PseudoSABR

In my mind it's pretty obvious what you do to turn out voters, own liberal values and adopt socialist values where they make sense. I know this doesn't appeal to you as a moderate, but moderates are typically pretty engaged enough to weigh differing concerns/values, so I think they tend to turn out. But young people, the disenfranchised, Latinos, etc. don't regularly turn out; esp. if the process to vote is arduous and prohibitive. I think Gillum (FL Gov candidate) is a good indicator of what I'm talking about. He was polling fourth among Democrats prior to the primaries, and the recent CNN poll shows him with a 12 point lead; though in fairness two local polls have the race much closer. I'm looking forward to 538s governor's forecast on how they see this race.

You want me to boil my own water? What are we, heathens?

Even though the Democrats are still out raising Republicans. Conservative PACs, etc., probably have significantly more resources than the candidates themselves, much less than liberal PACs. In Arizona, there's non-stop negative ads from a group called Defend AZ, who I recall reading have outspent both candidates. But the commercials are so extreme, trying to make Sinema look like she supports child pedophiles etc., that I don't know they'll have any traction with the middle, but they could rile up the base. Here's a website with spending for Arizona, I'm sure you can look at the other states from there as well. (Defend Arizona has spent 17 mil; Rep. Sen. Com. 6 mil; the Dem Com 4 mil)

I've read the early voting numbers are demonstrate a huge turnout, as well.

Keep forgetting you live there. Jesus.

The loyalty Republican voters have for their own is amazing. Well, I suppose they could support King because they are genuinely racist.

Beto already is a pretty far left guy; I don't see why that would have any more traction than his other overtly progressive stances.

I didn't really have any kind of a feel for Sinema, but after the debate, I came away pretty impressed with her composure, especially vis-a-vis with McSally who seem exasperated many times. Like you, I really hope there is a strong ground game on election day, and before then to get people to vote early. Beto winning Cruz' seat feels a bit out of reach. But his popularity, even if he doesn't win, will help other Democrats down ballot in Texas.

G League to offer alternative to one in done. I wonder how this is going to work.

Wolves put out a better effort than I had any right to imagine, though they lost.

Some scholarships need to be renewed each year/semester. I had a student "lose" his scholarship when he tore his ACL at Western Michigan. Though it was before Fleck was there. But that's an anecdotal experience.

Trump: "I have a natural instinct for science"

100 percent!

Interestingly, you posted the Democrat painting (which I hadn't seen), it's the Republican one you were referring to, right?

Thanks for being so thoughtful; but first, I have to say there's a false equivalency (that may well prove true over time, but certainly not now) in terms of dealing blame for the strife. Antifa? Give me a break. That's not actually a movement that has support among the left. Sure we are all anti-fascist, but there are no political candidates supporting that movement. Unlike, the right, which tacitly and openly seems to support some awful white supremacist, among other right wing awfulness. There is a divide, and it has grown through tribalism, and really, the clever and effective right wing propaganda machine. The left just isn't as "sophisticated" or as motivated (no profit in it) to make such propaganda, though, of course they do, just not in the mobilized, in-sync effort of the right. Dividing up the country is completely insane. And would dissolve in to war over resources inevitably. Let's not play that out (i.e. the West running out of water/the South running out of minable of resources). We are at a unique point in history where the populace has access to more information then they have been educated to deal with. This is a failing of our society as it was anticipated. But lest not forget that the right is always the enemy of critical thinking and it is that *inevitability* that will provide our solace. (In other words a bunch of dumb people have access to the internet (information) when they didn't before). Each subsequent generation will learn to be cynical of social media news, and professional media, to the point that they will reject it and hopefully learn for themselves (which I think is an inevitability). And in our time people are prone to the narrative that they are victims and their fellow Americans are the perpetrators (minorities/liberals); but that narrative will lose steam, as the tax cuts don't make really help out most people, and really, there aren't and new jobs. What growth there is in the GDP reflects the wealthy gaining more and more, not wages which actually impact real people who vote. I mean it's a bit cool to imagine the country dividing that the coasts would form their own countries with the midwest and the south another one or several. It's neat to think about. But unlike the USSR the states (save Texas and a few others) have had no independence prior to the formation of the USA; there is no cultural ethnicity with each state could rally its independence. There may come a time that we must take arms to defend what we believe is right, but I believe that will be a world-wide phenomenon. Maybe a necessary one, given the uber-wealthy's unwillingness to cede any power at all. For my part, we've been living in a "let them have cake" scenario and been okay with it, as along as we get ours (as Americans), even at the expense of the people of the world generally.

This is really well-written and clever. Please, quit it; we have standards around here.

I finally understand Trumps long-game with Kavanaugh: drunken civil war general 2.0.

Wha?

One can never have enough pitching. I don't advocate trading any of the young starters unless it nets an upgrade in the rotation.

While his lack of impartiality at the hearing is not the essence of his qualifications to sit on SCOTUS; it's disqualifying nonetheless. Again, the standard for judicial ethics is the appearance of impropriety not impropriety itself. It was Kavanaugh's own testimony and demeanor that caused the ABA to weigh in and Republican-appointed, Retired Justice Stevens to withdraw his support. It's simply not a blip that can be swept under the but-his-whole-career rug. I imagine that Kavanaugh will pick a token case with which to align with the liberal wing of SCOTUS to shrug off these attacks; but any litigant that has any ties to Democrats/Clintons etc. will be asking Kavanaugh to recuse, and be left wondering whether they will get a fair shake if he does not recuse, which does effect our (albeit fictional) belief that SCOTUS is a non-political branch of government. If nothing else, Kavanaugh's politicking probably opens the door for a Democrat to somewhat viably run on packing SCOTUS, where previously such a move would have been laughed off the stage.

Although, Post used the phrase "male entitlement" as part of his critique of Kavanaugh, that is hardly the essence of Post's critique. Rather Post takes issue with Kavanaugh's partisan conspiracy theory rage as it casts a shadow on his future impartiality. Which is totally a fair criticism, one that any fair person should worry about with equal force. Kavanaugh's male sense of entitlement also totally sucks, and should be disqualifying as well, but that's not what this article/critique was about.

wtf

The right's base is always galvanized. I don't think Kavanaugh motivated anyone who wasn't already motivated on the right. I do think it galvanized lots of women, in the middle and on the left though.