yoink

I'm unclear. Are you saying the US should just accept its fate and let other nations interfere with our elections or, that the US should stop interfering in other elections because, what goes around comes around? Neither. We should interfere in other countries if it's to our benefit and we can get away with it, and be outraged if it happens to us or at least be strong enough to prevent it. Telling it like it is - it's my new thing. I've got a role model.

You realize that nobody knows what you're talking about, right? You're just making a list of stuff - and more power to you. I can do this too: brenthutch mohatma ghandi sauron That guy down the pub Holy shit, what is the world coming to? Edit - and it's Ok. you can say 'pussy' on the internet. You're not going to get detention.

When I was a child my father told me 'engage brain THEN speak.' That is my biggest concern about Trump.

I've no idea, but somehow you're managing it.

much like your gloating, really.

See? That speaks volumes about you... I really hope Trump is a good president. Why would that be a nightmare? It should be a dream for an American. Unless of course if you see a successful presidency as some sort of scorecard for the political group that you associate with first and formost and above anything else...

As always - please provide your source for this claim. Because everything I can find says it's bullshit. Again, as always. And no semantics about 'out of the work-force', please. The % employed in total by year will do. In fact, let me do that for you: From the US Bureau of Labor Statistics: Any of the years in the red area is where the current unemployment rate is higher (worse) than it was then, any years in the green area are where it's lower (better) now... In fact there are only 6, maybe 7 time periods since the mid 40's where unemployment was lower than it currently is. Your 'more people out of work force' statement is wrong. Massively. Admit it.

I'm not arguing against the outcome of the game. I'm suggesting that the rules need changing for future matches - regardless of who wins. I don't think they're appropriate for today's society. And if you do a little research you'll see I've been championing this position long before this election... in fact my exact words were 'If one party seriously ran on electoral reform, that would probably be enough to swing my vote for that iteration - even if I disagreed with almost everything else they stood for', so there's goes the 'whiney left loser' argument that seems to be rush's go-to... As difficult as it seems for you and rush to believe, I've moved on from this election result. What's the point in either complaining about it or bragging about it? To me it's highlighted real issues in our country - how serious the political division is and how broken the electoral college is as a system. I'd rather focus on addressing those than scoring points about Trump vs Hillary. And Rush, I still don't believe you'd be OK with Hillary winning the election with 23% of the vote. No-one would be - not even moderate Hillary supporters.

I will say that I've been in a plane a number of times where the uppers were honking and when jumpers started to give 10 second plus delays before climbout they started getting shouted at by people in the front of the plane. Pissed me right off. Sit down & shut the fuck up. You have no idea what's going on in the door if you're not there.

Let's play a game. Imagine for a second that Trump had received 100 million popular votes and Hillary had only received about 30 million. But despite that Hillary had won the presidential election... I want you to tell me honestly that you would stand behind the correctness of that vote and wouldn't be pointing out the discrepancies or ridiculousness of the system in which that can happen. Because I don't believe it.

Just as low unemployment rates are more nuanced than "Obama good." As a side note, monthly income dropped. Now way to spin that into a positive. This is YOUR thread. You should have specified if only negative items were allowed. And you've been MASSIVELY oversimplifying economics as long as you've been posting here. Turnaround's a bitch. Lower overall monthly income is worse than higher overall monthly income. Lower unemployment is better than higher unemployment. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Having very few people employed but at higher wages would boost the first number but would be really bad for everyone, for example. Imagine if there was only 1 guy with a job in the US, but he was paid 120,000,000 a year. Average income for a working stiff in the US is 12,000,000! WOW! Nevermind that 99.999999% of people are out of work.

I agree. Let's see what happens... I'm willing to see how it pans out. You, on the other hand, are already making excuses about the metrics that will be used in retrospect. You're making excuses for shit that hasn't happened yet. The unemployment rate is at a 9 year low. That's a fact. You CANNOT argue it rationally. In fact it's almost back to where it was just before the collapse in 2009. If it keeps getting lower over the next 4 years, then I'd say the government is doing a good job in that respect. If it doesn't, it isn't. Come on - man up. Set a goal to measure success by and stick to it. 'Not being Obama' isn't allowed. More people employed is a good thing. Yes or No?

