Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, October 02, 2012

OTP: October 2012-THE RACE: As Candidates Prep, Attention in DC split between politics and baseball

While President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney bone up in Nevada and Colorado for Wednesday’s opening debate, back in the nation’s capital attention is split between the hard-fought presidential race and baseball playoffs.

The Nationals won the first division baseball championship for a Washington team since 1933 by clinching the National League East race Monday night.

Washington, D.C., has the only ballpark where so many Cabinet members, politicians and other luminaries routinely gather and where fans now are openly rooting for a particular president — one who served more than a century ago, Theodore Roosevelt.

“Let Teddy Win” banners and buttons are everywhere. Fans like 2008 GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona say it’s time for Roosevelt’s 500-plus losing streak to end.

[...]

“Teddy, you are the victim of a vast left-wing conspiracy by the commie pinko libs in this town,” McCain said in a video played in the stadium Monday night. “But you can overcome that.”

The October 2012 “OT: Politics” thread starts ... now.

Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 02, 2012 at 02:14 PM | 6119 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nationals, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 57 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 > 
   5601. Guapo Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:46 AM (#4288067)
Nate Silver tweet:

CAN'T BELIEVE METOROLOGISTS USED MATH AND SCIENCE TO PREDICT THIS STORM. THEY MUST BE MAGIC WIZARDS.
   5602. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:54 AM (#4288069)
God, this country is filled with idiots.
   5603. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:54 AM (#4288085)
Isn't Nate really making fifty separate predictions for the presidential election? If he's correct on all but one state, that wouldn't necessarily invalidate his methodology.
Good point about its being 50 predictions rather than 1, but I don't think it's going to be tough (obviously) to get the vast majority of the states right, and be off by one or two percent on the states you miss. It'll take a closer look than this.

I think we'll want to look at the actual numbers on each state, which ought to reveal if there's a systemic flaw, either in Nate's methods or in the way polls are currently being done.
And a closer look than this, too.

Unless he's off in a consistent direction, and even then separating the wheat from the noise may not be easy, it's going to be very tough to know exactly what Silver is missing (should he miss).

That article is insane.
Deliriously so, but if I had to bet I'm not sure I'd give long odds. His nose does look different. Surely that particular author wouldn't stoop to retouching, or a little shadow just for "emphasis"?

   5604. Jim Wisinski Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:25 AM (#4288096)
Regarding poll numbers in Ohio being unusually favorable for Obama compared to the national polls I think we have to keep in mind a couple things that have been previously brought up in this thread. One, the economy in Ohio is doing better than the national average and with significantly lower unemployment. Since the economy is THE issue this election that could easily result in more Obama votes. The other is that so many jobs in Ohio depend on the auto industry and Obama implemented the auto bailout that helped keep the companies going while Romney wanted to let them go bankrupt. Frankly I think the bigger surprise would be if Obama *doesn't* do better than historical precedent would suggest compared to the national polls.
   5605. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:55 AM (#4288098)
@5604: it would be great if someone less lazy than I looked back through the times the Dem did better in Ohio than the nat'l polls suggested and checked how the economy in the state versus the nation was doing.
   5606. Jim Wisinski Posted: October 30, 2012 at 04:57 AM (#4288101)
The economy isn't always such a hugely dominant issue though so that wouldn't always be the case anyway. Of course, since Ohio is doing pretty well right now, maybe they'll tend to vote on other factors more than the rest of the country. So who the #### knows really
   5607. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: October 30, 2012 at 06:37 AM (#4288108)
Re: #5605--
I won't do that, but if if we can skip the polls and go strictly by results, Ohio has also given a larger percentage of its vote to a few Democrats than the entire country did: John Kerry, George McGovern, and (just barely) Hubert Humphrey. Also, Walter Mondale and Jimmy Carter (1976) were just a smidge under their national averages.

Oddly, BOTH Bush and Kerry had better percentages in Ohio in 2004 than they did overall-- not by much for either man, obviously. Must've been a bad day in the Buckeye State for third party candidates.
   5608. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: October 30, 2012 at 06:50 AM (#4288112)
The poll makes clear that there are really two races underway in Ohio. On one hand, the two candidates are locked in a dead heat among Ohioans who have not yet voted but who say they intend to, with 45% of respondents supporting the President and 45% preferring his Republican challenger.

But Obama has clearly received a boost from Ohio’s early voting period, which began on Oct. 2 and runs through November 5. Among respondents who say they have already voted, Obama holds a two-to-one lead over Romney, 60% to 30%.

When those two groups are combined, the TIME poll reveals, Obama leads by five points overall in Ohio.
Since this doesn't account for WHO is voting early, it's entirely unpersuasive. Why isn't it simply more Obama voters voting early? In a number of states there's a history of African-Americans voting early.
   5609. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 07:58 AM (#4288126)
Montana? Seriously Minnesota is a very nice (I'll spot you cold) state with a perfectly reasonable metropolis, economy, history and politics (sorry about Michelle Bachmann). Montana is a wind swept howling wasteland with a few cows on it. And there is no fricking way MN (That's Minnesota, btw) is going for Romney.

Regarding polls, yeah it was kind of interesting and I'll keep reading, but I for one would love a non horse race topic to talk about. I just have no idea what it might be, especially since political news right now is pretty much all horse race (with a side of FrankenStorm).

And Joe K I thought you were reasonable about the Ohio 2% thing, so at least one liberal noticed. You are still wrong about 98% of everything else though - :)
   5610. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 30, 2012 at 08:03 AM (#4288127)
It's going to be interesting to see how this latest scare ad of Romney's plays out in Ohio.

