gehringer_2

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

I just don't want to end up with another capitulating Senator who will vote for Trump's nominees. We already have one Michigan Senator who capitulated to Trump in Elissa Slotkin. We don't need another one. 

Slotkin voted for 9 Trump cabinet,  executive, and/or judicial nominees. Imagine voting for the nomination of someone like a Joseph Goebbels, Herman Goring, or Heinrich Himmler in the 1930s. Insanity. She thought these people like Kristi Neom and Scott Bessent were qualified enough for the job. Haley Stevens would almost assuredly vote in line with Slotkin in my view. Voting in another candidate who votes for confirming that many Trump nominees is not more of what I want. I want someone who will fiercely oppose future nominees and Trump in general. 

I do feel Mallory McMorrow would be good on opposing Trump's nominees and his agenda more broadly. I think she would be in line with Abdul there and above Haley Stevens. I would feel far more comfortable with McMorrow than Stevens. 

voting against appointments from the minority doesn't actually accomplish anything - it's nice symbolism, but does it matter? I'd guess most members make those votes because they are hoping to bank some goodwill capital to get something later that will be worth more than a symbolic no vote that doesn't stop anything. I guess there is a level where more 'symbol' can be good thing but in the end, stuff that doesn't make a difference, doesn't make a difference.

OTOH, if any of those votes could have stopped one of those appointments, then I agree with you.

1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

Kane is not toast. He is still a highly skilled and creative offensive player. 

The rebuild has not failed. When Stevie got here, the team was dead last in goals scored and last in goals allowed. Now the team is average in both categories. The team also has arguably the best defenseman in the NHL, one of the best young defensive pairings in the NHL, a top-ten goal scorer, and two promising goaltender prospects.

They do not have to get worse to get better again. They might get worse but one could foresee a season where Edvinsson becomes more polished offensively and cuts out some of his defensive lapses; where a full season of Faulk allows ASP to play sheltered third line minutes and develop physically; where Kasper has a bounce back from his sophomore slump; where some of the slow, old, and uninspired bottom six forwards are replaced by young and hungry prospects; and where Cossa gives them a more reliable option at #2 than Talbot was. It is not out of the question that some, if not all, of these improvements occur, and the team improves marginally enough to make the playoffs. 

I would still like to see Stevie find this team’s Shanahan, and I’d like to see him make some changes in the front office (and no, I don’t want him to find this team’s Shanahan by hiring Shanahan to the front office). But I don’t think it is a terrible strategy to hold on until the CCR contracts are off the books and then plan to bring in one or two high end UFAs. 

I see little route for them to improve much. None of the players likely to come up from GR have shown much indication any of them are going to be more than younger versions of the same kind of middling players they are going to replace. They might have a goalie in either Augustine or Cossa, but it still looks like a mediocre team with little chance to do any more than get washed out of an early cup round. The D is good, yes, but they need more help on the lines than I see any way for them to generate.

Crikey - SGL and Hanifee combine to give up 11 ER in 5 IP. 

6 K's total in this game. Can't remember last time I saw a game with that few Ks.

1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

They have to bring Kane back. It would be an offensive disaster if they lost him, and they have to do everything they can to keep DeBrincat happy as he goes into the final year of his contract. 

Even if they do bring back Kane, and leave Mazur and MBN on the roster, they still have to fill spots for Perron, JVR, and Shine. Danielson better be ready, Lombardi too? Then who else? That would be roles for five kids, without even talking about CCR. Copp is serviceable, though he finished the year snakebit to say the least. Offload Compher or Rasmussen if you can, but now you’re talking about a sixth kid to bring up, unless somehow you can sign another short term free agent. 

They are treading water for two more years unless Stevie can pull a rabbit out of his hat this offseason. What could he get for Edvinsson and/or one of the goalies?

Kane is toast. This rebuild has already failed, they have to get worse to get better again.

51 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

 

how is he not ejected? NBA officiating is a joke.

tigers with only 4 hits but they took 6 walks. Torkelson with a silly 208/397  BA/OBP

Parker Meadows has surgery on his broken radius. That could mean the fracture was more complex than normal, or just that they decided they could cut down recovery time with in 'internal fixature'.

He was moved to the 60day. Hinch said he expects him back this season.

https://www.mlb.com/tigers/news/parker-meadows-left-arm-surgery-60-day-il

24 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

He was the favorite. The issue isn’t him becoming the nominee. California is a jungle primary. There is no Democratic and republican primary. The top two regardless of party advance. There are only two republicans running. There are a cluster**** of Dems. It’s a real possibility the top two are Republicans. Swalwell still being on the ballot means he takes votes away from other Dems. 

I get all that, but in general voters in CA aren't that dumb. If it were a presidential year the idea of 'autopilot' voters picking any name they had heard before seems like it could be a more serious risk. Dems splitting the vote is a risk in general, and they have to figure that out with or without Swalwell additional name on the ballot.

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

One of the more giant of the giant assholes. 

The water needs to seek him out and envelop him in its love.

39 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I want Stevie to quit signing mediocre veterans

this

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

Which means Putin was funding CPAC. 

correct

2 hours ago, Hongbit said:

It’s going to be a very close race

I hope you mean the primary. If the general is close in MI the Dems have no chance of taking the Senate.

