carpandean

There are some interesting potential outcomes in these races, as far as how the systems work. Sanders has received more voter-driven delegates in both states so far. However, due to the combination of six coin flips (all going Clinton's way) and the superdelegates, he has (or likely will) receive fewer delegates from each of them. What happens if Clinton wins on patterns like that? On the other side, Trump could have many, many more victories like NH, where he has a large lead, but not a majority, and then not end up getting the nomination (not sure on the details of how it would be decided, but I remember hearing that was a possibility.) Could we see Sanders and Trump receiving more voter support, only to have Clinton and Bush (or some other "establishment" candidate) receive their parties' nominations?

Yes, both the final number to get in and the fact that several teams were below that pace halfway in are pretty normal. Last year was a bit of a fluke. My point was that there were more teams off of the 93-point pace (all bunched together) that year than this year, so this year really isn't anything unusual. It will likely take 93 points (give-or-take) to get in again.

Maybe, but this is what it looked like two years ago at this time of year: Detroit and Columbus got in with 93 that year (Flyers had 94), while Washington missed with 90.

Haven't updated in a while. Almost brought out the Tank chart.

Only if one is the PowerBall. You need three whites to win anything without the PB. What I don't understand is why the PB, alone, is $4, but the PB + 1 white is ... $4?! There is 1/3 the chance of getting it, but the payout is the same? With PB+2 and 3, which have the same payouts, the odds are at least close (1/580 vs. 1/700.)

It's not that they don't want to win ... like the last two seasons ... but it's probably not their highest priority this season. Right now, they're seeing what they have and who they want to keep going forward. Figuring out what Murray actually bought in Lehner is a big part of that.

Almost as bad as a team whose name is derived from the Dutch word for brown (Bruins) wearing black instead, eh?

What/who defines "rapid" in your new law? Is it a type of action or an actual rounds-per-minute? Theoretical limits or practical ones? If it's RPM, what's the cutoff (and try hard to make it not an arbitrary number, because that generally gets thrown out legally.) Jerry Miculek can empty a six-shot revolver in less than 1 second (360 rpm) and can maintain 4 shots per second (240 rpm) with reloads. There is also a video out there that compares the rate of fire of various weapons at limited range (for example, inside a building.) The fastest? NY reloads. What's that? A bag of cheap revolvers, where "reloading" was done by tossing the empty one aside and pulling out another. It it's action, Australia would love for the US to place heavy restrictions on semi-auto's. Why? Because the development that would come out of US gun manufacturers devoting their efforts toward making better/faster lever-action, pump/slide-action and other manually-operated designs, which are close to semi's already, would be great for them. They have the restriction, but not our industry backing to make improvements. Search for "Troy PAR" to see what restrictive laws in a few US states (NY/CA/CT/etc) already created.

F*** cancer!

As with most things, the truth lies somewhere in between. The first article is overly harsh (to even flat-out incorrect) for many of the reasons that the second one points out. However, the second one does seem to let them off the hook a little too easily on some points. The explanations sometimes feel like a musician trying to tell you why you should like a song for its technical merits.

As Neo asked, do you actually mean automatic or just semi-automatic? Any automatic (full or burst) rifle produced after 1986 is illegal for a civilian to own. Any kit (and even some specific parts, thereof) designed to convert a semi-auto to automatic is illegal for a civilian to own. Many areas (NYS, for example) have made pre-1986 automatics illegal for civilians to own. The limited and declining number of pre-1986 automatic rifles in civilian hands are largely held by collectors, since they command 10's of thousands of dollars (supply = very low, demand = very high) and each one has a federal tax stamp, which means that its owner is registered (transfers require the new owners to get their own federal approval/stamp.)

Bummer :cry:

While I don't mind their current away jerseys (silver pits, trim and piping, in particular) as much as some, these definitely were better. Too bad they never had a real authentic one for sale (the only "Winter Classic" jersey released was just their old whites; no laces, different construction, etc.) Still kicking myself for not buying the full Pominville set (jersey, pant covers and socks) that was on Ebay a year or two later.

That's the only thing that I like about theirs. :P

I'm with Hoss on Montreal's being very good, but not #1 ever. Have to disagree on the Sharks' jersey. Wouldn't be anywhere close to #1 for me. Much better than their current ones, but not great. I do like the Ottawa "O" jerseys, but I wouldn't want to replace the "O" with their current logo. Something more than just a looks-like-a-zero, perhaps, but not their logo. Blackhawks are definitely near the top, as are most of the original-six teams. Canadiens, in general, are always near the top for me. The current Oilers jerseys are really nice, too. I may be a little biased, but ...

I went last night. Game was maybe half full. They had a small contest, the result of which was that every person in attendance won a ticket (voucher) for a Wednesday night game at the end of January. As for the game, they were the better team early on, but clearly had no energy left by the third. Despite that, they only lost 1-0, and had Rodrigues had even the slightly bit of scoring touch early on in the game, they might have won 3-0. Don't know if the schedule is wearing on him, but he had a rough game.

See for yourself. ;)

54/46 Con/Lib. About right. Of course, I still have a problem with any unidimensional measure. As with a few people above, I tend to be fiscally conservative, but socially liberal. I suppose that's why I got a close mix, but I'd rather it be measured in two dimension (I've seen that once after one of those "what candidate should you vote for" quizzes.)

Objecting at the rate, itself, would be no different than objecting at the rate now. Objections - and their subsequent deductions - are not adjustments to the rates, but rather to what is taxable. For example, if I am paying 40% on all my income and I give $100,000 to a charity, then that cost me 100000/(1-.4) = $166,667 in pre-tax income. I don't feel that I should be taxed on income that I give to a worthwhile cause, so make that deductible. My rate hasn't changed, per se, just what is taxed.

Like others, if you had asked me what the unwritten rule was, I would have said: don't do this (bolded).

This. Guy is pure effort and, unlike most such players that we've had since Drury, he's got great skills to go with it. He's only 24 (turns 25 in February) and is under contract for 6 more seasons after this one.

:o :wacko: :thumbsup:

"Considering" the list of demands does not mean that he is seriously thinking about actually doing it (at least, changing the name entirely; he may consider adding the first name and initial.) It's a very common way of saying, "I hear what you are saying and I am not dismissing your concerns outright," but rarely means that the demands end up actually be met. Often, "after careful consideration," some lesser action is taken (here, adding the first name and middle initial) or some "compromise" is reached.

Depends a bit on where you live and what you want to buy. The vast majority of gun deaths are from pistols. Decide you want one today (say, in Monroe county), it would take 9-18 months, a background check (not just NICS), finger-printing, being on a registry, etc, to get one. Want a fully automatic rifle, a silencer or a rifle with a barrel less that 16"? Can't have one in NY (even outside NY, you can't have a FA weapon produced in the last 33 years, so you'll have to pay 10's of thousands of $'s to buy an old one.) All that said, I stand by my statement. LGR4GM implied that they aren't restricted, which is not true.