G.O.P. Turns Fire on Obama Pillar, the Auto Bailout

TOLEDO, Ohio — The ad from Mitt Romney showed up on televisions here early Saturday morning without the usual public announcement that both campaigns typically use to herald their latest commercials: Chrysler, a bailout recipient, is going to begin producing Jeeps in China, an announcer says, leaving the misleading impression that the move would come at the expense of jobs here....

In the past few days his running mate, Representative Paul D. Ryan, has accused Mr. Obama of allowing the bailout to bypass nonunion workers at Delphi, a big auto parts maker with operations in Ohio; Mr. Romney has characterized Mr. Obama’s bailout plan as based on his approach; and Mr. Romney incorrectly told a rally in Defiance, Ohio, late last week outright that Jeep was considering moving its production to China. (Jeep is discussing increasing production in China for sales within China; it is not moving jobs out of Ohio or the United States, or building cars in China for export to the United States.)

It is a high-risk strategy: Jeep’s corporate parent, Chrysler, had already released a scathing statement calling suggestions that Jeep was moving American jobs to China “fantasies” and “extravagant”; news media outlets here and nationally have called the Romney campaign’s statements — initially based on a poorly worded quotation from Chrysler in a news article that was misinterpreted by blogs — misleading.

Mr. Obama’s campaign, seeking to maintain what it sees as its advantage in Ohio, responded on Monday by releasing a commercial calling Mr. Romney’s ad false and reiterating that Mr. Romney had opposed the bailout on the terms supported by Mr. Obama. And on Sunday it dispatched the investment banker who helped develop the bailout, Steven Rattner, here to discuss Jeep’s plans and the auto rescue with local news organizations.

Democrats are hoping that Mr. Romney’s latest move will draw a backlash in a city so dependent on Jeep, which has announced plans to add 1,100 jobs to an assembly plant here that is currently being refitted for the next iteration of what is now called the Jeep Liberty.

Bruce Baumhower, the president of the United Auto Workers local that oversees the major Jeep plant here, said Mr. Romney’s initial comments on moving production to China drew a rash of calls from members concerned about their jobs. When he informed them Chrysler was, in fact, is expanding its Jeep operation here, he said in an interview, “The response has been, ‘That’s pretty pitiful.’ ” ...

At the third and last debate last week in Boca Raton, Fla., Mr. Romney emphasized his position that “these companies need to go through a managed bankruptcy, and in that process they can get government help and government guarantees.”

Mr. Romney has stepped up his offense on the issue since.

So it was that he told those at the exuberant rally on Thursday in Defiance, “I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by the Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China.”

Mr. Romney was apparently referring to a Bloomberg News article that said Jeep would return to manufacturing in China that had been misinterpreted by several conservative blogs to mean Jeep was shifting its production to China; the company made clear in a statement that Chrysler was only resuming production in China for Chinese consumers, which it had done for years before halting in 2009 before its sale to Fiat....
   5611. bunyon Posted: October 30, 2012 at 08:44 AM (#4288138)
Must've been a bad day in the Buckeye State for third party candidates.

Did they make it onto the Ohio ballot? Third parties have to petition in each state - huge hurdle to such a campaign - so it wouldn't surprise me if they simply failed and it was either/or at the top of the ballot in Ohio.
   5612. spycake Posted: October 30, 2012 at 09:31 AM (#4288153)
Don't know about any candidates failing to make the ballot, but everybody knew that Ohio was going to be the swingingest of swing states in 2004, and after the debacle of Florida in 2000, I'm sure most folks were keenly aware of what a third-party vote would mean in that scenario.
   5613. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 09:42 AM (#4288160)
Given the way that Romney has not-so-swiftly tried to take credit for the auto bailout, I'm curious to see how they come up with late ads to take credit for this...

"The president has been all over this and he deserves great credit," Christie said. "I've been on the phone with him, like I said, yesterday, personally, three times. He gave me his number at the White House, told me to call him if I needed anything, and he absolutely means it. It's been very good working with the president, and he and his administration have been coordinating with us great. It's been wonderful."
   5614. bunyon Posted: October 30, 2012 at 09:43 AM (#4288161)
I looked it up. Nadar didn't make the Ohio ballot but Badnarik and Cobb did. Along with the Constitution Party guy. Of the approximately 5.6 million votes cast in Ohio, less than 30,000 went to people other than Bush and Kerry.

   5615. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 30, 2012 at 10:03 AM (#4288169)
Given the way that Romney has not-so-swiftly tried to take credit for the auto bailout, I'm curious to see how they come up with late ads to take credit for this...


"The president has been all over this and he deserves great credit," Christie said. "I've been on the phone with him, like I said, yesterday, personally, three times. He gave me his number at the White House, told me to call him if I needed anything, and he absolutely means it. It's been very good working with the president, and he and his administration have been coordinating with us great. It's been wonderful."


Since Romney's ideologically driven "solution" to natural disasters is to dismantle FEMA and let the states fend for themselves, it might not be a bad idea in the closing days for that position of his to be well publicized. It's just one of a zillion examples of how his Norquistian ideas about government would play out in the real world.
   5616. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 10:40 AM (#4288203)
Since this doesn't account for WHO is voting early, it's entirely unpersuasive. Why isn't it simply more Obama voters voting early? In a number of states there's a history of African-Americans voting early.

Why is it unpersuasive? The polls says that Obama and Romney are tied among people who intend to vote but haven't while Obama holds a commanding lead among people who have already voted. You don't need to know the color of their skin to know that isn't good for Romney.
   5617. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 10:50 AM (#4288210)
With some counties updates through yesterday Dem ballots are at about 400,000 and have about a 63,000 lead over Rep ballots in Ohio.
   5618. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 10:57 AM (#4288214)



A poll by Time magazine last week had Obama's advantage over Romney among early voters at 60-30 across Ohio.

