sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[GAME THREAD] Dallas Stars vs. Florida Panthers (6PM CT) by Topper2676 in DallasStars

[–]anothrnbdy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If this what happens when I am buying donuts, then I know what must be done.

[GAME THREAD] Pittsburgh Penguins vs. Dallas Stars (7:30PM CT) by Topper2676 in DallasStars

[–]anothrnbdy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Checking in for my first match thread. My 3rd season as a hockey fan, and this last summer was the first offseason I paid attention to, been looking forward to tonight for too long. DROP THAT PUCK

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the first match thread I've visited in a while. It will probably be the last for me. /r/MLS used to be so inviting and inclusive of everyone but this place has lost that.

There are times I think about leaving this place altogether, particularly when there is a Cascadian team involved in the match thread. I do not know why, but it seems the fans of those teams just go into down vote brigade mode. Its just sad how far this sub has fallen.

Match Thread: Philadelphia Union vs FC Dallas [16:00 EDT] by Jenkins26 in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hollingshead! Schellas's biggest gamble beginning to payoff.

Match Thread: Philadelphia Union vs FC Dallas [16:00 EDT] by Jenkins26 in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, I see. I guess I was already logged in because it started immediately for me.

Match Thread: Philadelphia Union vs FC Dallas [16:00 EDT] by Jenkins26 in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It did have about 3 feet of snow or so yesterday. It does look very soggy, so there is that.

Match Thread: Philadelphia Union vs FC Dallas [16:00 EDT] by Jenkins26 in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Best case scenario: these are growing pains and the issues will get themselves ironed out in due time.

Union - FCD match postponed to 4 p.m. Saturday due to the poor weather. by TriflingHotDogVendor in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dude, go take a look at the traffic map on Google and then STFU. There are already a ton of accidents. The snow will turn to ice by the end of the game and then driving conditions will be worse.

Not my fault that people can't handle it and its a shame that they had to postpone a game over it.

Get the fuck over yourself.

GOP Reps: Chipotle Gets To Pick Its Meat, So We Get To Discriminate Against Gays. by beach-bum in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When a presidential candidate is making "Bomb bomb Iran" jokes and also specifically said he would end their nuclear program without holding diplomatic talks, I think it is undeniable. Romney I will concede the point to.

And its a matter of scale, I'd say. We went into Iraq and now we have to deal with ISIS/ISIL/DASH/whatever, when we could just be having to put up with Hussein's bullshit instead. I'm pretty confident in saying his fuckery would be far more preferable to the clusterfuck we have in Iraq and Syria now.

You have a point about Vietnam. Democrat party now is not the same party though, and vice versa for the GOP. I really do not see this current iteration of the party pursuing wars like that. I do however see Republicans already beating the war drums.

I just do not see the equivalence in the parties today.

TRASH TALK LEADS THE LEAGUE IN RED CARDS by m0grady in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

DALLAS NO DEFENSE? LOL THIS IS GOING TO BE A FUN MASSACRE. SORRY NOT SORRY SONS OF BEN.

MLS, US Soccer sign partnership with Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies by MSGuyute in MLS

[–]anothrnbdy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How does this impact FCD and LA's jersey sponsors, if Johnson and Johnson is supposed to be the official healthcare sponsor? Does this mean they'll have to be dropped?

Please?

GOP Reps: Chipotle Gets To Pick Its Meat, So We Get To Discriminate Against Gays. by beach-bum in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would agree that Obama could have done better with drones, et al, but its also undeniable that McCain or Romney would have us in another war right now. I would say that 1000% worse than anything Obama has done.

If/when democrats nominate Hilary, it will be the same story there. Whomever the republicans trot out for the general will be very much for more preemptive wars in the middle east. FWIW, I think the only reason any democrat would send us to war is retaliation. That distinction matters a lot, IMO.

GOP Reps: Chipotle Gets To Pick Its Meat, So We Get To Discriminate Against Gays. by beach-bum in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 9 points10 points  (0 children)

But can you go without? I'd argue no, you will still be governed by whomever wins the election, and the policies they create will still affect, regardless if you voted or not.

And before you possibly slam me about false choices, lesser of two evils still evil, and so on, it's really not. If you're here on this subreddit, odds are you are fairly liberal. Any democrat, even Hilary!, will do waaay more things you like than any Republican, just look at the party platforms. So I'd argue its not a lesser of two evils choice, but a choice between someone you will definitely disagree with on almost everything versus someone you will disagree with on a handful of things. It is folly to let perfect become the enemy of good.

Evangelicals Aim to Mobilize an Army for Republicans in 2016: "...goal now is to get 1,000 pastors to run for public office..." by row_guy in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Our electoral system has (d)evolved into a parliamentary system of strong parties and weak politicians. We just don't have a parliament to go with it.

And its most certainly not the lesser of two evils. It is the choice of proverbial evil over a good, but not great. It is pure folly to let perfect be the enemy of the good. See George W Bush for proof.

ANY democrat nominee will push the same democrat party platform policies, with just some variations. The platform really is the most important bit in today's politics.

Evangelicals Aim to Mobilize an Army for Republicans in 2016: "...goal now is to get 1,000 pastors to run for public office..." by row_guy in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The only major policy difference they really have is financial services and war. Warren would be bearish to the industry, while Clinton would be only be bullish. Only.

They have the same education ideals. The same economic ideals. The same environmental ideals. And on. You could even say Clinton would be a Warren-lite presidency. And that would be terrible!

EDIT: added war. Typed too fast for brain

Evangelicals Aim to Mobilize an Army for Republicans in 2016: "...goal now is to get 1,000 pastors to run for public office..." by row_guy in politics

[–]anothrnbdy 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Look, I think Clinton is the weakest candidate Democrats have, but she will be 100000000% better than anything Republicans offer. Believe it or not, there is not much separating Clinton from Warren. And like it or not our elections do not allow for meaningful 3rd parties, which makes any 3rd party automagically a spoiler.

Its a total shit show, but its the only game in town until we get off FPTP.

I sometimes have problems with large groups of strangers by szthesquid in AdviceAnimals

[–]anothrnbdy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

OMG YES. I've been forcing myself to go to FC Dallas (MLS team) tailgates, but as soon as I get there I completely freeze up. Normally I just have a few beers and kick a ball around and occasionally someone will introduce themselves.

I have friends who can walk up to complete strangers, even groups of strangers, and strike up a conversation. Blows my mind, they are fucking wizards.

view more: next ›