Jump to content

berlinerbaer

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    749
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by berlinerbaer

  1. 6 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

    He won a lot of games at Colorado dude.  What's your record since he left?   You had some success with that phony-baloney McCartney and that's pretty much it. 

    Slick Rick left each of his stops in a worse position than when he arrived. 

    He inherited the Colorado and Washington programs during the start of their downward trajectories and was unable to reverse the trends. It sucks to immediately follow McCartney at Colorado, so this is basically true by default. At Washington, he oversaw some good teams that were loaded with off-field problems. The program seemed to collapse when he left and sucked ass for six years.

    The lone exception might be UCLA. He left Mora some real talent to inherit, although he really squandered it during his time. 

    • Like 1
  2. 2 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

    Cal's defense and run game looked great last night, and I have been told that that's how you win football games.

    If the passing game would only play like they did in the second half with some consistency, then Cal could win 8+ games. An average all-around QB performance is all I'm asking for.

    • Like 1
  3. 1) WSU - Haven't played anyone with a pulse yet, but damn they look good doing it

    2) USC - Two solid wins to take the heat of Helton, for now

    3) Utah - Early favorites to win the south, until last night?

    4) Oregon - Nice rebound for what should be  a 9+ win team

    5) Colorado - Not sold yet but great comeback against The Corn

    6) Cal - Impressive upset in Seattle after a lousy first week

    7) Washington - Growing pains with a green QB

    8 ) Stanford - Probably better than this ranking but last night will leave a mark

    9) ASU - 2-0 but looks like a young team with some issues all-around

    10) OSU - Two respectable losses (Rainbows are tough on the Islands)

    11) Arizona - Sumlin can't field a defense worth a shit

    12) UCLA - Chip can't field an offense team worth a shit

    • Like 1
  4. I've worked peripherally in O&G for 5 years now, and there's too much about it that I don't get, but there are some recent trends I and others have observed that suggest that many of the characteristics people take for granted about the industry might be changing. Wall Street just isn't pumping money into it like it used to. That might be a lingering effect of the downturn, but I think some of it has to do with the arrival of renewables, which aren't going away. 

    When I joined my company in 2014 (chemical supplier), I was told the next annual meeting was going to be in St. Thomas. Then it was California. Then it was cancelled altogether. We finally got around to having one in San Antonio just last year. This year, it was in downtown Houston, but only for the sales force. The downturn is over and yet, here we are. The point is that the days of people lighting cigars with $100 bills isn't that far away in the rear view mirror, but people still seem to think they're up ahead. I don't think they are.

    The sky-high salaries are going to come down. Either that, or the number of folks making them will drop due to layoffs. Speaking of layoffs, they happen by the hundreds of thousands every decade or so anyway thanks to the boom and bust inherent with the industry. Many of the folks who get the axe never go back to O&G. People talk about a generation gap in the workforce, with lots of young people and folks approaching retirement, but nobody in between. That's because those people went elsewhere.

    Bottom line is I don't see the GND, in the likely watered-down form it will take, doing all that much to alter the natural trajectory of the industry, which is to become overall more hostile to its workforce.

     

  5. 3 hours ago, texifornia said:

    Their administration pretty openly sort of wishes the football team would go away. It's such a basketball school at heart.

     

    3 hours ago, mulletpelini said:

    It is quite amazing that football has never really been successful there especially when you consider how fucking many NC's they've won in other sports.

    A hostile admin, success in other sports, underachievement, fickle fan base... It's a California thing.

    At least UCLA went for broke when it hired Kelly. I'm not sold that he's a flame-out just yet, but the school should be able to go out and get another good name if he moves on. In contrast, the next flashy hire Cal makes will be the first.

     

  6. I'm not opposed to a few more candidates being let in through the back door in six weeks if they manage better poll numbers. IMO winnowing down to 10 candidates by Iowa is a realistic target while hitting that number five months early is going too fast. There are a lot of white dudes who are carbon copies of each other that need to go, but there are a few other candidates who might bring something compelling to the table that are currently on the outside looking in: Steyer, Gabbard, and Inslee if he had stuck around.

    At least this way gives us one debate with the anticipated Warren-Biden and Warren-Harris match-ups. I won't mind expanding to two nights in October as long as the Houston showdown tells us something new.

  7. 1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

    Why do people have such strong negative feelings about Tulsi? It's weird

    I wouldn't describe what I feel antipathy as much as apathy. To say that her performance so far hasn't matched the hype would be a massive understatement. 