And internal Republican polls also show Obama with leads even in Republican-leaning parts of the state, increasing the burden on Romney to do well on Election Day.


So far, Democratic voters casting early ballots outnumber Republicans in Ohio, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina and Nevada. Republican voters have the edge in Colorado. No votes will be counted until Nov. 6, but several battleground states report the party affiliation of people who have already cast ballots. Some, like Ohio, have large blocs of unaffiliated voters.

In North Carolina, more than 1.5 million people have cast ballots, 50 percent of them Democrats and 31 percent Republicans. In Iowa, about 471,000 people have already voted—45 percent Democrats and 32 percent Republicans. About 433,000 voters in Nevada have cast ballots, 45 percent Democrats and 37 percent Republicans.

In Florida, about 1.8 million voters have cast ballots and Democrats have edged in front of Republicans, 42 percent to 41 percent, according to a tally by the AP. Republicans had the early lead among people who voted by mail, but the Obama campaign has made a big push since in-person early voting started Saturday.

About 804,000 voters have cast ballots in Colorado, and Republicans have a slight edge over Democrats, 39 percent to 36 percent.



Swing states
   5619. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM (#4288227)
Why is it unpersuasive? The polls says that Obama and Romney are tied among people who intend to vote but haven't while Obama holds a commanding lead among people who have already voted. You don't need to know the color of their skin to know that isn't good for Romney.


Supposedly, 30% of all NC AA's have already voted... that's not 30% of registered voters, that's 30% of the total NC AA population...

Canvassed a bit for the campaign this weekend and dropped off some stuff at Obama HQ last night - talking to the coordinator a bit, the campaign is outpacing its early voting targets in the swing states - they're thrilled with Ohio, Iowa and Nevada, happy with Florida, and feel that the early voting numbers in NC are good reason to keep an eye on the state election night. We gabbed a bit about RV vs LV screens - and one thing he mentioned is that they've either hit already or are well on track to hit (and surpass) their 'first time voter' numbers in most of the swing states... he cautioned that he wasn't saying we ought to pay more attention to the RV and than LV numbers, but just noted that first time voters generally get screened out in most LV models ("Did you vote in the last election..." is generally one of the LV/RV screen questions) - but that he thought LV models hadn't yet caught up to the surge they feel they've accomplished.

Sure, sure - it might be bubble insulation at work, but it felt like confidence, not nervous confidence or blustery confidence, just plain old confidence to me...

   5620. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:18 AM (#4288235)
I think the NC talk is most definitely insulated talk. Romney is picking up that state.
   5621. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4288244)
I think the NC talk is most definitely insulated talk. Romney is picking up that state.


Oh, he wasn't proposing they'd win it -- just that CW has it as about a 4-5 pt Romney pick up and he thinks it will stay in within a pt or 2... he was more talking about watching it in the context of whether the networks put it in the too early to call or too close to call as soon as polls close.
   5622. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:36 AM (#4288256)
whether the networks put it in the too early to call or too close to call as soon as polls close.


With the increased importance in early voting I am not sure how this will work. Once upon a time the states will called (I think) because of exit polling, but doesn't early voting make exit polling less useful, especially if the early votign stuff is not counted early.

I guess I really am not sure how this works, and so I guess I am exposing my lack of knowledge on this.
   5623. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4288261)
Since Florida 2000, networks won't call states based on exit polls unless there is absolutely no doubt of the result.
   5624. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:44 AM (#4288264)
Since Florida 2000, networks won't call states based on exit polls unless there is absolutely no doubt of the result.


Absolutely - but they do have tells - making a state "too early" to call vs "too close" to call... it's tea leaf reading to be sure, but if NC is "too early to call", it's good news for Romney... if it's "too close" to call, not so much, even if the state ultimately flips.
   5625. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:45 AM (#4288267)
Early ballots are not counted until the day of the election and the results are not made public until the polls are closed.
   5626. Morty Causa Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM (#4288274)
   5627. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:54 AM (#4288275)
When it comes time to do the November OT_Politics thread, I assume we'll have a different "Election Prediction Thread" set up?
If so, it should be Electoral count, popular vote percentages, and exact time and network when the winner is declared.
   5628. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4288281)
   5629. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 30, 2012 at 11:58 AM (#4288283)
. . . doesn't early voting make exit polling less useful, especially if the early votign stuff is not counted early.

That, and the fact the exit polls were way off in 2000 & 2004 (Shrum: "May I be the 1st to call you President Kerry?") should make one a bit skeptical about calls based on exit polls. Even with this caveat, it does seem like the networks hold back some of the exit poll detail that would be interesting to know. IIRC, it used to be fairly common for the networks to say something like "when all is said and done, we expect Smith to carry the state with 55% of the vote". Now they seem more likely to project Smith the winner without mentioning his final % of the vote until much later, when they are less likely to be wrong.
   5630. GregD Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:01 PM (#4288287)
When it comes time to do the November OT_Politics thread, I assume we'll have a different "Election Prediction Thread" set up?
Yes! Then I can establish my foolishness for posterity!
   5631. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:02 PM (#4288288)
It doesn't look like this has been linked already


Wow... that's one hell of a scam.

If I'm understanding it right, you basically set up a charitable trust -- effectively 'renting' the charity's tax-exempt status to pay yourself an annuity until the trust matures, at which point the targeted charity gets a fair bit less in actual donations than the trust originally held - but you, the trust owner, makes a tidy tax free income on it.

