mtutiger

This is definitely a concern... he needs more time to kinda prove it. Which he is not gonna get anytime soon. In the meantime, IDK if rolling into next season with Haase/Garneau and hoping Dingler moves fast next year is a great move if you desire to make improvements on next year (as the Tigers brass says they do). It's a lot to ask of Haase who easily could regress next season and whose defense is touch and go. They don't need best available, just serviceable. The asking price may be reasonable depending on who it is and what the circumstances are. Mentioned it a while ago, but someone like Pedro Severino from the Orioles might be a fit... with Adley Rutschman likely to be elevated to Baltimore, one imagines he's not going to get as much playing time next year. And I doubt the asking price would be high.

Of course, Diaz called one of those pitches that was four ball widths off the plate a strike to the previous batter. Laz Diaz sucks, but let's not pretend they didn't benefit as well at times.

Red Sox 9th Inning:

Alex Cora pulls a Dave Roberts lol

And this, folks, is why you hit Fangraphs first lol

Feels like a whole new series in LA! Baseball man

And like that, Dodgers lead... baseball

Reagan was philosophically different in ways as well. Not that I like the guy much, but I still marvel at how, when you go back and listen to Reagan speeches, how much more optimistic Reagan sounded compared to Trump... just completely different personalities.

Lol, so much for that

Astros gonna need vintage Grienke tonight lol

To their credit. Doesn't really change my view though.

This postseason seems kinda easy to figure out at the moment... Houston and LA may be better teams in the grand scheme, but a combination of pitching injuries and fatigue are a really bad fit for the lineups Boston and Atlanta are featuring. There's just no let up in either lineup... and they've cashed in on their opportunities. Particularly the Sawx

I am amused at how the Trump tax cuts that added trillions to the debt and are seen as virtuous while social spending on things like child care or health care or free community college are seen as extravagant. The time for lectures and pearl clutching from Republicans and conservatives about the debt is long passed... it just is. President Trump pissed away whatever remained of that credibility.

It didn't amount to much for me. Situations can be different. In any event, the tax cuts, in my experience, don't cover for the failures that I see of his administration. Nor the embarrassment of his leadership, particularly during COVID and the post election period. If anything, my views are reinforced with every passing day.

Re. Trump's tax cuts: I got the equivalent of a Costco membership back in terms of benefit. Forgive me if I'm not in awe. I'm guessing the people who benefited more from the tax cuts have more zeros in their annual salary than I do lol.

Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton would have won regardless of Superdelegates

The reality with Democratic Primary politics is that the most important constituency in the party is African American voters, particularly Gen-X and Above and particularly AA Women. In both cases (particularly with Biden, but with Clinton as well) the writing was on the wall as soon as South Carolina happened, because it foreshadowed everything that would occur once Super Tuesday hit. Clinton and Biden were more establishment candidates, but the structure of Democratic politics simply elevates establishment candidates in a way that Republican politics doesn't because of the importance of that constituency and what they tend to value in candidates.

I understand this POV, but isn't the design of our system part of the problem? We have an antiquated system of elections which is both a "first past the post" system and one dependent on a system that assigns electors based on states rather than popular vote. Which, theoretically, if neither candidate wins the majority of said electors, ends up being decided by Congress You couldn't possibly design a system of government more likely to encourage less viable choices for voters to choose from if you tried. But at the same time, many who complain about having to choose the lesser of two evils (particularly on the right) tend not to want to look at the flaws that bring us to this place.

On the micro level, I do believe there's more that unites than divides us. But on the macro level, there are a lot of forces working to pull people on all sides apart. Starting with social and partisan media sources.

You should ask our state legislators down in Austin.... they're the ones who passed a bill to (ostensibly) boost election security while simultaneously passing a Constitutional Carry bill.

I'm good with Picture ID

This is the thing about the gun debate... there are absolutely ways in which guns could be regulated that could reduce gun crime in this country. Not just in terms of mass shootings at school, but even in terms of violent crime in larger cities. That would not involve things like buybacks or confiscation or anything like that. But, like the abortion debate, we are congenitally incapable of having a nuanced debate... its either you favor gun rights or you favor confiscation. No middle ground. I've largely checked out of the gun debate because of it... nothing will be accomplished because, while some middle ground may exist in the population as a whole, the extremes in Washington control the debate

I know this is probably the point (ie. owning the libs, etc.) but it never ceases to amaze that people tolerate (or even like) the kind of behavior out of their leaders that they would ground their kids for a month over at home. I love this country, but in many ways we are not a serious people.

Similar to how, despite the fear mongering, companies with vax mandates are generally getting compliance in excess of 95%. At the end of the day, I don't think the theoretical efficacy of gun laws is much of a debate. Setting aside the 2nd Amendment, which makes it impossible to really do much with guns anyway, it basically comes down to what you value more: a society where guns are widely or easily accessible. Or one that where they are more restricted. And whether one is OK with the tradeoffs that come with those positions.

What a douchecanoe