Jake

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 02:25 PM) And the President is to represent everyone, not just highly populated areas. As the video I posted explains, the top 100 cities combined still only cover 20% of our population. From a strategic standpoint, one will have to remember that very few cities are actually very competitive so there will be a strategic issue in determining where it is that undecided voters live. Do they live in cities? Do they live in my city that is 80% democrat at >1M people? Probably not, but who knows. They would be spreading campaign dollars EVERYWHERE to try to get every last vote. This change, IMO, should have a tremendous effect on turnout since so many people would no longer have the feeling of being disenfranchised. The myth that everyone has an equal voice would become truth.

For those thinking of electing a third party as a sure-fire way of fixing things, realize the problem is in our winner-take-all system of representation. I can tolerate it on the national level, but not for our legislative bodies. Here's a simple example of an alternative (aptly named). This even provides a scenario as if it was implemented into our own bipolar system.

This video even addresses why politicians couldn't focus solely on cities in a reformed system.The best part is that the system is just as inequitable, even if every single state was competitive.

Though cuts to military spending is somewhat hard to sell, it's much easier to sell than cuts to Medicare/Social Security, the only other expenses that rival the military. There are just a huge amount of people that use or are thinking about the time they will use Medicare/Social Security and don't want to think of those things changing.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) By cutting the revenue you're kicking the economy into gear and increasing your revenues over time. Obama's plan is basically nothing at this point. Wait it out. We've been waiting 4 years and not much has improved. This is speculation. Recent history has shown this to not have much of an effect. Moody's predicts that at our current pace, we will gain 12 million new jobs by 2016 (that number sound familiar?). This would probably encourage a sitting President to wait it out. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 11:20 AM) Europe has shown pretty clearly that austerity will only make things worse, as well as our own experience with the Bush tax cuts. Yep. A better argument would be if we had European-level tax rates to begin with, kind of like the levels they were at when Reagan slashed them down.

@AnnCoulter: I highly approve of Romney's decision to be kind and gentle to the retard

On Suh's hit, I agree with the posts after mine. I have no problem saying that there are no problems with the tackle in a vacuum. In context of Suh's past, it seems like just another emotional, intent-to-harm play.

Romney can shove fiscal conservatism up his ass as long as he wants to increase military budget and our presence abroad while cutting dollars at home. I'm happy to entertain ideas about budget slashing, etc. but he is not one I'm going to support. Increase military budget, cut healthcare reform and education spending. Okay. Well will the budget at least be balanced? No, we're actually going to cut our revenue. Don't harp on balancing the budget if your idea is essentially the same as Obama's -- I'm going to bridge the gap with increased revenue from a recovered economy. The only difference is one person will retain tax rates and much of current services while one will cut both, leaving largely the same deficit. Asinine. His buddy Paul Ryan is a sham as a fiscal conservative as well, it's disappointing. Will a decent conservative please stand up? And then sit down when it comes to legislating social issues?

I find it to be fundamentally good, even if the jokes that come out are about smaller things. It's political discourse either way. You want politics to be in the mainstream. The catch is, politics are difficult to talk about and sometimes you need little quips if you want to keep things fresh. The nitty gritty is confusing, frustrating, and gets boring after it has been rehashed too much. You can only talk about it so much. You start dropping "big bird," "binders full of women," etc. and you not only keep the campaign in people's minds, you encourage people to find the source of these things. How many times are you going to read "binders full of women" on facebook before you figure out where it came from? You might read the context and find it very troubling that Romney specifically sought out some special woman as if he were trying to fill a quota or you might be so pleased that the guy you heard was anti-woman was trying to keep female company in his workplace. Our society values fun and that's awesome. Not only do we encourage open discussion about politics, we discuss it so much that we have to digress into humor to keep it fresh. We can make fun of people protected by the Secret Service and not find the Secret Service knocking at our door. I also don't think that all of these things are trivial when you look into them. "47%" - this was a huge thing going around and what an important thing to talk about. Am I in the 47%? What did he say about them? Do I like a system that results in such a number being able to be thrown around? "Big Bird" - Romney wants to cut PBS. By itself, this may be very important to some people and to others they will find it troubling that that is the largest specific budget cut he had shared to that point. "Binders full of women" - I touched on this. This will inform your opinion of that candidate's gender views one way or the other. "horses and bayonets" - This throws a wrench in the way we judge our military. It's an apt point that our military strength isn't so easily counted in numbers of things or dollars spent. It may also characterize one person as out of touch with the needs of our military if you see it that way. I think it summarized the debate very well as the two agreed on most everything, but at this moment and others it seemed they agreed because one person was simply learning from the other. These are the things that encourage discussion, turnout, thought, you name it. You might not like that everyone that participates in these catchphrases and buzzwords knows much, but they will know MORE as more of these things happen. To think that these things are the only things being talked about after the debates is also an oversimplification -- yet I'm happy that for the low-information folks, they're at least thinking SOMETHING about the debates and the election.

