• Blog Entries

    • By Destino in ES Coverage
         1
      We’re still doing this?  Absolutely!  Despite all the compelling reasons to just let everyone go home and enjoy and extended offseason, this is not an option.  The games must be played, and therefore we the long-suffering fans will feel compelled to watch.  Even games no reasonable football fan would choose to watch like, for example, today’s Redskins Jets game.   

      Today’s convergence of sadness features the 30th ranked scoring offense (Jets 14.4 ppg) versus the 32nd (Redskins 12.0 ppg).  The first team to 15 wins!  With no playoff aspirations the compelling story lines for this game are largely limited to watching young players (hopefully) develop.  Dwayne Haskins gets his first home start and Derrius Guice is back from injury.   
       
      My, reasonable, goals for today’s game:  
      1- Score a touchdown 
      2- Score more than 17 points.   
      3- Haskins throws for 200 yards or more with no interceptions  
      4- Guice runs the ball at least 10 times and finishes at 3.5 yards per carry and healthy.  
       
      Hoping for a win at this point feels like setting myself up for disappointment, so I’m happy to settle for an entertaining loss.  
       
      Special thanks to @pez for some excellent Guinness beef stew.  If you absolutely have to stand in a frozen parking lot at 9am, the best place to do it is at the Extremeskins Tailgate with Pez and @Huly.  Great fans, great people. 
       
      The Redskins have declared for the following players as inactive: 
      Paul Richardson  
      Colt McCoy 
      Deshazor Everett 
      Chris Thompson  
      Ross Pierschbacher 
      Vernon Davis  
      Tim Settle  
       
      The Jets declared the following players as inactive  
      Nate Hairston  
      Darryl Roberts  
      Paul Worrilow 
      Matthias Farley  
      CJ Mosley  
      Jordan Willis  
      Leo Koloamatangi 
       
      1st Quarter - Redskins 0 - 6 Jets
      If you wanted to sit in the cold and watch a football game with some Jets fans at FedEx, but were worried that there were not enough seats available, I have good news.  There’s plenty of space available, so come on down and prove you’re a real fan by sitting though this in person.
       
      Jets dominated the 1st quarter even though they only scored 6 points.  The reason being that Washington managed only 13 yards of offense and a single first down.  
       
      Question: Is it still a check down pass if the QB never looks at anyone else?
       
      2nd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      The Jets have achieved an insurmountable 13 point lead early in the 2nd quarter.  All hope is lost.

      Is there a more perfect example of the Redskins offense than their first scoring drive in the 2nd quarter?  Interception gives the Redskins the ball on the Jets 16 yard line.  They proceed to march 10 yards backwards before kicking a field goal from the Jets 26.  It's perfect.  Two or three more field goals we can call it a day. 

      The Jets score again and if feels like they are are just piling on at this point.  Three touchdowns in the first half for them, just three points for the redskins.  Our streak of no touchdowns has now extended to 15 quarters. 
       
      3rd Quarter - Redskins 3 - 20 Jets
      There is a spider slowly descending from the ceiling in the press box and it's the most interesting thing that's happened during the third quarter of this game. 
       
      I have decided to allow the spider to live, provided it does not touch me.  I'm off to get some more caffeine. 

      4th Quarter - Redskins 17 - 34 Jets
      The first wave of Redskins fans, the few that are here, started streaming towards the exits after that 4th Jets touchdown.  As if the Jets didn't have this game wrapped up in the 2nd quarter. 
       
      Jet have now more than doubled their average points per game and have matched their season high of 34 points (and they missed two field goals in this game). 
       
      TOUCHDOWN REDSKINS!  THE DROUGHT IT OVER!  Guice took a short pass from Haskins  all the way to the house.  2 point conversion is successful on a pass from Haskins to Quinn. 
       
      The Redskins score another touchdown!  This feels like an embarrassment of riches, even if we are still certain to lose this game. 
       
      End of Game.
       
      Let's review those reasonable goals I mentioned earlier:
       
      1- Success.
      2- Close enough, I'm counting it
      3- Haskins did throw for over 200, but unfortunately did have an interception. 
      4- Guice was not given the opportunity to run the ball ten times today.  He did however score on a 45 yard TD pass and finish the game healthy.  I'll take it.
       
