Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

PseudoSABR

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. PseudoSABR
    This thread just goes back to the prospect paradox: the team deserves criticism either because: 1) the team is unwilling to promote prospects b/c it is risk adverse and allows useful talent to waste away in the minor leagues, or 2) the team too readily promotes prospects and puts them in the position to fail. We have these same arguments about every prospect when they initially struggle, yet too many fans--rather than accepting that even the best-developed prospects still fail when first exposed--will impugn the intentions and the integrity of the front office. It's a rather insufferable attitude.
  2. PseudoSABR
    I don't know what other point you could be making other than to suggest that Molitor (secretly or strategically) wants Meyer to fail in order to get him in the bullpen and free a spot up for Santana/Gibson. I think that's pretty unreasonable to suggest.
  3. PseudoSABR
    Glad they didn't stretch it out. A few deaths and some renewed beginnings, a good episode.
  4. PseudoSABR
    And I always laugh when climate-change-deniers suggest there's an overwhelming vested interest in promoting a global warming myth. If we want to trace the dollars, there's far more money and interest to deny global warming than to promote it. If we should reject one side of the debate because of their own vested interest in the outcome, it's the climate-change-deniers...like duh. That said, alternatives like ethanol and battery power are clearly problematic as it takes energy to make such alternatives, but solar and wind, and well, using less energy are alternatives which don't suffer from the lie-to-make-money scheme.
  5. PseudoSABR
    Cows toot methane, lots of it.
  6. PseudoSABR
    This is my (dated) two-cents. Hope it helps. If you want music that has the human pang of Nirvana but without the in-your-face angst. I'd look at a collection of singer song-writers that for whatever reason some people label Indy Rock or Country Folk. For one Damien Jurado is deep, and rad, and evidently a practicing Christian, but his music is just human to me. In the same vein of subtle pain, angst, and beauty, listen to Cat Power, Feist, Bon Iver. All are excellent, and speak to the depth of humanity with more sadness than anger.
  7. PseudoSABR
    How long a rope does Nolasco get here? Edit: not much
  8. PseudoSABR
    Painfully, I had this thought too. I just hope it isn't sporadic scenes with extended absences from many episodes. I'd rather the (Snow)/Melisendre/Davos story get stretched out in terms of time and complexity, but that's probably wishful thinking.
  9. PseudoSABR
    I think the long wait between seasons always leads to what appears to be an unclimatic first episode; but each episode of GoT (esp. early in the season) delivers the plot in piecemeal. There was some (temporary) resolution with Sansa, and much of the lingering threads from last season are picked up and moved forward though in unrevealing ways. I'm looking forward to rest of the season, for sure.
  10. PseudoSABR
    If the topic-at-hand was caucuses and the anti-democratic abuses that happened within them, you're damn right I'd rail against them. The thing is you're not giving an inch. You're denigrating the people left out and you are the one making extreme arguments about Bernie trying to destroy the Democratic party. Get a grip? Seriously, don't throw rocks when you live in a glass house. This discussion has allowed you to take some ugly positions and say some ugly things - I'll stop participating as it's going no where.
  11. PseudoSABR
    So the people that get left out by the process, just too bad for them, huh? You keep saying that people aren't left out, but they are, and you assume that it's their own fault. There's a whole swath of our population (usually supporters of the Democratic party) who don't have stable residences, have informational barriers, and lack resources to enable them to abide by the registration requirements. Why do you think Democrats typically rail against Voting ID laws, etc.? It's just crazy to me that you're using the conservative/Republican argument to justify the imposition of voting barriers. This is exact kind arguments they make: it's not too hard to get a Voting ID, if they really care they can do it, ignorance of the rule is no excuse, they had enough time, they should have been paying attention sooner, blah, blah, bleh. (Next you'll bring up voter-fraud!) If same-day registration is a logistical mess; you fix it, you don't get rid of it. Democracy is more important than saving the party costs. I wish we'd nationalize the damn process, so these wouldn't be excuses.
  12. PseudoSABR
    If I had my druthers, we'd hold open primaries over a four month period in several week intervals, where the order of states would rotate on a election-cycle basis. Moreover, no party primaries, just one primary per state. And at the end of the primary season the two top candidates would enter a run-off for the Presidency regardless of party affiliation. No party conventions, no 'nomination' process. I'd love to see the five remaining candidates debate on one stage. And if the top two candidates are from one party, so be it. Allow more people to get involved in that choice, rather than just the party itself. (Given that the Democrats are the odds on favorite to win the presidency no matter the candidate, I'm sure the rest of America would like to weigh in on that choice.
