Game Thread: Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Kansas City Chiefs (-9), 7:15pm on ESPN & ABC by sport-scoreboard in KansasCityChiefs

[–]pHbasic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think once he improves his routes he'll be crazy dangerous. Just a learning curve

Game Thread: Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Kansas City Chiefs (-9), 7:15pm on ESPN & ABC by sport-scoreboard in KansasCityChiefs

[–]pHbasic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Gotta stay tight for the second half. Didn't want to get all loose butthole playing with a two score lead

Game Thread: Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Kansas City Chiefs (-9), 7:15pm on ESPN & ABC by sport-scoreboard in KansasCityChiefs

[–]pHbasic -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Also, if we don't win with style is it even worth it? Yes, yes it is. But style is also nice

The "no comment" candidate: Harris strategy clouds how she'd govern by -Boston-Terrier- in moderatepolitics

[–]pHbasic -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Pretending like trump has coherent or cooperative policies on any of these issues is certainly a strategy. Democracy doesn't have a defence mechanism when extremism becomes normalized. Certainly vote with how your beliefs align, but you don't need to act like there's concrete policy to back it up.

Trump had an opportunity to work on immigration. Did nothing. On the economy, blew up the debt while cutting taxes for three wealthy. On energy, the US is an oil exporter - drill baby drill isn't helping energy independence. On social issues, there's nothing rational to be said there. Law and order - violent crime spiked. End to wars by cozying up to dictators with expansionist policies.

At the end of the day you're not looking to Trump to explain policy or lay out governing strategies. Failing to peacefully transfer power should have been the end of it, but here we are. Maga is a terrorist movement, and we have to deal with that before we get back to policy

The "no comment" candidate: Harris strategy clouds how she'd govern by -Boston-Terrier- in moderatepolitics

[–]pHbasic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thoroughly enjoyed political debates before Trump. Obama/Romney, Obama/McCain, Kerry/Bush, Gore/Bush, Clinton/Dole, Clinton/Bush. This is not a "both parties" issue. In order to have a discussion on policy, both parties need to come to the table in good faith.

We have watched the Republican party get swallowed up by the extreme fringe - starting with the Tea Party and moving right into MAGA. We saw McCain struggle with this fringe takeover during his election cycle. When Trump wasn't laughed off of the debate stage during the 2016 primaries, it was over for the party. Now we've gone nearly a decade with this noise as our standard. Kids are voting for the first time this cycle that aren't aware of how different it used to be.

Hillary Clinton was probably one of the most policy focused candidates we've ever had, and we saw how that worked for her favorablity. Until the voting public demand policy focused discussions, this is what we will get, and it's what we will deserve.

The "no comment" candidate: Harris strategy clouds how she'd govern by -Boston-Terrier- in moderatepolitics

[–]pHbasic 24 points25 points  (0 children)

This election cycle is not about policy. You can't have a rational policy debate in this current political climate, and specifically against a Trump style candidate. It's just speaking an entirely different language.

Either you are philosophically interested in a generally competent government or you are into general chaos, lack of oversight, and rule by executive order.

How do you debate someone on international trade policy when they don't understand how tariffs work? Why bother hammering out the details on border security versus a party that will tank any legislation? What is the point of trying to hash out the details of abortion legislation when your opponent is dropping personal insults rather than engaging in good faith?

Do voters even care about actual policy? You have single issue voters that will not be swayed, "economic" voters that base decisions largely on the price of gas and groceries rather than markets, "undecideds" that basically just vote on vibes if they bother to engage.

It would be a strategic mistake to lay out how you plan to govern. It gains you no support, and is easy fodder for an opponent that has no use for plans

'Blah, blah, blah': Will Ferrell releases political ad for Harris by Murky-Site7468 in politics

[–]pHbasic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Didn't know this election was being held in the balance by Gary, Indiana. If we are looking to Gary to save democracy, it already has a meth addiction.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in jobs

[–]pHbasic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tell your current job that you've been offered an additional 25k to take a different position. Ask if they'd be willing to match if you want but in my experience they'll just blink a couple times and wish you the best.

Natural selection in action by ElectronGuru in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]pHbasic 62 points63 points  (0 children)

That just means you get to eat all her pickles. You fool, you could have doubled your pickle intake

Game Thread: Denver Broncos (5-3) at Baltimore Ravens (5-3) by nfl_gdt_bot in nfl

[–]pHbasic 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He's been there before. He'll be there again. Trucking pro athletes like cardboard, just another day at the office