      Even though the Redskins lost, it was good to see the offense show some faint signs of life and end the streak of games without a TD.  The team looked competitive for much of the second half, and perhaps they could have made this a fun game if they carried that same energy throughout.  It was good to see Guice and Mclaurin show out today.  I think both of them have a future with this team that I look forward to seeing. 

       
       

       
       
       
       
       
Rdskns2000

Presidential Election :11/3/2020- Trump the Impeached vs Superplanner Lizzie & some other Dems

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

I just hope we can all realize that the 10k SALT deduction limit is a giant ****ing problem for anyone who lives in a progressive state. **** the GOP for using this to pay for the 1% tax reductions.

I live in one of those states and my wife has done a preliminary return online and we got screwed beyond anything I could have ever imagined. 

I'm gonna take my taxes to an expert this year to see if we're not understanding the new rules this year but as of right now nothing has changed between this year and last year as far as our jobs or income but the new tax plan cost us 15 thousand dollars. 

  • Sad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So pre SALT plan it was shifting 15K to your state as a deduction?

 

no wonder we have a federal deficit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I think she was always a trainwreck, but she invited scrutiny by saying she wants to be President. 

 

 

i love it---cut the weak ones out of the herd quickly

 

i mean, except they're people and all people matter

 

well, ok, not really

 

 

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, twa said:

So pre SALT plan it was shifting 15K to your state as a deduction?

 

no wonder we have a federal deficit

I don't know if it's salt or what the hell it is but all I know is my tax return changed by that much this year and it sucks.

And it sure as hell isn't because I don't pay taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, redskinss said:

 it sucks.

And it sure as hell isn't because I don't pay taxes.

 

I feel ya there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

15 minutes ago, twa said:

So pre SALT plan it was shifting 15K to your state as a deduction?

 

no wonder we have a federal deficit

Remember too that blue states with higher SALT tends to be net givers to the federal government.

 

I could see the sense in a tax reform that results in higher taxes for some if it was in pursuit of a worthy goal.  But the Trump plan blew a 1.5 trillion dollar hole in the deficit over the next 10 years to give the biggest break to those who least need it.  In essence, @redskinss of the country is getting hit with 15k more in taxes so that Daniel Snyder can buy a new yacht with an IMAX certified theatre (Napoleon Complex anyone?).  Something very wrong there.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bearrock said:

 

Remember too that blue states with higher SALT tends to be net givers to the federal government.

 

I could see the sense in a tax reform that results in higher taxes for some if it was in pursuit of a worthy goal.  But the Trump plan blew a 1.5 trillion dollar hole in the deficit over the next 10 years to give the biggest break to those who least need it.  In essence, @redskinss of the country is getting hit with 15k more in taxes so that Daniel Snyder can buy a new yacht with an IMAX certified theatre (Napoleon Complex anyone?).  Something very wrong there.

 

Those blue states have high income....many as a direct result of the federal govt spending.

I would certainly hope they were net givers. :)

 

I'm all for slashing govt spending and reasonable taxes.

 

on the other hand it seems wrong to shift 15K to the blue state from federal funds as a deduction(after the 10K).

 

sorta encourages more bad behavior

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Those blue states have high income....many as a direct result of the federal govt spending.

I would certainly hope they were net givers. :)

 

I'm all for slashing govt spending and reasonable taxes.

 

on the other hand it seems wrong to shift 15K to the blue state from federal funds as a deduction(after the 10K).

 

sorta encourages more bad behavior

 

 

If Fed Govt spending returns more money to federal coffers than it gives out to those blue states, maybe we should have massive tax increase and start spending more money!  How about AOC's New Green Deal?  Wanna barnstorm the countryside and whip up some support together? 😂

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for the helicopter drop.....on my land  :ols:

 

I think my example showed it shifting federal revenue to Blue states, which ain't all bad if you live there. :evil:

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Those blue states have high income....many as a direct result of the federal govt spending.

 

 

 

 

You’re from Texas. You have 31 military installations in your state. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, skinsfan_1215 said:

 

You’re from Texas. You have 31 military installations in your state. 