  13. PseudoSABR
    Why make voting difficult at all? What should the voting process necessitate failing at it in order to learn how to do it correctly? Again, these are barriers designed to leave people out. There's no good reason for having party-affiliation switch 6 months ahead of the election. And its no justification for the policy to suggest that people should have known about the policy. The poor and the young (esp. college students) are often left on the margins by such rules as they have less stability in terms of residency and less familiarity with the process. This isn't welfare, this is voting a right independent of how hard some has worked or what someone knows. Voting isn't just for those who work hard and who know what they should, and it's anti-democratic to argue otherwise.
  14. PseudoSABR
    It does have meaning in the context of the conversation at hand. How else should we refer to party-elites/insiders? Perhaps as "people who really deserve to get elected because they abide by the rules they wrote themselves"? I get that railing against the 'establishment' on the campaign trail just creates a faceless boogie man, but when we talk about accessibility to choosing a nominee for president, there are certainly establishments that make such accessibility prohibitive.
  15. PseudoSABR
    Has Sanders even said anything negative about Clinton since New York? I read all the news sites and check multiple political blogs and there's no new stories about Bernie being derisive against Clinton. And really, beyond the 'unqualified' remark (which I do understand is a low-blow, that misrepresents what is real criticism, why couldn't he just have used more precise phrasing that her vote on the Iraq war and speaking fees were 'disqualifying'; she's clearly qualified for the job, though the some aspects of her past might eliminate her for consideration for some), has Bernie been overtly derisive? Again, Bernie called Clinton to congratulate her on her NY victory, something neither had been doing over the past month or so; and he stopped campaigning that night. That certainly doesn't look like he's trying to take down the party.
  16. PseudoSABR
    I'm not copping an attitude, at all. I'm suggesting that Sanders' sole reason for running is not to destroy the party. You're being incendiary, not me. We all get that you hate Sanders, but the conclusions you're drawing look like unfair conjecture to me. You're 'its not that complicated'/lazy, ignorant, entitled argument is exactly like the arguments made justifying literacy tests and other "easily overcame" barriers to voting. It's an insulting argument to make. And characterizes people who the NY process left out as somehow not worthy of voting. For my part, if open primaries or same-day registration works against Sanders, that's just fine, because I'm far more interested in a democratic process than my preferred horse winning the race undemocratically.
  17. PseudoSABR
    This is crazy to me. The premise of Sanders campaign is to win the Democratic nomination, not destroy the Democratic party. His outsider status can reflect frustration with the party without the implication that he wants burn it down; seriously that's crazy conjecture. You don't have any evidence of this save for some speculation and a few uncontextualized quotes from Sanders. (FTR, Sanders called and congratulated Clinton last night; and he also went home rather than continuing to campaign). We'll see soon enough, whether your theory is true. If Sanders drops out and campaigns for Clinton, will you be willing to scale this back? And all the arguments you've made are the same arguments that have rationalized keeping the disenfranchised from voting for generations. Really lazy, ignorant, entitled? What is this the Jim Crowe era? Maybe we should only allow those who really prove their party loyalty to vote? Or those who have had to walk uphill both ways to the voting poll? Give me a break. Again, if you think voting shouldn't be accommodating and accessible, you don't believe in democracy. It's the same elites should rule argument the establishment has made for generations. And I can't believe it's being made in this context. Disappointing really.
  18. PseudoSABR
    I don't think any one is crying foul (here at least, and on these points). It's not a knowledge gap; it's an establishment-bias. You can know the rules, and also know that they are prohibitive to candidates at the margins of the party (which seem to be actual liberals, unfortunately). And the party system needs to be destroyed, though that's hardly what Sanders is about. (I think you can make your point without framing Sanders as some diabolical monster.) If you can't acknowledge the real problems that primary poses to actual democracy, well, I'm just bewildered. I'll say it again, if you think party-loyalty should be a factor in determining the actual candidates for president, it doesn't sound like you believe in democracy to me.
  19. PseudoSABR
    I don't mean to speak for Smerf, but I think you're missing the point. It's not that Sanders doesn't know how this work. But given that the hit against Sanders early on was that he could never win the nomination, that may have affected early state contest and party registration. For instance, one would have to register as a Democrat six months ago in order to vote for Bernie in New York yesterday. Six months ago. And really mastering the party primary process should hardly be the basis of running or not. Some of our willingness to just accept establishment-bias is pretty surprising to me.
  20. PseudoSABR
    Well, when you're alleging it's the start 2016 that is more of the same (2nd half of 2016), I'd say the basis for that sameness is SSS.
  21. PseudoSABR
    SSS
  22. PseudoSABR
    That's my reading, as well. Who else could it be?
  23. PseudoSABR
    Excellent phrasing.
  24. PseudoSABR
    Well done, Brock.
  25. PseudoSABR
    Nice at bat, even though Park did look fooled an a couple swings. He can tag the ball when he makes contact.
×
×
  • Create New...