billw55

If 2NT = negative, those two lovely queens now give me a big maximum. 4♥ feels like an underbid opposite a solid 2♣ style.

Part of the problem is that the D party hierarchy stubbornly hitched their wagon to a bad candidate. This created a no-win situation for many voters on both sides, myself included. The Ds had candidates that could have beaten Trump (or so I believe). But instead of trying to win the election or best represent their voters, the DNC had become merely a vehicle of Clinton's ambition. Also, I wouldn't say that trump "rode the media like a cowboy". He capitalized on free publicity from media eager to portray stupidity in the R primary field, when they should have simply ignored him. But that's about it.

Right. The status quo is that for the most part, fans and governing bodies like the enhanced performance more than they dislike the use of PEDs. So enforcement is generally token. In a way it is kind of similar to enforcement of underage drinking in the USA: most involved parties actually want it to happen, so enforcement is again token.

Hah, yes, once again my errant prediction from page 1 of this thread has been taunted. Indeed, I was tragically wrong. In my defense, I plead that my error was not underestimating Trump. So far he is almost exactly the president I thought he could be. My error was overestimating R voters. I thought that not enough of them could possibly be fooled by such an obvious charlatan. That was quite wrong .. and here we are.

My thought exactly.

I'm still puzzled about the Iraq and WMD thing. There are multiple documented cases in the 1980s of Hussein using chemical weapons, including Halabja. So it is beyond question that Iraq had them as late as 1988. Then we invaded in 2003 and ... didn't find them. So what really happened? Where did they go? Did Iraq simply run out, or sell them, or hide them? I wonder. OK, some were removed after the first gulf war. But all of them? Perhaps some ended up in Syria? In any case, let's not pretend that the Hussein regime was innocent in regards to WMD. And not just threats, but actual use, on civilians.

Sounds like mostly still arguing against Obama, Clinton, and CNN. Straw man at its best. Also a long list of things Trump has done, many of which are really just things that happened. There is a difference. I can understand being a conservative. I can understand being a republican. I can certainly understand not wanting Hillary Clinton to be president. None of that justifies electing and supporting ... this. There were good options among the R primary pool. Perhaps my first choice would have been John Kasich. Instead, the R voters willfully chose an ignorant, belligerent, self serving fool. Why? I can understand this to some extent. Business experience could be beneficial. But government experience also matters, and Trump has none, zero. Rs often complained that Obama was not qualified for the job ... with only seven years as a state legislator and a partial term in the US Senate. So of course Trump, with zero, is qualified because business? And his business skill is far from clear at that. Essentially it boils down to qualified because rich and famous. Kim Kardashian is just as qualified for the presidency as Trump was.

That's what all the stories are saying, but I am not sure "comeback" is the right word. He teed off with a 3 shot lead, lost it, then finished strong to end with ... a 3 shot lead. And he never trailed by more than 1 stroke. I would just say he won.

Interesting. Intuitively, it seems it should be rolled back, as SB has obviously and wildly changed his call because of the UI. Not sure exactly how this works with the letter of law though. Perhaps one could argue that with such an ordinary hand, the opening bid is well defined, and hence that all other calls as a group fall under "is suggested by the UI".

edit: strange semi-duplicate

I see. And what do you think his statement means? And, just for thoroughness, what is the source for the $10m figure?

It is virtually certain that Trump will serve out his term. He won't resign, and there is virtually nothing that he could do to get enough R congressman to do it. What happens after that is less certain. I give about even odds for Donald Sr. to seek another term. If he does not, one of his children probably will seek nomination. If they do they probably win it. In which case the general election likely hinges on a credible D candidate.

Hmm. For years the GOP congress churned out "repeal the ACA" bills, knowing full well they were going nowhere. It was all for show, to impress their far right constituents. Now such a bill might actually get signed into law. Which would mean that some of their near right constituents would lose health coverage. And we are seeing quite a different song and dance ... leading to the same result. Could it be that the R establishment does not actually want to repeal the ACA? That they are once again putting on a show for the hard right? I'm not normally a conspiracy guy but I do wonder.

Or the devout Christian who believes in Biblical law. They want to backtrack humanity as well. And they are much closer to doing it than Muslims are (in the USA at least).

You are understating your case. Almost everything he says is meaningless.