I think that whenever we talk about 'best practices' or 'standard procedures' they apply to a typical jumper. The majority of people who are in the middle of a bell curve. Someone jumping an extremely loaded, ultra high performance canopy with all the removable bells and whistles is at the extreme end of that normal distribution curve and many of those standards won't apply to them. That's one reason why people shouldn't jump gear like that until they're suitably experienced - because the SOPs which have kept them safe don't necessarily apply any more and they need to have the experience to make safe alterations to them.

Here's one of Obama's legacies: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38181041 US unemployment rate at 9 year low. Let's see if that trend continues with Trump.

Holy fucking shit. You cannot be serious...

Because it literally would make zero difference to the outcome if they did it in states Hillary won. Trump would still be president elect. What a ludicrous (not ludacris ;) ) question... Any recount would be bad for the country at this point - especially if Hillary won. The margins are too small and the country too divided to accept any outcome of a recount other than the current one. I'm actually dissapointed Hillary has jumped on the recount train.

Fishermen, too. And loggers as well. Farmers and Ranchers at #4.... In fact according to Forbes you have to go all the way to #10 before you come across police officers in terms of the most dangerous jobs out there. I'm not saying that people in the military don't deserve respect. They absolutely do. But there are a lot of other people who risk their lives for things a lot less noble than 'defending the constitution' who don't get the same level of respect service members do. How often have you thanked a fisherman?... Dangerous jobs that contribute to society are ALL worthy of respect and thanks. But not one more than another. People who contribute to society without risking themselves should also be respected but I agree they're a tier down... I wouldn't demand the same level of thanks and respect for my job, for example. People who don't contribute are worthy of neither. That's what 'society' is.

Bullshit. The military is more of a tool of the government to press its external agendas than anything else in today's civilization. If you really think that the US would be invaded and conquered then you're way past drinking the military cool-aid. Bullshit again. It's the US constitution that allows for that. And as that isn't in any danger of going away via military force anytime soon your argument is moot. The next time you see a working stiff get your head out of your ass and say thank you. They might be an engineer who keeps the plane that the troops are flying in airborne, or a doctor who trains the medics that keeps the troops alive, or miner who keeps the chemicals used in their fucking guns coming. I'm so fed up of the pedestal that people like you put your military on. Absolutely - they should be thanked for doing their jobs and risking their lives, but no more so than police officers or EMTs. And they shouldn't expect that treatment more than anyone else who keeps society that they're 'defending' running or any other of a multitude of professions that contributes to society. Being in the military does not make one inherently more deserving of respect than everyone else. I've lived in countries where serving in the military isn't exactly a stigma, but its certainly not something to be proud of or has gratitude associated with it. It's a job and they signed up to do it. I think that's wrong and people who risk their lives deserve respect for that, but the second it goes past 'good job' and towards 'you owe them', then I disagree. And that's protected by the constitution too - not the military.

I don't know if that's fair. He convinced people he wasn't a Washington insider. Which is partially true.

The other thing that pisses me off is the apathy that people have. This is what the government is relying on. 'So they'll know what I search for, so what?' 'So they'll block access to stuff I don't watch anyway? Who cares?' 'It probably won't affect me, really...' All of this is so much easier than actually doing anything about it. Those were all responses I got when I suggested my friends write a letter to their MPs, because this is a big slide on a slippery slope.

Yeah. This is really bad news. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN! and Censor ALL the things! are two memes that immediately come to mind. [/:/]

This should absolutely happen. The big problem is what I call 'Brexit demographics' - Younger people have an idea of what bills like this mean, but I tried explaining issues with this bill to my parents who's stance was 'I've got nothing to hide, so why not?'. :(

The same way Obama funded his not-shovel-ready stimulus. If Obama did something you disagree with that's fine. If Trumps does it the same way the correct response isn't 'well, Obama did it!'... Hold your President Elect to a higher standard than 'don't fuck up worse than Obama'. On both sides of the isle 'X did it first' is a shit argument.

I agree. Not all cops are bad.

Already up at the in-laws prepping food for tomorrow and 'sampling' the wine. Might have to sample some more. Have a good Thanksgiving, folks.