Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2016, 06:01:06 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1240
26  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) on: March 26, 2016, 08:02:41 pm
I've noticed that 538 isn't covering these contests. Why no love for the Pacific states, Nate? Sad
538 dislikes Sanders. They think the Dem contest is already over and show more interest in the GOP race because Trump.

lol. They don't "dislike Sanders", they just accept the reality that the race is over.

Not necessarily, even by their math. Right now, he's at 89% of his delegate goal according to 538. After today, he'll likely be at 91-92%, unless something surprising happens in Hawaii.  Granted, he still has the Superdelegate problem, but that could change.
27  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) on: March 26, 2016, 07:56:31 pm
I've noticed that 538 isn't covering these contests. Why no love for the Pacific states, Nate? Sad

I had that thought too. Perhaps because of March Madness?
28  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) on: March 26, 2016, 07:46:58 pm
He's still going to be way down after tonight, but Bernie did a lot better in Washington than he had to in the abstract, which will end up helping him make up for lost ground. It's still a long shot for him, but this margin in Washington is really what will end up keeping him alive through the weekend.
29  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Poll: How embarrassing is Trump/Rep. conduct to you ? on: March 26, 2016, 05:37:38 pm
Very embarrassing, to the point that I can't defend my party anymore.
30  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Hypocritical politicians on: March 22, 2016, 11:17:16 pm
Schumer and Reid and Pelosi did the same thing July 27, 2007.

What was in this regards to? Just Schumer talking about not confirming any more Bush SCOTUS nominees? As I recall, there were no justices to nominate in 2007 anyway.

In hindsight, that was a really stupid thing for him to do.  Why publicize your hypothetical obstructionism?  The costs of doing so far outweigh any potential benefit.
31  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: 2016 Republican Primary Map Colors on: March 20, 2016, 06:28:37 pm
Map E, for the sake of consistency. We're all used to the colors, and I see no reason to change them now.
32  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Are you surprised dead0man is so anti-Trump? on: March 20, 2016, 05:38:25 pm
No. dead0man is one of our more rational and sane posters, so it makes sense he's anti-Trump.
33  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: If Democrats win WH, Senate, & House... should/will Schumer nix the filibuster? on: March 20, 2016, 04:22:56 pm
Should they? Yes. As I've said for years, we should return the Senate to requiring an actual talking filibuster to stop things. Will they? Probably not.

Not on legislation, but on judicial vacancies.

I would argue for everything.
34  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: If Democrats win WH, Senate, & House... should/will Schumer nix the filibuster? on: March 20, 2016, 03:49:25 pm
Should they? Yes. As I've said for years, we should return the Senate to requiring an actual talking filibuster to stop things. Will they? Probably not.
35  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland on: March 20, 2016, 03:11:08 pm
This guy is against the rights of people to keep and bare arms as witnessed by Judge Garland wanting to reconsider the ruling D.C. vs Heller


They shouldnt even give him a chance.  Hes a trojan horse.

How does voting to merely rehear the case amount to opposing a constitutional right that you don't even know how to spell?
36  About this Site / How To / Re: Emoticons / smileys on: March 20, 2016, 12:59:03 pm


I must say this is the weirdest one of them all. What context could this possibly be used in?

I used to use it sarcastically as a mod, but yeah, for general forum-esque things, it is a weird smiley.
37  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is there any doubt in your mind Trump will be the nominee? on: March 17, 2016, 08:42:28 pm
There is some doubt, but I'd give Trump a 99+% chance of winning... 90% that he secures it pre-convention.
38  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland on: March 17, 2016, 08:37:03 pm

One Senator posing a hypothetical that never came to fruition.
39  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland on: March 17, 2016, 06:01:40 pm
No . This guy has a horrible 2nd admin record.   They shouldn't entertain the ideal of even meeting with this left wing loon.

He voted to rehear a case without taking a position on its merits.

Yeah, as I indicated above, that is the worst possible reason to oppose him.
40  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland on: March 16, 2016, 08:17:39 pm
Perhaps the most annoying thing to happen substance-wise in opposition to Garland is the assumption by many Republicans that because he voted in favor of rehearing on Parker v. District of Columbia he MUST be anti-gun.
41  About this Site / How To / Re: Emoticons / smileys on: March 13, 2016, 07:50:21 pm
42  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of AAD on: March 12, 2016, 01:51:08 pm
Meh... I tried it. I couldn't really get into it.
43  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Wedding conundrum on: March 12, 2016, 01:49:29 pm
It's probably worth mentioning that I've been invited to her wedding.

How big are your respective weddings? I'm inclined to agree with Vosem's take, and if her wedding is big while your's is a more intimate affair, you could not invite the other friend and save face pretty easily.

