Jump to content

Mr. Bigglesworth

MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

    51,577
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    168

Everything posted by Mr. Bigglesworth

  1. Because he knows better than the Giants organization as to how to assemble the Giants coaching staff. Regardless, he's just trying to get attention anyway. The thing that hurts him the most is to just ignore him.
  2. That isn't intended as a snarky response - I ask it because it is central to the thesis that we can't determine the impacts of the agreement, and I don't see a reason for China to capitulate. Maybe I am missing it.
  3. Why should we expect them to capitulate moving forward?
  4. It isn't close. Grumpfart >>>>>>>>>>> Peckerhead
  5. Even if I buy the premise that our trade relations with China weren't working, doing something objectively worse doesn't somehow make a bad situation better. I'd further suggest change for change's sake, especially done with an eye for bombast, is not a prudent way to approach international trade deals. International trade negotiation is extremely complicated and nuanced. Setting that aside, the reason why there isn't more of a push against China by more nations is because, rightly or wrongly, they have a lot of power in the relationship. Multinational corporations both value a cheap labor force and access to their market, and these corporations heavily influence their nations' trade policies. China knows this, they aren't fools, and as a consequence they aren't going to be pushed around easily. So I don't think it is about being too scared to change things up as much as a recognition that blowing things up won't work because we value what they bring to the table more than they value what we bring. In other words we are not negotiating from a position of strength. I also disagree with the premise it will be a long time before differences can be evaluated. I think they can be estimated pretty quickly and it can / will be shown that even with the most favorable interpretation of the analyses show a net loss short and long term. What did China capitulate on?
  6. Ever notice how douches wear thongs? Like it correlates 85%+.
  7. So most likely just random *** BS that sometimes crops up in sports from time to time.
  8. Who says we didn't? Kenny had some pine tar on his hand.
  9. Side note: the total population of those 17 states is less than Texas or California.
  10. He only needs 34 for acquittal, right? That is 17 states worth of senators. The 17 least populated states make up roughly 7.5% of the population. Not all of those states are red (though most are), so you have to move up the list if you want 34 R senators to acquit, but it is quite possible that only 11% of the represented population could vote for acquittal and he be acquitted.
  11. He is the POTUS. Rarely, if ever, is any lawyer going to get the opportunity to defend / argue such a high profile case.
  12. I will point out that Sanders support among 18-35 age group was consistent with what DC313 was observing / suggesting earlier.
  13. Regardless, the point is everyone would hire the best defense they can, which is true. I just don't know if Starr and Dershowitz are that.
  14. It's Biden's nomination to lose, and that hasn't changed since the start
  15. I wonder if it also isn't affected playing in the Mile High City. I know roughly half of those back-to-backs are on the road, but for the home half, they maybe have an advantage playing at altitude that helps offset the b2b effect.
×
×
  • Create New...