    She had the anti-war lane all to herself and completely squandered it, despite given chances to debate lightweights like Tim Ryan. There are plenty of anti-war democrats who would have given her a second thought, but she chose to appear in the wrong kind of media. With most of the Left digging Liz or Bernie, she chose to go after the male disaffected anti-establishment quasi-libertarian crowd. These people are an already small proportion of the population. LOL if she expected them ever to vote in a Democratic primary. 

    She has been strangely subdued in debates and at other public forums. Too often she also showed up in the wrong places. Go on Fox News and do a town hall, like Bernie. Don't go on fucking Tucker Carlson and rail against the DNC. She needed to talk to the voters. Instead, she was just another cable news talking head. As far a controversial candidates go, she was downright boring.

     

  8. Question for the M4A or bust folks.

    What happens when Congress sends a bill to the president's desk that doesn't go all the way? I can see vetoing one or two of them, but on the flip side I honestly can't see the Senate passing a legit M4A bill. This is especially true considering the Dem's path to control of that chamber involves the election and re-election of several moderates in 2020.

    At what point does Bernie sign a public option bill? How about Liz?

     

  9. 14 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

     

     


    lol Those two are probably reporters.

     

    I don't know whether to think this is good or bad.

    I'd rather see a room full of pissed off Iowans, throwing at him take-out from any of the district's ethnic restaurants, or rotting ears of corn that they are unable to sell.

  10. On 7/26/2019 at 2:16 PM, Brisketexan said:

    It's not just the president.  Not even close.  It is the entire party in charge of our government -- the GOP.  And they have been throwing up roadblocks and actively attacking any efforts to mitigate climate change for YEARS.  If you don't think that has been a HUGE drag on our path to mitigating climate change, I have a bridge filled with unicorns to sell you.

    Look at where we are.

    Understand that it's woefully short of where we need to be.

    Now imagine where we would be if the machinery of our government wasn't actively FIGHTING AGAINST US.

    I'm heartened that politics is being taken out of the issue, slowly but surely. We have Texas, a red state, leading the way and communities like Georgetown going 100% renewables. State and local governments are taking the lead. California alone deserves credit for getting automakers to adopt its standards as the de-facto national standard, for example.

    I'll go on record to say that climate change denialism will be politically untenable at the national scale in ten years. It will be one of the things the GOP will try to sweep under the rug.

    It's certainly true that we'd be well on our way to fixing our growing climate calamity if it were not for the GOP's bullshit. Instead, our great grandchildren will be perplexed at why we let it get so bad, and they'll shudder to think how close we came to absolute disaster before things got better.

     

    6 hours ago, Axiom of Choice said:

     

    Do you have any idea how much damage the democratic party and their progressive supporters & associates have done to the environment with their absolutely ridiculous initiatives and policies over the last several decades, initiatives that continue to this day?  What the world needs is safe, reliable, on demand large centralized power plants that produce no carbon and other greenhouse gases.  As it happens, the world has had technology like that for many decades now in nuclear power plants.  Who do you think halted the expansion of the nuclear industry?  Many current democrat examples could be given that continue today with these initiatives.  Tom Steyer is anti nuclear and "bankrolled an Arizona ballot initiative that would prematurely close the state’s sole nuclear plant."  He also has large investments in non-nuclear renewables (and also coal and natural gas).  Strange coincidence.  There are many other current leading democrats who oppose nuclear energy, e.g. Bernie Sanders and Ed Markey.

    Also, democrats now oppose natural gas, which produces only half the CO2 emissions that coal does for a given power output.  Right now, the world has two well proven and reliable on demand power sources that can replace coal, one that has zero greenhouse emissions and another that cuts the emissions in half compared to coal.  The democrats oppose them both.  They even use fear mongering and pseudoscience to achieve these goals, just like the GOP.  Millions and millions of tons of carbon have been released into the atmosphere and will continue to be released for the foreseeable future because of the actions of democrats and their progressive supporters.  We could replace coal completely within the next couple of decades with nuclear and natural gas plants, but that won't happen in part because of resistance by democrats.  Imagine where we would be without republicans or democrats.  

     

     

    You should have picked a state that wasn't drowning in sunlight as your example. So regular is the sun in Arizona, that even Li ion battery technology at today's prices would be all that is needed to keep the grid load constant.

    Seriously, bro, Arizona has no need whatsoever for nuclear power.

    Your anti-nuclear conspiracy argument is rich when one considers that no other source of energy has received close to as many handouts over the past 5 decades. Nukes are a massive investment. Half of them wouldn't exist if it weren't for our government's strange obsession with too-big-to-fail boondoggles. I was greatly intrigued by the thorium fuel cycle just a few years ago but I've since seen prices for non-nuclear renewables and battery technology fall at such a rate to convince me that's where the money should go.

