mtutiger

Yet another pitcher the Tigers will make look like Tom Seaver lol

He looked relieved lol

Dusty fielding the B team today lineup wise...

I swear, whether its the wildlife or the flora and fauna, everything in Texas wants to kill you 🤣

This is so spot on... And even on the latter point, does signing Correa instead of Baez or, say, Gausman instead of ERod make *that* much of a difference record wise to this team, with the way they have played so far? I doubt it.

And it's Texas... with all the tree pollen and ragweed this state has floating around in the air, it has to be one of the worse for allergies

My own theory is that Hispanics, despite the oft-frequent debate about the degree to which they are culturally more conservative than the average white D, are a lot less black and white on these cultural hot button issues than white voters more generally. Put another way, it's possible that Hispanics are more open to something like a 16 week ban than the average D, while still being opposed to all-out bans on the practice compared to the average R.

From the latest UT poll released this week. Net negative, looks like

The problem is that state parties like the Texas GOP often beget the direction that the national party pursues. I dont see this situation being different

Is this true though? Polls of Texas continually show that a majority of Texans support a right to choose in at least some cases, while the Texas GOP legislates otherwise. The only thing it tells me is that there are far more single-issue pro-life voters than pro-choice voters.

I dont get the dismissiveness that nothing more will happen. But again, I see hardcore anti-choice pols in action everytime I flip on the morning news where I live, so nothing would surprise me at this point

On the question of Avila... the org made a bunch of hires on the developmental side, particular on growing the use if analytics in player development. (Ryan Garko, Gabe Rivas, Stephanos Stroop, etc.), and got a rid of Dave Littlefield and others as well. From a practical standpoint, if you sack Al Avila, wouldn't the likeliest outcome be that you risk losing these guys you just hired and replacing them as well? It's not even that I'm saying that Al has done a good job or not but rather that the org has, while way too delayed, made a lot of personnel decisions and reorg already even with him still being here. The likeliest outcome, imo, is that he ends up in a President role and that someone else will end up GM sooner or later. If he was at risk of being fired, I'm not sure they would have made all the org moves they did beforehand.

That would be nice....They get 8 in a row with Oakland and Baltimore coming up, would be nice to come home with one. But alas, L

Maybe you are right, but at a minimum, there will 100% be a real push to do it... as stated before, if the base feels as strongly as they do on this issue, they aren't going to quietly sit back and allow states like Illinois or NY to exercise their ability to have laws allowing for it. I dont buy it. But even the 6-8 year question for Texas, it really isn't interesting at all... we have a trigger law that is gonna be exercised if Roe is overturned, and there's little reason to believe it goes away anytime soon.

ok

Only three guys in the pen with 9+ K/9 and less than 4+ BB/9? Lange, Chafin and Vest. One hopes at some point Fulmer can join this crowd, or maybe Joe if he can stop walking the leadoff man, but yeah, not great.

6-8 years from now, we are likely to have national legislation that bans abortions.

Failed in the sense that they thought they could control it.... which they cannot.

In general, maybe it's just because it is so fresh, but there just hasn't been a lot of demand from the pro-life side of the aisle for practical policy answers that need to be known in a world without Roe v. Wade. Starting to see that now with Jake Tapper's interview of the MS Governor, but it is totally fair to ask questions of pro-life pols and voters about whether there should be exceptions, whether contraception could be impacted, or whether women should be jailed for their decisions. Or discussions of the social safety net and the inherent contradiction that arises from continually advocating cuts. Of course, straight answers are likely not forthcoming, but the questions are totally fair.

Begs the question: if incest is such a small percentage, why not carve out an exception? Just idiotic

Well, he said he's not focusing on it at this time, therefore it isn't gonna happen. Also, I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.

A better question may be that, if one feels as strongly on an issue as the most pro-life people feel about abortion (to the point of making no exceptions for rape or incest or, in a few cases, health of mother), why would they allow abortions to happen in states like Illinois or New York or California? The only logical answer is that they will not stop pressuring the national party until they ban it everywhere.

The amount of deference to the percieved political aims of the GOP establishment on how they approach a post-Roe world, given how the past few years have gone, seems misguided to say the least. Particularly when one lives in a red state and has seen the legislation that has been pushed and enacted on this issue, it seems naive to trust the better judgment of national Republicans. Not to mention, just a few years ago, Roe being overturned seemed far fetched, now it is reality... why should anyone trust McConnell here?

This is the same Republican Party who thought they could ride the tiger with Donald Trump and failed miserably. Consider me skeptical

They would only have a small % chance at the top draft pick, so they should win as many games as possible. Not to mention that for all the overblown talk of AJ bolting, tanking with this roster would be the kinda thing that would have any manager thinking about the door