SectionC3

Let me get this straight. The refined political nose of Buffalo Timmy, cognizant of the competing and largely unchecked crises in this country, believes that Trump, who lost the popular election in 2016, nit only will win the popular vote in 2020 but will take more than 50% of that vote. You have consumed way too much trump kool aid, sir.

Or the piece wasn’t vetted properly and contained at least one BS alt-right talking point. Either one.

Sooo ... why not recommend zinc and broccoli instead of zinc and HCQ. Broccoli might cause indigestion, but it’s no threat to create an arrhythmia, right?

My personal beliefs have nothing to do with this. We’re a nation of laws. And the law says that a fetus has to be born alive to become a person. Fortunately for all of us the law is not a matter of convenience.

It’s a matter of perspective. Tre probably looks at it like he and Jamal are on the same team, and that Jake has outed himself as the opposition. I have no issue whatsoever with what Tre did.

Yeah if he makes it to preseason and is protected by dudes whose roster spots are safe he should expect a little bit of education from the opposing d-line.

Unless you speak for the locker room the matter remains open for the third-string quarterback.

Kaepernick was treated horribly in Buffalo the last time he played here. We don’t have a very forward-thinking fan base, that’s for sure. But, we also accepted Shady after his behavior during the national anthem, so ultimately I think White will be OK. (For what it’s worth, I’m completely fine with what Kaepernick did, and although I completely agree with Shady’s political and cultural position I don’t think he handled his expression very well.)

I just read what Leslie Frazier said about the incident, and I thought Fromm might be OK. Now it seems like the All-Pro corner, who is well liked in the locker room, has a big issue with the kid. Not good for Jake.

I’m not sure how much the apology helps him. As noted, if his comments were solely based on class, why add the “white” qualifier? And if there was something in the conversation not apparent from screenshots (e.g., sarcasm or an ill-advised attempt at humor), we probably would have learned of it in the apology. I read the apology as ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the question of racial undertones. He tried to sidestep the issue, and I wonder how helpful his apology will be.

Yeah I’m with you. Maybe they can suspend him or keep him out of team activities and try to let it cool down. But it’s a tough spot for him, his teammates, and the team.

A good point. Context is important. The first blush doesn’t work out well for Fromm here. Maybe, as you have suggested, there is more to the story.

To a point, yes. Maybe professional life or political life would have been better put on my end. Of course, if Franken defined his life by his Senate seat, then the broader statement would have been fair. The same logic might apply to Fromm. The kid’s life won’t be ruined if he gets fired. But his professional football career might be over before it started.

Capitalism doesn’t much care about morality. If Jake’s comments are bad for business then he will be a former employee.

EDIT: This responds to Doc’s post with respect to the possible constructions of Fromm’s text. *** Disagree. He didn’t intend the first for obvious reasons of construction. (In that event he would have said simply all whites.) He may have meant something closer to the latter, which absolutely is classist. The racial undertones appear through the use of the qualifier “white” in that context. If there were no racial undertones to the comment, then there would have been no need for that qualifier. The reference to “elites” would have sufficed as an expression of classism. So he’s left with a statement that appears to be both classist and potentially racist. Jake has some explaining to do to that locker room.

I don’t think cancel culture pertains only to choice of words, but Al Franken leaps to mind as someone who got the bum’s rush over one stupid moment in his life.

Ballots get mailed out to them after a signed document requesting the ballot is returned to the BOE with a signature similar to that on file at the BOE. The only mass mailing of the BOE is the missive inquiring whether the voter wants the ballot. Trope #1 debunked. Let’s see your evidence, big boy.

This is bad. The timing obviously is terrible. But it’s vastly different from Allen’s social media issue a couple of years ago. What Allen said was dumb, but was fairly and fairly obviously characterized as a bad joke. What Fromm said has terrible undertones. Only “elite whites” should be able to get silencers is what I understand him to have said. Not “only elites,” but only white people with money. And only white people with money should have access to a particular type (and, arguably, a particularly dangerous type) of weaponry. This, of course, after what we as a society agree was at “best” the homicide of an unarmed black man by police in Minnesota about a week ago, and maybe at worst the broad daylight lynching of that man. I don’t believe in cancel culture, and I don’t believe that one dumb mistake in choice of words should ruin someone’s life. But this is really bad, and ultimately it will be up to the locker room whether the kid sticks around.

Let’s start with the second link. What do inactive voters have to do with voter fraud?

Andrew Jackson is the President who made the White House more accessible to the public, right? And Donald Trump styles himself after Andrew Jackson, right?

The BOE keeps a list of ballots out and ballots in. That’s a problem that would be quickly identified. And the issue is highly, highly unlikely to change an election because absentees usually track the general, and because it’s unlikely that the “lost mail” would be votes for only one candidate. Besides, we already do absentees by mail and the issue you identified hasn’t been identified as a trouble spot. I suppose your point might be more of an issue in broad race, like for governor or president, if, say, a mail truck from an urban area went missing. But the mail loss concern is not nearly the danger one would think it to be. Similarly there’s no reason to argue that we can’t make it easier to exercise the right to vote. None.

It didn’t start strictly over slavery, you’re right. And you’re right about Washington and Jefferson. It’s a slippery slope there. But the monuments have to go.

Nope. You’re a hoaxer. Keep on talking about ballot harvesting, rigged elections, and whatever other nonsense you like on this point. Instigating against the loosening of the rules on absentee balloting is simply another way of helping discourage voting in larger urban areas where a voter may have to stand in line for hours before exercising his or her right to vote. I probably don’t agree with the candidates for whom the folks in Wyoming County are going to vote this year. But I will defend until the end their right to cast a vote contrary to my political preferences. And I will similarly contend that they should not be subject to any impediment, be it a backdoor poll tax or a waiting requirement, before casting that ballot. You, on the other hand, buy into contrived election protection narratives that you apparently can’t root in fact. So I guess we know where you stand on those and related matters.

Those are some fair points. I was a history major, and I’m very interested in American history and Civil War history. On the one hand, I agree with you. We shouldn’t destroy anything of historical value in the passions of the moment. On the other hand, I can’t say that I think it appropriate to literally elevate Robert E. Lee in Richmond. Maybe there’s a better way to do it without making the statutes shrines or gathering points. I don’t have a good explanation of what that should be - perhaps the Smithsonian? I don’t know. But I do know that the time to change the “monumental” character of those things has long since passed.

Nope. I want your facts. The ones you rely on when you propound your tropes about the voter fraud. Unfortunately I have no choice but to presume that you have no facts supporting your contentions that voting by mail will result in an election permeated by fraud.