     

  11. 3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

    One wonders if the Republicans wouldn't be better off at this point without Collins.  Her brand has really taken a beating over the last 12 months.

    It's Collins or bust for the GOP. I don't see any other Republican winning an open seat. Maine has really swung left fast.

  12. 4 hours ago, Js1 said:

    Pete Olsen is retiring.  R+4 district. 

    Hearing this on my drive home from work this afternoon was music to my ears.

    4 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

    That's interesting.  Most of that district is Fort Bend County, which is now pretty solidly Democratic.

    True, but the 22nd has been gerrymandered to exclude the northern deep blue portions of Sugar Land and Missouri City. It runs east into Pearland as far as Webster and south as far as Alvin. That's a lot of red ground.

    It's not a R +4. It was drawn up to be more like an R +10 or so, which is what it was prior to 2018. It is eminently flippable as an open seat, like TX-7 2018 flippable. The 2018 Dem, Sri Kulkarni, is running again and has almost $400,000 cash-on-hand as of right now.

    It's probable that the R who will try to keep the seat red will be none other than Troy Nehls, who is not seeking reelection as county sheriff. Some folks down here have strong opinions of him.

    Spoiler

    spacer.png

  13. 8 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

    I don’t believe there are reluctant Trump voters.

    Anyone even considering voting for him after the last 3 years isn’t worth it.

    And I’m so tired of hearing why the shitty decisions of Trump voters is the fault of people who oppose Trump. And being asked to bend and moderate to placate their retrograde viewpoints. And no one expects them to compromise.

    Just ignore them and wait for them to die of old age or diabetes or heart disease or opioid overdose.

    This is correct. Some voters who were reluctant in 2016 were corporatist Republicans who will vote for him again because red team. They are already counted in the equation. This thread should not be about them.

    A different, maybe smaller group of Trump voters should be the focus: independents who gave him a chance in 2016 but who then proceeded to turn on him and his party in 2018. I see no reason why these people would swing back around and vote for him again.

    The 538 polling shows a precipitous double digit drop in his approval in his first couple months in office, from which he has never recovered.

  14. 1 hour ago, freyguy said:

    A good 10% of my state and municipal votes typically go libertarian.  I at least look at the first 2 candidates and their platforms, but if I'm not sold on either, then on to candidate 3 or 4.  None of them won, but screw you and your 2 party philosophy.  Let my <1% get analyzed by the political scientists.

    I vote for who I think the best candidate of the pool is.  I do not treat it like a game of spades and curtail my vote against who I hate the most.

    I hope you looked at #3 or 4 with half as much scrutiny as you did #1 and 2, but I suspect you didn't. Like it or not, all the talent gravitates to the Dems or the Pubs and third parties are full of Whothefucks and Whatshernames. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are both utter trash. If you really did your homework, you would have stayed home instead of voting for one of those idiots.

    If you cared at all about third parties, then you would do it all in reverse and closely examine their candidates first and either stay at home or go with the D or R as a fall back.

  15. 4 hours ago, Voldemort86 said:

    North Carolina republicans are the nastiest republicans in the country. Actually no, Wisconsin republicans are the worst. Their maps are drawn to where win almost all of the seats with less than %50 of the votes.

    NC is a close second tho. NC is a very competitive state when you view it at face value. Presidential races always come within 3-4 points, but NC republicans cheat like no other. The state is about even from a partisan stand point, probably 55% repub and 45% dem, but the repubs cheat so hardcore in North Carolina. Look at their legislative maps. They had to do a redo of the NC-9 election.

     

    i don’t trust those fuckers at all

    A party gets desperate as its power starts to wane.

    Just watch as Texas starts really trending purple.

  16. 3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

    The pro-Warren mass media blitz continues. If the establishment powers have settled on her as the compromise candidate, she can build some very-difficult-to-beat momentum.

    Wait. How come I haven't heard that Biden, Beto, Pete, and Kamala all dropped out of the race?

    • Like 1
  17. 2 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:


    I almost can't believe that their strategy was  to use a fake heavily armed mob to claim that Democrats were inside cowering in fear (to use their term), like the rest of the world wouldn't figure it out in 2.3 seconds. Almost. 

    It's stupidity on a staggering level. 

    It isn't meant for us. Like everything the GOP does, it's for their base stuck inside the matrix.

×
×
  • Create New...