 

and Texas is a net giver,,,,both in taxes and military volunteers

 

but you don't hear me complaining about the 10K SALT cap.....of course I would love to pay less taxes even w/o a deduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, twa said:

 

 

sorta encourages more bad behavior

 

 

 

Owning property is bad behavior?  You GOPers really have ****ed up values when owning property is bad behavior but impeading a federal investigation is a mere “process crime” that should be ignored. 

Edited by PleaseBlitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Owning property is bad behavior?  

 

Obviously so from the property taxes I just paid on home and business. :pint:

 

Wouldn't take much for me to go postal...or sell and move

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howard Schultz buries himself pretty quickly. He won’t pull any Dem votes and he is super out of touch on issues.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Llevron said:

 

Not sure why so many people think this. Do we not acknowledge the fact that there is a large population of conservatives AND independents who will be running from the republican candidate in 2020? The fact that we might have a strong indi running would pull people towards the center to get votes by itself. You dont have to be the most left to win the nom unless the DNC is actively trying to lose again by forcing a particular candidate no one wants. Again. 

 

No, I dont think the only way to get the dem nom is to be the most left candidate out there. Im not sure why anyone does. 

 

And EVEN if that ends up being the way it goes I still dont see how any of you can justify that equating to a Trump win at this point. He has isolated himself to his base and is even losing them. No way he can win. Its over. Seriously, this shut down finished it for him. He lost in all phases on that one. 

Actually, no we don't.  Those anti-Trump conservatives and conservative leaning Independents aren't going to all of sudden vote for a Progressive Democrat.  They may not vote for Trump but they aren't going to be lured to a progressive who's policies are anathma.  They'll either vote for some third party candidate or not vote for PResident.  When push comes to shove, I think many of them will vote for Trump again.  Better than the evil Progressive Socialist Communist Democrat.

 

You may think it's over for Trump.  Until I see it called on election day that Trump has lost, there's always a shot he can win.

 

Trump, the GOP and the Russians will do everything they can to make sure the GOP wins in 2020.  The Dems nominate someone who's to far to the left, I don't care how crazy Trump is; that left Dem is going to have a hard time beating Trump.

 

I siad early in this thread, I don't think the progressive stand on the issues can win a national election in 2020.  Maybe by 2024 or 2028.

 

Medicare for All, sounds nice. Who wouldn't want that.  Then you tell the voters, to get that; they will have to pay higher taxes. Not B.S. that they can tax the Trumps and Shultzs of the world and you get medicare for all.  You want it, then you have to pay for it.

 

Free College Education.  Well, your taxes have to pay for it.  Do you really want to pay taxes to give education to people who can afford it.

 

Gauranteed basic income.  Sounds great but where's that money coming from.

 

You can do down the list on issues like that.

 

If your running for the Dem nomination in 2020; you will have to be for these issues to get the nomination. That's where the Democratic primary electorate is now.

 

In the Fall of 2020, I don't believe the country is yet there on those issues or issues like that; especially against Trump and the Russian supported GOP.  I could be dead wrong on this. WE will see, which type of Dem wins the nomination.  People are for alot of things until you tell them, how much it costs and that they have to pay for it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Theres water in the the toilet bowl, doesn’t mean I’m gonna drink it. :D

 

Youve been drinking it for years.

 

And serving it too...

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

 

 

Trump, the GOP and the Russians will do everything they can to make sure the GOP wins in 2020.  The Dems nominate someone who's to far to the left, I don't care how crazy Trump is; that left Dem is going to have a hard time beating Trump.

 

 

Let's be honest though, if the Dems resurrected Ronald Reagan  and indoctrinated him on every classic conservative theory and he ran under the D ticket he would be named the "furthest left candidate ever!!!" The Dems always choose someone center-left. Recently, the Repubs always choose someone fringe-insane.

 

I mean was Hillary Clinton really an extremist left character? The conservative media said she was. 

 

I do agree about the Russians and Trump though. There's no depth of mud Trump won't sink too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Actually, no we don't.  Those anti-Trump conservatives and conservative leaning Independents aren't going to all of sudden vote for a Progressive Democrat.  They may not vote for Trump but they aren't going to be lured to a progressive who's policies are anathma.  They'll either vote for some third party candidate or not vote for PResident.  When push comes to shove, I think many of them will vote for Trump again.  Better than the evil Progressive Socialist Communist Democrat.

