BuffaloHokie13

Is that the bar rescue guy?

No, he tells people to think for themselves, as far as I can tell. If that works against the democrats there are bigger problems.

I think he's more on the side of don't be blindly beholden to a party just because of your skin tone. I doubt he cares who anyone votes for.

While we're on the subject, a fluffernutter is a severely underrated sandwich.

I tend to stick to the old manual ignore

Do they also have charts for tests administered, hospitalizations, and fatalities?

You forgot the step where Chauvin walks because Ellison overcharged. I really hope that doesn't happen...

Gwen Stefani is also white...

Someone specific overlooked? Or is skin color the most important factor in this line of work?

To be clear, the circumstances necessary to bring another shutdown would need to be along the lines of multiple Buffalo hospitals at capacity, excessive patient transfers, and patients dying because of it. We're past the point of models or projections dictating actions and it would very much be reactive.

As long as he brings the receipts I believe the vast majority will be accepting. It's unfortunate that the well is already so poisoned with misinformation, but that just amplifies the need for him to point to verifiable data if he expects reasonable compliance imo As I just implied above, the well has been sufficiently poisoned and as such he should expect whatever receipts he produces to be heavily scrutinized. Not saying that's what will happen, but at this point if you want peaceful compliance you need a very solid case.

If the statistics point to that being necessary in a localized area it shouldn't be a problem, but don't force those requirements onto western New York if the city is the issue. And they never really wanted to shut down anyway. You want to shut down NYC? Shut off the subway (and sterilize it while you're at it). If statistics do not warrant a shutdown his attempt will absolutely be met with resistance.

I voted Cruz, but I think his best place may be congress. Even so, I think he may be more representative of the Republicans than whoever may run for prez

Americans should do what they believe is in their best interest. Ideally they would educate themselves on the matter enough to make a decision.

As someone who was a freshman at VT for April 16th, this terrifies me.

I was thinking about this and, while it is true that any interaction could end up with lethal force, I think it's worth limiting to violent crimes plus weapons charges - which appear to be separate. This analysis was done in an effort to concisely summarize my take on the current ongoing discussion. I think generally this graph shows the injustice being protested. It is derived by the percentage of lethal interactions divided by the percentage of US population. As you can see, black Americans are the only demographic over 1, and they're over 1.5. Almost double the rate of the others. If this was what you focused on I could certainly understand the concern. If you then look at the violent crime rate, a different picture is painted. Violent is strictly violent crimes (murder, manslaughter, rape, assault, robbery) while violent+ also includes weapons offenses. This was in an effort to only include the likeliest interactions to get violent. It is found the same way as graph 1. Percentage of violent offenses divided by percentage of US population. If you combine the two data points, you end up with the following: So in other words, maybe Asians should be upset. In talking through this with my father, a retired officer, he speculated that the higher rate of Asian incidents could probably be traced to language barriers to some extent. Anyway, just thoughts on the topic. Certainly open to discussion.

Today's election day. Should be interesting!

No, I don't really see it. Who exactly is Mr. Sowell beholden to? It's abundantly clear with Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and most entertainers, who Malcolm also denounces as poor leaders.

I've been studying more of Malcolm with the current events, and I find I relate and understand a lot of his points.

Interestingly enough, it appears to echo a point made by Malcolm X.

I didn't know they published the demographics already. Can you link me? It'd be very interesting for sure.

I heard the online viewership was really good. Roughly 1M concurrent viewers and Nearly 6M unique viewers. Didn't tune in myself though.

Not what I said or intended to imply. I'm speaking specifically about the faulty logic of a bad rebuttal, not about the circumstances. The 'he can't be innocent because he plead guilty' crowd is wrong and using bad logic. To use the same logic by saying 'but he wasn't fired. He resigned!' is stooping to their level.

Insisting that the Flynn case must continue 'because he plead guilty' is the same as you can't investigate Berman's firing 'because he resigned'. Both are terrible rebuttals in my opinion regardless of where I stand on the actual issues surrounding the two.

To be fair, this is basically the equivalent of 'but Flynn plead guilty'. I don't know your stance on that but please be consistent. Neither was given a choice. Either both are acceptable defenses, or neither is. I'm in the neither is a good rebuttal camp, though I disagree with Nadler's decision to investigate every Trump action.