MLB moves All-Star Game from Atlanta

[TopGunn#22]

Well said Dutch Farmer.  This was a knee jerk, uninformed decision by Manfred and it will have serious negative outcomes for MLB.  Anger 25% of the fans ?  Hah !  How about 75%.  The left wing Washington Post already gave Biden FOUR Pinnochio's over his false portrayal of the bill.  Jen Psaki doubled down and she earned another four.  Whoever claimed that the A.P. is even handed and fair is living in a bubble!  The A.P. has been as far left on the spectrum as you can get for over 50 years.  Get Real !!

This whole can of worms reminds me of when one of the other "posters" or "moderators" on this sight tried to make a racist out of Max Kepler because of a t-shirt he was wearing in a picture of him.  

Look, if you don't want to burn this sight to the ground don't post dumb-a$$ crap like this article or the Max Kepler crap you did some time ago.  It serves no specific purpose.  It's clear "moderators" like Brock B and others have a left wing slant.  As a "moderator" if you guys were doing your job, none of us would have a clue which way your politics lean.  BUT WE DO !  And that shows that as a "moderator" you've completely failed at your job.  COMPLETELY !  You're nothing but Carol Simpson supposedly "moderating" a debate.  And if your going to post crap like this on your otherwise excellent site PLEASE don't lecture those of us who don't agree with your "OPINION."  Good Lord, after NBC News anchor Lester Holt, less than a week ago, came out and said "there is no need to cover both sides of a story anymore" when the "truth" (as HE defines it) is obvious,  you know we've reached a point of practically no return.  

I will now step away from Twins Daily until I hear about the extent of Josh Donaldson's injury and how the Twins hope to patch their lineup until he ready to play.  

[TheLeviathan]

Again, you specifically asked for sources. Now you're moving the goalposts to a nebulous "listening to those who are impacted" standard. 

 

Here's the actual text of the bill. If you choose to read it you'll notice that it's filled with rather mundane rule changes to a pre-existing law. Things such as limiting the ability for an election superintendent to receive donations from partisan groups, and altering the process of an election board, and how a poll watcher must reside in the county either of the precinct or a county bordering. 

 

The narrative of this bill being "racist" is exactly that, a narrative, and the narrative itself is ironically racist in that it makes the argument of, "This group of people - based solely off of the pigmentation of their skin - can't vote if you don't allow free water." (and other equally specious arguments)

The NYT's link uses the text of the bill and provides context relevant analysis. Provide a debunking of that point by point please.

 

This is a brazen attempt to leverage power to maintain power by robbing people of a Constitutionally protected civic duty.

 

But I await your thorough analysis.

[DutchFarmer]

Moving the goalposts again...

 

To be clear, you (and assume others too) don't find the actual original text of the bill to be a substantial enough source. The bill itself is not a good enough source...unreal. Instead, you'd prefer to use a left-wing paraphrase of the bill?

 

The argument thus far is:

 

Leftwing: "You're a racist because you support this bill requiring election monitors to live in the county of the election!" 

 

Rightwing: "The bill doesn't mention race. Did you read the bill? Here it is. Perhaps we should talk about specifics in the bill before asserting ill intent?"

 

Leftwing: "I don't need to read the bill, other people who agree with me politically already provided talking points so you'll have to refute those talking points before I take you seriously."

 

Yeah, that's a strawman, I get it, but that's honestly what it feels and looks like. 

 

The NYT's link uses the text of the bill and provides context relevant analysis. Provide a debunking of that point by point please.

This is a brazen attempt to leverage power to maintain power by robbing people of a Constitutionally protected civic duty.

But I await your thorough analysis.

 

[TheLeviathan]

I continue to await your detailed analysis.

[DutchFarmer]

My link didn't have any analysis attached so I don't know what you're alluding to. Furthermore, I don't need to conduct any analysis just because you said so. Do I need to also respond to Daily Beast articles? HuffPo too? How about People's World?

 

I think it's appropriate to discuss politics on this site if politics directly impacts baseball, so I'm glad this thread is here; however, if you're going to assert a point be prepared to discuss the original source. Everything else is intentional distraction. 

 

I continue to await your detailed analysis.

 

[wabene]

Well said Dutch Farmer. This was a knee jerk, uninformed decision by Manfred and it will have serious negative outcomes for MLB. Anger 25% of the fans ? Hah ! How about 75%. The left wing Washington Post already gave Biden FOUR Pinnochio's over his false portrayal of the bill. Jen Psaki doubled down and she earned another four. Whoever claimed that the A.P. is even handed and fair is living in a bubble! The A.P. has been as far left on the spectrum as you can get for over 50 years. Get Real !!

This whole can of worms reminds me of when one of the other "posters" or "moderators" on this sight tried to make a racist out of Max Kepler because of a t-shirt he was wearing in a picture of him.

