Jump to content

College Sports Forum

Discuss college sports topics here!


1,717 topics in this forum

    • 0 replies
    • 418 views
    • 0 replies
    • 379 views
    • 3 replies
    • 493 views
  1. Tennis Anyone?

    • 5 replies
    • 503 views
    • 24 replies
    • 2.2k views
    • 0 replies
    • 323 views
    • 2 replies
    • 460 views
    • 12 replies
    • 819 views
    • 2 replies
    • 485 views
    • 4 replies
    • 542 views
  2. Twitter

    • 17 replies
    • 1.2k views
    • 11 replies
    • 955 views
    • 0 replies
    • 362 views
  3. DBU??

    • 6 replies
    • 1.2k views
  4. CFP Ratings

    • 0 replies
    • 451 views
    • 0 replies
    • 505 views
  5. All Other CFB Teams

    • 1 reply
    • 447 views
  6. Position U

    • 1 reply
    • 484 views
    • 10 replies
    • 861 views
    • 0 replies
    • 392 views
  7. Von Miller

    • 6 replies
    • 689 views
    • 4 replies
    • 475 views
    • 0 replies
    • 365 views
    • 1 reply
    • 491 views
    • 0 replies
    • 303 views
    • 17 replies
    • 1.1k views
    • 3 replies
    • 554 views
  8. Top 25 CFB Seniors

    • 0 replies
    • 324 views
    • 0 replies
    • 416 views
    • 0 replies
    • 365 views
    • 0 replies
    • 311 views
  9. 5 angriest fanbases

    • 2 replies
    • 546 views
    • 0 replies
    • 276 views
    • 5 replies
    • 768 views
  10. Make or Break Games

    • 0 replies
    • 277 views
  11. South beach

    • 4 replies
    • 453 views
  12. Former Aggies QB

    • 8 replies
    • 807 views
  13. Again Baylor??? 1 2 3

    • 71 replies
    • 5k views
    • 0 replies
    • 275 views
  14. Spring games.

    • 4 replies
    • 552 views
    • 0 replies
    • 375 views
    • 4 replies
    • 432 views
    • 2 replies
    • 354 views
    • 0 replies
    • 349 views
    • 2 replies
    • 554 views
  15. David Ash

    • 1 reply
    • 569 views
    • 0 replies
    • 472 views
    • 4 replies
    • 585 views
    • 0 replies
    • 305 views
    • 0 replies
    • 378 views
    • 5 replies
    • 581 views
    • 2 replies
    • 471 views
    • 0 replies
    • 416 views
    • 3 replies
    • 1.1k views
  16. Final 4 Thread

    • 15 replies
    • 838 views
    • 0 replies
    • 532 views
  17. Pat Knight

    • 2 replies
    • 667 views
    • 3 replies
    • 525 views
    • 8 replies
    • 837 views
    • 0 replies
    • 442 views


  • Live & Upcoming Broadcasts

  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
×
×
  • Create New...