imaenoon
-
Posts
17 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Everything posted by imaenoon
-
Frasier was better than cheers. Recently Game of Thrones beat out Frasier as most awarded series of all time. Never took to GoT, but more power to 'em.
-
I'd read it before and I don't discount the idea of taking more care for security although, if it comes to that, use paper ballots if the potential for mayhem is *that* grave. From my perspective, the problem is that the concerns over the security of the voting machines were already brought up before the election and brushed aside. If I recall correctly, both Democrat and Republican officials in various districts rejected the idea that there was a serious risk. Now, after the election, it's a call to arms to take action, and I think that will forever cloud the results of the recount. There is no serious allegation of misdeeds, only the supposition. I've also heard some suggest random recounts regularly done. I'm not averse to that, but that's not what this would be. It's a recount in only three states and only those states where Clinton, should *all three* results be overturned, could win the election. New Hampshire hasn't been called into question although it was just as close or closer than the three states in question. What's the difference? New Hampshire went to Clinton. If we're to institute random recounts or the like, it needs to be established as procedure before the election so as to remove all doubt that it's not entirely motivated by immediate political gain. I can imagine a scenario, and it's not all that far fetched aside from the extreme unlikelihood of an actual recount in all three states, that the result would render neither candidate the winner. Then it would be up to the House, which would undoubtedly give the election to Trump. Now, some Democrats would relish the idea of attacking the Republican party over giving the election to Trump under these circumstances, but somewhere along the line I'd hope that at least a few of them would be more interested in actually helping the country heal than shallow political ploys that probably won't even help them much in the long term. EDIT: Actually looking over it, the Clinton would either win all three recounts or still lose the election. She'd have to overturn all three states, and that's crazy difficult to do *unless* something hinky's going on.
-
The problem is, it won't, BruceVC. It doesn't matter what they do, someone somewhere will still want a recount... on only those exact states Clinton needs. This election will never be acceptable to fringe (and even not so fringe) leftists. They'll always claim that it is illegitimate. As far as I'm concerned, both candidates authored this problem. Trump for being cutesy and establishing his human magic 8-ball approach to answering questions by saying he wouldn't commit to accepting the results. Clinton for ragging on him beforehand for saying he wouldn't accept them. Now Stein, who wouldn't need a recount if her votes had counted for Clinton to begin with, has completely undermined her own moral authority by essentially shilling for Clinton. I don't think anything will come of this, but I do believe this is a poisonous trap that won't help the Democrats at all. ...And Trump is a populist, not a Republican, so some people hating on him now will, and mark my words, be praising things he does during his presidency. I, however, won't be surprised by his crazy assed comportment. If he comes to the podium and starts bleating like a farm animal, the five minutes of astonished silence on the part of most people will meet with five seconds of shock on my part and four and a half minutes of gut rending guffaws. Democrat or Republican, you should not be calling for overturning the presidential election this late in the game. It will be disastrous if it happens and it's simply reckless even to play games with it now. Stein should be ashamed of herself. She, at the least, ran an honorable campaign and held a certain moral position based on her conviction.
-
Some people will be calling for a recount the day after the inauguration. They'll get their recount. In four years, there will be a recount and everyone who wants a recount can overturn this election.
-
Avoid acquiring boons
imaenoon replied to Elaborigen's question in Pathfinder Adventures: Technical Support (Spoiler Warning!)
I would simply say that there should be an option to avoid rolling on gear because those are supposed to be the rules. However, the work around you described is pretty much what I use. ...And some gear is better than others, especially, in my opinion, for casters, so I send people who can either lose the gear or don't have any. I don't like playing with Seelah, so that's not an option. However, the point someone made above about changing the check to something specific that forces you to roll a d4 works also. Nevertheless, I don't think you should have to do it. Of coruse, more importantly, I think the fact that my new four player party keeps running afoul in deck 1 where the boss springs a wrathful sinspawn before the fight. Somehow, there's a glitch that keeps preventing me from moving past the die roll. I'm actually here now looking for a solution and that problem is far worse than one where at least you know exactly what you're getting into after the first time you play the scenario in deck 5. -
I won't say that I know much about fermentation, but I hear that some people like to make ciders with naturally occurring yeast from orchards since those yeasts will be most adapted to apple fermentation and as a result produce a superior product. There actually some wineries that do the same with grapes. For people who don't have the time and inclination, I hear that it's too much of a pain to do as a small home brewer like Zoraptor. http://drinks.seriouseats.com/2013/03/wild-fermented-ciders-natural-yeast-fermentation-cider-reviews.html If only Zoraptor lived closer, we could all go over to his place to sample his cider. I heard a story about one guy who was making some brews and he was happy with the product but tried to ferment honey, pineapple, and coconut together. Apparently, the stuff had a wicked taste, but it hammered the hell out of him. He said the coconut that he used for steeping and then took out before putting in the fermenter made for some of the best candied coconut he's ever tasted. Anyhow, I picked up a couple of twelve packs for later today. The brother in law doesn't like IPAs, Stouts, or Porters, so I got a variety pack that was mostly novelty sounding stuff like cinnamon horchata, brown ales, and just a couple of the heftier varieties included. I think it was Blue Moon and... Goose Island? When you're sharing the beer with a group of people, you try to find something everyone can enjoy.
-
That drew an outloud chuckle.
-
That's patently untrue, Elerond. There might be a small segment of society (talking US electorate, not outside interests) who would be mollified by a recount, but not much. Trump haters will still proclaim the illegitimacy of his victory. If there were specific things that came to light after the election that weren't already cited as possible problems that Democrat and Republican officials had not assured the public would not be problems during the election, I could see doing a recount in a state where those problems were apparent. I understand the whole equivalency idea, and I agree that there would be irate Trump supporters if he lost. I submit: not like the leftist crazy outpouring, but there would be some grief. Some of it would probably be genuine as opposed to ginned up by hoaxsters and friendly press. Now that that's aside, on my social media, before the election, I stated without hesitation that, although I was against a Clinton presidency, the person who won would be my president and I would refer that person as such with all respect due the office. I have undoubtedly been a hypocrite in my life, but I'm not being one now. Overturning the results in any state, even a close contest, is hard, but not impossible. Overturning the elections in at least two different states would assure worse problems than we have now and we might actually see genuine reactions on the right like we've seen on the left, and maybe even worse. I personally could have seen a recount against Trump in one state where there was compelling evidence of foul play. I do not feel the same way about three states that all just happened to favor Trump. I notice these people of conscience aren't clamoring for recounts in states like New Hampshire. I would say I wonder why, but I don't want it to appear as if I'm joking. Clearly the states in question were picked for the sole purpose of overturning the national election. Overturning the election by changing the votes in two states out of three cherry picked contests would be a recipe for disaster. It would be terrible and not just for Republicans and Democrats. With the evidence and circumstances as they stand now, it would be disastrous for the nation. Good Lord, what if New Hampshire were thrown in and Trump won and we ended up with the congress deciding? It's fine that you feel the way you do in Finland, but I *live* here. I frankly don't see it happening, but I think the specter of this recount idea is prolonging something most people said they'd like to see over. Namely the election. Anything goes this election, and I suppose it could happen, but the best thing for Republicans and Democrats alike is for the election to be over and the Democrats to concentrate on the next election because, even if Clinton were declared the winner, the left got a bruising this cycle. Better to fix their systemic problem than fight to have a president enter office under these circumstances with a hostile congress and most states shifting towards the Republicans.
-
I doubt that will work, Elerond, but even more I hope it doesn't. This election has been screwy enough without inflicting an *actual* constitutional crisis on the country.
-
Damned straight. Everyone, back to Africa! No one should live where their species weren't indigenous! [imagine that blue text thing]
-
Because it makes sense. We'd have 4 states choosing our pres every single time without the EC. With all due respect mate, we don't want to be Sweden. Forget states. look at the counties in California for one example. The sliver of coast provided the margin, but much of the state went to Trump. When it is all said and done, New York City itself will have provided damn near the popular vote margin by itself. In fact, it might have done so outright. Once again, I can understand the argument of devaluing the votes, but regions of a country should not be completely railroaded. I've said all along that whoever won the electoral college won the election. That's how it works. Yeah, a lot of Trump supporters are making a lot of noise. I'm sure some of the people complaining about the electoral college now would be doing the same if the situation were reversed, but not all of them. I would be against any change to the electoral college as it stands now.
-
I met with a friend (kind of a nephew by association) and his lovely lady friend at a local dive bar. Great place. Had a local brew, Ritual Extra Red. I like it. A little heft, but not like so many of these new beers that are so inclined to hops that you feel like you're chewing the beer instead of drinking it. I also threw down the old standby Newcastles. Taco Tuesday, so the brews, only four in all over the hours I was there since I had to drive home, were great accompaniment to tacos just like we used to make back home. Had a real homemade taste.
-
Well, the candidates from the two major parties were older than sin. Trump has a lot of frenetic energy, and I actually don't doubt that he has had some drug experiences that could curl your nose hairs. There's just some unhealthy pallor to his skin. Hillary Clinton kind of reminds me of that frog she's always on about, although he smiles more often. They're both creepy. ...And the frog weirds me out also.
-
Yep, losing the popular vote ensures that you'll only be a one term president. (I need that blue text thing the other uses.) Anything can happen in politics, but dog guy above is right that the electoral college is pretty safe as it sounds. It doesn't matter how much Hillary had in her margin. I would say this is somewhat analogous to Europe where The people in Paris and Berlin (and other population centers) get to decide things in every small city on the continent. It's not in the self interest of the vast majority of states that large cities (not even the entire state just small cities) like Los Angeles and San Francisco, Chicago, and New York City get the last word. Seriously Trump didn't just win the majority of states. He won the majority of counties in many of the states he lost. Land does not equal people, but regions should have some sort of equalizing say. Trump might well implode. He's pretty sketchy. However, his victory is largely due to his native skill. He was in on the strategy and that strategy won. Not only that, but the moaners who complain about the popular vote might want to reckon that both campaign ran to win the electoral college. If the goal were the popular vote, they would both had different strategies. In all charity, I would suggest the other side start fighting the next battle rather than trying to relive the won they just lost. Hillary Clinton was a bad candidate. The Democrats did extremely poorly considering the seats up for grabs without even reckoning the presidential race. They should concentrate on why they didn't resonate better with the public rather than on weeping because they didn't bragging rights for the first female president. They should be glad Clinton isn't as charismatic at Obama. Otherwise they'd have another popular president who ushered in horrible performances for her party nationwide. It'll be easier to run for the seats next election as the opposition. EDIT: meant land does *not* equal people.
-
Kind of like sexism, Volourn. Now someone at thinkprogress (which is associated with the center for American progress) has accused Tim Ryan, a *Democrat* who dared challenge Pelosi as leader of House Democrats, as sexist simply for throwing in his hat in the ring to oppose her. This is precisely how to destroy the meaning and eventually the impact of a word. Even better, the word become weapon became an avenue of attack on people in the Democratic party. I can actually get behind some of what Tim Ryan says, but, and I admit this is crazy, I don't want the Speaker and the Minority leader to have the same last name or it'll be confusing as hell. EDIT: linky https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/800415311983874048?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
-
I don't know if she's an idiot, but opening up with that salvo was foolish. Ms. May had other things to say, but her opening salvo to state outrage (which may well have been genuine) over the language Ms. Rempel used, language I would suggest many if not most people even in Canada would find trivial. If she viewed it as an avenue of attack, why not insert it as an aside and use it to ridicule Ms. Rempel in a humorous way? I would even then suggest it would be counter to her purpose. Ms. May's further commentary on Ms. Rempel's speech becomes diluted by the unnecessary attack on a single innocuous word. At it's heart, a representative republic will always boil down to rhetoric. The specifics in terms of word usage and ranges from casual to formal might change, but everything boils down to the end question: "how do I accomplish my goal?" I guess I don't really know enough to be even a mediocre rhetorician, but a scrub can nevertheless tell the difference between a weed from a tree.
-
Why Political Correctness (Cultural Marxism) Must End!
imaenoon replied to Valsuelm's topic in Way Off-Topic
Hey, if the National Enquirer can become 'legitimate news,' then why not Breitbart? ...And, it's even better that both papers are brazenly pro-Trump. http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/national-enquirer-now-legit-pulitzer-prize-board/story?id=9887329 This all portends the end of days.- 135 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Milo Yiannopoulos
- Stefan Molyneux
- (and 4 more)
-
I guess that would be my point, Red. The fire warnings of a hotel are misplaced. That's nothing compared to the possible conflict if the children continue to run the organization. If folks hear an argument about the specific hotel, the larger holdings will end up getting lost. This is all strategy on how to a. Attack Trump effectively and b. Prevent malfeasance.
-
I get ya, bud. I really do, but the kids running the foundation is bad whether or not Clinton's foundation is better or worse. I think bringing up the Foundation dilutes your argument because, if you say there's a possibility of serious issues, I've been agreeing with that since my first response.
-
She won't be running again. The dems would be fools to back her. I also think this, but I keep thinking of Nixon and his little dog checkers. BTW: That's somewhat analogous to scandals in this thread. ...But, yeah, I'm with you and I hope you're right.
-
Apart from what will be largely a non-issue of the Trump hotels, there is nothing that compares to the Clinton apparatus in American politics today. This false equivalency is quite remarkable. I would point out, Elerond, that you're the one who brought up the Clinton Foundation when you cited the article that started this discussion as a comparison to the Trump hotel in Washington DC. Had that not been the case, I wouldn't be addressing the Clinton Foundation at all. I've already spoken about a solution, which is probably a good avenue of attack on Trump. If people come forward and, without sounding like it's the typical anti-trump Phillippic, then it will probably come across as reasonable to suggest a blind Trust. I don't think he'll go for it. I think he'll get away with it. ...And I think that's because of the press mishandling Trump and his supporters from the very beginning. Clearly, his children should not receive clearances and work as presidential advisors while also administering the Trump brand, but that's a harder fight to win at this point. So, I'll ask, and I'm not being snotty, what would you do? If your solution is to say he should be deprived of everything he's built, I don't think you'll get anywhere with the electorate. Seriously, what solution do you have that wouldn't force Trump to divest? The hotel in Washington DC is a wise decision for citizen Trump before and after a Trump administration. The sort of lavish hotel we're talking about is in demand in Washington DC. And if you count the Washington hotel as an insurmountable conflict of interest, why wouldn't you do the same for all Trump holdings? Why wouldn't someone stay at Trump Tower in New York in order to show off that he frequents the hotel and possible engender good will? It's silly. Trump Tower has been there quite some time.
-
Avoid acquiring boons
imaenoon replied to Elaborigen's question in Pathfinder Adventures: Technical Support (Spoiler Warning!)
Yeah, that 5-4 scenario really sucks. Ezren ended up losing his +2 int crown that lets him play another item on a check. Of course, I was a bit greedy in that I had three +2 int items that helped him pound down the baddies, but losing it hurt. Lem lost the enervation wand. Ugh. When I went to the vault, I saw another wand, but I didn't see the crown. Maybe if I'd chosen the robes, they'd still be in the vault since their a scenario reward? I could farm the crown (it's not the loot crown) but I've played that particular party without farming and just taking what I get as I complete the scenarios. I want to play it as if it were tabletop. Well, just a game and all, but it hurts losing good gear. -
I say this without meaning to start a fight, Elerond, but if Hillary Clinton runs again, I hope her campaign relies on these same distinctions. If she actually came up with plans for the country and talked about those sometimes instead of running down her opponent all the time, she could actually win. *shudder*
-
There are many great breweries in the area and there are some great wineries farther inland around the Temecula area. Overall, I think the ones up in central California are superior, but we have some gems down here in the south also. I didn't time to listen to your podcast yet, but I did read over the page. Do you confine yourself to being a connoisseur, or do you also craft and experiment? EDIT: I liked that before I saw you were using an Apple. I decided to leave it liked anyway.
-
Why Political Correctness (Cultural Marxism) Must End!
imaenoon replied to Valsuelm's topic in Way Off-Topic
Mmmhmm... Just keep tellin' yourself that. You'll just keep going there, getting more and more brainwashed. Soon you'll exclusively listen to nationalist propaganda as only they see the, "truth". Do you know why that is your fate? Because you gave Stephan "not an argument" Molyneux a chance. Now you WANT to be brainwashed. Don't worry though; you've picked the right team to be brainwashed by. At least they have dank memes. I thought you'd gone off the deep end until I read your signature.
