jdub27

Might have gotten a real gem in Ihenacho. Can't wait to see this team gel.

Just curious, I assume this does not inlcude UND hockey as Midco doesn't have streaming rights? Or is that included?

LOL. Somehow pointing out exactly where what is normally a very informative thread is headed in hope of stopping it is a bad thing...

The limited edition (with the Stanley Cup-like stopper) originally retailed for $300 (100 proof, aged 2 years). Your second link is the regular rye (94 proof, aged 1 year). The cool Stanley Cup thing vs. a bottle of Mac18 would be a struggle. Here's a decent write-up on them: https://thewhiskeywash.com/reviews/whiskey-review-round-up-belfour-spirits/

Based on what it is, I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. Young, sourced whiskey at a really high price point. That being said, bottle is very cool and has the UND/Eddie Belfour ties which can justify some of the cost for certain people. But if you're looking for legitimately good whiskey/bourbon, you can do better at easily half the price. I'll pick one or two up for a conversation piece.

No. And there is good reason. What are they going to do? Come tow Berry's car while he was gone? Any pulling of donations right now is a threat that won't be able to be carried out for a few months. Maybe there is some blowback then? We'll have to see I guess.

I haven't heard of any issues with various messages on shoes/athletic tape or proclamations of faith during interviews or after games in the past but I'm not sure what the overall discussion has been. I'd venture that "props", such as a flag, go beyond that though. Maybe you can find a few players to take up your cause and see.

Yep. I don't think anyone has said different. The athletic department was aware of what those might be. They were also aware of the blowback of putting a full ban on preventing any expression. I have already stated, I believe they compromised for a one time thing during the first game.

Like I previously stated, plenty of selective outrage due to people's own particular view on what they personally deem to be acceptable or not.

A) Both of these two do plenty off the ice to show this was more than some sort of virtue signaling B) As generality, ".....home of the brave Sioux!" is viewed in a very similar light by many and can also be viewed as "trampling on peoples pride in country and sacrifices made to preserve it" yet there seems to be minimal handwringing over that.

I'm not sure what they were hoping for, but it has definitely generated conversation. Personally, the response is almost exactly in line with what I would have guessed it to be. If it is a one-time thing, I'm glad they did it when/where they did it. This has been something that has been discussed at length within the athletic department and teams. Those in charge were aware of what the potential blowback could/would be. On the other side, the blowback to prohibit them from doing it would caused much, much more significant issues. Reading between the lines, my guess is a compromise was made for them to do it the first game to make the point they wanted to make.

Considering both of the guys kneeling are wearing an "A" on their jersey, which is voted on by the players, I don't think that is an issue. And exactly what time/place do they have that draws the attention that this did? Whether you agree with it or not, that's the whole point. It is a very passive, peaceful, non-confrontational way to make a point in front of a significant audience.

I thought this was already an existing postion and I wasn't too far off. There is already a VP for Studen Affairs and Diversity. It will be interesting on how this is handled as the things on the "Top 10" list are all going to invovle some signficant funds at a time when UND is already slashing budgets and that was pre-CoVid. Are these people willing to see (realistic) cuts in other parts of the University to help fund it? What programs are they willing to shut down to fund this list?

Their issue was that NDSU produced a video that they showed prior to the game. More or less used state resources to produce media with a (possible) political message/agenda.

No, it gets out (which there is zero doubt that it absolutely would) and the players don't get to give their reasonings and its completely misconstrued. A large percentage of people won't care about their reasoning, regardless of what it is but, again, it was about doing what is possible to control the message knowing there was going to be blowback.