Look, if you don't want to burn this sight to the ground don't post dumb-a$$ crap like this article or the Max Kepler crap you did some time ago. It serves no specific purpose. It's clear "moderators" like Brock B and others have a left wing slant. As a "moderator" if you guys were doing your job, none of us would have a clue which way your politics lean. BUT WE DO ! And that shows that as a "moderator" you've completely failed at your job. COMPLETELY ! You're nothing but Carol Simpson supposedly "moderating" a debate. And if your going to post crap like this on your otherwise excellent site PLEASE don't lecture those of us who don't agree with your "OPINION." Good Lord, after NBC News anchor Lester Holt, less than a week ago, came out and said "there is no need to cover both sides of a story anymore" when the "truth" (as HE defines it) is obvious, you know we've reached a point of practically no return.

I will now step away from Twins Daily until I hear about the extent of Josh Donaldson's injury and how the Twins hope to patch their lineup until he ready to play.

 

You state "The A.P. has been as far left on the spectrum as you can get for over 50 years.Get Real !!". Ok this is true then? I've poked around quite a bit at attempts to classify news reporting and wire services like the AP, Reuters and Bloomberg are routinely rated as unbiased and with solid journalistic ethics. Along with NPR, the PBC,CBS News, ABC News and BBC showing up as in the middle. Here is a good attempt at rankings from another highly rated publication, Forbes.

 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlinschoolofcreativeleadership/2017/02/01/10-journalism-brands-where-you-will-find-real-facts-rather-than-alternative-facts/amp/

 

I think a good strategy would be to read the NYT (or WAPO) and the WSJ. That way you would be reading some of the US' premier news sources which also happen to closely straddle the center from opposite sides.

 

Where do you get your news and information?

 

Edit: P.S. I just have to plug the long form journalism of The Atlantic (my favorite) and the venerable New Yorker. Also Outside magazine still has a few long form offerings. This gives me hope that not all info in the future will be of the sound bite variety. I'm open to suggestions for long form journalism from the other side of the spectrum.

[TheLeviathan]

My link didn't have any analysis attached so I don't know what you're alluding to. Furthermore, I don't need to conduct any analysis just because you said so. Do I need to also respond to Daily Beast articles? HuffPo too? How about People's World?

 

I think it's appropriate to discuss politics on this site if politics directly impacts baseball, so I'm glad this thread is here; however, if you're going to assert a point be prepared to discuss the original source. Everything else is intentional distraction.

 

This is not how burden of proof works. You are asserting the NYTs is wrong. Ok....then you need to show it. What you are doing is moving goalposts, beating up strawmen, and mostly whining.

 

The burden is on you. If you cant answer it then come to terms with that. The rest of this is, as you say, a distraction. One rather embarrassing for you.

[mnfireman]

There has been a long history of racial tensions (riots, protests and assassinations) in this country and MLB has always chosen to play the games. And always without moving them. This is just one more example of the divide our country has between the left and the right and the guilt felt by the "woke" being pushed on society as a whole. 

 

Here is full list of States and their voter identification laws/rules, move the game accordingly I guess:

 

Photo ID required (strict): Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

 

Photo ID requested (non-strict): Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Texas.

 

Non-photo ID required (strict): Arizona, North Dakota, and Ohio.

 

Non-photo ID requested (non-strict): Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia,.

 

No ID required to vote at ballot box: California, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C. No ID is required to vote in North Carolina as of Dec. 31, 2019.

[Squirrel]

As a moderator, I've been avoiding stepping into this thread. Brock, one of the owners of this site, wanted to give leeway to this discussion because of the nature of MLB's decision to move the game. As a rule, we don't allow political discussions at this site, but it was unavoidable being that MLB's decision was because of current politics in Georgia. Their decision was not knee-jerk, they did so after thought and discussion, whether you like the decision or not.

But we have strayed far afield of the original topic now discussing what constitutes appropriate discussion/debate and what sources are/are not legitimate. I'd say that straying began with the first response to the OP, outlining what was thought to be the GA law. And here begins the divide and the straying.

In the process, several posts needed to be removed because of outright rudeness and disrespect and name-calling. Whatever you think constitutes legitimate discussion, that is not part of it. And a big reason we made the decision a couple years ago to no longer allow political discourse here. And other than a few, impossibly tangled and related topics ... such as this one ... we've held true to it.

Whatever your opinions are regarding MLB's decision, it's done. It was theirs to make and they did so. it wasn't knee-jerk nor was it righteous (imo). It was what was best for them, like it or not, whether or not it was what was best for you. If you want to cancel your subscriptions and season tickets, or subscribe and buy season tickets, as a result, it is your right. However, beyond as it relates to baseball, your discussions need to be had elsewhere. It's truly sad the divide is so great and that people resort to dismissing others and disrespectful name calling.

If you want to discuss where the All-Star game should be held, please begin a new thread, and leave the politics out of it. As for my opinion on where it should be moved to, I don't really care because it's the All-Star game.

 

Thread closed.