If they are partisan hacks in your eyes, and the party's stance changed, wouldnt it make sense that they changed their public stance to coincide?
Also, if that is the case, it is quite possible that the first stance wouldnt necessarily have been their real stance then correct? So how do we know how they really feel one way or the other?
So going by her expert, the most she could have is 3.25% and worst case .20%.
That's not enough to be anything, and I bet most people would have something similar
Is there a link to the actual results? I could only see peoples comments saying something about 6-10 generations ago
My wife grew up on the Rez, she said where she is from, anyone with less than 40% is considered white. My wife has a decent amount (I think her great grandmother was full) but she was still called white girl and not considered indian by them
I wasnt a fan of the 3rd and 2 run to Ivory but I understood it, we pick a first down there we have a good shot to end the game. That was one chance for the offense to "win" it. Also after they tied it, I was hoping for a run or a screen on first down. Get the clock moving. I didnt like putting Peterman in the position where the D knew we had to pass. I would have been happy with OT the way our D was playing
The Left needs to make things about race, even when its not there, so they can keep the minorites riled up and on their side, because if they lose any significant amount, their party loses power, perhaps for good
They dont want Anderson to have to come in this week if Allen gets hurt as he doesnt know enough of the offense (scary I know) but I bet Peterman is still on the roster for a couple weeks