Maybe this is one of those loopholes that Romney will eliminate? Oh wait, it was eliminated... but such existing vehicles were grandfathered.

Good work if you can get it!
   5632. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM (#4288297)
Wow... that's one hell of a scam.

If I'm understanding it right, you basically set up a charitable trust -- effectively 'renting' the charity's tax-exempt status to pay yourself an annuity until the trust matures, at which point the targeted charity gets a fair bit less in actual donations than the trust originally held - but you, the trust owner, makes a tidy tax free income on it.

Maybe this is one of those loopholes that Romney will eliminate? Oh wait, it was eliminated... but such existing vehicles were grandfathered.

Good work if you can get it!


Of course if you complain about any of this, then obviously you hate religion.
   5633. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM (#4288303)
I believe you pay taxes on the earning and it was around during a time when capital gains were a lot higher. It wasn't a way to completely avoid paying taxes but a way to reduce how much you paid in taxes. Plus you always run the risk of dying before you get to spend it all or find yourself in a liquidity crunch and won't be able to use the money for personal reasons.
   5634. The Yankee Clapper Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:20 PM (#4288307)
I wonder why no one complained about John Kerry's financial arrangements? Would it be because he didn't earn the $$ himself? Jay Rockefeller?
   5635. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4288310)
I wonder why no one complained about John Kerry's financial arrangements? Would it be because he didn't earn the $$ himself? Jay Rockefeller?


Which arrangements?

I'll be happy to complain about them - just give me something real rather than vague...
   5636. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4288311)
No one complained? Were you living in Tasmania in 2004?
   5637. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:23 PM (#4288312)
I wonder why no one complained about John Kerry's financial arrangements?


I'm pretty sure the Republicans would have dragged out any and all financial items they found politically useful to use against Kerry. If none of it seemed memorable or politically useful, then maybe there wasn't anything really worth complaining about...
   5638. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:26 PM (#4288318)
I wonder why no one complained about John Kerry's financial arrangements?


Well a big chunk of it (fair or not) was that he was not advocating policies that helped him out, like lowering the taxes on the wealthy. Romney has a very pro-rich agenda, which makes his "richness" a bit more fair game.

EDIT: And what everyone else said. I think the internet is slow here in MN.
   5639. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:27 PM (#4288320)
The narrative the Republicans were trying to create about Kerry's wealth was that he was an out of touch elite liberal who married into money.

The problem with 2004 is that the Republicans had a president who came from money and whose family was profiting from oil/middle eastern money. They weren't going to bring up wealth in that campaign.
   5640. Tilden Katz Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:33 PM (#4288326)
Republicans in 2004 attacked a war veteran for his service while running a ticket of two chickenhawks. They would have attacked Kerry's financials if there was anything there.
   5641. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:38 PM (#4288335)
And if Kerry was a war dodger like Bush they wouldn't have brought it up. Kerry being a "war hero" was a plus for Kerry and a minus for Bush. So the proxies attacked Kerry's status as a war hero to level the playing field. If Bush was a working class Republican (I know, there is no such thing) then Kerry's wealth would have been an issue but since they both came from money and had money it wasn't going to be an issue.
   5642. GregD Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:42 PM (#4288343)
Another issue was that Kerry didn't have all that much in the way of financial arrangements. He claimed personal assets of less than $2.5 million (and possibly far less given the wide range they have on congressional disclosure forms.) Teresa, on the other hand...
   5643. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM (#4288344)
Turning FEMA over to the states might not be a good idea if the state has a Romney for governor...

New Hampshire had faced the same flooding. It’s damage was worse. Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat, called up the National Guard and cut short a trip to Europe to return to his state so he could oversee the flood response.

Forgey, according to press accounts, tried to get Romney on the phone, but she only got as far as a the Lieutenant Governor’s chief of staff. She and others started complaining to the press in the hopes of getting the governor’s attention.

The town could handle distributing donated shirts and juice. But Greenfield, with its population of 18,000, couldn’t repair this level of loss, which had been estimated to exceed $1 million. Forgey said she needed the state government to respond and for Romney to declare an emergency. But for days, Greenfield residents were on their own, with limited outside help. “We really didn’t get the response we were looking for,” she says. “I had to declare a state of emergency … We really needed help desperately, desperately.”

On the first day, Forgey says she did not hear from Romney. Nor the second day. Nor the third.

* * *

Seven years later, Forgey still brings up Lynch’s leadership as an example that Romney should have followed. “You can imagine the level of frustration as a mayor on a local level and people are saying please help us and your hands are tied,” she said. “I wished that Governor Romney had taken a page from Governor Lynch’s book and basically paid attention to what was happening in Western Massachusetts. Government is here to help people, especially in disasters.”
   5644. spike Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:43 PM (#4288345)
I wonder why no one complained about John Kerry's financial arrangements?

Because Kerry both released his tax returns and wasn't campaigning that the richest Americans are overtaxed. No one cares that Romney is wealthy per se. The objection is to how he feels they ought have separate rules that guarantee their wealth incumbency in perpetuity, and allow them to pay proportionally less than middle class Americans.
   5645. Shredder Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:44 PM (#4288348)
With some counties updates through yesterday Dem ballots are at about 400,000 and have about a 63,000 lead over Rep ballots in Ohio.
Remember again, if you voted in Ohio's open primary, your general election ballot is for the party/primary in which you voted. So you could be a Democrat, vote in the Republican primary, and you will receive a Republican "ballot" in the general, and vice versa. I'm not making any claim as to who is leading in Ohio, but there were a lot more republican votes in the primary this year (and therefore more outstanding republican ballots) than four years ago. You can argue that's due to increased enthusiasm for Republicans this year, but more likely it's because the Republican primary was actually contested, while the Dem primary was not.
   5646. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM (#4288365)
To the Senate for a moment...

