The generation you're referring to is the "Silent Generation." Americans of that generation fought in Korea. In spite of Korea being a less-popular war than Vietnam, the Silents never really complained very much about it, they just imitated their older siblings and drank heavily. A lot of major Civil Rights leaders…

I'm always surprised and confused that there are so many people who don't understand the generation categories.

In theory, market pressures should force costs of access down. Content creators should eventually be able to realize the value of their product without distributors effectively building in losses to subsidize their own businesses.

No offense intended, but you don't really seem to understand the economics of the distribution media you're discussing. Broadcast media was the original "give it away free and figure out how to pay later," and the solution they came up with was advertising. Cable piggybacked on that strategy, and then made consumers…

Yeah, consider the source. Man whose job depends on providing a service whose principal merits are (a) avoiding commercials and (b) allowing users to watch shows at times other than their scheduled airdate derides generation who will not even consider paying for media that bundles commercials or fails to provide…

You're Gen-X. Cutoff for Millennials is somewhere between 1980 and 1984.

The debate was better than on national TV. It was on YouTube.

Explain Trump's demographics.

You know that you can watch everything and anything on your computer on your TV, right?

Not fairly priced. In addition to the (increasingly unjustifiable and exorbitant) monthly fee, cable shows were often advertiser supported. I am willing to pay a significant premium to avoid advertising. Also falls down on the "access most or all of their entertainment," since cable has only limited on-demand…

Or while watching an episode of See Dad Run. Little-known fact.

Actually this is consistent. She is not married to any of the voters yet.

I mean, it's not like New York is in play anyway. On the other hand, he'd have to go into a voting booth and he's a massive germaphobe and anti-democratic fascist, so you can see how he'd be averse to that.

I don't understand why the Marlins aren't more reviled, other than that after each of their Series wins, Huizenga broke the team up and sold them off like the chattel he viewed them as.

I'm just saying, it would be a nice throwback to an era when Cleveland had an economy.

Very similar games. It's weird visiting countries that are into cricket, because I look at the TV while it's on and I feel like I can almost understand the game, but everything is wrong. It's like how sometimes German can sound like really weirdly accented English until you realize it's a foreign language.

The Indians will immediately pick up the flag with their 68-year drought if they don't win this year. Even if they win next year, you've still got a half dozen* teams that have literally never, since their creation, won the World Series, including two who haven't even appeared.

You guys could go with a WNBA/WMLS-style name and be the Cleveland Riverfires.

The Red Sox were never lovable losers. They were always hated. For everyone outside of Boston, the Sox losing at the last second was a sign of divine justice—the benign ghostly hand of loved icon Babe Ruth reaching down from heaven to save us from a Boston championship—not some cosmic unfairness. And it's not the…

Seriously. Second-longest all-time world series drought after the Cubs? The fucking White Sox. Boston brings up third.