K-9

100 dice simply means 100 chances of hitting a 1 in 6 outcome. The odds are still 1 in 6 for any one of those 100 dice to land on a 3. Probability and odds are not the same things, mathematically speaking.

It's not about those numbers being right or wrong, it's about understanding how our government works before making an argument assigning blame for them and having people believe that a president is solely responsible for those outcomes. That is sophistry in my book. When you get a chance, please refer me to a single president that didn't see the national debt grow during his tenure.

I give you points for diligence.

Sophistry at its finest.

The short cop looks like constable Bob Sweeney from 'Justified.'

I detest this attitude. It doesn't matter if people haven't been a cop, knew a cop, or ever even saw a cop. All that matters is that the police remember who they work for. Period. Kinda like you would never put a military man in charge of the defense department.

Yes, if only we had 1,000,000 third round draft picks. And, once again, the odds don't change. Although "independent events" has a nice ring to it. GO SABRES!!! Trollin' trollin' trollin' Keep them doggies rollin'

I hope it's Ivanka. She is every bit as intelligent as she is beautiful.

My apologies for misreading and misrepresenting the numbers presented up thread. But the point stands. The odds of any 3rd round pick succeeding do not change, regardless how many 3rd round picks you have. In honor of revision, less than 1 in 10 third round picks succeed. All the more statistical justification for Murray to roll the dice and take a gamble on Vesey. He would have been a top 10 pick in this year's draft, after all. GO SABRES!!!

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Every four years the GOP co-opts several planks from the Democratic platform. Without fail. It's all lip service.

No, it's not. The point is that even if you had 100 third round draft choices, the odds of any of them succeeding in the NHL is 1 in 4. All you have with those 100 picks is 100 chances to hit on a 1 in 4 probability. People like to throw out terms like, "the odds are", when the odds don't change at all. It's the old coin toss scenario. GO SABRES!!!

The odds are 1 in 4, regardless.

Obama did not say the same thing, unless I missed the part where he suggested some NATO countries might be on their own in a conflict because they didn't pay their fair share. Context matters. If you want to simply equate Obama's use of the term "free riders" with Trump's remarks and say they said the same thing, I think you are missing the mark.

Your math is not correct. It doesn't matter how many picks you have; each pick has a one in four chance. Period. Happy trolling.

I am not suggesting Trump is suggesting to reneg. Not at all. I am suggesting he is out of his depth and very misleading. "Fair share" is not simply an equal amount per member country as his out of context remarks suggest. The way the treaty is structured mandates some countries pay more, some less. I doubt the average citizen, hearing his remarks, would appreciate that.

Proportionate is what is agreed to by the treaty which means those currently paying less than their 2% need to ante up. Simple as that. It's been a problem for 10 years now. "Fair share", as Trump put it, and without the proper context of the treaty structure, is irresponsible. If you favor restructuring the treaty and its terms for member countries, that is an entirely different discussion.

Perhaps this will help provide some context on NATO. Trump is and always has been short on context. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/30/trumps-claim-that-the-u-s-pays-the-lions-share-for-nato/

I remember when respect was something given unequivocally until it was lost. Nowadays it is something that has to be earned first before we grant it. When did that change?

In watching the video, the autistic kid has a toy truck in his hand but the cops don't know that. The caregiver, thinking the cops might misconstrue the toy truck for something else, keeps telling the cops it's a toy. And they shoot him, anyway. Never mind that he was laying flat down with his arms raised and the autistic kid had the potential threatening weapon. I'm glad the man wasn't killed. I can hear the cop spin now: "Our officers showed great restraint in not shooting to kill." I hope this guy sues North Miami for every penny they have.

Stafford soft. That could be a new slogan for Charmin. GO SABRES!!!

Hillary Clinton went to China and begged for the money to fund our big government spending? Chris Christie needs a doughnut, stat.

Saw some talk of Trump's "platform" above. Here's the republican platform in its entirety. Is he not that party's representative and banner carrier for that platform? https://prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL%5B1%5D-ben_1468872234.pdf My favorite part (from many) is that they uniformly adopt coal as "clean" energy. Right.

I have a right to arm bears.

Pretty sure Kaleta's uncle has that contract. Either him or Cody Hodgson's dad.

In addition to invading foreign muslim lands, they are also hoping our fear makes us invade muslims right here at home. How soon before our own domestic nutjobs take matters into their own hands on a larger scale? We've got a presidential candidate who stops just short of advocating such actions for crissakes. In the meantime, I'd like to know what kind of military action stops an individual from using a computer to access websites anywhere in the world? Bombs and invasions won't work. There have to be certain cyber measures we can employ, no?