I'm not sure how big her wedding will be, but mine will be ~250.
44  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Wedding conundrum on: March 11, 2016, 07:43:52 pm
Anyway, my best friend has indicated that he and his fiancÚ will not attend if I invite his ex. Through diacussuions with him, it appears that the objection is mainly coming from his fiancÚ (for unknown reasons...

I really think you should ask your best man/best friend to get his fiancÚ on board. Think about it: What is really the big deal here? Just tell them to avoid her. How hard is that? It seems unfair to make you disinvite someone just because they may bump into that person. Like, come on, over 250 people? If he doesn't care as much as it's his fiancÚ, then this seems a little ridiculous.
In theory, I agree with you, but I've come to realize that she's kinda crazy. And honestly, their relationship is probably not going to last. He went from wanting to break up, not knowing how to sit her down to do it, to proposing a couple months later. She's crazy clingy... She didn't hear from him for 4 hours and started freaking out. And I don't think it's ,y place to say anything, but this is just part of a larger problem.

Quote
However, if they won't budge, then I think you should ultimately not invite the ex. Yes, I think it's kind of petty for them, aka, your best man, to say they won't come if his ex happens to be 1 of 250+ people, but at the same time he should still get priority over that other person - Especially if he's your best man. You should let him know this is kind of ridiculous, though.

Also, one thing that might change all of this - Is his ex vindictive or a scene-maker? Because if she isn't, and is generally reserved/won't cause issues, then it shouldn't be a problem. If she is liable to do that, then just don't invite her.
No. And if I told her not to talk to him at the wedding, I'm confident she would respect that.
45  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Wedding conundrum on: March 10, 2016, 10:17:37 pm
It's probably worth mentioning that I've been invited to her wedding.
46  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Wedding conundrum on: March 10, 2016, 10:09:11 pm
I agree with Vosem (don't get to say that every day!).

So would you suggest I tell the friend why I'm not inviting her?
47  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Wedding conundrum on: March 10, 2016, 09:59:19 pm
I am 18 and perhaps not the greatest person to give you advice here, but it seems to me that if someone is your very best friend and they are insistent on a certain person not going to your wedding for them to attend, I would accede to their wishes. Things can later be smoothed out with your other friend without the risk of you losing what seems to be a much more significant friendship.

Interesting... that's the position I took initially, but of the 10+ people I've talked to looking for advice, you're the first person besides myself to take that position.

Simple solution to this problem: invite both of them and assure each that the other is DEFINITELY not coming.

Horrible idea. #1, the girl doesn't care if he's there. #2, and more importantly, if I lie, and he flips out, things could go horribly wrong. Lying to the guy with depression probably isn't the way to go, and while inviting her could leas to him not coming to the wedding, we would still be friends after. If I lied, I doubt he'd forgive that.
48  Forum Community / Forum Community / Wedding conundrum on: March 10, 2016, 08:36:57 pm
So I'm looking for some advice here, and I made this a general topic as opposed to a poll because I'm more interested in the "why" rather than pure numbers.

Years ago, my best friend dated one of my other friends; I was the one who got them dating (although they were acquaintances through politics prior to this). They had a very nasty break-up after he was medically discharged from basic training due to an injury sustained there; the breakup and discharge led to his depression significantly worsening

I wish to invite both of them to my wedding. The best friend is my best man. Due to my wanting to avoid conflict and ability to put my foot in my mouth (which you and I are all well aware of--the same flaw led to my resignation as a moderator... Yes, I resigned), I screwed up and informed my best friend of my desire to invite his ex. At this point , I am of the opinion that I should have never said anything to him at all regarding the issue , so bringing that up that error will not be helpful.

Anyway, my best friend has indicated that he and his fiancÚ will not attend if I invite his ex. Through diacussuions with him, it appears that the objection is mainly coming from his fiancÚ (for unknown reasons... I really don't know why she would/should care if his ex is there),  his part of the objection is due to his uncomfortability around his ex.  My thought is that the wedding will have 250+ people there. He and his ex honestly likely won't even bump into each other. The only reason he knows ahead of time that she would be there is because I was trying to avoid conflict and ended up putting my foot in my mouth.

So the point I'm at is deciding between inviting her and risking him not coming to the wedding (meaning I'm losing my best man and risking my friendship with my best friend) or not inviting a good friend in order to avoid sacerificing another friendship. The third option I came up with is to ask her if she is even available the date of the wedding... If she can't come, I could just avoid the conflict by finding that out before, but does this option have any downsides I'm not realizing?

So, any input would be greatly appreciated.
49  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic MI/MS election results thread (first results @8pm ET) on: March 08, 2016, 09:35:15 pm
Shout out to Nate Silver who gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning Michigan.

Nate Silver's model, not Nate Silver
50  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic MI/MS election results thread (first results @8pm ET) on: March 08, 2016, 09:23:44 pm
Shout out to Nate Silver who gave Clinton a 99% chance of winning Michigan.

Nate Silver's model, not Nate Silver
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1240


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines