K-9

There is no defending TT's utter lack of QBing skills on that first play from scrimmage. He paid little attention to what the safeties were doing pre snap, never looked left pre snap, and was too quick in his progressions post snap. On another note, he has GOT to stop stepping into pressure as well. This was a frequent problem last year that I attributed to his inexperience as pocket command is acquired through experience, but I was hoping to see some progress on that front and didn't see much of it on Sunday. 15 starts into his career, I'm willing to be patient, but he needs to start showing more command, more often.

Totally not related to your post, PA. I was just expanding on N'eo's point. We sometimes marginalize other voters because we think they aren't smart enough, aren't informed enough, aren't something else enough. For good or bad, we view things through the prisms of our own experiences and I don't get to tell people their's aren't valid. Again, not that you suggested that. But I think it's a fair question to ask Trump voters if they've heard his rhetoric, are they at all conflicted with voting for someone with such transparent racist and xenophobic views? I'm not the barometer for that. The GOP itself seems divided on that issue which is why I thinks it's a fair point to make. Why even our own moderator posted a link to an article and made the point of "why some people will hold their nose and vote for Trump." They know it's an odious thing to do.

I agree entirely with this. One person, one vote. And there should NEVER be a litmus test for that. That is dangerous territory and I've had that argument with many liberals over the years, too. And more than a few of my conservative friends as well who seem to think that voters must pass some sort of literacy muster before being allowed to vote. It's an absurd and decidedly un-American position to take.

Not terrible. Predictable but not terrible. Interesting to me how defensive the right is on this issue. As well they should be. This is what happens when a candidate like Trump spews his kind of rhetoric. As stupid as her comment was, Hillary struck a chord in those who resent being given a bad name by the "ignorant, racist, white trash" who find comfort in Trump's ideology.

Well, we are. Troops still in Afghanistan. "Advisers" in Iraq and Syria. Not to mention the ongoing "War on Terrorism" and the ongoing drone operations. Things are quite the mess still.

A buck says we see Jack back on the half wall with Matthews playing in front on the first unit come tourney time.

Do I dare say, "McDavid floating?"

Other than the ones we are already in?

Good point.

Ditto. Do young folks still say, "ditto?"

I don't know if I can agree with that given his rhetoric about Mexico, Iran, ISIS, Syria, Iraq and the seeming attraction that has for his constituency. Then again, foreign policy can be boiled down to "bomb the schit out of them" by some, I guess.

Anyone who gives that positive weight is an ignoramus. That's as kind as I can be on that score. What single issue could demand more gravity than the literal ability to determine the deployment of weapons that could annihilate 100s of millions? EDIT: It occurs to me that "ignoramus" might be a banable offense, depending. Right up there with "bigot", "racist", and, God forbid, "white supremacist." Oh the humanity!

I think you're parsing the language a little too finely here. A vote for Trump is not always a vote for racism, sexism, xenophobia. I doubt it is for the majority of his voters. It may simply be a vote for a single issue as previously mentioned or simply a vote NOT for Clinton. Regardless though, it IS a vote for the guy who is also that racist xenophobe. I think that's why much of his constituency is conflicted. It's not easy admitting you're voting for a guy who espouses such negative values. For me, his deal breaker of all deal breakers is his war rhetoric. "Bomb the schit out of them" and "I'd blow the Iranians out of the water for gesturing" speak to his utter lack of temperament for the job. Personally, I don't know why that doesn't scare the crap out of everybody when they hear that. Racist, sexist intemperate xenophobes are generally harmless but one with his finger on the button is a whole different matter.

I know the IIHF tourney doesn't mean best on best, but ROR acquitted himself nicely in that tourney for Canada.

Don't we all, as semi-adult grownups, understand the concept you describe? Of course Trump voters don't stand for everything Trump is. But his odorous rhetoric can't be ignored. I can say I voted for the anti-abortion Trump, but the racist, xenophobe Trump got my vote, too.

After waiting through the playing of three, count 'em THREE, national anthems before puck drop, I wonder if Kaepernick's knee would hold up. Sheesh!

Good luck with that. We've had some average and below average Joes hold the office in our history, and imo they have all been total disasters. Unmitigated, complete, and total disasters. Here's my take: we need to get back to DEMANDING exceptionalism vs. settling for average and below average. But that demand takes engagement of the sort that our attention span deprived populace isn't willing to put the work in to accomplish.

Reality TV show to determine the next candidates. Totally appropriate for America. But why stop there? Let's go all the way and have the president elected in the finals. No voting booths, no state election officials, no state oversight. Just call that 800 number or text #nextprez. People who don't watch TV, use the internet, or have smart phone? Too bad! My favorite aspect is the part where they are filmed doing various tasks so we can determine their qualifications. See how humane he is? Look at him building that house for the poor! See how tough she is? Look at her in that police ride along and how she helps collar that perp! No more need for the countless photo ops candidates currently engage in. Seriously though, I'd be curious to see how the viewers who decide to "get involved" actually get involved simply because of this new format. Is that the cure for cynicism?

I understand this and it doesn't sit right with me, either. But it can be a challenge for Trump voters (I purposely avoided the term "supporters") to draw a line of distinction because no matter how you slice it, when you vote for Trump you are voting for the racist, sexist, what have you Trump that's been on display the last year and a half. And his campaign knows that, hence the photo ops at black churches to convince voters "Look, I'm hanging out and grooving with black people, at church, so I'm not a racist and so it's OK to vote for me. See?" If they didn't realize the stink of his statements didn't color his constituents and cause conflict within them, they wouldn't have bothered wasting a second in that black church. Or is someone going to argue that he was courting the black vote? Ironically, that display at the black church was racist in and of itself. Talk about a whole other discussion! I just don't have the energy today, but that is a ton of food for thought.

That's fair enough. But I happen to think the groundwork for moral foundation theory was well laid previously by psychologists, social anthropologists, etc. And I don't agree that our motivations as individuals and groups are necessarily governed by morality. Indeed, they are sometimes guided by the utter lack of morality, especially in a group setting. I suppose what I view as a lack of morality can argued to be a different morality as defined and accepted by the group I say lacks it, but that's another discussion.

Holyschitzky! I'm with eleven. Screw the bridge.

People that stick up for racism? Who defends racism? I'm not following this line of reasoning. I think Haidt offers up some interesting food for thought, but nothing new. Applying morality to our political leanings is, at best, often inaccurate, imo. Our political leanings are mostly dictated by self-interests and there are too many examples of how we are quick to put our moral principles on hold in favor of self interest.

Haha. Putin is Trump's version of a great American.

Saw a bumper sticker driving down Niagara Falls Blvd the other day: "Life is a bitch. Don't vote for one." I understand your point about what it says about people who say and write such stuff. What does it say about people willing to slap it on their HUMVEE and advertise it? Both the Schrute buck and Stanley Nickel are pegged to the Ricky Buck in New Mexico.

PA's banning was politically motivated. Simple as that. No reasonable person could read his post and consider it a personal attack on anyone. Anyone other than a partisan, I guess.