Jump to content

Skipper

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    6127
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Skipper

  1. Agreed. This is clearly great news but they really should have done this retroactive so those that were supporting without "loyalty" benefits to date were rewarded. That could obviously be tracked. I'm guessing someone made a decision that could be problematic from a compliance standpoint but nothing has really changed to my knowledge (other than more schools moving in this direction). In any event, hopefully this results in others making the shift from LHF donations that aren't 'mandatory' for seats that many of us made a while back. It doesn't really matter for me personally outside of OU tickets which get shittier and shittier for me every year as my loyalty points stayed stagnant.
  2. What a weird fucking post. So glad you have all the information necessary to make such a definitive statement. WTF.
  3. Really can't ask for more for a season opener. This has been a great game.
  4. I haven't spent a lot of time on this so very good chance there is a reason I'm wrong but it seems like it might be easier to regulate or tax this specific scenario compared to taxing unrealized gains.
  5. Here is my final answer: Big10: Oregon SEC: Georgia BIG12:Utah ACC: Clemson Other 8: OSU, Texas, Penn State, ND, Bama, Florida State, Ole Miss, Memphis Championship: Homer pick. Texas beats UGA in the rubber match. Sidenote: I really don't know what to do with the Big 12 or ACC at all. I feel decent about the Utah pick but the ACC is a total crapshoot. I guess we get a feel for FSU in about an hour. It won't shock me if both the ACC and Big 12 beat each other up revealing a bunch of good not great teams and neither gets 2 teams in the playoff. Or at least we all feel like that is the correct outcome. Not sure the committee will have the balls to do that unless it isn't debatable.
  6. I could be off but what I vaguely remember is she had one pretty decent debate performance early but then seemed to trail off and not really distinguish herself. I seem to recall my personal preference towards the end was Delaney (never had a chance), then Biden, Klobuchar/Pete/Kamala with a pretty big gap after Biden.
  7. Agreed. It was pretty impressive. When she first took over the nomination I was of the opinion it wasn't likely she would have risen to the top of a true open Democratic primary. After watching that speech (which is the definitively the most I've paid attention to her since the 2020 nomination process) I think pretty likely she would have come out on top in any event. Not that it matters now, but in hindsight in an alternative scenario where Biden was still running, he really should have put her more in the spotlight. She had low favorability partially because she didn't seem to really do much or be highlighted as VP. I was (wrongly) in the category believing she was a liability to Biden. But the Kamala we saw last night would have put any concern about her taking over for Biden to bed. Of course, that might have been the exact reason Biden staffers didn't want to put her in the spotlight if they were trying to avoid Biden stepping down. In any event - I have not gone back and read the thread but I assume the consensus is she absolutely knocked it out of the park and I agree.
  8. Yep - ifany of those snaps are meaningful we are probably in trouble. Seems likely stricly garbage time carries splitting with walk-ons (or the series before we get to walk-ons, trying to run clock with a 3+TD lead). Clearly something we needed so good addition. Agreed would rather those snaps go to this guy compared to other scholarship backups that might be needed at their actual position.
  9. So the startup or small business owner or group of owners that have been grinding past 10-15 years to build their business (income is taxed) while taking a small salary (also already taxed) to build equity should now pay more than double capital gains tax because their risk and hard work paid off? How American of you.
  10. LOL. Sure thing. You are Exhibit A as to why most avoid this place.
  11. LOL This isn't a "policy discussion" thread. This is a thread trashing former UT athletes for having political positions that don't align with this board. I just found that amusing considering the state we live in. Of course a shit load of former UT athletes are Trumpers. Just like a bunch of your family, friends, and work colleagues are. It's not newsworthy. Trump will easily carry this state again as we all know. But next time I engage in an actual policy discussion thread/topic I'll be sure to loop you in since.
  12. Fiscal conservatism, Covid, Israel are all topics I've been shouted down as Maga/Trumper/Republican for having a non-liberal position the few times I engage over here. No time to debate this further today. If this board (and we are talking about most, not all) wants to pretend it doesn't lean liberal, go for it. I don't really give a shit. Just call it like I see it when I rarely venture over here.