I thought the DSCC was foolish to think recruiting Bob Kerrey would help them hold the NE-SEN seat - though, I'm awfully glad that they haven't bothered to waste any money there... but interestingly, the seat has moved from Safe GOP to Lean GOP -- and a poll from the Omaha paper says it's a 3 point race.

I'm not buying that - for one thing, the GOP got a candidate less likely to say something stupid about rape (hint: the candidate has lady parts) and for another, retreads always seem to go out with a whimper... but it is worth noting that Crossroads (Rove's SuperPAC) has just gone up with an ad buy.

I wouldn't bet money on Kerrey here if you gave me 10 to 1 odds, but if it pulls some PAC/RSCC money away from other places - that's a good thing.
   5647. GregD Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:01 PM (#4288369)
Kerrey is going to do one of those rare Liebermans and end up disliked by every single segment of political opinion before he's gone. He's just the right combination of smug centrist lecturing liberals while also not appeasing conservatives to be on the Tom Friedman 0% support platform.
   5648. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:07 PM (#4288374)
Kerrey is going to do one of those rare Liebermans and end up disliked by every single segment of political opinion before he's gone. He's just the right combination of smug centrist lecturing liberals while also not appeasing conservatives to be on the Tom Friedman 0% support platform.


I don't know...

It IS worth noting that Kerrey was actually voted against DOMA back in 1996 -- one of only 14 Senators to do so (all 14 were Democratic - 32 Dem Senators voted yes)... If he were to be elected - and like I said, I don't think he will be - I think he'd actually be fairly left of anything I'd expect out of a blue Nebraska seat. He's certainly further left than Nelson.

Again, though - doubt he'll be elected.
   5649. spike Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:14 PM (#4288385)
There is no one as detestable as Lieberman. Seriously, screw that guy.
   5650. GregD Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:19 PM (#4288393)
Oh I agree zonk that he'd be far more liberal than Nelson and would vote for some things I'd support. My point was just his tone makes him unlikable at this point to people who agree with him since he's always sneering. I don't think it's the Lieberman Last Honest Man complex (a farce) but it's rather a bit of Bill Bradley Only Smart Man who goes around telling radicals how dumb they are, then liberals how dumb they are, then neocons, then paleocons.
   5651. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:30 PM (#4288408)
   5652. spike Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:34 PM (#4288412)
Pool "asked Romney at least five times whether he would eliminate FEMA as president/what he would do with FEMA." He ignored the questions.

- Sabrina Siddiqui (@SabrinaSiddiqui) October 30, 2012

I can't imagine how even Republicans can ####ing stand this guy. He has the courage of conviction of a banana slug.
   5653. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:34 PM (#4288414)
I received one of thos "Dreams From My Real Father" DVDs in the mail. The description and endorsements on the mailer were good comedy but I didn't watch the movie at all for fear it would make my DVD player dumber


I got mine a couple of weeks ago and have been saving it for this upcoming weekend. Invite some friends over and make a drinking game out of it. Also be sure and have some suitable theme music playing softly in the background.
   5654. Shredder Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:35 PM (#4288415)
Game changer - Obama Camapign Takes Donations From Osama bin Ladin!
Seems like this would be OK to do now, since the famous one is dead.
   5655. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:36 PM (#4288417)
Good to see he holds no hard feelings against Obama.
   5656. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:53 PM (#4288427)
Since this doesn't account for WHO is voting early, it's entirely unpersuasive. Why isn't it simply more Obama voters voting early? In a number of states there's a history of African-Americans voting early.
Why is it unpersuasive? The polls says that Obama and Romney are tied among people who intend to vote but haven't while Obama holds a commanding lead among people who have already voted. You don't need to know the color of their skin to know that isn't good for Romney.
Fer instance,

10m voters will eventually cast their votes as
5m Obama.
5m Romney.

1m vote early. 500k of those are African-American.
680k Obama.
320k Romney.

Look! Obama's leading!! Except,

End result:
5m Obama.
5m Romney.

As a predictor, in the sense you're looking at it (i.e. out of context) early voting is meaningless.
   5657. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 30, 2012 at 01:54 PM (#4288428)
Seems like this would be OK to do now, since the famous one is dead.


Is he? Maybe we should have a drone blow up the WND offices, just to be sure.
   5658. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:08 PM (#4288433)
Jack -

Read the article again:
On one hand, the two candidates are locked in a dead heat among Ohioans who have not yet voted but who say they intend to, with 45% of respondents supporting the President and 45% preferring his Republican challenger.

But Obama has clearly received a boost from Ohio’s early voting period, which began on Oct. 2 and runs through November 5. Among respondents who say they have already voted, Obama holds a two-to-one lead over Romney, 60% to 30%.

When those two groups are combined, the TIME poll reveals, Obama leads by five points overall in Ohio.
Now, there's no guarantee that Time has correctly surveyed the Ohio electorate, but they have not made the basic methodological error you've claimed. They are properly separating likely voters who have yet to vote (whom they survey as tied) from people who have voted already (whom they survey as significantly tilted to Obama).
   5659. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:11 PM (#4288437)
Good to see he holds no hard feelings against Obama.
Why does this remind me of MST3K's Space Mutiny?

"I think it's great you gave that dead girl another chance..."
   5660. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:11 PM (#4288438)
Look! Obama's leading!! Except,

End result:
5m Obama.
5m Romney.


