chasfh

I can’t help but wonder, had Skubal not given up that grand slam and the Tigers had won that Game 5, would Vogt have still won manager of the year? Did it really come down to that?

Technical point taken. I didn’t mean it in that way. I meant released.

And that's not idle political forum speculation—that was their actual goal! https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/14/politics/trump-controversial-cabinet-picks/index.html Trump’s latest round of Cabinet announcements stunned much of Washington. But the hair-raising nature of Trump’s picks was intended to be a feature, not a bug, say people briefed by the team. “People being in a state of shock was the goal, that’s exactly what the MAGA gang wants,” said one Trump ally, requesting anonymity to discuss private deliberations with the president-elect’s team. “They want people who are a total challenge to the system.”

Do you mean "his court", the people like Stephen Miller and Elon Musk who buzz around Trump at the White House? Or do you mean "the Court", as in the justices? Because I think the Court could easily reinterpret the law and the Constitution to neuter Congress or even the President and make themselves truly supreme. Who's going to stop them? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? They have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom etc. etc. etc.

I have a Football 101 question here: just how legitimate is the idea of Goff, or any other quarterback, having a "perfect game" based on QB rating? I get that Goff had a rating of 158.3 this past Sunday, and that's "perfect", but is it really perfect? Sure, he threw for a lot of yards and a bunch of touchdowns, but what makes it "perfect", other than an arithmetic calculation? After all, he didn't complete all his passes. In fact, when you review the list of all the QBs who have had "perfect games", which has now happened 86 times, literally every one of them had at least one incomplete pass, and a couple of them whiffed on seven of their passes. And Rich Gannon was said to have had a "perfect game" in 1992 against the Lions, when he went 8-for-10 for 146 yards and 2 TDs. Doesn't seem like quite a standing ovation-type of performance. This isn't so much me asking for help understanding how the calculation works, or why the calculation came to be what it is. My real question is, do you buy the idea of "perfect" in this case?

So who's the lady at the end of the two bottom videos? Is her breaking into NFL videos a known thing I'm just now learning about?

One thing Scott will absolutely positively not do is outright Tork, at least before he reaches free agency. We on the board may be down with him, but he’s not worthless to the market yet.

Yes, and then, what do we do after a year? What’s the plan at first base? The one distinct downside to signing a first baseman is that it tanks the market for Tork. That may not be the absolute worst outcome, necessarily, but If we’re going to risk that, then I’ll want something more than an older copy of Tork for a single year.

They don’t seem like the egg white type, so yolk’s definitely on them.

The projection is strong. Someone accusing another of something there is no evidence for is frequently a cover for that someone’s misdeeds. And the louder the accusations, the more blatant their own misdeeds. There must be a Murphy’s law that contemplates that.

The crime is dissent, and it will be seen whether that means merely exile, or something more.

Joke's on them—eggs ain't coming down in price.

Ick.

Do we even have time to wait for that to happen? I don't think our window is very short, necessarily, but I wouldn't want to waste any of it on a substandard player at a position who's costing us three or four or five wins a year. The $64 question is, is Tork done done as far as we're concerned? I think I'd be a little surprised if we gave him all the way through his arb years to break out of the sub-1.0 WAR ghetto he's been in.

So all of a sudden Trump is a light, cheery, jolly soul that everybody loves and wants to emulate now? Barf.

They apparently have a protected religious liberty to force children to watch Christian videos and pray Christian prayers during class in schools that are supported by taxpayers who are not Christian or religious.

The question is what speed does AT&T say you have. This is not a hard, tricky, or unclear question.

I am borderline offended whenever I read anyone in the non-RW media seriously suggesting that Trump wants to do anything with the intention of helping everyday people. It's just so insulting to the intelligence that they think people who are at least decently-informed would take that seriously. I get why red hats want to believe that—they've committed to the bit and they can't go back on it in any way, so they bull**** themselves into honestly believing the nonsense and hoping or even expecting it will come true, like a wish upon a star. But the MSM, especially, are supposed to be decently-informed and at least cast an arched eyebrow toward the proclamations of any politician promising anything they have no track record of delivering on.

Do you have 300 mbps?

I made the mistake of getting my second shingles shot and then going on a long bike ride, halfway through which I thought I might collapse. Or maybe it wasn't exactly a mistake, since I wasn't warned by the physician about this or anything else related to the shot.

The difference is that Sanders wants to curb interest rates permanently to help the people, while Trump wants to curb rates temporarily until "working Americans catch up", which I assume means until the working American banks catch up to the new way of doing things and pony up the big bucks to Trump to remove the cap he's using to hold them hostage.

They've been jacking me up five bucks a month every six months or so for at least a couple years. Really, it must based in large part what market you're in. Maybe it's also I'm not being a pest to them about it.

Are you saying you get AT&T gigabit service only, not bundled with any other AT&T products, for $60 a month as is, and not $100 a month?

I have tried to bundle my DirecTV with AT&T GB and they wouldn't let me. Must be a market-based thing where they feel they have to give it to you in Ann Arbor to be comeptitive, but they don't have to in Chicago. I'm thinking of moving down to the 300 mb level, and I'm wondering whether at my level of usage (two people in the hosue, streaming mostly, no gaming or anything else taxing like that), I will even notice a difference?

My feeling is that he is being sponsored by outside forces to destroy the country.