Melierax

Looks like a textbook Greater to me.

Did you noise reduce the audio? If so, can you post the original?

Oof. Ivory? ?

Bonapartes?

Thayer's Gull?

Lecontes?

Tundra. Note how the eye is very distinct, and the immatures have minimal pink on the bills. (I keep getting the pink thing wrong so I'm not sure about that)

So we're just posting pictures of birds, no rules? Here's a few Clark's Nutcracker shots I got last winter:

Yep, that's an Eastern Phoebe.

Yep. There is a black eye line - the photo just has weird lighting.

Northern Mockingbird - note among other things the long tail, pale eye, and white wing bars. (Not to mention posture - mockingbirds sit with their tails up.)

This is awesome! I've always wanted something like this.

Starling?

Looks good for Red-shouldered to me with the pale crescents, front pattern, and tail pattern.

White-breasted Nuthatches calling in the background. I think the loud call could be some type of ground squirrel. EDIT: Possibly Downy/Hairy Woodpecker being weird?

Cardinal?

Definitely not Harrier. I agree with Cooper's.

Bay-breasted Warbler?

I would probably call that an Oregon. The sides look drabber because I think the bird is molting... I'm not comfortable with bird molts though. The sides just don't look dark enough to me.

The OP's response clearly indicates how the statement comes across, regardless of intentions.

Just to clarify my own position, @Tony Leukering your knowledge is impeccable and I always love being able to defer to you for complicated ID's. Everywhere else, your commentary is extremely useful - but then you do something like this which seems like you're high and mighty on a bird ID pedestal and you don't seem to understand how new birders could possibly not be confident about an ID. I agree with @Jerry Friedman - you may have good intentions, but your statement just comes across as demeaning. You can see that your response was really just not helpful and inappropriate by reading the OP's reply.

When I was first starting out my biggest fear when learning birds was that there were birds that look identical or at least similar to whatever I think a bird is. For example, Ferruginous Hawks also have red-orange tails, and if I don't know the field marks to look for I could've gotten confused between the two. You were a new birder once - why would you not have been sure about an ID when you were first starting out?

Along the same lines of what @Jerry Friedman said, the emotionless internet is not the place to do this. If I was birding and a random stranger came up to me and I pointed out a hawk and said "I think that's a Red-tail" and they replied with "why only think?" I would be very turned off, not only because I would have multiple reasons for why I wasn't positive and this random stranger just acted as though I'm just too stupid to realize that it's a Red-tailed Hawk, but because most random strangers aren't that belittling.

It's almost without a doubt a Black-bellied Plover in my eyes.

This. I tried to ID birds with my pitiful camera for way too long before I realized binoculars were so much better.