stringer bell
-
Posts
21,647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
96
Content Type
Profiles
Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis
Minnesota Twins Videos
2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings
2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Minnesota Twins Players Project
2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by stringer bell
-
Haven't you heard "Chuck Grassley works"? It doesn't matter that he hasn't seen fit to hold hearings for Garland. He is a shoo-in despite the historic obstruction.
-
Checked 538 a few minutes ago and saw that Hill seems to be moving up in the odds from 63-64% to now 68-69%. It seems that Trump has used all his ammo and that the country is going to go with her. However, I am disappointed to see that the same 538 is giving the Democrats less than 50-50 odds to take over the Senate. I have been of the opinion that the Supreme Court obstruction in and of itself should be enough to punish the Senate GOP, but at least according to Silver, it looks like they are going to get away with it.
-
Leidner has not been good, but part of the problem is the talent around him. Receivers that can't get open and drop too many balls when they do combined with an O-line that is much better run blocking than pass protecting contribute to the problem.
-
Checking 538 every day. Clinton's win percentage has sunk from near 90 to about 65. Talk of a landslide and Democratic Congress has abated. It does look to me like Clinton has bottomed out (or Trump has peaked) and she still holds a discernible lead. I wonder if there will be another bombshell dropped today or this weekend.
-
Back to the divide. I also believe the gap between liberal and conservative needs to be bridged and that would mean between Democratic and Republican as well. I don't think there is equivalency between compromise proposed by liberals (Democrats) and conservatives (Republicans) and until there is, we are stuck in this partisan muck. There should be some agreement on what is wrong and some measures should be passed to deal with what is wrong. However, one party has spent the last eight years opposing everything that the administration has proposed. The Republican party is moving away from even attempting to govern. It is my opinion that those in the legislative branch are satisfied with gumming up the works and then saying government is broken. For the record, Democrats aren't blameless and their leadership in the Senate (Reid and Shumer) are two of the most partisan. I can name two Republicans to every Democrat that have no intention of governing, though. These characters keep getting elected! Further, redistricting has made so many bad Congressmen bulletproof, they can feel free to screw up the country, knowing that with a few platitudes they will be re-elected in two years. Yes, I'm sick of it too.
-
From what I've read, the story is that Democrats are moving left, but at a far slower rate than Republicans are moving right. Not the perfect segue, but IMHO the ACA could be salvaged, but Republicans will have none of it. It's not quite "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" but there is no compromise that Republicans will accept when it comes to the law. In general Republicans have accepted zero compromises unless faced with government shutdown. I do wonder if Clinton is elected if she can garner some compromise to improve the ACA. I am growing increasingly pessimistic that I will find out.
-
I somehow want to blame the media. In some respects I do. Does no one see that Donald Trump is not qualified to be the leader of the most powerful nation in the world? However, the stories are there--Trump shafted or stiffed people, may have engaged in illegality, made unwanted sexual advances and still some think he is better than Hillary. Clinton has the most newspaper endorsements in modern history. I guess people just read or watch what they want online.
-
I liked your post, but to be serious, I just don't know what to think. Smart people are voting for Donald Trump, not just dumb ones, and I can see no reason for that except that they may despise Hillary Clinton. I don't despise Clinton, but she is certainly an imperfect vessel for the progressive message and perhaps any message. I really fear a trifecta of House and Senate control and Donald Trump in the White House, with Pence perhaps having a major role in all things not yuge enough for the Donald to care about. Certainly, the obstruction of the Supreme Court seat should be reason to punish the Republican right now, but apparently it isn't an issue anywhere. Regarding the ACA, which is what it will be called when Obama is out of office (I think), my thought when it was passed was that it was too complicated to be a major success, but that parts of the law (no exclusions, more people covered) would help enough people to keep the law in force. Apparently not. Is there really an alternative, or are we just going to repeal the law and have the same swamp to navigate afterwards?
-
Is anyone else getting a little bit nervous that the orange one might be our next president? I am checking on Canadian citizenship and early retirement. Not really, but....I do think the email news on Hillary has stopped her momentum and again made her the issue instead of Trump. Goodness what a pair to pick from.
-
This "rigged" election stuff drives me to distraction. There are so many layers to refute. Has the media favored Clinton? That's really a tough question. I know that many editorials have favored Clinton, but that is editorials. No person has ever gotten more free publicity than the Donald. As far as fixing the election, every election official should be incensed by that implication. I do expect voter fraud stories to arise and mostly be shot down. IMHO, the biggest voting issue is the blatant suppression brought on by the GOP.
-
I check 538 every day during election season. While their formulas are conservative about Hillary's presidential prospects, I have watched with interest 538's projection for the US Senate. Until about a week ago, it seemed like control was up for grabs, but their models seem very optimistic for the Democrats in the last few days. The current projection is flips in NC, MO, IN, NH, PA, WI, IL, and a hold in Nevada. That would be a wipeout for the GOP.
-
This idea of small towns dying isn't new at all. In the 70s, I wrote a paper about the decline of population is SW Minnesota. I went to college in Marshall and visiting a lot of little burgs all around. Education, transportation and lack of good jobs was the problem then and remains so today.
