All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I don't think Trump is particularly intelligent or interested in learning. I suspect he governs a lot by "instinct". But I also think he does understand that there isn't a lot of public interest/appetite out there for another war. And that will affect his thinking. I think he knows in general wars are bad for the economy and a good economy is an important factor in him being re-elected. I don't think he's eager to go to war with Iran. But I also think he wants to play the tough guy. He wants to carry a big stick and be loud, but he doesn't really want to use the big stick. He likes the likes of Bolton because they have that tough guy and be loud component to them, but I don't think he's as willing to use the stick as them. But I also don't think he really has any idea of how to be that loud tough guy while avoiding using the big stick (well, really, I don't think he's put much thought into how to do that.) And so the only thing he can really do is down play the Iranian actions. (And I'm a little worried that's going to result in Iran being further emboldened to the point that they do something that's not really reversible (and is really bad). In general and normally, I'd say that Iran is what I'd call a rational actor and I'm not overly worried about them doing something to cause a war. But they are used to a rational actor based on a US that follows a set rules well grounded in historical norms. Which is not currently the case.)
  3. Oh I agree with your entire post. I don't strike Trump as someone who understands anything about much of anything. He probably falls asleep during meetings or spaces out, has little intellectual curiosity about anything, has pre-conceived notions about everything that he refuses to bend on even after being confronted with facts that contradict his thinking which is based on only his "super excellent knowledge on all things ever." What I was trying to say is that Trump is likely going to be manipulated into this war by his cabinet because he has no real thoughts of his own. He claims to not be for intervention but he has no experience or wherewithal to go about diplomacy aka negotiate with hostile countries. The people around him know he is an easy target to manipulate and push in whatever direction they want him to go. Trump can say he is not for war, but it is based on nothing. Sort of like his "wonderful healthcare plan"
  4. When someone asked candidate Trump how he would handle fighting between Al Quds forces and ISIS, he had no clue what the interviewer was talking about. Not surprising, since President Trump in France last year started lecturing the befuddled Presidents of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia about how they screwed up Yugoslavia...until one of his aides explained to him the difference between the Baltic states and the Balkans.
  5. This is a fair point - benching Haskins isn’t automatically dooming his career. Of course, you’d have to wonder what that would do to fan optimism. You’d wonder if a new coach in 2020 (if that happens) holds that against him. Speaking of which... What Haskins gains from sitting (at least in theory) is a chance to work on his fundamentals in a nonpressure situation. He gets some opportunity to play with, go against and adjust to NFL NFL speed. He gets a chance to watch film on NFL defenses, including learning about opposing schemes and players, and their tendencies. He gets a chance to adjust to new personnel. My son has been playing this typing game. It gave him a quick primer on hand placement and how to access the different characters. Then it threw him into these races that decide how much money he gets to spend on getting upgrades and new cars. So winning became the main focus for him. Unsurprisingly, his fundamentals went to crap. Not a perfect analogy of course, but this would be both a major concern for me in terms of starting Haskins, but it also points to what he gains even if he switches coaches - solidifying his fundamentals. Throw Haskins in early and you risk 1) him overthinking - because he’s worried about the play call, protections, his footwork, defensive scheme, down/distance, personnel, etc. - and 2) a regression of his tweaked fundamentals because the focus is now on winning as opposed to solidifying/improving those fundamentals. Don't get me wrong, I am not one of those saying he needs to sit... I just want to make sure the fundamentals are sound before putting him into the fire. I’m far more concerned with perfecting, or at least significantly improving this than making sure he has the playbook down. The latter is (in my mind) much easier to work on/improve in-season.
  6. volsmet

    The Official Washington Wizards Thread: The JOHN WALL ERA

    Trade Beal to the Knicks for Robinson, 2 firsts, a 2nd, Knox, & Smith/Mudiay. Draft RJ, Reddish, Lecque, Schofield. RJ, Reddish, Lecque, Robinson, Knox, Smith, #1 next year & the two we’d have the following year would give us an insane amount of talent & plenty of money to spend. Better to be atrocious than decent. Smith Sato RJ Reddish/Knox Robinson Lets run. Lecque is the ultimate lottery ticket.
  7. volsmet

    The Official Washington Wizards Thread: The JOHN WALL ERA

    I’ve seen every minute he’s played. He’s got very limited athleticism & he’s short, he could be a Draymond type, he’s been promised a round 1 selection... but those don’t always come through. Ernie passed on Currie, Leonard & Giannis. Ted should be forced to wear a photo of Ernies ass on his shirt every day.
  8. volsmet

    The Official Washington Wizards Thread: The JOHN WALL ERA

    I thought you were anti-Bol. I agree with you on Bol, he’s the top guy for me, then Reddish/Nas/Porter jr with OkeKe, Schofield & Lecque in round 2. Guy & Bone udfa.
  9. Mr. Sinister

    I Just Had a Moment With a Squirrel: Part Deux

    Probably abducted by aliens.
  10. SkinFanInMinn

    The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

    Does anybody know where I can get a sub with torpedoes? Asking for a friend...
  11. stevemcqueen1

    The Official Washington Wizards Thread: The JOHN WALL ERA

    I checked out Langford. His numbers are mostly just OK, but I liked what I saw from his cut ups. Confident handle with a strong intermediate game and a real knack for taking it to the basket and finishing through contact. He reminds me of Oladipo with his powerful, hunched over style where he usually seems to be under control, and he keeps that handle nice and low. Kind of see a little bit of Eric Gordon in him too, so maybe two former Indiana 2 guards offer a nice preview of his potential. good call on him, he could be a nice pick too.
  12. Whenever you see a protester circle them and chant "Trump trump trump!" while holding up your sign and security will come and get them. So basically act like a ****ing Moron to protect your freedom of speech.
  13. Mr. Sinister

    Random Thought Thread

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27001765/ex-rb-hate-smart-found-safe-police-say "He Found Me"????
  14. Based on everything we've observed about Trump since he took office, what gives you the impression this is his idea or that he even understands any of it? I don't view the guy as intelligent enough to have a foreign policy framework, much less one that we can judge as good/bad. To me he's obviously doing what he admin is directing him, and I don't think that's that grand of a statement considering who he has in what roles. At this point I don't even think he has the intellectual capacity to sit down, shut up, and listen to the relevant intelligent officers brief him on things. Does he strike you as the kind of guy that can sit in a 30-60 minute briefing on the going-ons of Iran? Do you think he can even keep straight who's Sunni and who's Shia? Do you think if someone asked him who the Houthie's are that he'd even have a clue as to where to start? I'm betting he'd try to play it off as a music group of some sort. "Yeah, I've listened to their music but I'm not that big of a fan" is the type of response I'd expect, for example. The GOP has had it out for Iran for a long time. One of the first things I read when Trump won the election and started building his admin, was that they were all very anti-iran, some not just anti-iran but overtly looking for a way to justify a war. I told my friends and wife early on that the thing to watch for was starting a war with Iran. Hell, we've been in a proxy war with them via Yemen/Saudi Arabia for years, it's not exactly a stretch to predict this. Trump's the perfect person for them to manipulate, because he had his number one goal (it seems) to be to dismantle anything Obama did just to spite Obama, one of which was the Iran nuclear deal. Given what we know about Trump's intellect, I can't imagine it was hard for someone like Bolton to slow-play that from spiting Obama to being on the cusp of war with them. Much like Bush was the perfect person to manipulate with the invasion of Iraq. It wasn't a tough sell to say Saddam was a cruel dictator that was openly courting Bin Laden, and tie that to justification for invading. 9/11 was still recent in everyone's minds. Convincing him to go in with little to no plan was probably not hard. Now the news from the US is that they're determining an appropriate response and putting together support for their claim that the drone was over international waters. NPR humorously ran with the idea this morning that it could lead to sanctions, but my bet is on a missile strike. I'm willing to bet the only thing that's keeping us from striking iran are military generals that are actually in-tune with what it means to send young men and women into a combat zone to potentially die, or come back with devastating injuries (even if just mental.) Until we have a competent president with competent national security advisers, I think that's the only thing keeping us from going to a war with someone. PS: Houthies launched rockets in Saudi Arabia about the same time Iran shot down the drone. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not.
  15. PleaseBlitz

    Presidential Election 2020 - ManChild vs Adult

    People that sympathize with that view are voting for Trump no matter who the Dems nominate. Everyone else, well, doesn't hold those views.
  16. Rdskns2000

    Presidential Election 2020 - ManChild vs Adult

    We were normal then. This is era of Trump. Where every racist, sexist,homophobe,bigot, etc.. Are now out in the open. They have the President agreeing ir at least sympathizing with their view. Pete gets it, you will hear cries of the apocalypse is now upon us and it will work. They are still to many Americans who will never vote for a gay man or woman. I say we are still a decade away. By then enough people with those views will gave died off.
  17. Today
  18. At some point the Dems will have to let go of their aspirations to be career public officials and just call things for what they are.
  19. BenningRoadSkin

    Presidential Election 2020 - ManChild vs Adult

    People were talking about Obama after that 2004 DNC speech as a future president. Mayor Pete hasn't had that moment yet.
  20. Riggo-toni

    Presidential Election 2020 - ManChild vs Adult

    Do you think anyone in, say, 2006, would have believed a black man named Barack Hussein Obama could win the presidency...
  21. Don't we have some concentration camps down south?
  22. Do actually think the reason Griffin was passed by in DC was Jay didn't like him? I suppose they didn't like Griffin in Cleveland and the rest of the league just didn't like Griffin so he sat home until Baltimore liked him as a backup but since Baltimore drafted the kid from Penn State maybe Griffin is going to be looking for another stop this summer. I think your rush on the field and draft a new guy if he isn't lightening in a bottle coming out of the blocks approach is crazy and I hope the Skins have more sense.
  23. Rdskns2000

    Presidential Election 2020 - ManChild vs Adult

    In the era of Trump, you really think a gay man could win the presidency? I don't. Mayor Pete could win the nomination but he would lose the general.
  1. Load more activity