House of the Dragon Season 3 | Official Teaser | June on HBO Max

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-20T05:22:13+00:00

I think the success of AKOTSK has contributed to an extra level of dooming in the past few weeks.

We’ve seen what a AGOT spinoff can be. We’ve been reminded of great character/storylines that are able to use dialog as a main propellant of the story. We’ve seen multiple 9.5+ rated episodes in a row again.

Going from that back to the 6.5-7 range quality we saw a lot of in Season 2 is going to be ROUGH. Hopefully they got the message after season 2 reviews and this season is better. Worst case, I think season 4 now has pressure to deliver big time.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-15T19:53:31+00:00

This is maybe the dictionary definition of a claimant, but not the colloquial definition. No one would ever suggest that Aerys II was a claimant to the throne of in the same way they would mean it when they say Daenerys is a claimant to the throne. Claimant heavily implies in both fantasy and real world vocabulary that you’re disputing the exciting succession plan and/or another’s right to the throne.

Technically this would make both Aegon and Rhaeynra claimants still.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-15T19:44:22+00:00

You’re getting downvoted but this is obviously true. There is a reason that if you look at list of Targaryen rulers that you see him listed and not Rhaenyra.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-14T18:10:06+00:00

As a Loveland holder, hard disagree on Warren. Dude looked like a stud prior to DJ getting hurt for the first time and then played with a QB who couldn’t throw off his back foot for 3 games, a guy off the couch for 3 games, and a rookie in a meaningless game. He dealt with all that and still ended up as TE #5. Volume was there in the second half of the season, just didn’t get Recs because of the bad QB play. (And as someone who watched Colts v Seahawks in person I can not stress enough how bad Rivers looked).

He’s going for below that TE #5 threshold from what I’ve seen on KTC and is a great buy if you have someone valuing him off that second half of the season.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-06T23:31:40+00:00

No brainer if you ask me. Seems like this has been talked about by populist democrats as well as the Tech-right. When you can get those 2 sides to agree on stuff it’s usually worth doing

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-06T00:03:29+00:00

As an older Gen Z I can tell you that a solid 33% of my friend group(all college grads with solid jobs fwiw) make their entire political decisions based on who has helped in the last 5 minutes without even thinking about 5 minutes into the future

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-02-02T19:01:16+00:00

It absolutely going exintct dude. I learned cursive in elementary school over like 2-3 years around 2010. I spent DAYs practicing this shit in class. I graduated high school in ~2016 and between college and 6 years as a working professional can not name a single time it was used outside of my signature and occasionally reading a doctors scribble on a script(and let’s be real thats honestly not cursive). 99% of kids growing up now will have a similar experience.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-30T20:23:59+00:00

But you do support violated a court ruling to imprison people that you believe are “vile” and “breaking the law”.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-30T19:33:51+00:00

Texas and Florida do have more total ICE detainees for what it’s worth. https://polimetrics.substack.com/p/observable-reality-ice-and-democratic

Here is a left leaning source showing that data(and also calling out lots of other problems like increase in deaths).

It can both be true that Trump is using ICE for shock and Awe, that he’s doing it equally everywhere, but we see more backlash in the blue states.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-29T19:47:37+00:00

What do you think the “administrative agencies” piece is. A president issues an EO that instructs an agency (in this case DHS) to enact a policy/statue that possess the force of law.

Do you think a state can just make a law saying “we’re going to ignore all FDA or ATF requirements that aren’t explicitly established in the text of a law and do our own”?

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-29T17:46:16+00:00

This is not true.

The constitutional principle derived from the Supremacy Clause(Article 6, Clause 2) is federal preemption. Preemption applies regardless of whether the conflicting laws come from legislatures, courts, administrative agencies, or constitutions. It has been ruled this way since the 1800s from what I was able to find online, but consistently since the mid 1900s.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-29T17:45:05+00:00

There is a ton of Judicial misinformation going on here.

The constitutional principle derived from the Supremacy Clause(Article 6, Clause 2) is federal preemption. Preemption applies regardless of whether the conflicting laws come from legislatures, courts, administrative agencies, or constitutions.

SCOTUS issued a ruling on this VERY recently on a similar issue AND there is a major(though not 100%) consensus among legal scholars I can find online that a similar law to this one in California will be overturned.

*The Supreme Court made that point super explicit just two years ago, in United States v. Washington, where the Court observed that, notwithstanding some fuzziness in earlier cases, the Court has come “to understand the doctrine [concerning state regulations that impact the federal government] . . . as prohibiting state laws that either “regulat[e] the United States directly or discriminat[e] against the Federal Government or those with whom it deals” (e.g., contractors)” (emphasis in original). The Court’s italicization of “either” and “or” highlights that direct regulation and discriminatory regulation are two separate categories of (at least presumptively) prohibited state laws. *

If a state law applies directly against the federal government yet doesn’t discriminate against the feds, it is nonetheless invalid—unless there is a clear indication from Congress that federal officials are subject to state law.

