MattPie

http://www.emwfootballandcheerleading.org/

It's not me, it's you, Buffalo Bills.

Salt, duh.

Bills WIN! BILLS WIN! (the can vote)

Probably more intolerance than ignorance. FWIW, I probably see more "stupid liberals" stuff on FB that the other way around. Someone actually posted something like, "Thanks for all the birthday wishes, if I have one birthday wish it's that all the stupid people that are going to vote for Hillary Clinton don't." No party has a monopoly on being condescending.

So do you really agree with everything Hillary does and every policy she'll push? I never figured you for pro-Big Banks and a hawk.

I'm surprised at how... candid... people are in email. I'm just a guy with no political aspirations but even then I know better than to write anything in a email that'll come back to haunt me.

I don't believe that. If so, no one could vote other than true believers. I'm not going to find a viable candidate that I fully agree with, so I have to take the good with the bad and accept that I'm not going to agree with everything. Given the other discussions here, you should probably substitute "white racists" in there. There are certainly black, latino, asian, and other enthnicities that are racists and not voting for Trump.

Unfortunately, there are enough people that'll say something borderline, and then when called on it say, "Well, I didn't mean it THAT way. [Exaggerated wink]". For all the complaining about Clinton parsing of language, Trump seems to be the master. "Oh, I didn't *MEAN* to suggest someone shoot Hillary." Did he? I hope not. Would someone read that into it? Maybe. And that's the scary part. There's a point there, but it might be a bit too far. I believe you can support Trump without personally being a racist if you're a single-issue voter, but it's a fine distinction. If I say, "I like IBM and BMW", does that mean I support Nazis because they both have links in their past? I hope not. That being said, voting for Clinton doesn't mean the person agrees with the gun-rights policies she may support (that remains to be seen, I don't think it's really a fight she's interested in). The problem with Trump, though, is he seems to bring it to the forefront a lot so it makes it harder for someone to make that distinction.

Unfortunately, I think the Republican primary this election is indicative of what you'd get from a "TV reality show" approach to candidates. You'd end up with a field of reasonable people (for values of reasonable relating to politicians) and a couple whackos that people flock to because they're whackos. It might work, but it might end up being, "who can say the most inflammatory thing this week?"

In a heated discussion, you probably need to be more explicit than normal. "BLM Extremists" can be misunderstood as "BLM, a group of extremists," vs. "the extremists in BLM". I believe you that you mean the latter, but it's easy to read it the other way. The same may apply to people saying "racist Trump supporters"; that can be read both ways and see how upset that gets people.

FWIW, if I have a couple SA Boston Lagers or Yuengling Lagers, I'll often start sneezing. I do have some mild seasonal allergies and it wouldn't surprise me if I'm a little allergic to something in it.

I used to get far-worse headaches from certain beers (Yuengling and Sam Adams Boston Lager come to mind) than others for the same amount consumed. Genny Cream, the few times I've had it, seemed to have some gastrointestinal effects as well. I feel like it's possible that the differing grains in beers (rice in Bud, corn in Genny (I think), etc.) may trigger issues in some people.

If you haven't seen it, this ties into one of the more wacky conspiracy theories I've seen on Facebook well before the "sickness" meme. In short, it goes like this: Obama has "the goods" on Clinton's email server and it's totally jail-worthy He's holding off releasing these until after Clinton wins the election. Once she wins, he's going to leak all that info and the DoJ will be forced to indict her. Since she's disqualified from being President, he'll be forced to declare martial law and continue being president. President for life. I suspect there's a bit of stretching there once you get to point 3. From the above article's comments, a twist on the theory:

Putting my N'eo hat on, 2nd paragraph: Insight. Truth. Thank you.

Some background. Ken Block indeed has been doing these for years, first with Subarus and later the Ford Focus (which in Europe has some really hot versions running around). He was in the World Rally Championship for awhile, but didn't have a ton of success. I think his best finish was 7th and usually he was down towards the bottom of the pack. He's a great showman but apparently doesn't quite have "it" when it comes to competing against the top guys in the world. I love the videos, though. There's something to it as I played it for MrsPie last night thinking she'd enjoy the Buffalo bits but she was really impressed and watched the Dubai video with me afterwards. Color my shocked. In a similar vein, once you get through the Ken Block videos, go watch Danny McCaskill ride a bicycle.

Dude, the comments on the Jalopmik article are sweet.

From what I read, I think the entire offense missed the first quarter. No, you're right.

Gimmick is right, there are still cabs and if they were home, I'm sure they'd either have their own cars or someone to give them a lift (but not a Lyft).

At least make any Bills threads OT, since it is.

Against the Jets again, so Santas Elves running around the field.

I'm curious what mechanism Trump is going use to cut lobbying interests? I can't think of a way; he can't pass laws, and even if he did hasn't the Supreme Court ruled in essence that money is free speech? If I remember my school, they only way to override the Supreme Court is a Constitutional Amendment. I don't see that happening. I'd be amused if he tried to do it by Executive Order, though. I'm interested in the other thing you mentioned about Texas and part-time politicians. It seems like that would be very susceptible to companies or other interests hiring people "part-time" that happen to be elected officials and paying them with no clear job duties (other than advocate for whatever their employer wants). Anyone have more info on this I could read up on?

If only I could pull up that post I made years ago (probably around the last lockout) about how the NHL was going to a system where after a goal was scored the goaltender and scoring player had to have an MMA-style fight to decide if the goal counted. (Context: something about "changing things up to bring in a new audience but close enough to before so the old timers wouldn't get upset")

I'm trying to think of others. Vatican City is all I'm coming up with.

I actually knew that one. I understand being mad at the government (some how this is OK, just as long as you play along and stand for the anthem), but why would you want someone who doesn't know what they're doing? We don't ask for the mechanic that doesn't know how cars work. We don't go to concerts where the performers don't know how to sing (unless it's a punk show). I understand wanting someone who is not part of the "the machine", but Trump doesn't seem to understand what the machine can or can't do.