Even more interesting, the exit polls will announce that Romney has a lead on Obama (because more of them waited until Election Day), and that might lead people to make further errors in judgement.
   5661. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4288439)
Instead of saying something and then editing it to give a coke to MCoA I'll just say,

What 5658 said.

   5662. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:12 PM (#4288441)
Why is it unpersuasive? The polls says that Obama and Romney are tied among people who intend to vote but haven't while Obama holds a commanding lead among people who have already voted. You don't need to know the color of their skin to know that isn't good for Romney.
A poll by Time magazine last week had Obama's advantage over Romney among early voters at 60-30 across Ohio.

The problem is, the math doesn't really add up to anything reasonable. If a third of Ohio's voters have voted early, as claimed by Sunday's PPP poll and others, and if Obama leads this group by roughly 2 to 1, and if Obama and Romney will split the Election Day vote, as alleged by those polls and others, then Romney would lose Ohio by roughly 10 points. Does anyone really believe that's a real-world outcome?

In poll after poll of Ohio, somewhere between 5 and 10 percent more respondents are claiming to have voted than have actually voted according to the Ohio sec. of state numbers. If early voters skew heavily toward Obama and the polls are over-counting early voters, that will wreak havoc with the projections.
   5663. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:14 PM (#4288443)
Game changer - Obama Camapign Takes Donations From Osama bin Ladin!


But in this case, the money really DID come from Americans, so there is nothing wrong with it.
Maybe Obama's team saw through the ruse and knew it was okay to keep the money.

;)

Is there a law that says the political donations have to be done by the person saying they are doing them?
Or could a corporation donate millions of dollars to a campaign by setting up a lot of fake people/accounts and donating the max through those accounts?
   5664. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:16 PM (#4288444)
Or could a corporation donate millions of dollars to a campaign by setting up a lot of fake people/accounts and donating the max through those accounts?

People would go to jail on that one.

In fact the people who donated money to Obama's campaign as fake Osama probably broke the law by doing so.
   5665. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:26 PM (#4288457)
In fact the people who donated money to Obama's campaign as fake Osama probably broke the law by doing so.


Heh. That's what I thought.

It seems to be a common occurrence for people trying to catch Democrats/liberals in scams that they get caught possibly breaking the law while doing it (ex: James O'Keefe).
   5666. spike Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:36 PM (#4288468)
Compare and contrast -

The president has been all over this and he deserves great credit." - Chris Christie

"One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly" - Michael "Brownie" Brown

   5667. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:47 PM (#4288476)
"One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly" - Michael "Brownie" Brown
That man should be ashamed to still walk the earth, let alone comment on disaster response.
   5668. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:48 PM (#4288477)
You'd think Brown would know better than to answer the phone after a hurricane has hit an American shoreline.

Edit: A gold star for Gold Star.
   5669. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:48 PM (#4288480)
"The federal government’s response has been great. I was on the phone at midnight again last night with the President, personally, he has expedited the designation of New Jersey as a major disaster area. The President has been outstanding in this and so have the folks at FEMA," - Chris Christie.

At this point, Team Romney probably needs to hope that whatever "momentum" they've had has been enough, because I'm pretty sure the election is locked in place as of today. Barring something truly terrible happening that makes Obama look Bush-Katrina-esque, the 2012 general election officially "is what it is." Any campaigning will be seen mostly as dancing on the graves of victims.
   5670. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:50 PM (#4288481)
I wonder if Jason will tell us how Obama visiting New York and New Jersey means those states are back in play...
   5671. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:50 PM (#4288482)
Funny how the same lefties who generally loathe Chris Christie are now quoting him as the voice of reason.

Also funny how Obama, who gets bashed even within his party for being too hands-off, suddenly is Mr. Hands On with Sandy. I'm sure the election being a week away has nothing to do with it.
   5672. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:53 PM (#4288483)
I am just surprised Christie went off message like that, but I don't know what the relationship is between the two. Or maybe I am being cynical and he is just being honest.

I think it interesting that even though the media narrative (non-Nate Silver and other models and aggregators) is a race too close to call, every survey I have seen has people thinking (but really large margins) that Obama will win the election (including surveys of political professionals).

I don't know that people's expectations are that accurate in large groups though (wisdom of the crowds always struck me as possible but iffy, good for some things though I suppose).
   5673. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:54 PM (#4288484)
Obama, who gets bashed even within his party for being too hands-off


This is a new one on me. He is aloof, willing to negotiate with himself*, too centrist (or a Kenyan Socialist Muslim - whichever), but too hands off. Not one I have heard much of.

* By this I mean he negotiates before he has to, condeding things he doesn't seem to need to. Poorly phrased thugh I admit.
   5674. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:54 PM (#4288485)
White House just announced Obama will tour NJ with Christie tomorrow.
   5675. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4288487)
Any campaigning will be seen mostly as dancing on the graves of victims.

If you're scoring at home:

- Campaigning after a hurricane = "dancing on the graves of victims";
- Fundraising in Las Vegas the day after four Americans were killed in a terrorist attack = perfectly acceptable.
   5676. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:58 PM (#4288490)
Chris Christie ain't a Romney guy and he's the Governor of New Jersey. He's going to attack Obama and the federal government during a disaster hitting his state? I don't think so. Governors and mayors get kicked out of office if they botch disasters and Christie isn't going to sacrifice his office or his citizens to try and score some national points for Romney. It's silly to think he would wage that kind of war against Obama in a state that is going to go solidly blue in the election and doing so while people are recovering from a disaster in his state.
   5677. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 02:59 PM (#4288491)
Funny how the same lefties who generally loathe Chris Christie are now quoting him as the voice of reason.


