pastajoe

Registered Democrats, when we vote for our elected officials and party representatives: 20 distinguished party leaders (current and former presidents, vice-presidents, congressional leaders, and DNC chairs) (DPLs) 20 Democratic governors (including territorial governors and the Mayor of the District of Columbia) 46 Democratic members of the United States Senate (including Washington, DC shadow senators) 193 Democratic members of the United States House of Representatives (including non-voting delegates) 436 elected members of the Democratic National Committee Yes, because the Clintons went back in time to early 80's to set up the superdelegate process, knowing that Hillary would run in 2016. :doh:

Actually it's not, it is representative democracy. We vote for people to represent us in all levels of government, this is just allowing our representatives to represent the will of Democrats in choosing the strongest candidate. It is a result of the Kennedy insurgency against President Carter which led to a fractured convention. It also prevents outsiders (independents that some states allow to vote in the Democrat primaries/caucuses) from disrupting the will of registered Democrats. If they want a say in either party, they should join the party, or form their own. Besides, super delegates are not committed, they just indicate their preference at this time. They can vote for whoever they want at the convention. If Bernie came into the convention as the stronger candidate with more delegates but not enough, they could put him over the top. But I think it will be a moot point and Hillary will have a clear lead in regular delegates by the convention.

There is the possibity that some of these 2nd and 3rd round picks could be packaged to get a higher pick, or used as a sweetener in a player acquisition. This trade might be Murray sending a message that if teams want in on a D like Franson or Bogo, don't wait until the deadline, pay the asking price now.

Plus minus is deceiving. He played less minutes and against 3rd or 4th line forwards compared to the other D. Not much of a dump given he will be a UFA.

If Murray can get fair value, he'll trade more D. Can always call up Ruewedal or Austin to fill in.

So you're against the ACA, and anyone who believes there are legitimate reasons for military intervention is a war monger. Even Bernie who supported the Afganistan war and would continue to fight ISIS. That's your right, but I don't think you'll find an electable candidate who shares your opinions.

Even Romney ran away from the ACA in the last election, it's toxic to Republicans. All the other issues are dependent on a president blocking the Republican Congress from reversing, or a SCOTUS (with multiple seats in play for the next president to fill) ruling on. - Iraq War vote - Admitted it was a mistake based on misleading evidence provided by the Bush administration. - Arming Syrian rebels sooner - Would have brought a quicker resolution to the Syrian war. - Libya air attacks - Done with a European coalition to prevent govt slaughter of civilians, and led to democratic elections. New govt didn't take support offered by US which led to current situation. Libya was given the opportunity to succeed and didn't embrace it. Much different than calling for bombing Iran instead of diplomacy to get an agreement. Details matter. - Afghanistan was the right war, going after the terrorists and the people who harbored the 9/11 terrorists. One of W's correct decisions. Unfortunately got sidetracked with Iraq and didn't finish the job, which was left for Obama to deal with. Only the most extreme liberals would think that was the wrong war. Even Bernie voted for it.

I think it's naive to think that a Repub president wouldn't be different than Clinton on healthcare, same sex marriage, women's choice, tax policy, immigration, and voting rights. What are distractions to you are important issues for millions of Americans. Define "war monger". Clinton got other countries to join in sanctions that drove Iran to the table to halt their nuclear enrichment. The Repubs would rather "bomb, bomb Iran". and unless you want a pacifist or isolationist president, there are situations that require military action as a last resort.

So you believe Clinton will be the same as the Republicans on social issues (minorities, gays, women, immigrants), the role of the federal govt (tax policy, immigration, job creation, healthcare, education), Supreme Court appointees, and foreign policy (diplomacy first vs shoot first)?

I can understand in previous decades when both parties often ran moderates. But this year especially the party positions are so diametrically different that the choice of which party best represents ones views should be clear.

I don't understand people who debate between voting for a Democrat or Republican. The parties economic policy proposals and social views are so different that it should be clear what candidate to support in the general election, regardless of who are the party candidates.

Could put Zemgus on Crosby.

Sounds like some some size issues, did you try them on in the store? Take them back and exchange them. To keep your shin pads in place many use plastic tape over the socks. Most rec skaters don't wear neck guards.

To carry your coffee? In case you don't know, wear an underarmor type shirt under your gear to wick away the sweat. Take your gear out of the bag afterwards to air it out. I have a gear tree in the basement that I hang it on in front of the dehumidifier. Get a couple of those sneaker balls air fresheners, and stick one in each of your gloves and one in your bag to reduce smell. Occasionally spray Frabreeze on the inside of the shoulder and knee pads. You don't want to be the guy whose gear reeks because he leaves it in his trunk all week. Good luck and bend your knees.

Trump wins big in South Carolina. Jeb! suspending his campaign. Hillary wins by more than expected in Nevada. The general election is starting to crystallize. I can't see Cruz getting more support than Trump, and how can they choose Rubio when he lacks the experience that they've criticized Obama about.

The fact that you're criticizing his decision is itself a partisan move. He's paying his respects before the funeral. Leave the funeral for the family.

I'm not defending the decision. I'm saying he will be criticized no matter what he decides. Anyone who thinks otherwise isn't paying attention to the political discourse among Republicans.

And if he went to the funeral, the haters would claim he's politicizing it. So either way, they''ll complain for political points.

Just pointing out that some of them do well. Clarke MacArthur is another who did better.

I got home from work yesterday and found multiple spots on the kitchen ceiling where the roof leaked.

So what is the statute of limitations on how long a person is defined by what they said or did in the past? Every day in the campaign we hear that some one said this in 1998 or voted for that in 2003. Are people no longer allowed to change their views based on new information or experiences? I'm not talking about switching during the campaign to pander, but pre-election. I think every candidate is hit with this charge.

How about: Cody Hodgson Christian Erhoff Steve Ott Nathan Gerbe Chris Stewart Danny Paille

Scott scored a power play goal and was 3rd star in win over Syracuse.

Where's Brad Boyes when they need him.