 

You may think it's over for Trump.  Until I see it called on election day that Trump has lost, there's always a shot he can win.

 

Trump, the GOP and the Russians will do everything they can to make sure the GOP wins in 2020.  The Dems nominate someone who's to far to the left, I don't care how crazy Trump is; that left Dem is going to have a hard time beating Trump.

 

I siad early in this thread, I don't think the progressive stand on the issues can win a national election in 2020.  Maybe by 2024 or 2028.

 

Medicare for All, sounds nice. Who wouldn't want that.  Then you tell the voters, to get that; they will have to pay higher taxes. Not B.S. that they can tax the Trumps and Shultzs of the world and you get medicare for all.  You want it, then you have to pay for it.

 

Free College Education.  Well, your taxes have to pay for it.  Do you really want to pay taxes to give education to people who can afford it.

 

Gauranteed basic income.  Sounds great but where's that money coming from.

 

You can do down the list on issues like that.

 

If your running for the Dem nomination in 2020; you will have to be for these issues to get the nomination. That's where the Democratic primary electorate is now.

 

In the Fall of 2020, I don't believe the country is yet there on those issues or issues like that; especially against Trump and the Russian supported GOP.  I could be dead wrong on this. WE will see, which type of Dem wins the nomination.  People are for alot of things until you tell them, how much it costs and that they have to pay for it.

 

 

 

Just cause I can tell you didn’t read it, half of that post was an argument against the dems nominating the left most candidate they can find. 

 

So so most of your post here is arguing against yourself. 

 

You can can wait and see, of course. We all will have to. But I don’t believe there is a way for Trump to win it now. Look at the midterms. The candidates he backed were the losers. There are your data points. If you can ignore that then I have no problem ignoring your argument.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Actually, no we don't.  Those anti-Trump conservatives and conservative leaning Independents aren't going to all of sudden vote for a Progressive Democrat.  They may not vote for Trump but they aren't going to be lured to a progressive who's policies are anathma.  They'll either vote for some third party candidate or not vote for PResident.  When push comes to shove, I think many of them will vote for Trump again.  Better than the evil Progressive Socialist Communist Democrat.

 

 

I've been saying this for a while now.  I voted 3rd party for President.  Partly because I didn't think there was anyway Trump could win and I wanted to do my part to raise a 3rd party.  In hindsight, I probably would have voted Hillary but then needed to go home and take a shower.

 

This cycle I am begging for a Dem that isn't way too far off from my views.  I want Trump gone but that doesn't mean I will just automatically vote Dem.  It has to be some I can at least somewhat agree with and a far left progressive won't get my vote.  I don't know a whole lot about Kamala (too early to start deep research) but I'm not a fan of what I have seen so far.  Someone too far Left will end up with me going 3rd party again.  And I'm not sure the Dems can win without people like me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Llevron said:

 

Just cause I can tell you didn’t read it, half of that post was an argument against the dems nominating the left most candidate they can find. 

 

So so most of your post here is arguing against yourself. 

 

You can can wait and see, of course. We all will have to. But I don’t believe there is a way for Trump to win it now. Look at the midterms. The candidates he backed were the losers. There are your data points. If you can ignore that then I have no problem ignoring your argument.

 

There is a way. Trump shutdown the government for a month. Who knows how much fun Russian hackers have had during that time. Our election was  already compromised. Trump, McConnell, and Ryan did everything they could to stonewall or cut funding to watchdog groups.

 

I don't know if I'm being totally tin hat, but it would be worth hundreds of billions, at least, to Russia for Trump to remain in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I think she was always a trainwreck, but she invited scrutiny by saying she wants to be President. 

 

Another political windsock like Gillibrand whose sole concern is opportunity for her own advancement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, twa said:

 

Wouldn't take much for me to go postal...or sell and move

 

 

love it or leave it hippy

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, twa said:

Wouldn't take much for me to go postal...or sell and move

 

I suspect I can speak for most of Tailgate when I recommend option "postal".  

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.