Yeah, because, you know -- it's not really newsworthy when the GOP convention keynote speaker heaps praise on the President...

"One thing he’s gonna be asked is, why did he jump on [the hurricane] so quickly and go back to D.C. so quickly" - Michael "Brownie" Brown

That man should be ashamed to still walk the earth, let alone comment on disaster response.


It really ought to be noted...

FEMA was created under Carter, elevated to cabinet level under Clinton, then demoted and placed into the hands of a political hack whose 'experience' was judging horses... It ought to be noted that current FEMA chief Craig Fugate is a former firefighter and former head of Florida's Emergency Management.

Again... it all comes back to the central idea of people who think government can do no right proving the point by getting in office and then, well, doing nothing right.
   5678. Shredder Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:00 PM (#4288493)
Funny how the same lefties who generally loathe Chris Christie are now quoting him as the voice of reason.
Joek has apparently never heard (or more likely simply doesn't understand) the phrase "statement against interest".
Also funny how Obama, who gets bashed even within his party for being too hands-off, suddenly is Mr. Hands On with Sandy. I'm sure the election being a week away has nothing to do with it.
Care to cite those criticisms as they relate to natural disasters? What a paranoid freak you are.
I am just surprised Christie went off message like that, but I don't know what the relationship is between the two. Or maybe I am being cynical and he is just being honest.
He does this occasionally, like when he bashed the wingnuts who got all bent out of shape when Christie appointed a muslim to a position as a Superior Court Judge. He actually takes some honorable positions, occasionally. Not nearly enough to convince me I'd ever want him governing my state or my country, but still...
   5679. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:02 PM (#4288496)
He's going to attack Obama and the federal government during a disaster hitting his state?


There is a difference between working with Obama, cooperating, and then keeping your mouth shut, versus praising Obama to the sky. It was the praise I was referring to, not the working with Obama or doing his job - that's all.
   5680. Tilden Katz Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:03 PM (#4288497)
Maybe Christie wants Obama to win because a Romney win almost certainly shuts off his own path to the White House.
   5681. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:03 PM (#4288499)
- Campaigning after a hurricane = "dancing on the graves of victims";
- Fundraising in Las Vegas the day after four Americans were killed in a terrorist attack = perfectly acceptable.


What an asinine comparison...

A monster storm engulfs the entire eastern seaboard from Maine to the Carolinas, killing dozens, leaving millions without power, and thousands still in harms way... as opposed to -- what, exactly... were the guys with the RPGs in Benghazi going to next invade Florida?

This Jonah Goldbergian stupidity at its finest -- find two clumps of 'facty' material and just chuck 'em shouting with gusto "THEY'RE BOTH APPLES! THEY'RE BOTH APPLES!"
   5682. Ron J2 Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:06 PM (#4288501)
Or maybe I am being cynical and he is just being honest.


From what I've seen, most politicians who ask for help and get it are pretty honest in their comments.

   5683. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:08 PM (#4288506)
Yeah, because, you know -- it's not really newsworthy when the GOP convention keynote speaker heaps praise on the President...


It should be noted that Christie mentioned Obama's name MUCH sooner in this address to the press than he mentioned Romney's name during the keynote speech.
   5684. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4288507)
I am just surprised Christie went off message like that, but I don't know what the relationship is between the two. Or maybe I am being cynical and he is just being honest.
Nah, it's both honest and it's building his brand. Christie's the tough-talking guy who tells it like it is (or, he's an a**hole). Every political brand has to be based in the truth of the person behind it, and this is both who Christie is and what Christie is selling.
   5685. Guapo Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:09 PM (#4288508)
http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/polls/509002ceebcabf4f740000b5

Mitt Romney in the eyes of Massachusetts: 35% favorable, 58% unfavorable. That's pretty remarkable.
   5686. dlf Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:11 PM (#4288509)
edit: never mind
   5687. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:12 PM (#4288510)
Yeah, because, you know -- it's not really newsworthy when the GOP convention keynote speaker heaps praise on the President...

But only yesterday, Obama's campaign people were warning that the storm shouldn't be politicized. The rules change so quickly with you guys.

***
Joek has apparently never heard (or more likely simply doesn't understand) the phrase "statement against interest".

I've actually used the phrase on this very site.

But anyway, how was it a statement against interest for the governor of New Jersey to say what absolutely everyone expected him to say, and what the circumstances essentially required him to say? This wasn't a hidden microphone catching Christie endorsing Obama over Romney.
   5688. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:14 PM (#4288511)
But only yesterday, Obama's campaign people were warning that the storm shouldn't be politicized. The rules change so quickly with you guys.


If you don't mind, I think I'd prefer my lecture on politicizing things from someone with a scintilla of credibility on the topic...
   5689. Random Transaction Generator Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:16 PM (#4288513)
But only yesterday, Obama's campaign people were warning that the storm shouldn't be politicized. The rules change so quickly with you guys.


Hey, if this is considered "politicizing", then it's a Republican who's done it. Blame him, not the Democrats.
All he had to do was say "Thanks to the President for declaring it a disaster and for FEMA for stepping in to help. We're working together to get this done."