I doubt he broke the rules, but it clearly looks like he went with the tackling method most likely to injure rather than most likely to tackle the QB. Luckily for him, he's so immensely talented that he pretty much always gets you down no matter how he goes after you. Also, Jay Cutler is easily the toughest son of a b**** we've had behind center since I've started watching the Bears. I do recall a delirious Chris Chandler trying to take snaps at one point, though

Matheny more or less throws Kozma under the bus, saying that the game turned on that non-play. Makes a half-hearted effort to explain that the ball had funny spin. Seeing the replay, I don't blame Kozma at all. He hit the ball three times. A good infielder breaks during the swing in most cases, if not at the moment of contact. By the third contact, you're f***ed if it's not at where you're going.

BTW, Briggs is playing the best ball of his career right now. Possibly Tillman as well, and he's STILL not the best CB on the team.

I will give Romney to credit for one thing: even when he's getting beat, he never shows it in his demeanor. Despite literally offering no substance, he remained confident and calculated...so as to give the illusion that he was talking substantively. When it comes to foreign policy, especially in this age, it is just a tremendous advantage to have been President already. There's no other way to prepare or even know exactly what's going on.

f***, there goes the shutout

Lovie > Ditka

This defense is f***ing good boys.

I wouldn't expect the Sox to add anyone in the rotation, especially if we bring back Peavy or Floyd. It would really shock me given our depth if we tried to make another splash in the rotation.

I'm not as down on the o-line this year.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 21, 2012 -> 07:20 PM) The more I have to deal with Cardinals fans on Facebook, the more I am hoping that the Giants complete the comeback. They have won the 2nd most WS titles in history, yet Cardinals fans act like they are some bad luck franchise that has dealt with so much adversity. Gimme a break. A Cards/Tigers WS would be brutal. This go Giants

If you live in IL, you can consider your vote worthless Likewise with the vast majority of states. I know you could theoretically start a movement large enough to make your collective votes shift things, but let's get real. That's not happening. If and when we get rid of the electoral college, politics will change forever, for the better. My vote will count as much as some middle aged guy in Ohio.

I voted in IL a week ago I'm pretty sure it was basically as if I mailed them an absentee ballot, except I just filled it out and gave it to them in person.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 22, 2012 -> 08:27 AM) I thought he actually did pretty decently in 2010? http://www.pacificnorthwestcoastbias.com/g...on-predictions/ Yeah he did fairly well, depending on the standard with which you measure. Maybe that rate of accuracy doesn't feel accurate, because it is of course not absolutely certain. As a Political Science student (by no means an expert, I don't even like this aspect of the field), I love his methods and his willingness to share them. He doesn't make the smart guy mistake of over-complicating everything and you see over-complication screwing a lot of pollsters, especially the wildly inconsistent ones like Gallup.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 21, 2012 -> 10:31 PM) What's the best service to see new to relatively new movies online? Doesn't exist.

I REALLY want to go to Spain, especially now that I've rekindled my studies of the language.

All my beer snob buddies love IPA's, but the ones I've had are just okay for me. Very strong stuff