kid believing in the Easter bunny).  I've made my point clear, or as clear as I plan to make it.  You want to say anyone supporting him is racist or tacitly racist or inherrently racist or what racist.  Fine.  I disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:

I'm not putting my personal well being above anyone's racism.  I'm not a Trump voter.  In fact, I'm the one that started a thread hoping that he gets primaried (a thread in which chief-judge Tobias compared my naivete for simply discussing a primary challenger to his kid believing in the Easter bunny).  I've made my point clear, or as clear as I plan to make it.  You want to say anyone supporting him is racist or tacitly racist or inherrently racist or what racist.  Fine.  I disagree.

Again....that's not what's been said.  I have said that if you are continuing to actively support Trump, at minimum you are putting "other things" above his racism.  As long as you ignore that and try to fit me in the ideal I bolded here, I think we can stop the discussion as you don't seem to want to have an honest one :shrug: 

ETA:  And replace "you" with "one" in the post above to remove confusion if it helps clarify the point that remains.

Edited by The Commish
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Commish said:

Again....that's not what's been said.  I have said that if you are continuing to actively support Trump, at minimum you are putting "other things" above his racism.  As long as you ignore that and try to fit me in the ideal I bolded here, I think we can stop the discussion as you don't seem to want to have an honest one :shrug: 

Okay fair enough.  What is the take away of someone that "puts other things" above Trump's racism.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unckeyherb said:

Not to hijack, but why does this ###-clown have a job, much less a front-page-of-cnn-every-day kind of job?  His "articles" read as though they were written by a junior high school kid, complete with lots of exclamation points!  He is only worse when speaking.  

 

I totally understand why people hate his writing and think there are good criticisms of him. 

Having said that, I enjoy him on Tony Kornheiser's podcast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...