2 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

 

I don't think this will be a big issue since Swalwell didn't have prior state wide recognition. He's only  a household name in one district.

25 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Yes, it matters. Well, I guess it selectively matters. Because if they are a white, alleged rapist, it's ok. But if they are someone like Hasan it is not. Furthermore, Elissa Slotkin has gone on Bill Maher's show numerous times and I don't see her getting a bunch of **** for going on the Democratic version of Tucker Carlson.

just as an aside, I wouldn't compare going to interview shows run by people you may not like (Like Pete B to Fox) where you have a chance to reach an audience that you can't by other means, to campaigning with someone - it's a whole different order of magnitude of validation.

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

The NYTimes publishes a million words from hundreds of people every day. Super easy to find a few dozen words that make people's hair combust.

Beyond that, I read the article, and I'm having trouble seeing what the problem is here.

speaking of the Times. If anyone has the time (it's a very long read or listen) and access, the Ezra Klein inverview with Marc Lynch and Shibley Telhami (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/14/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-lynch-telhami.html) is worth the time to slog through  - esp the discussion near the end about Netanyahu's desperation to complete his program before he loses Trump and thus probably US support. 

Especially if you are old enough to have memory of what Israel was in the days of Golda Mier and Abba Eban, reading this will disabuse you any idea that it's the same place it was then or - even 15 yrs ago for that matter. It seems the only thing either side in the Arab/Israeli conflict can do successfully is further radicalize its enemy to hate it even more - and Israel's current course will be no exception.

5 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Ridiculous. Republicans doubled down when Trump talked about eating dogs and cats. 

What Trump does by comparison is meaningless, GOP and Dem voters have different criteria - it is what it is.

You have an ongoing complaint about the radical left, I share some of that, but they are most useful as the stalking horse for the right to campaign against no matter who the mainstream Dems run. I mean, honestly, was Hammoud any more help to Harris than he would have been to Biden?

27 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

McMorrow was part of the rat****ing coop. She urged Biden to drop out after I voted for him and he won the primary so she doesn’t give a **** about Michigan primary voters. 

No comment on McMorrow in partcular, but I can't hold a Dem's position on Biden's run against them - I think Dems of good conscience were in a serious quandry about it. It was completely reasonable to believe if Biden had tried to keep campaigning there would soon have been more video flying around of more episodes that looked like the debate. There was no clear right answer there. I was ambivalent myself, and I think it still would have been the right decision if Harris had been able to connect to people better. To me she had this weakness that when you heard her speaking on video, it was always like she was talking to someone else, not to 'you'. Somehow she didn't connect through the camera like Obama or Trump can. Video 'Charisma' is a weird thing, but it's indispensable.

9 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Fun fact: Cale Iorg played for Canada in the 2013 WBC. 1-for-12, six strikeouts. His highlight was hitting a sac fly.

Garth was playing for the Jays when Cale was born...

40 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

I guess every player is different when it comes to having their weaknesses exposed. Teams get the "book" out on how to pitch to hitters once they find their weakness. McGonigle has such good hand eye coordination and is capable of making adjustments during an at bat (!!!) that any book on him may never be known. The kid has a very bright future. It will be very interesting to see how he handles a slump, keeping one short is key. Pretty soon, we may be talking about him as an All Star??

he's going to be tested with a lot more breaking stuff, but that's not going to be easy either with a guy who takes a walk as well as McGonigle

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I think anyone would love to have a career as dead as that!

a game that sort of encapsulates Trout's career. Great individual performance but it still couldn't pull the Angels over the line.

14 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Tyler Collins and Cale Iorg are you comps for McGonigle? You're just messing with us now.  

not sure if 2022 was talking about McG or Rainer but either way I agree I never remember Collins being treated as that much of a deal. IIRC Iorg did get a fair amount of early hype but it was pretty short lived because he never lived up to any of it. they kept pushing him up the system but he never really had a year that merited a promotion anywhere.

Rainer already has a better year last year than Iorg ever had.

6 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

They need to worry about the election before them and do what they need to do to try to win as many races as they can in this cycle. I'm not thinking about 2028 right now

you and I don't have to, but if TPTB in the Democratic party leadership are not doing the party building to prep for '28, we're in trouble. Maybe my biggest knock on Obama was exactly that once he had his win, he didn't put much effort into making sure he left the DNC stronger than where he found it.

4 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

At least when blue dresses and terrorist attacks were involved anyway.

It's not the historical norm. The stakes are higher because of Trump, but I stand by what I said. The base case for incumbent parties in our ****ed up system of government is to eat it during the Midterms. Just holding the Senate alone under those circumstances made it a win IMO

that's why you have to win big enough in the quadrennials to be able to take the 'inevitable' mid-term attrition. 😉

3 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Not engaging in anti-incumbent messaging against a wildly unpopular President would be malpractice 

not what I'm saying - of course you make it about Trump if people are moving away from Trump and that's going to work for you. That's what I mean about '28 - after anti-trump do you have a story to tell Iowa, Tx, Fla, even Maine - states that should be flippable but that have failed to flip over several cycles, that can win without an unpopular incumbent there to run against?