u/Lisztchopinovsky

Robby: Libertarian, he’s too focused on his own issues to care what others do.

Dana: Old School Democrat, generally supports progressive issues but thinks everyone is too sensitive nowadays

Dr. Santos: Democratic Socialist, staunch feminist and tends to be weary of men (likely due to past trauma).

Dr. King: Progressive but pragmatic, focuses more on what she can do than what others should do and doesn’t disparage others.

Dr. Whitaker: Grew up conservative, but ultimately doesn’t get involved in politics.

Dr. Jivadi: Will support progressive social causes when fashionable, but is generally pretty naive and still finding her voice.

Dr. Oglesville: Libertarian Right, but his James Baldwin pull may contradict that.

Monica: Hardcore MAGA conservative

Dr. Langdon: Centerist. Likely will hear anyone out but asks questions to force people to think.

What are your hot takes for the Vikings this year. Make sure you stay civil, and don’t call people names if you disagree with them. It can be about a certain player or a team statistic.

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

In 2023, Danielle Hunter was by far the best person on the defense and really on the team outside Jefferson. Hunter had probably his best career year and was pretty much deemed an irreplaceable superstar. So what did we do? We let him walk.

We weren’t in a horrible place cap wise, maybe we were looking to retool but not rebuild. By most metrics this should have been a bad move…

…except it wasn’t. Now I was critical of Kwesi and thought it was a good idea to let him go this offseason, but this ended up being a masterclass of a move, because we were able to use that money to sign Greenard and Van Ginkel. While neither of them are as good as Hunter, they were both really really good in their own right and better scheme fits for Flores. They both put out a very good 2024 campaign, alongside a surprisingly solid season from Pat Jones II after a very bad season in 2023 (one of the worst in PFF history) for edge rushers.

While Greenard is no longer on the Vikings, Van Ginkel still is a very good player, and most importantly the EDGE position remained not only satisfactory, but a strength of the defense, especially as Dallas Turner has improved dramatically last year.

My main point is the transition was pretty seamless after getting rid of Hunter.

Like this article says, his story resembles a fable, but can you say that you’re surprised? He genuinely felt like a steal from the beginning based off vibes.

What gets me is the fact that he has had to push through so much competition, yet it still looks like he is potentially carving out at least a short term starting role.

I don’t know about you, but LDR has been one of the more fun stories of the last few years, and I can’t wait to see what he does next.

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

Every once in a while you come across this commentator that seems to be so good at propaganda, it is honestly impressive.

The person I am talking about here is conservative commentator Grand Ole Evan. You take this somewhat charming muscular gay Republican man saying “see republicans aren’t homophobic,” but then continues to use the straw man fallacy against the entire liberal ideology, framing them as this unhinged party of lunatics while framing himself as level headed while basically saying “racism and xenophobia is ay ok because certain trends exist.” It’s like he’s arguing about what he thinks liberals are like rather than actual liberals. The funniest part is that he calls himself a moderate which makes no sense. Moderates don’t talk about restricting immigration from “low trust societies.”

The reason why it is a masterclass is that most people fail to see through his shtick. He’s well spoken, he’s charming, he speaks very confidently, he doesn’t fall into the same rage baiting tactics that other commentators use, even when I first saw his page I thought I may disagree with him but he seems to have well thought out arguments and is calm and composed, but the more you see about him the more you see his arguments are fundamentally flawed. He rarely cites sources, and when he does he only sources articles that confirm his preconceived notions, like the Tylenol causing autism Harvard article. He tries to prove himself right rather than to try to prove himself wrong, the latter of which is what a good journalist and scientist does. I’ve been seeing his account for a while now and it honestly fascinates me just how much a person can be so willfully ignorant.

If I missed anything or you disagree with anything, feel free to comment.

Superheroes’ Superpowers vs. Skills

Chart Axes:

• Horizontal: Superheroes’ Superpowers vs. Skills

Chart Grid:

| | Extreme Skills | Great Skills | Good Skills | Meh

Skills | No skill | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | God level superpower | — | — | — | — | — | | **Great Superpower ** | — | — | — | — | — | | Good Superpower | — | — | — | — | — | | Meh Superpower | — | — | — | — | — | | No Superpower | — | — | — | — | — |

Cell Details:

No cell content yet

---

To view the interactive chart, switch to new Reddit or use the official Reddit app!

This is an interactive alignment chart. For the full experience with images and interactivity, please view on new Reddit or the official Reddit app.

Created with Alignment Chart Creator

---

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post