gehringer_2

in earlier times, the idea of a public person, or even a party elected official doing a 180 deg reversal in their politics and bolting to the other side, wasn't a totally out of bounds idea. For instance, there were Reps/Sens that changed parties over Vietnam and Watergate, but politics has become so much a matter or culture and identity - a situation which has been mined especially deeply by the right, that I think we may now see people throw up their hands and quit, but the incidence of people changing sides is going to be really, really rare. And the flip side of that is that today the other side is never going to welcome you or trust you or forgive who you were if you did consider crossing over.

somewhere upthread I think I posted the number reported by the URecord for the amount the Regents approved to transfer from the general fund to the AD and IIRC it was $16M or $20M - in that vicinity anyway. That may actually represent a bigger one year drop off. Prior to all this upheaval, the AD generally returned money - maybe $10M/yr, to the general fund, but I couldn't tell you if that has still been true recently.

That loss total may also include the fine they paid. $20M IIRC.

I heard Izzo has the #1 ranked recruiting class coming in next season. Of course whether that will hold till next season or even for another 2 wks is an open question.

Just for a little more economic context, when it was signed in '23, USA Today reported that the total B1G TV deal was worth "over" $1B. That sounds like a lot, but that's $55M per school and the House settlement alone commits schools to $20M in direct payments before they even turn the lights on in the gyms. That deal runs through 2030. So any bigger pot of gold is at least another 5 yrs away. For UM the annual gate is probably close to $100M, but they share something like half of that for conference games. And actually maybe less than that is shared because I imagine 'seat licenses' don't count as gate revenue for the purposes of the gate share. In any case, that's the irony. If Petiti were to succeed in driving UM out of the conference, not sharing the Big House gates plus an independent TV deal could leave UM better off financially. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2022/08/18/big-ten-media-rights-deal-nbc-fox-cbs/10356358002/

a temporary blow for sanity I guess.

the NBA is messed up. The team the Pistons have put on the floor the last few nights should not be undefeated. Sure it's fun as a fan, but you can't take what we are seeing seriously.

Good point. If you are going past 1 sig fig you ought to also add the C.I. 🤔

to be accurate, this is not Voter fraud (fraud by a voter), it's Election fraud (an attempt by Candidates or other people in the system to rig an election). They are two different things. There is even a thread here somewhere about the difference. You can certainly try to put individual voters up to voter fraud as part of an election fraud scheme, but that part still wouldn't be an effective strategy. Voter ID isn't an election fraud remedy either. I don't think anyone here has ever said they don't worry about election fraud - esp with the current crop of GOP crazies.

she got a point there. This is like the "the Emperor has no Clothes" moment in the story where no-one wants to admit the obvious truth that public universities have absolutely no business running professional sports teams. If they are going to turn collegiate sports into profit making ventures - which given the interest of private equity seems a pretty incontrovertible fact, then they damn well ought to pay taxes

It's a fairly apt metaphor, but the difference is that your house being broken into isn't a matter of Constitutional rights (granted that's cold comfort if it happens to you, but it is what it is 😉 ), so Constitutional practice demands that there be a actual showing of need before *any* burden is imposed, and for my money the SCOTUS has just been plain been wrong on this issue in letting any state require it - and certainly in any absence of a positive mandate that the state undertake provision of ID to everyone. But in the grand scheme of things to me it's not the hill to die on that something like Gerrymandering or CU are (and that CU should be to more people.)

Because showing ID has little to do with it. Your precinct has a voter role. You sign your voter application - they match you to an entry from the voter registration role, you vote. If someone else tries to show up using your name - it's immedately obvious something was wrong, if you show up and someone has tried to use your name already - just as obvious. No official ID required for the system to check itself. You don't get to vote by proving who you are on Election Day, you get to vote because you are registered. There is little need for any system of proof beyond the person's attestation because impersonating other people is just not an effective form of voter fraud. What few cases of voter fraud there are come mostly from people registering where or when they are not legal voters. ID at the poll gets you nowhere against that if the person is already on the rolls but shouldn't be.

FEMA under Trump is its own biggest disaster.

Already bored with the new wife?

It's a funny thing though, it certainly is true that good fielders are a dime a dozen compared to good hitters, but just because that is true, we (well at least 'I'..😉) tend to think they should be more common than they are -- so I'm always a bit surprised when a minor leaguer with a weak bat or a utility guy gets called up and their glove is only mediocre at best. If you don't have a big bat and can't field how do you even get to AAA? 🤷‍♂️

you've probably figured over the years that I'm not too much a doomsayer - but I have to agree this is getting really nuts.

no arg on that.

I'd only been commuting to Toledo for a short time when the shipping traffic stopped and the bridge was pretty much always down - so watched the new bridge go up behind schedule, overbudget, and with a major construction collapse disaster with few worker deaths added in, I remember they built a cement/fab plant a bit to the east of the bridge site where they cast the sections. I don't remember what I use to have to go over there for, but if you got stuck behind one of the ~30 axle flatbeds they used for moving the sections to the river you might as well have your lunch.

exactly - but do we see any movement in that direction? RIght now it still looks like the plan most places is to try the climb out of the whole on the heap of all the other corpses......

the round settee looks like an '70 Cray supercomputer with the center hardware tower taken out. -

I like that. For me it just goes back the idea that I find it nonsensical for an above average defender at any position to be considered as having cost his team runs/wins. That part is only a matter of the semantics of what the unit is called. If you are going to call it Wins above replacement, than no above average D player at any position should be rated as costing his team wins, because they didn't in any reasonable sense. He may not field like a SS, but his contribution was not negative. So if you call it something else that goes away. 😉

actually, I'll answer my own question. There is one case where the voter bringing in an ID, particularly a machine readable one like an MDL, is if you have a precinct with 5 guys named Joe Smith. That's a case were the particular ID, tied to some other unique identifier like an MDL# serves a legitimate use in administering the election and insuring the Joe Smith #3 doesn't get to polls only to be told he has already voted because a poll worker entered Joe Smith #2 as having voted at Joe Smith #3. Now it that enough justify the burden on every voter? Obviously SCOTUS has said yes because they haven't overturned the requirement anywhere. Personally, I'd say you can get the same result if ID is optional and you advise people with really common names that they are the best served if they bring ID if they have it, without burdening everyone. In MI ID is requested but you can get a provisional ballot if you don't have it. That's not a terrible compromise.

well, you tell me. Since most states get by perfectly well without it and voter fraud is virtually non-existent in any state, who put it in place and why? Just a bunch of petty bureaucrats who think dotted i's need be dotted better? If so they need to get over themselves. If not that, any alternative explanation says something less attractive....

'Permanently' until the end of the season? /..sigh../ There are many adverbs that might describe "till the end of the season". One thing that is permanent is that permanently isn't one of them! 🙄

your point is valid that in the abstract, everyone needs to learn to be a responsible citizen regardless of their economic or racial circumstances. The question is whether constructing hurdles to voting that have no other factually supportable purpose than to be hurdles is even a remotely good or effective way to this.