PseudoSABR
-
Posts
6,120 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
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 PseudoSABR
-
Clearly he was joking. And it was an easy one at that; it probably should have been left for someone not running for President to say.
-
Naturalize, you coward.
-
That seems doubtful at this point, doesn't it?
-
Whelp, Season Two will be a direct sequel.
-
Fangraphs (and other national publications) on the Twins
PseudoSABR replied to Mike Sixel's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Not many Twins prospects have been noted for their deception so much as their ground ball tendencies and 'control' the strike zone. His stuff still might not play up, but he's not in the Radke/Slowey/Gibson mold exactly. -
Bernie's quite the advocate. Interesting path to the endorsement of Clinton and right back to the progressive platform. He's not wrong though. (Ah, I think what if. I just really like the guy. He should have been on the national scene years ago.)
-
I agree. There are those who cannot stand Trump and tolerate Hillary that would vote for Johnson, and then, there are those who cannot stand Hillary and tolerate Trump that would vote for Johnson.
-
Oh, Russia, you have not mattered in a US election since Palin could see you.
-
Great article on the 7 biggest problems with science; I think many (if not all) of these problems are punctuated by the climate change "debate."
-
If they set Stranger Things Season Two, a decade later, say 1993; they might be able to mine a similar retro feel; though the early 1990s don't feel, as of yet, a time-period rife for re-exploration...
-
I thought it was them staying true to the genre; I certainly hope they won't try to milk the upside-down world any more than they already have. There next project probably needs to be something totally different, or it might fall in the True Detective Season 2 trap.
-
Really enjoyed it, for all the reasons listed above. I have to say that last scene, was such an 80s thing to do to set up an unnecessary sequal, not that I think there will be one. Have the Duffer brothers done anything else before this?
-
I can only speak from personal experience, but it was Bernie's unabashed advocacy of what I consider common, long-held liberal values. It was the first time I really ever witnessed a politician not try to hide his liberalism. Liberal was a dirty word for decades. Socialism was akin to treason. For my part, it wasn't just one issue.
-
Don't disagree. But the notion that Democratic socialism and Bernie Sanders would get any play at all, was out-of-hand dismissed a year ago. Let's not pretend that progressive wing the Democratic Party didn't show some heft; the group you identified is composed of a lot of college-educated whites who settled for moderate democratic policy for decades, but chose not to this time--that's significant. No one was betting Sanders would garner 45% of the primary vote and finally bow out in June/July...
-
And it's Kaine. Bleh.
-
Trump will have to appear competent if people are going to be swayed that he'll keep us safe. Trump really hasn't set out any kind of vision for addressing terrorism abroad. An immigration policy is not a foreign policy. I just don't know how he sways people he hasn't already convinced. The more one learns about Trump the worse it is for him. Beyond a domestic terrorist attack by a Mexican-Islamic border-jumper or video of Clinton kicking a dog; I just don't see how Trump makes up any more ground. Today, the day after the convention and just weeks after the end of the email scandal, should have always been his high water mark. It will be interesting to see what the polls look like Monday...
-
A bit unrelated to the current discussion, but I thought this twitter screed shaming white liberals that Trump can win made a lot of good points.
-
Next up: Clinton VP. I'll be disappointed with a pick of Kaine or Tom Vilsack if what's being reported is true. (Smerf what do you think of Vilsack? Does he have national appeal?) For lefties on Vilsack's regime at USDA (a mixed bag). The other supposed final contender is Labor Secretary Tom Perez. I think it's a mistake to lurch to the center, and assume she has the progressive wing in the bag.
-
Lot's of people I respect feel this way, and I do get shades of such a feeling now again. Although I agree with Dave, that Hillary will dominate the debates, I think exposure will be Trumps total and final unraveling. Looking back, Romney was a heck of a candidate; he was smart, reasonable, a track record of competence and moderation, and the turn to the general election exposed his elitism, his out-of-touchness. We all remember the 47% percent, but there was more than that--the elevator in the house, the dog on the roof of the car for a family trip, those gray streaks and the shape of his hair--that exposed his elitism. Trump, is not only a phony and a bluster-bus, he's an elite. I don't think America really gets that yet. They'll get the chance, but as I said, there might be a class of Americans I choose to ignore, because I'm too ashamed of them. But I know many, many conservatives, that are disgusted by Trump, and will not vote for him. These are people that voted for Romney. Such a group would have to make up that deficit, as well as overcome the gap Obama won by (which was nearly four percent),
-
Hey that's good. (I didn't get to watch much today and tuned in and out the Donald's speech, full disclosure.). I just walked a clip of a portion of what I missed; he actually shamed Republicans a bit, which, to be fair, deserves credit. I guess if you feed the base enough nationalism and shift the othering tendency to immigrants and terrorists, the base may tolerate inclusive rhetoric, but is the religious right happy with this speech, this convention, are they motivated to show up in droves? I just don't think Trump can have it both ways. He can't both be reasonable and fire up all those who actually compose his base....
-
I do give him credit for eschewing Republican dogma. But I just find him so utterly phony that his points of empathy seem transparently tokenistic and opportunistic. That said, I expected a 'good' speech, meaning one not totally objectionable, palatable, and, even, aspirational. I just don't think he can keep it up. Edited Correction: My facebook stats: 5 likes for Trump, 25 likes for Clinton, and 6 likes for Gary Johnson. (Bernie at 55). Obviously, we've grown up in different circles, passed through different kinds of careers. I just don't see how Trump appeals to people he's not already appealing too. I don't think he's going to flip people going for Gary, though Clinton could if she does something objectionable. This should be the low point in the campaign for Clinton, the convention, and the lingering news of the careless label from the email server scandal. My one fear is that there's been a non-voting white population who will register and vote for Trump in large numbers, that we've been discounting.
-
I never expected him to come unhinged in this speech, too much at stake and plenty of time to prepare. He's really not saying much of anything, lots of bluster and nationalism. I think the standard has become so low for the guy, that when's not full-bore crazy we mistake it for reason. He made a brief turn towards reason in one of the final debates, only to fall back into unenforced errors and hate. I mean he did promise to protect NATO allies only on a conditional basis just today.
-
Gleeman & The Geek, Ep 265: Replacing Terry Ryan
PseudoSABR replied to John Bonnes's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
Is being embarrassed for a poster/administrator/content-provider the new formulation of an (unwarranted) personal attack that floats under the TOS? I don't mean to run-around the mods. But that's the second time that formulation emerged. We can disagree without....this. -
My feeble fan-mind can't yet grasp Kepler's talent. He still doesn't look confident to me, yet look at his production so far, and that effortless swing...
-
I clicked...incognito.