UND Fans: The anthem is sacred, no one should dare do anything that might be considered disrespectful to it or our country!!!! Also UND Fans: "O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave SIOUX!!!" A hell of a lot of selective outrage going on. There's a reason it was leaked prior to the game

I'd guess Trump since he created the vaccine? But really, instead they are putting it all on the states. I'm sure none of it will be politicized (from either side). https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/30/trump-states-handle-vaccines-440798

Disagree, the hatred for Hillary was off the charts on both the right and left. D's didn't have the burning hatred for Trump yet (maybe because he had previously been a registered Democrat as recently as 2001-2009?) and he hadn't crossed a bunch of R's yet either. I believe the number is slightly low, but I'm not sure what is so confusing about the difference between land and people. States =/= counties when looking at national elections as it relates to the electoral college. A single county in New York City (Queens) has 3x the population as all 53 counties in ND combined. Another (Brooklyn) as 3x the population of South Dakota's 66 counties. So out of the 121 counties mentioned, Biden won a whopping 10 of them (8.3%), yet Biden had 1.2 million votes and Trump had 853K. Land doesn't vote. In 2016, Hillary won something like 18.2% of counties, had nearly 3 million more votes nationally and lost the electoral college by around 60,000 votes spread out between 3 states. It is no secret that Trump did better in rural American while Biden did better in the population centers. This is nothing new between R and D voter breakdowns. Lay out the population of the counties Biden won vs. the counties that Trump one and there is nothing fishy about it.

Now do 2016.

Well, I mean, Trump is the one who publicly stated she was on the team so.....? Hopefully they got away quick enough to not damage the R's chance in the Senate races since Powell's strategy seems to be going scorched earth by calling out R leaders of the state as part of the conspiracy with no evidence to back up. Not exactly a great look when you're trying to win two pretty important races.

Fixed your post.

I agree fully with this, which is why I've stated multiple times R's should be fine with a short-term loss in the WH to gain even more seats in the House in 2022 mid-terms and have an excellent shot to take the WH back in 2024 (assuming they don't absolutely drop the ball on a candidate like both parties have the last two elections). It gives them a change to reset and put forth a quality candidate that can unite their base and bring in more independents. The D's have their far-left wing screaming at Biden already which is going to cause internal issues and turn off independents. That being said, I think this shows even further that there was not the massive voter fraud that is being claimed. If you're going to smart and bold enough to cheat in one race, why not bolster your ranks in the Senate and House as well and make it worth your while.

But it isn't a short-sighted opinion. In fact, by your own admission, it is accurate. It has nothing to do with CNN or the "liberal" media. You can find plenty of sources touting the exact same thing. Hey look, the Forum even wrote an article about it today: https://www.inforum.com/news/government-and-politics/6759749-What-is-Parler-and-why-are-so-many-conservatives-going-there As for your comments about swearing an oath to defend the constitution and thus the Freedom of Speech (which I fully back people to have an opinion I don't agree with), how exactly are you trying to apply that to a company like Facebook or Twitter or Parler or whatever else is out there. No one is requiring people to use those platforms and they have a right to set their community standards, whether you agree with them or not.

From what I hear, you'd probably have at least a few takers. Which is definitely part of the disappointment. I firmly believe there is a fair amount of spreading going on by the kids, but they are asymptomatic so their cases aren't necessarily being caught and counted but there is steps that could be taken by some staff that would also help.

Feel free to look back at my posts. I've repeatedly said I thought they needed to do whatever possible to keep kids in school. That was literally my highest priority. If that took some personal sacrifices for myself and others, it was worth it. Unfortunately that became impossible when they literally don't have enough staff (which includes support staff, paras, specialty teachers) to monitor all the classrooms which is happening everywhere in Grand Forks. It literally doesn't matter. You're the one who got offended when I made a joke that Parler was a safe space for the far-right, which isn't that far off. No one is upset about it other than you, who is somehow afraid to admit what it is, even though you are literally doing that in your post above. Personally, I prefer to understand both sides of discussions, which is why I think Twitter is personally fine. If I see something that is marked as inaccurate and I actually care, I will look into it. Don't care if its right or left. Despite being right leaning, I have no issue with how companies handle their free to use platforms.