Hts121

GSW was at (or near) full strength for their playoff run. That is key. Their opponents, including us, were all down key players. A lot of it comes down to being healthy at the right time. I think the Cavs are on par with GSW, LAC, and SAS. Those are the four teams I see a being the top tier. All are ridiculously loaded. I will say that, believe it or not, Steph Curry does seem better this year (in a limited sample size) compared to his outstanding MVP run last year. He is scary good. Then again, so are LeBron and Kyrie.

I'd say that last night was the first and last time we ever see the Cavs in sleeves.

^For the reasons I stated before. It reinforces stereotypes about Ohio. It drives away more progressive thinking millenials which Ohio is already losing to the coasts. And the outcome of this vote was highly deceptive. It would be like if we passed a law saying you have the free speech right to burn a flag, and the headlines read "Ohioans support flag burning"....... technically true, but the issue is more complex than that.

^My guess is they want to take the bite out of any broader 2016 initiative. If medicinal marijuana is legal, then the petitioners can't claim some sick person is being deprived of medication. Maybe, but maybe not. USA Today leads today with the complication about the monopoly issue. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/11/04/6-reasons-ohio-marijuana-legalization-failed/75143764/ Prior to the vote, just a couple days ago, the New York Times also made the monopoly aspect central to its reporting. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/us/on-ballot-ohio-grapples-with-specter-of-marijuana-monopoly.html The Atlantic, a much more in-depth publication, notes that "unlike some other cases in which ballot referenda to liberalize drug laws were defeated at the polls, it’s a bit more difficult to draw broad conclusions in Ohio." http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/where-did-ohios-marijuana-legalizers-go-wrong/414061/ CNN's coverage pretty well covered the oligopoly angle as well, though surprisingly they also didn't give the referendum its own story at all, making it the second part of a combined story: http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/03/politics/election-day-2015-ballot-measures-referendum/index.html (Not sure how long the actual video will load when you click that link, but hopefully the article itself will be reasonably permanent.) Bottom line: The national media were all over this. They did not ignore the oligopoly angle. True. But probably 95% of the population only reads the headlines..... and all the headlines I read from this morning were something along the lines of "Marijuana Legalization Efforts Fail in Ohio."

^you see.... even a guy with a Bob Marley avatar is voting no on 3. It doesn't stand a chance.

^Macedonia is a city

I'd say about half the people I've talked to today who are otherwise in favor of legalization have voted no or plan to vote no on Issue 3. This thing is going down in flames. Too bad no one outside of Ohio will know why.

Based on the quick snapshot of the demographics I saw at the polls today, I'm not optimistic at all on 3. Too much gray hair.

^I have nipples, Greg. Could you milk me?

The stands were packed. Most of them were there to see Lebron. I'd imagine turnout is pretty low in Philly nowadays

Some kind of team chemistry building experiment last night.... https://instagram.com/p/9h42R2nfWO/ Game. Blouses

The best parts of downtown at street level are those gaps you see in the skyline from a distance

^Do either of you have a source for the 'more votes' angle?

^Unless the rules of severability somehow apply

I would think that "anchor" tenant for this project would have to be for office space.

I'm a NO on Issue 2 and a heavy lean YES on Issue 3. If both pass, then it will be interesting to see what the Statehouse does. That will be the first move. Assuming it takes some action, pursuant to Issue 2, to block Issue 3's implementation, then a suit would be filed by the proponents of Issue 3, which would eventually be decided by the Ohio Supreme Court. Not sure if the Supreme Court would have original jurisdiction (thus, no need to go through the common pleas court and court of appeals), but I suspect someone will make an argument it does. What will also be interesting to see is if Issue 2 does in fact block all of Issue 3. For instance, the right to grow and possess your own doesn't really have anything to do with a monopoly or oligopoly.

This might sound crazy, but could the JC provide the necessary infrastructure to boost the local film industry? Courtrooms, jails, high ceilings, a large atrium, the potential to open up several floors for sound stages, a cafeteria, wiring, etc.

^How was the court supposed to know?

Much, much better last night.... although I really wasn't down at all for losing the opener on the road to a deep and loaded Bulls team which is in relatively good health. Last night, they largely toyed with a perennial Western Conference powerhouse on their home floor. KLove seems like he came ready to play this season and the Cavs have made strides incorporating him into the offense more than they did last season. Mo Williams has already earned his salary. Also, major props to Delly, RJeff and Andy off the bench. Their +/- numbers were outstanding.

^That was the goal

Yeah.... my understanding is that was the State GOP's (via Husted) way of trying to undermine the support.

I'm sure we have more than a few members of the GA who would vote in favor of legalization. But our GA is so heavily tilted to the rural conservatives, it would never gain majority support. I probably should educate myself some more. Does anyone have an impartial summary of Issue 3, including an analysis of whether it really creates a monopoly in the traditional sense of that term. I understand that there will be only 10 grow areas, much like we have with the casinos. Are the 'growers' also limited to specific individuals or is that just by practical effect of who owns the land? Aren't you allowed to grow your own, as well? Would pot grown out of state still be illegal? I suppose so given the federal regulations on transportation. Is the distribution market limited in the same way as the growers? Again, I'm looking for something objective on this. Not something put out by either campaign or any supporters.

Reminger (in the Midland Bldg) probably has somewhere close to 100,000sf

I am still on the YES side of this, for the reasons stated above. But I am hearing more and more of people who otherwise support legalization either planning to vote no or abstaining. I am not optimistic this will pass