Squirrel

Lol, so glad I could be helpful, but that's also what moderators are for.

I'm hoping so.

It's really its own category and is not typical cake. Very dense and very moist, almost like eating straight, rich, amazing chocolate. Almost like a dark chocolate truffle in cake form.

I'm going with E.T. I loved Close Encounters, then came all this press for E.T. and lots and lots and lots of hype. By the time I saw it I thought it was going to be the best movie I'd ever seen. Huge disappointment. It's a good movie, but I wouldn't say great, not even close.

Yeah, but James Earl Jones ... classic.

I'm not sure I've seen a remake that I've liked better or even liked as much. Total Recall remake, yuck. The Shining remake, yuck.

You actually did that incorrectly. It's (.)(.)(.) If size is important, it's ( . )( . )( . )

CONCUR!!!!!!!

Three what?

Heh, I was about to quote it and make some kind of snarky comment about you writing a doctoral thesis on Star Wars

If you ever have cause to be in Chicago and come to my home, I'll make apple rum dum for you. It's a very moist apple cake with a warm rum butter sauce poured over the top of it. Without the sauce, pie. With the sauce, well, the choice is far more difficult.

Agreed most pies are better than most cakes. I haven't met a dessert pie I haven't liked. British meat pies? No thank you. Although, there are some cheesecakes I might take over some pies. A flourless chocolate cake I might take over some pies. Apple rum dum I'll take over some pies. Favorite pies, though ... hmmm ... pumpkin and bourbon pecan. Dutch apple ranks up there, too.

I'm actually more concerned about next week.

That's way more succinctly put that what I said, but yeah. It's not even just groups, but individuals themselves, too. They have difficulties finding that 95% because it's difficult for them to compromise on the 5%. And then it's not their fault because the party ignored them and their wishes and they just can't possibly lower themselves because their 5% is more important than your 5%.

FYI: There are two other ongoing threads should you wish to see some of the discussion that has already taken place. http://twinsdaily.com/topic/24079-article-early-2017-draft-prospects/ http://twinsdaily.com/topic/23980-2017-mlb-draft-thread/

As most of you know, I'm not a huge fan of bacon. But since I know most of you are, this is for you: http://peewee.com/2017/01/22/theres-a-bacon-toaster/

Geez, this world lately ...

We are living in 1984.

You'd think they'd get and be more involved ... but the ones who I call pseudo-intellectual liberals who are supposedly part of the base but not part of the party do everything to point fingers elsewhere. "Well, if you had given me a 'better' candidate ..." "Well, if you had given me a candidate who supported [insert this specific care here] in the way I think it should be ..." "Well, if you had given me someone inspiring ..." "Well, if you had given me the only candidate worthy of my vote ..." There are many so-called liberals who find all kinds of excuses who just can't be bothered to vote if the candidate doesn't meet fully with their issues or who doesn't meet their lofty, intellectual ideal. And it's a problem, because they will continue doing that and it won't be their fault. They won't get involved to help shape the party into what they feel it should be, because they have difficulties compromising their ideals one iota for the greater good and if that one candidate they would support doesn't win the nomination, they stay home or vote alternatively, and claim the party 'ignored' them because they can't lower themselves to support anyone but. There is never going to be a candidate that supports everything I think they should as I think they should, and some less so than others, but I don't 'poo poo' the process if it doesn't work out the way I think it should or point fingers at a majority and say they just don't know better. But that's what happens with many so-called liberal voters. Conservative voters vote no matter what, even if it's in protest to the other candidate, they hold their noses if they must, but they vote. Yeah, there are flaws with that, too ... but unless our two-party systems changes, this is what it is.

I think there were a lot of people in denial who thought it couldn't/wouldn't happen and let others be their voice and now realize they can't do that. I hope this momentum keeps up, but the cynical me doubts it. People will go back to their mode of letting someone else do the work for them. Of all the millions world wide who participated in the over 600 different sister marches, I have yet to read of many (any?) major instances of violence. I've read some isolated instances of some unfriendly verbal exchanges, but no major instances of violence or vandalism. I think that's kind of impressive considering the number of events and participants. And especially since many of the events hugely exceeded their planned expectations of participants.

What he's saying is that if the situation weren't just a loss, but one involving a huge disparity in popular vote along with another country's involvement it would have been worse. What they did, the list you just gave, was after true loss, not a questionable one. I think there would have been a lot of threats of real violence if the situation were reversed here and not just mostly peaceful protests.

Let's be real here ... you were equating the reaction to Trump's election to Obama's. It's not the same scenario at all and that's all I was saying.

That's really a different scenario than what stringer said. Obama didn't lose the popular vote by 3million. I think there'd be plenty of uproar and plenty involving guns and other weaponry.

This is the report from Chicago. The rally swelled to more than 3 times what was expected. The official march part was cancelled and it just became a huge rally, but those unable to get close enough didn't know that and still took to the streets ... they really had no where else to go the crowd was that large. And the reports I've read so far, including this one, said it remained peaceful. http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/womens-march-chicago-411405495.html

They say the number in Chicago reached 250,000. I don't know what was going on where the crowd had nowhere to go but overflow to the streets away from the rally point with all the speakers were