Drunkard

Sweet. I thought we were going to have to start cutting up the drive way.

So where's all the good hash at?

It'll never happen. You need a 2/3 majority in both the House and the Senate to do that and the GOP would never go for that because doing the opposite tipped the court in their favor.

He could easily get impeached if the Democrats win control of the House because it only takes a simple majority. He just won't be removed from office because there's almost no chance they get 67 Senate votes to remove him so it would really just be symbolic the way it was with Bill Clinton.

Sweet. That's what I was hoping for with the first 3 lines, although I'd prefer to replace the 4th line with kids who are no longer waiver exempt (Bailey, Baptiste, etc.) while letting guys like Pominville ride the bench.

You guys should all buy some lightning rods and install them on your roofs. I'm not sure why that concept went out of practice but when I used to sell insurance for Banker's Life and Casualty our target demographic was old people and that's one of the things my boss pointed out to me when he was first training me (that old people tend to have lightning rods on their houses).

Yep. That's why lawyers are involved every of the way and both sides are usually corrupt.

I can't imagine the don't wait, call 8 people ever losing a case.

I'm not going to quote that huge table but what's the deal with the multiple contributions of the same amount ($1,000 or $2,700) being made by the same person on the same day? I assume $2,700 is some sort of a limit but if that's the case why were Terry and Kim eligible to donate $2,700 on December 31st so many damn times? Did they make donations in the name of each kid? Pets? etc. Or was there some sort of error when it was copy/pasted? And if it's donated to some PAC that has no limit why not just donate $30,000 all in one shot instead of a dozen times in $2,700 increments?

I've always heard D means done.

My mistake. But hey, 3 out of 4 ain't bad.

Thanks, man. I appreciate the response. I hope you're right wrt Roe v. Wade but I think it gets overturned. Either way, we should see within the next year or so. I'd just like to see the Democrats take control of the House in the midterms to place a check on the GOP and to see if Trump has the ability to negotiate and broker deals on a real bipartisan basis.

Can't blame them either. Signing deals like that allow guys to: A) Get paid up front B) Protect themselves against being bought out C) Avoid escrow D) Avoid state income taxes (in states with no income tax)

I think he will at this point. It's not set in stone but he knows how to motivate his base and Conservatives are much better at getting to the polls as a percentage of the population. There's plenty of things that could change that though. The best chance is for the Democrats to overtake the House in the midterms. They'd essentially be able to neuter his conservative agenda at that point and increase the changes of either constant stalemates (most likely) or actual bipartisan legislation (way less likely). Maybe after 2 years of that he gets sick of it and decides not to run or maybe Mueller pulls enough string in his investigation to chase him out. I'd give him better than 50% odds he gets a second term though.

So what do you love about Gorsuch? I'm genuinely curious. I'm personally a liberal but even back in the days when I used to learn more conservative I've always been in favor of liberal judges (in case I ever ended up in front of one).

The other team they are looking for is probably just a sucker team they'll get to take Ryan for Ottawa and Callahan for Tampa.

I can't see the video here at work, but to steal a word from J-Rock of the Trailer Park Boys, Trump is one shrewd MAFKA. He's running the White House like his television show and the people who love him and the people who hate him both eat it up by the shovel full. The Supreme Court will probably skew right until I'm old and gray or dead and I'm 37 right now. His base of evangelicals will be even more motivated to support him in the mid terms and whenever he starts taking on heat for any issue, he's able to launch into an unrelated twitter tirade that attacks someone/something else (North Korea, trade wars, kneeling during the anthem) and moves everyone onto a new issue. Love him or hate him, the guy has his finger on the pulse of our ADD stricken electorate. As a liberal, I actually feel lucky that him and his cohorts aren't more competent because they could do even more damage if they were. I'm not religious, but Lord Casey help us if the GOP gets to 60 votes in the Senate at any time during his Presidency while maintaining control of the House.

Republicans are so much better at the "game" of politics than Democrats are and until far more liberals actually go vote instead of just attending opposition rallies and acting like keyboard warriors it's going to stay that way. The timing is no coincidence. Trump has been lobbying behind the scenes to get someone on the court to retire before the midterms and he found the best piece of red meat he could to satisfy his base. Record disapproval ratings? Who cares. He's about to replace the so called swing vote on the Supreme Court with a Conservative that will likely want to overturn Roe v Wade and Marriage Equality. This is the exact type of thing that Evangelicals use to justify voting for an adulterous, bully, predator, with a foul mouth who has been married 3 or more times. They will come out in droves to support him because despite his life of sin, he's actually more effective for their cause than guys like Mike Pence or Mitt Romney have ever been.

Maybe a team looking for a cheap injury replacement? No matter how you slice it they are 1000% more likely to get plucked off the waiver wire than Jason Pominville and his boat anchor cap hit.

I agree. Rodriguez in particular, should be given a chance in the top 6 because he's produced better than the alternatives at this point. I still see Reinhart as a winger and with O'Reilly gone I think the top 6 will consist of: Eichel, Reinhart, Mittelstadt, Sheary, Rodriguez, and somebody (I'll be hopeful and say Thompson). There are all sorts of combinations that can be had, but I hope they use those guys in the top 6 and put Okposo on the 3rd line with Sobotka and Berglund. Go with youth on the 4th line and let the vets like Pominville, Larsson, etc. either ride the pine or send them down to Rochester.

Of course you can do that. What's more, those guys would probably be some of Rochester's best players. Matt Moulson looked like death warmed over playing for Buffalo at the end (0 points in 14 games) but produced at nearly a PPG pace (46 points in 49 games) in the AHL for the Kings minor league affiliate. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=71387

Given all of the "faith" comments, I'd say that's a pretty safe assumption. While there are Democrats who are religious, you don't see them talk out it in public forums nearly as much. Exceptions being Reverends like Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson, etc.

I think I'd roll the dice and offer him the 8 year deal at $50 million. If he takes it, great. If he balks I'd possibly push it up to a max of 8 years at $54 million ($6.75 million aav) but no higher. At that point I'd bridge him to a 2 or 3 year at $4+ million to get him into camp.

Yep. Being able to count on a guy for 20+ goals and 55+ points year in and year out while shouldering the load of difficult minutes is honestly quite remarkable. It will be interesting to see whether they just pick an unfortunate guy to replace him or if they attempt to replace him via committee, such as Berglund getting the difficult DZ minutes, Eichel getting the more difficult OZ minutes, or however they try to do it.

Glad he's been signed. I'd still like to know whether they expect him to play on the left or right hand side? Can anyone tell me which side he played during the prospect camp? Maybe that would give us an indication.