  13. I don't think that. You aren't reading what I wrote. Do you think 2012 Romney would win this current election in a hypothetical world where he was a Republican nominee and "MAGA" didn't exist? I think he would win somewhat easily. Do you think the majority of regular posters on this board would vote for that candidate? Again, I don't think it would really be close in the other direction. I don't think 2024 Democrat = Ultra LIberal. There are a ton of Anti-Trump moderates that are now "Democrats" by default. But that doesn't mean I don't think this board doesn't lean pretty liberal which becomes more obvious when it isn't election season and actual issues are discussed.
  14. Do you live in a fantasy world where Trump isn't about to get at least 47% or 48% of the popular vote? You don't call that mainstream? Just because not everyone puts a MAGA flag on their truck doesn't mean his viewpoints aren't mainstream.
  15. There is some anti-trump alignment on this board at the moment for sure, but outside of election season when political issues have come up (i.e., Covid, Israel, fiscal policy/taxation, etc.) moderate (and majority) positions are routinely shouted down. It is what it is. I think in an alternative universe where MAGA didn't hijact the Republican party and a candidate like 2012 Romney is the nominee, he wins this election pretty easily, but clearly would not be supported on this board. That's not the reality but it's not really a debate in my view that this board leans pretty hard left. I remember thinking John Delaney was the ideal candidate (moderate and reasonable/realistic about what could actually be accomplished) after hearing a few of his answers in the 2020 D debates and many on this board crucified him.
  16. Pretty consistent with my interactions as well. Exact order. Limited experience around any NHL guys but those guys have always seemed super down to earth/normal when I've seen them out and about.
  17. About once a month when slow I'll take a look at this board then flip over to Orangebloods and read their board and it's hilariously night and day. All UT fans that somehow found their message board political tribes. To be clear, I think both extremes are crazy. And I'll vote for Kamala. But 55% of this State will vote for Trump and the vast majority of those are full blown MAGA. So that a bunch of former Texas athletes fall into that category is not at all surprising to anyone not living in an echo chamber. Just not sure why this is deserving of a thread considering the reality is their political viewpoint is relatively mainstream.
  18. A board comprised of ultra liberals somehow shocked to find out a few former Texas athletes fall into the other 55% of the state population that disagree with them politically. LOL.
  19. Just an elite public speaker. I remember almost 20 years ago I sat in on some public speaking workshop in DC for work and his '04 convention speech (before anyone really knew him) was the example shown as a "perfect speech". He wasn't even in his prime then and still nobody has touched him since.
  20. This is a Cloak room topic so really should be discussed over there. But I would call savers that siphon cash that accumulate interest or invest excess cash anticipating returns "financially responsible" in contrast to a massive chunk of current society. And those in that category are almost certainly cutting fat checks to the govt. I've got hot takes on 'more taxation' as a solution (to inflation or otherwise) but this would veer way too off topic into the other forum.
  21. Agree with this 100%. From what I witness on a micro basis with acquaintances/family spending well above their means + on a macro basis with data showing no real slowdown in discretionary spending in the face of inflation, it just doesn't add up at all without the combination noted above. I was just pricing some potential holiday travel and pricing is insane with limited availability where I was looking. But why not keep raising prices if people keep paying for it? I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop but that has probably been for 18 months now. There is going to be a reckoning at some point.
  22. Tell me Kamala isn't actually supporting 44.6% capital gains tax idiocy like I'm suddenly seeing on twitter.
  23. This the guy I've had great experiences with 2 years in a row. Capt. Josh (@fishinfrenzycharters) • Instagram photos and videos Really a bay guide but he took us out a bit with calm waters. He has good equipment and will spend a lot of time looking for the fish (i.e., you might spend a lot of time driving around). If he finds them and they aren't biting he won't waste time in that spot. It's been pretty obvious both trips that other captains try to follow him at times to see what he's doing. He's a bit more expensive but good odds you will come back with a haul. I have another guide that is a bit cheaper but great with kids. More into teaching and the experience. 2 different types of trips but both good.
×
×
  • Create New...