-
I'm voting for Clinton understanding her weaknesses and that chances of her accomplishing much are limited. Obama had nice majorities upon his election, but failed to get much done. It is doubtful that Hill will have much more than a slim majority in the Senate and a minority in the House. Clinton may actually be better than Obama as far as working across party lines, but witnessing what Republicans achieved by stonewalling Obama, I doubt they will be willing to make many compromises. Further, I think Clinton is quite likely to be a one-term president, either for health reasons or because having a Democrat in the White House will be out of fashion after three consecutive terms and five of the last seven. If Clinton fails in the eyes of the public, I really fear for our country unless the GOP realizes that in this (2016) election, their problem is both the message and the messenger. I can see a Ted Cruz or his type winning in 2020 as the general population tires of the status quo.
-
While I agree with you, Smerf, it doesn't seem to be the last gasp for the Republican Party. They hold too many seats in too many legislative bodies to be considered endangered. Amongst older white people like me, the conservative set of values that most of the Republican presidential candidates espoused is alive and well. That demographic will continue to diminish, but there is a lot of money and power to sustain Republicans in public office.
-
Word for word Chief. I agree with every syllable.
-
Well, Fox News was trying to make the leaked excerpts of Hillary's speeches to Wall Street types the equivalent of Trump's taped lecherism (probably not a word). Well, there has never been a serious candidate for president that is the equivalent of Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton is not my ideal candidate, but she is light years more qualified than the joker the Republicans nominated. I hope the voters punish the entire Republican party for nominating and supporting this man. Wow, just wow.
-
VP debates seldom move the needle. Bentsen/Quayle should have given people pause about Poppy's judgment, but it didn't. I will say that McCain's choice of Palin clinched Obama's win, but I don't think that VP debate was the be-all and end-all.
-
Back to the horse race: Clinton has opened up probably a five-point lead over Trump according to the pundits and pollsters, pretty much the margin that Obama had versus Romney in 2012. The map is pretty similar with the swing states changing order a bit. Iowa is Trump's best bet to win where Obama won four years ago, while Clinton has a solid chance to carry North Carolina. I wonder if Mitt Romney is thinking that if he waited four years, he could have been king of the world (president). I'm pretty confident that Mittens would beat Hillary comfortably. Not as confident that he could get the GOP nomination.
-
Going back to an earlier discussion, RCP has a "no-tossup" map in which Clinton leads 296-242. The include Florida and New Hampshire for HRC, while Trump is allotted Colorado, North Carolina, Ohio, Nevada, and Iowa. I think that distribution probably was pretty accurate when the debate occurred. The way I see the race is that Clinton has about 263 EVs secure barring a scandal or October surprise. That would mean Trump basically has to win all the tossups with perhaps a loss of one small state (NH, IA, or NV). One of Colorado, Florida, Ohio or North Carolina plus the 263 electoral votes would be enough for Clinton. Five days after the first debate, I believe Clinton leads in all of the larger swing states, and probably every one listed here but Iowa. It isn't locked up because both major candidates are so poorly regarded. I'd much rather be in Clinton's position than Trump's, but the next five-plus weeks will be fun to watch.
-
Quite a few Republican defections, including a number of newspapers. I read somewhere that former Senator John Warner was going to endorse Clinton. Have there been any notable Democratic defections?
-
There are many segments of the population that won't be effected by the debate. Those that want to "send Washington a message" will still vote for Trump. A lot of people that would never vote for Clinton aren't in play either. Finally "the deplorables" are still in the Trump camp. Trump gets a boost also for being on the same stage and not coming off as a total idiot. Anyone who wondered who was more qualified, or if Hillary was really not well should be more prone to vote for Mrs. Clinton. A week ago I was confident that America was smarter than the Brits. I am not so sure right now.
-
I haven't voted for many Republicans in my life, but Hill is such a lousy candidate that if any Republican with a shred of decency had run, I would have strongly considered them. However, Trump must not be elected. I will vote for Clinton despite her flaws. I do believe she would be a better president than presidential candidate and it is time for a woman to take over the Oval Office.
-
Game Thread: Twins vs. Tigers, 9/21/16 @ 7:10pm CST
stringer bell replied to twinssporto's topic in Archived Game Threads
I see the Twins have Pat Dean pitching batting practice in the afternoon game. -
I haven't often wished for a guy to retire. I did for Torii and I am glad he did. At least we've seen Kepler for more than half the season. I now wish that Mauer exits, for the good of his team and what is left of his legacy. The longer he goes on as James Loney, the less we will remember what a great player he was in the Metrodome years. Vargas' season has been interesting, to say the least. He's been very good for the Twins, not so much for the Red Wings. He seems to have made the adjustments necessary to succeed as a major league DH. I said in another thread that IMHO he has put himself in front of Park if that is the competition to be the alternate 1B and primary DH. On another topic raised here, I'll give the organization some slack in their handling of Arcia. From what I've seen, he can't handle high heat or lay off breaking stuff. IMHO, that is one too many holes to cover and it means that for all of his hard work last offseason, Oswaldo Arcia will never amount to a substantial baseball player, despite early success and a really good minor league pedigree.
-
Early Returns: Polanco's Play At Shortstop
stringer bell replied to Seth Stohs's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
Doesn't it really depend on the metric? I know other have cited stats that say Dozier's range is poor. While I don't consider him a gold-glover, I see him as average or at least in the middle range. As for Polanco, I don't think any one factor of his defense at short is excellent, but on the other hand I don't see any factors that are irredeemably bad.
