StrangeSox

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 02:35 PM) In Illinois, evidence of subsequent remedial measures is inadmissible to prove negligence. That's good, otherwise it'd set up a pretty bad incentive to not fix problems. QUOTE (FT35 @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 02:40 PM) To the replay: In the frozen frame here you can see the knee making contact with the box and the box at a slight angle back from the impact. I'm sure Fowler's camp is saying that the box being at the angle is proof of the knee hitting the box itself. I'm sure the GRF legal staff is arguing that of course the box would move--it was attached to the protective padding--which his knee hit as it was designed to--CAUSING the box to slightly move. To me...this logic makes the replay inconclusive from a legal standpoint--as it's not conclusive that the box didn't move from the top of the padding it was attached to--which was being moved by Fowler's knee. I watch too much Law and Order... Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) I see the right knee hitting the padded wall, not the box. The box appears to be a few inches behind the wall (not even with the wall), therefore both legs make contact with the wall. When he makes impact with the wall, his left arm reaches out far enough so his left hand is in front of the box. If had struck the box initially, his body would be obstructing view of the box, but actually his body (except for his left hand) is to the right side of the box. . In the head-on view you linked, you can't actually see his knees in the frame during the collision at all.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 11:36 AM) R candidate Yancey is now challenging, saying that a single vote thrown out yesterday for being an "overvote" should have been counted, which would put the race at a tie. They'd draw lots to determine the winner then. aaannnd it's a tie https://twitter.com/13MikeGooding/status/943562599295266816

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 01:05 PM) That was the plan all along. Most everyone gets a little more money, the real people get A LOT more money, but now the deficit, the deficit, what will we do? Well, we could take away this extra money we gave most of you, even if it's not a lot, or we can just stop paying for people who have no money. Most people will stick with having more money, even if it isn't a life changing amount. They aren't even trying to hide it. If there is a maker, I hope these thieves meet him or her. And I hope on Election Day regular people realize they have been conned. Love to balance the budget by giving trillions to the wealthy and defense contractors while gutting everything else

On the same day Ryan helped to pass a $1.5T tax cut for the wealthy, he's also talking about needing to cut anti-poverty programs to get the national debt "under control" https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/943553072827166720

Kaine's request for Senate harassment data, which he said he'd release publicly, was denied. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/18/k...ent-data-304736

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 03:01 PM) Wow Jordan Pascale‏Verified account @JWPascale Follow Follow @JWPascale More BREAKING: Democrat Shelly Simonds appears to win Virginia House seat by A SINGLE VOTE, according to preliminary unofficial recount results. Would mean 50-50 split of House. Judge panel must certify results. Legal challenge probably coming. It is 11,608 to 11,607 R candidate Yancey is now challenging, saying that a single vote thrown out yesterday for being an "overvote" should have been counted, which would put the race at a tie. They'd draw lots to determine the winner then.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 10:18 AM) Did that go out the window with Hillary? It wasn't a highlight of the criticisms of her, and the entire country has now seen how competent and capable Trump is in office. I wouldn't argue against the idea that there's a general disadvantage for a woman candidate, but I'm still not seeing why being a woman is a negative particularly against Trump.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2017 -> 10:15 AM) As of right now Gillebrand and Harris look like the two strongest candidates to me and I'm totally happy with that. We'll see where that goes in 2 years. I'm not voting for an inferior man just because of some fear that the country demands inferior white men as their leaders. Who knows how something like that would really play out, anyway. I don't know if Bernie would have won in the general, but I do know my wife voted for Clinton in the primary because she was terrified of Trump and thought Clinton was the "safer" nominee.

Why would being a woman be a negative against Trump specifically? A major typical sexist criticism of women in positions of power, that they're 'too emotional', would go right out the window. I also don't think there's much value to be had in the "conventional DC wisdom" these days.

At the very least, hopefully they've already removed or protected this box in some way and did an assessment of other potential hazards around the field. edit: wonder if doing that would be admitting liability or negligence in some way though

Buried in the GOP's tax cuts for the wealthy is a tax hike on Puerto Rico.

He's also got his own kinda creepy/inappropriate history with women that might not be a great fit these days.

Democrats are caving on forcing a DACA vote this year, despite numerous promises to do so.

They were a single vote in the Senate away from turning Medicaid into a block grant program. If not for the HFC rebelling, they'd have gotten substantial entitlement program cuts back under Obama's "Grand Bargain" BS. And this tax plan passed the House with a fairly comfortable margin.

hahaha the title of the bill got taken out in the Byrd Bath looks like Trump was right again, shoulda been the Cut Cut Cut Act!

Sure, okay. It still undermines a key part of the ACA. Meanwhile, it looks like Corker was straight up bribed to move to a "yes" on this bill. GOP Provision Could Give 10 Times More Tax Relief To Corker And Trump Than Senate Bill

They're throwing 13M people off of insurance tomorrow and crippling the individual markets nationwide. They've let CHIP expire and appear to be in absolutely no hurry to do anything about that.

This could really go here or the financial thread given recent bitcoin chat, but Why the bitcoin craze is using up so much energy It's too bad that all of this computational effort couldn't be directed at something actually beneficial like folding@home. It's pure waste.

Two minor provisions (using 529's to pay for homeschooling, a really specific college endowment thing that only seemed to apply to a single christian school in Kentucky) got taken out by the Byrd rule in the Senate, so the House will actually have to vote again. It'll just be a formality, but it does eat up more time while they're also trying to avoid a government shutdown and should maybe do something about CHIP expiring and leaving millions of kids without health care. The Reagan-era tax bill took two years to craft. This bill took two months, and we've already seen unintended provisions causing problems in passing the thing.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 19, 2017 -> 02:03 PM) At the very least I'm glad some of the dumber pay-fors were removed. They'll use the billions they're giving away to billionaires as an excuse to cut social programs, health care programs, education, etc. anyway. They've been very explicit about this already.

Incidentally, the billionaires' tax cut bill that'll be signed into law soon includes repealing the individual mandate, which is estimated to result in 13M people losing health insurance and untold impacts on the individual market. Truly, a great day for the GOP and for our country.

Tax Cuts For The Wealthy bill passed the House, will likely pass the Senate later tonight or early tomorrow. This is bill is deeply unpopular, with sub-30% approval ratings.

We’re witnessing the wholesale looting of America Unchecked by norms or political prudence, it’s smash-and-grab time for the GOP. Really depressing read on just how much class warfare the Republicans are waging on behalf of the wealthy.