Instead, he sounded like he wanted to give Obama a bro-hug and an political endorsement.
   5690. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:17 PM (#4288515)
But only yesterday, Obama's campaign people were warning that the storm shouldn't be politicized. The rules change so quickly with you guys.
Translation: Please don't ask the Romney/Ryan campaign about laying waste to FEMA's funding.
   5691. GregD Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:17 PM (#4288516)
Christie has to win re-election next year to have a chance of keeping his national profile. That isn't in the bag since he's fairly unpopular. On the other hand, the Democrats in the state are also unpopular so the Onion headline applies: Generic Democrat will win, polls says; Democrats search for Generic Democrat. Anyway Christie is trying not to inflame all the Democrats in his state--just the Atlantic City ones--in hopes of keeping his office. Then he'll start pivoting back to the Tea Party. Any good politician--and he's a very good one--would do the same.
   5692. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:18 PM (#4288518)
Obama is politicizing the disaster? We're doing that?
   5693. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4288520)
Obama is politicizing the disaster?
Yes! Why else would he visit the swing states of New Jersey and New York?
   5694. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:20 PM (#4288524)
Hey, if this is considered "politicizing", then it's a Republican who's done it. Blame him, not the Democrats.

No, the Republican said what everyone expected him to say and what basic decency and courtesy required him to say. But now Dems are acting as if Christie endorsed Obama over Romney. It's absurd.
   5695. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:21 PM (#4288526)
Perhaps the confusion is that while it's true, I have volunteered for and donated to the Obama campaign -- I am in no way nor to the best of my knowledge have I ever made any claim that I am empowered to speak for the campaign, the campaign does not coordinate with me nor do I coordinate with them my BBFT-OTP-P postings, etc.

Does that clear things up?
   5696. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:23 PM (#4288530)
Ha ha. I wasn't referring to you at all when I said "Obama's campaign people" in #5687. (I was, however, including you when I said "you guys.")
   5697. McCoy Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:25 PM (#4288531)
I just watched the ABC clip where Chris thanked Obama. It lasted like 15 seconds and seems pretty typical fair of the kind where a smaller government body (yes I know) thanks a larger government body for their assistance.

I'm sure because of the election it is and will be blown up many times over but there really is no fire behind the smoke.
   5698. zonk Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:25 PM (#4288532)

No, the Republican said what everyone expected him to say and what basic decency and courtesy required him to say. But now Dems are acting as if Christie endorsed Obama over Romney. It's absurd.


Yes, yes, yes... let the crocodile tears flow...

Given that Romney was on record earlier this year proposing cuts to FEMA, while a major disaster just elicited this from the GOP Convention keynote speaker says:

"The president has been all over this and he deserves great credit," Christie said. "I've been on the phone with him, like I said, yesterday, personally, three times. He gave me his number at the White House, told me to call him if I needed anything, and he absolutely means it. It's been very good working with the president, and he and his administration have been coordinating with us great. It's been wonderful."


It's beyond me why -- when the "size, scope and responsibilities of government" seem to be the underlying theme of choice behind the whole election -- anyone would bother to highlight it.

Shorter Joe: There is no emoticon for my outrage over the opposition not being as stupid as I'd like them to be for my politically expedient purposes!

But hey, Joe, in the spirit of attaboys, let me praise Romney for not holding a press conference hours after landfall after he did with Benghazi!
   5699. Joe Kehoskie Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:31 PM (#4288534)
Shorter Joe: There is no emoticon for my outrage over the opposition not being as stupid as I'd like them to be for my politically expedient purposes!

(Much) shorter Zonk: It would be an outrage for Romney to politicize Sandy in any way, but it's perfectly acceptable and smart politics for Obama & Co. to do the same.
   5700. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: October 30, 2012 at 03:31 PM (#4288535)
Also funny how Obama, who gets bashed even within his party for being too hands-off, suddenly is Mr. Hands On with Sandy. I'm sure the election being a week away has nothing to do with it.

No kidding. It really sucks for Ambassador Stevens and the guys who tried to save his life that they weren't attacked a few weeks later. If it had happened now, maybe Obama would have cared a little more and maybe they'd still be alive.
Page 57 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Vegas Watch
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogGraphic designer creates Star Wars/MLB mash-up logos for all 30 teams
(15 - 4:14am, Aug 02)
Last: Barnaby Jones

NewsblogMike Carp designated for assignment, Mookie Betts called up - Over the Monster
(31 - 4:00am, Aug 02)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(218 - 3:08am, Aug 02)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogOT:  2014 College Football pre-season thread
(10 - 2:46am, Aug 02)
Last: Every Inge Counts

NewsblogCubs deal Emilio Bonifacio, James Russell to Braves
(47 - 2:38am, Aug 02)
Last: Mess with the Meat, you get the Wad!

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(43 - 2:22am, Aug 02)
Last: Norcan

NewsblogJim Bowden Caught Stealing From Fake Twitter Account, Deletes Everything
(35 - 1:33am, Aug 02)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogMiklasz: Mozeliak sets off a loud wake-up call
(14 - 1:13am, Aug 02)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogGiants Designate Dan Uggla, Tyler Colvin
(13 - 12:26am, Aug 02)
Last: Infinite Joost (Voxter)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-1
(29 - 12:13am, Aug 02)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

NewsblogRosendo ‘Rusty’ Torres found guilty of 5 counts of sex abuse, acquitted of 3 other charges
(15 - 12:11am, Aug 02)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(1081 - 10:39pm, Aug 01)
Last: Quaker

NewsblogGeorge "The Animal" Steele Mangles A Baseball
(160 - 9:12pm, Aug 01)
Last: NJ in DC (Now unemployed!)

NewsblogBill James Mailbag - 7/13/14 - 7/22/14 (Subscription Required)
(11 - 8:40pm, Aug 01)
Last: robinred

NewsblogJose Bautista, Casey Janssen “frustrated” and “disappointed” by Jays’ lack of deadline activity
(6 - 8:31pm, Aug 01)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

Page rendered in 0.8065 seconds
52 querie(s) executed