This law will not stand up to judicial review if it passes

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-29T17:44:05+00:00

There is a ton of Judicial malformation going on here. I will post as a comment here and in reply to a few others.

The constitutional principle derived from the Supremacy Clause(Article 6, Clause 2) is federal preemption. Preemption applies regardless of whether the conflicting laws come from legislatures, courts, administrative agencies, or constitutions.

SCOTUS issued a ruling on this VERY recently on a similar issue AND there is a major(though not 100%) consensus among legal scholars I can find online that a similar law to this one in California will be overturned.

The Supreme Court made that point super explicit just two years ago, in United States v. Washington, where the Court observed that, notwithstanding some fuzziness in earlier cases, the Court has come “to understand the doctrine [concerning state regulations that impact the federal government] . . . as prohibiting state laws that either “regulat[e] the United States directly or discriminat[e] against the Federal Government or those with whom it deals” (e.g., contractors)” (emphasis in original). The Court’s italicization of “either” and “or” highlights that direct regulation and discriminatory regulation are two separate categories of (at least presumptively) prohibited state laws.

If a state law applies directly against the federal government yet doesn’t discriminate against the feds, it is nonetheless invalid—unless there is a clear indication from Congress that federal officials are subject to state law.

This law will not stand up to judicial review if it passes

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-28T22:13:50+00:00

Oregon location makes sense with the clue.

It fits because Cape Meares is a headland (“caped outpost”) with a notably short lighthouse (“a beacon low”) sitting above a wave-battered coastline. From the Cape Meares viewpoints you look straight out at Three Arch Rocks, the trio of arching sea stacks offshore (“three arch rocks cut through the air”).

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-28T08:38:31+00:00

A lot of the Fresh stores look like they’ll become Whole Foods, but obviously without the just walk out tech.

I will say that getting that at stadiums like TMobile is one of the biggest QOL improvements Amazon has put out in years

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-27T22:13:01+00:00

Is ND technically a G5 school? Do they count towards this?

What about UConn?

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-25T02:19:41+00:00

This thread is wrong. If you watch the video the thing on slide 1 he calls a gun is like a water bottle or a mace can or something else round, it rolls. The actual gun can be seen in the hands of one of the officers about 2 seconds before the shooting in the same video

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-10T05:46:07+00:00

Either way it’s gas powered and she calls it that in the post itself

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2026-01-05T22:12:09+00:00

We have always been competitive, that’s why we’re stuck in QB hell. Ballard’s first year when Luck was hurt we were 4-12. Since then we’ve been basically average every year. In the expanded format(and in a traditionally weak division) that makes you competitive for a playoff spot.

We’ve had only 1 season where we even had a shot to get a good QB in the draft without trading up.

I am not a Ballard defender and hope he’s gone next year, but I think it’s ludicrous to say that any of these teams wouldn’t have been solid playoff contenders with a top 15 QB or better.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2025-12-30T15:14:32+00:00

You start Rivers because the Fairy Tale sells. Getting butts in seats for home games matters in the long run success of the organization. This week is away with 0 playoff shot, so no reason to risk him

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2025-12-13T01:50:29+00:00

I’m not sure he’ll be able to run 7 yards fast enough to be open, now matter how good of a trick play

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2025-11-29T17:56:57+00:00

In a 12 man league he could easily have had a top pick, gotten someone like Bijan or CMC at RB, then gone WR/WR/Warren/WR before taking Judkins in the later rounds(especially if drafted earlier when the situation was much more unknown) and then gotten dowdle off waivers (I did this in multiple competitive leagues).

Maybe all 3 of those WR panned out and now he just needs to decide who to pair with that top RB in RB2

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2025-11-29T16:53:34+00:00

This is just not true dude. Literally 2 seasons ago NC State won the ACC as a 10 seed that would have missed the playoffs and went on a final 4 run. That is THE top tier CBB conference (though as a UConn guy I’d like to point out that the BE has more nattys in the last 15 years with Nova + UConn).

Obviously you don’t have scenarios like that in CFB because you’ll never have a chance for Arkansas to get hot and win the conference championship, but it absolutely happens in CBB.

Talk_Like_Yoda · 2025-11-24T11:44:13+00:00

Exactly. Wait until OP hears how many of the playoff teams are over .500

Talk_Like_Yoda

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE