Leferd

PaddyPower's Democratic VP lines: -Elizabeth Warren: 5/2 -Tim Kaine: 3/1 -Julian Castro: 7/2 -Bernie Sanders: 7/1 -Tom Perez: 9/1 Warren jumped way up since last time I checked. She's the flashy pick --by picking her, Clinton is doubling down on the woman vote and rallying the liberal base. But the Democrats are trying to take back the Senate, and can't afford to needlessly lose a seat --while there's a Republican Governor in Massachusetts. The Democratic Party will want/need to develop their thin bench. Julian Castro and Tom Perez make great candidates for this purpose. Young, smart, and capable minorities. Additionally, because they are currently Obama Cabinet secretaries, they're not losing any House/Senate seats. It'll give them greater national exposure, putting them in a position to make their own Presidential run down the line. That is...if they can beat out Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris when the time comes. Republican VP nominee lines: -Jeff Session: 15/8 -Newt Gingrich: 5/2 -Chris Christie: 16/1 -Susana Martinez: 20/1 -Nikki Haley: 25/1 -Ivanka Trump: 66/1 66/1?? I'd tap that.

Ichiro! one hit away from equaling Pete Rose on the hits list and 23 away from 3,000 with MLB. https://theringer.com/ichiro-pete-rose-hits-record-f27a4a486b8e#.tcpsgp3lc Completely revamped and patterned my College Intramural Softball game the spring of '02 after of him. Halfway through the season, I was called out by the ump for a "swinging bunt." Argued profusely. Fascists.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/274721/Techland_Publishing_and_inXile_Entertainment_Sign_GlobalPublishing_Deal_for_Torment_Tides_of_Numenera.php Who??

It'll be released with the upcoming patch (still in beta).

Well written/researched profile on Gary Johnson. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gary-johnson-is-here-to-tell-you-youre-a-libertarian/

This should be fun.

Beta open to all backers. Release date pushed back to Q1 2017. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inxile/torment-tides-of-numenera/posts/1598831 Worth playing yet?

Or you can vote by mail if you hate waiting in lines. Some counties (like Santa Clara) even make it mandatory.

The Signal and the Noise... Talking about creative interpretation of data. But hey, the Golden State Warriors broke the all time wins record at 73 this past season. But you know what, they won 22 games where they didn't blow out their opponent by 10 points. Let's move those victories into the tie column since they were so close. So in essence, the Warriors only won 51 games this year... Here are the facts and my noteworthy interpretation of the data. Hillary Clinton currently has 2,203 pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders's 1,828. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 400. Clinton won 33 contests. Sanders won 23. It's worth noting that this is a double digit victory. Clinton received 16,015,681 votes. Sanders 12,287,030 votes. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 4 million votes. Clinton won 55.6% of the vote. Sanders won 42.7%. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 13%.

Nationwide results/margin of victory 2008 -Obama 18,107,587; 1828 1/2 pledged delegates -Clinton 18,045,829; 1726 1/2 pledged delegates 2016 -Clinton 15,571,643; 2184 pledged delegates -Sanders 11,888,779; 1804 pledged delegates Looks to me that the margins of victory numbers are pretty self-evident. And these don't include superdelegates. Half of a delegate? Are they superpositioned schrödinger's delegates among the democratic party? Well... the US Constitution did count a segment of the population as 3/5ths of a person...

Nationwide results/margin of victory 2008 -Obama 18,107,587; 1828 1/2 pledged delegates -Clinton 18,045,829; 1726 1/2 pledged delegates 2016 -Clinton 15,571,643; 2184 pledged delegates -Sanders 11,888,779; 1804 pledged delegates Looks to me that the margins of victory numbers are pretty self-evident. And these don't include superdelegates.

Obama inspired record breaking first-time voter turnouts. Voter mobilization was a thing of beauty. We won't see these type of numbers again for a while. Still early but the indicator metrics has Clinton as a resounding favorite over Trump.

Apparently, these boards are not quite a representation of the general and diverse American voting public. It appears that way, when do you think Sanders will throw in the towel? I hear he will be meeting Obama this week Emotions are running high. Clinton's margin of victory was greater over Sanders than Obama's over Clinton in 08. Sanders will meet with Obama and party leadership and negotiate over his lists of demands and how he will fall back in line, especially if he wants the prime committee roles when the Dems are in position to taking back the Senate in November.

Apparently, these boards are not quite a representation of the general and diverse American voting public.

Swearengen had a good run. Too bad he died before Ian McShane could get off a "C--Sucker" or two for old times' sake.

The best Madonna ballad.

I'd like them to take Bond back to the 50's-60's Cold War era.

Yeah, and you don't have to worry about being drafted, you get to go to college regardless of your parents education, and you get to live tweet the entire thing to the world. Aren't you even in a biracial relationship? How easy do you think that was 50 years ago? edit: You can legally smoke pot in a growing amount of states! Alcohol was illegal less than a century ago. I dunno. I've also seen a lot of articles and studies about millennials having it harder economically. I'm not old enough to speak for the last 60 years but from what I've seen and heard I absolutely believe it is harder now than it was for my parents generation. Unemployment in the last 60 years Unemployment has been steadily declining since the start of the Obama administration. Home Ownership http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf Homeownership took a massive nosedive since the subprime mortgage crisis, approaching back to 1995 levels. Consumer Price Index The CPI has been rising steadily. Things get more expensive through the years. U.S. Inflation Like CPI, Inflation has been steady...except for that precipitous drop in 08.

Sharks take OT. The Rustbelt Finals sweep still in play!

Trump should be refuted at every point. He should not be given a pass on any dumb, bigoted, and incendiary statement he makes. Apathy is a form of acceptance and an informed voting public should be engaged to the point that Trump is exposed for the sham that he is. Trump is dangerous because he wields the rhetorical power of a demagogue who holds a not insignificant amount of sway on a chunk of the American public. PaddyPower currently has Trump with a 7:4 bookmaker odds of winning the Presidency. Clinton is at 1:2. Aggregate futures markets currently has Clinton's chances of winning at 70%, Trump at 24%, and Gary Johnson at 0.1% There is a difference between attacking other humans at a Trump rally and refuting points. You can remain informed, retain your ability to refute, but not allow it to effect your mental well being. You don't have to have it personally harm you emotionally. Being able to refute and not having it bother you are not mutually exclusive. Apathy is an easy accusation if I am not willing to attack someone based on political ideology. I just believe that almost nothing is worth violence. I would also like to point that we wouldn't get people like Trump running for office if our elected officials hadn't grown the Fed to the point it has. Too much centralized power has been allowed to occur. People keep voting for politicians that want to grow the federal government and then complain when the next politician wields that power in a way that they (the voter) don't seem morally right. It's like leaving an open honey pot on the counter for a few weeks and then complaining about flies. I'm not disagreeing with your point about violent protest. It's deplorable. But a little empathy would go a long way. It's easy to throw stones from the glass tower but people like Trump touch off a nerve --even those that are normally stoic and even keeled -- that could make people more susceptible to emotional outburst. To listen to Trump and his hateful speech is bad enough. To witness people actually cheering him on, and have a not-so insignificant portion of the population voting for him is very distressing for me. I've been discriminated against due to my ethnic background --from the way I speak, to the way I look. I've been called a monkey and told to go back to the jungle. I'm a first generation immigrant. It's significantly better now but to deny that there are still plenty of racist, xenophobic scumbags around and to not refute them is just not going to happen. Having racial epithets thrown on my face is damn well going to set me off. Some people crossed the line both ways. Now put yourself in those shoes. You're at a rally to protest a group of people are lionizing a man who says that your people are criminals and rapists. Then you get into arguments with these same people. Maybe bad words are exchanged and then racially charged bad words are exchanged. Emotions run high, no?

Guard Dog already got it, mostly. Though calling my post a "potshot" when your original reply to Guard Dog was little better after you stripped his post of the context that would make your post make...well, not that much sense (for reasons Guard Dog went on to explain better), is...well, I guess the pot calling the kettle black, . I don't know why you are trying to call me out on being a hypocrite which seemingly originated on my "irreverent" posting of a link to the betting markets on a Clinton indictment with the statement that there is good value (better than 3 to 1) in betting "Yes" if one is "absolutely" sure that Clinton would be getting indicted. I was being cheeky and I would think Longknife and others thought so. You then made it a point to state that Longknife didn't say "absolutely sure" as if his point went over my head. I then made an explicitly sarcastic response (I even stated I was being sarcastic) stating that I understood Longknife's point with my basic command of English and that I was explicitly being irreverent. Then days later, out of context, you quoted my basic command of English post that I missed GD's point. I quoted GD''s specific paragraph because I took specific exception to my interpretation of his equating being insulted (his words)/victimized (my words) by Obama and that he and people like him aren't animals for protesting violently. Admittedly, that touched a nerve and forced me to respond to that specific point without tempering myself. Now, if you're going into OCD mode over semantics and/or my command of the English language, then mea culpa --I can't help you. Because it seems to me that you're not debating me as opposed to taking cheap shots at me.

Trump should be refuted at every point. He should not be given a pass on any dumb, bigoted, and incendiary statement he makes. Apathy is a form of acceptance and an informed voting public should be engaged to the point that Trump is exposed for the sham that he is. Trump is dangerous because he wields the rhetorical power of a demagogue who holds a not insignificant amount of sway on a chunk of the American public. PaddyPower currently has Trump with a 7:4 bookmaker odds of winning the Presidency. Clinton is at 1:2. Aggregate futures markets currently has Clinton's chances of winning at 70%, Trump at 24%, and Gary Johnson at 0.1%

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSFQrPzSAnE That shimmy at the end. Hahaha!

Boo hoo hoo. Way to play the victim card. In all seriousness, get a grip. Let's see here. I posted three paragraphs to support one point. You chose to take one of those, absent the context of the other two, and get a little zinger in. That means that despite your impressive command if the English language you either failed to grasp the point I was making or just wanted to get a little zinger in. Since I seriously doubt it was the former all I can say is hope you got a chuckle out of it at least. And where did I say I had an impressive understanding of the English language? I stated that I had a GENERAL understanding and BASIC command of the English language. Gee whiz folks! And yes, I wanted to get the zinger in. But I have to admit that I was more than a little put off by you actually insinuating that Obama has victimized you and that people like you don't break out in protest, assault, and riot over your perceived slights, because you're not animals. That's the Minority Victim in me lashing back out. I didn't say victimized. I said insulted. If he had victimized me it would imply he caused me harm. Donald Trump didn't harm anyone either. He insulted them. He is what he is, an idiot with a microphone that says stupid things. Nothing he says, now or in the future give anyone license to destroy property that isn't theirs or assault people. Epecially people not named Donald Trump. Because they are not animals. Until they start to act like animals. And they are. Screw them. I don't pretend to know you well but I'd be very suprised to hear you had actually assaulted someone over a political difference. Talked to them about it, sure. Debated them, of course. Shouted them down over it, fine. But that is where the line is. Once you damage their property or person you don't have a point anymore... you are just an animal. And you had better f-----g believe I have found many of Obama's comments about veterans and people who don't dream of a world where the government controls every aspect of life to be VERY insulting. But if he stopped by my house today he would be as safe in my home as he would be in his own. Fair enough. I respect your opinions and you're right, I don't condone riots and violent acts, but your using that analogy still set me off. I'm human. There's a difference from the outright race-baiting, xenophobic, and bigoted rhetoric of Donald Trump (per distinguished fellow Republican) and this: