nonniey

Well there are two ways to approach this - one getting a high score with what is essentially a wasted draft, (Draft about 20 players which obviously the team would have to cut about half of) or taking a look at a realistic haul which yours is closer too.

His an old hard-line Marxist and anti-British. Even the Greens aren't anti-British so he would oppose alliances with them and others due to ideological grounds.

OK I'll count this one you caught me good draft (What was your overall ranking for Skins drafts?) But if I had a choice of either draft actually occurring I'd prefer getting the players I got ( Fournette, Cunningham, Wormsley and Mahomes were my first four)

That is a Browns score that is equivalent of playing from the ladies tee.

OK guys beat this (ranked #13 to date for all Redskins drafts): Your score is: 15752 (GRADE: A+) Your Picks:Round 1 Pick 18 (TENN): Leonard Fournette, RB, LSU (A+)Round 2 Pick 9 (CINN): Zach Cunningham, OLB/ILB, Vanderbilt (A)Round 3 Pick 19 (TENN): Chris Wormley, DT, Michigan (A+)Round 3 Pick 23 (NYG): Patrick Mahomes II, QB, Texas Tech (A+)Round 3 Pick 34 (CAR): Jake Butt, TE, Michigan (A)Round 3 Pick 35 (BALT): Dalvin Tomlinson, DT, Alabama (B+)Round 4 Pick 2 (S.F.): Eddie Jackson, SS, Alabama (A)Round 4 Pick 3 (JAX): ArDarius Stewart, WR, Alabama (A+)Round 4 Pick 16 (BALT): Carlos Henderson, WR, Louisiana Tech (A+)Round 4 Pick 20 (DEN): Kyle Fuller, C, Baylor (A)Round 4 Pick 25 (K.C.): Danny Isidora, OG, Miami (Fla.) (A+)Round 4 Pick 27 (G.B.): J.J. Dielman, OT, Utah (A-)Round 6 Pick 14 (S.F.): Austin Rehkow, P, Idaho (A-)Round 6 Pick 17: Delano Hill, FS, Michigan (A-)Round 6 Pick 18 (S.F.): Aarion Penton, CB, Missouri (B+)Round 6 Pick 25: Zane Gonzalez, K, Arizona State (A)Round 7 Pick 1 (S.F.): Amba Etta-Tawo, WR, Syracuse (A-)Round 7 Pick 2: Javancy Jones, OLB, Jackson State (B)Your Future Picks: 2018 Round 1 Pick2019 Round 1 Pick Traded down to 21 and then back up to 18 gained a 2d and lost a 3rd - then traded up to with one of the 2ds and both 4ths to get Cunningham followed by lots of trade downs from my original 2d.

Yes that is still possible. They can decide not to fund the parts that are not mandatory and adjust regs to weaken it as well. This could hasten it's demise.

1st time I've tried this This is what I got 13775. A+ Round 1 Pick 19 (T.B.): Dalvin Cook, RB, Florida State (A+)Round 2 Pick 17: Budda Baker, FS, Washington (A+)Round 2 Pick 27 (K.C.): Caleb Brantley, DT, Florida (A)Round 3 Pick 17: Tyler Orlosky, C, West Virginia (A)Round 3 Pick 27 (K.C.): Isaiah Ford, WR, Virginia Tech (A+)Round 4 Pick 7: Anthony Walker Jr., ILB, Northwestern (A+)Round 4 Pick 17: Justin Evans, SS, Texas A&M (A-)Round 4 Pick 18 (TENN): Ryan Glasgow, DT, Michigan (B)Round 6 Pick 17: Jalen Myrick, CB, Minnesota (A-)Round 6 Pick 25: Kenny Golladay, WR, Northern Illinois (C+)

Can't say would need more information about why he votes this way (Is it because that party espouses other beliefs he rates higher than his personal interest?) but what I can say is there is nothing admirable about voting for your own personal interests (may not be anything wrong with it but it certainly isn't admirable).

Hidden Figures was pretty darn good. Janelle Monáe has been added to my wish list.

Well I certainly hope the "progressives" do follow Nima's recommendation and expend lots effort and money to primary the "racist"Jim Webb. Wonder how much time and energy they will waste on him before they realize he is no longer in office.

Disregard already addressed.

Just want to point out that Franken is the best (admittedly maybe only?) recent example where a study showed he most likely won (against Norm Coleman) due to fraudulent voting. And BTW he is actually one of the Democratic Senators I fully respect but totally disagree with (he opposed Iraq yet still did USO tours there and admired and respected the troops).

Well you are not going to get me to strongly defend Johnson as he is an idiot and for years on this board I was the lone voice calling him that, but at least he didn't have that corruption perception Hillary has (I will stick by three of the VPs being better than any of top of the ticket choices though). Didn't we just have that prediction this past November. I have never been so wrong in my life so I'd hesitate to make such a prediction again. Are you sure you want to?

Which state is that? Very limited in your choices. Really don't like Johnson but I'd put him above Hillary. (On that ballot I'd put three of the VP candidates above any of those at the top of the ticket).

I wouldn't say she was the best candidate on the ballot certainly not even top five and maybe even in the bottom five. And Trump as number 2???? I don't think anyone in this thread would agree with that.

I would have believed it was the former as well until his posts of the last couple of months but now I actually think it is the latter.

That is a very confusing headline. (Doesn't seem to match up with the story)

Well saw Dr Strange it was pretty good I'd rank it #4 in the Marvel movies (behind #1 Guardians, #2 Avengers and #3 - First Class).

Yes they did somewhat do that. But there are some Trump supporters that want to pursue that option so don't only think the stupidity is confined to the Democrats the past three weeks.

Confused - a Klingon Captain? (of the Federation Star Ship??) And this is set 10 years prior to Kirk becoming a captain??? They need to fire the writers if that is the plot. It would be the equivalent of having a Soviet Captain of an American Nuclear Submarine in the late 1950s. Damn Just watched one of the previews. That ship looks more like a Klingon Battle Cruiser than a Federation Starship. What the hell this looks like it is turning into a complete abortion.

Not at all - The minority cannot use the filibuster anymore because the minute they do the majority will eliminate it. Ergo it is in fact dead.

Academic as there is no way to preserve it short of a Constitutional Amendment (as I've explained and Chait and numerous other political writers have written about, - it is de facto dead). I've said it would be stupid for the Republicans to keep in place any part of it that effects their attempts to seat nominees or legislation when the other side has already stated and shown that they won't let it effect them when they are in power. As for your second question this was just a long escalation of abuse of the use of the filibuster. The Republicans the last eight years abused it worse than any previous Senate, During the Bush administration the Dem Senate minorities abused it more than any of the congresses previous to them and so on. If Reid hadn't killed (De Facto) it I'm sure the Dem congress coming in would have exceeded what the Republicans did. And don't forget Ried thoroughly abused Senate scheduling and amendment access to bills (More than any other Senate Majority leader ever has - Reid has a pretty wretched Senate legacy).

Again this statement shows you just don't know what De Facto means. You just don't. Heck the article I posted explained it, I've explained it (for years now), if you have a friend who is a social studies or political science teacher show him this thread and have him explain it to you.

That is not a personal attack. Larry just because I pointed out that you don't seem to understand what De Jure and De Facto mean doesn't make it an insult. It just explains why you could not grasp what I was saying (Just a classic miscommunication problem). I don't know everything either and I'd wager less than 50% population know what those terms mean.

Disagree his follow on posts seem to indicate he has no idea what de facto or de jure mean.