I’ve come to the conclusion Trump is basically using Maggie Habberman as a down-low press secretary.

Well, that’s too bad. I just figured out that he was one of the ones who didn’t suck.

Counterpoint: these developers knew damn well that exclusives piss off a large section of the community. This isn’t new to Epic, but Epic’s approach has everyone on edge even more than usual. And they knew that when making the deal too.

Here’s the thing though ... this game was totally already in production with a release date before Epic ever came along.

In fairness, a lot of folks didn’t actually install Steam until, like, 2017 ... well after it had gone through a lot of those earlier issues and changed many things about it’s initial structure. If Epic ever evolves like Steam did, they should get credit for doing so. But Valve’s evolution doesn’t implicitly mean Epic…

In this case, I don’t think it’s so much “comments” as actually putting his game up for presale in places and then pulling it. That’s an entirely different thing than some offhanded remarks about future plans.

Maybe. But we’re certainly not the ones who selected a candidate that lost to Donald #$^@! Trump. The current reality is a direct result of *your* approach here, asshole. 

So ... are you old enough to have done this once over Nader already ... or are you a virgin?

You understand that many presidential candidates in the past, regardless of politcal party, have bypassed several states, correct? They have to be somewhat strategic about resource utilization.

I told most people to vote third party too. You guys picked Hillary #$&^@! Clinton to be your &^#~$ candidate. Damn near everyone told you we hated her ... and you picked her anyhow. And then *SHE* had surrogates go out and promote Donald Trump during the primaries for fucksake .. because she thought it would damage…

Lol. PUMA.

This is top-grade analysis.

Good lord. Seriously? Neera Tanden is like the Democrat’s own Bill Kristol.

Democrats generally having failed to accomplish a single thing of substance since their heyday in the 1960s isn’t necessarily the great arguing point you seem to think it is.

So, with precise specificity, what impact do you imagine these court rulings made to create all the manifest problems in our healthcare system that still need fixing?

If this were accurate, why would Americans be facing a desperate need to pass healthcare reform barely 5 years into full implementation of the policy? I guess they just don’t make “the single biggest progressive achievement in half a century” like they used to.

If the proposed policy isn’t eliminating the role of private insurance companies, it isn’t really M4A at all. Keeping primary private insurance makes the policy functionally equivalent to Biden’s public option proposal. If you take something that isn’t M4A and just start calling it M4A ... it doesn’t magically become…

Hmmm. We seem to be talking past each other. My argument is that quibbling over the specifics of the debate’s starting point and ideological contours now is very much NOT a waste of time.

I thought “Cadet Bonespurs” was actually pretty good.

If by “most” you mean approximately 16% ... sure.