MLB removes all-star game and draft from Georgia

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

True, CO requires ID the first time you vote by mail, but not every time. Boy, I forgot doing that 14 years ago. Crazy!!! I must have Alzheimer’s or something for me to have forgotten something of such major importance when it was SO recent!!!! Put me in the slammer I guess!!!!! Golly gee willikers!!!!!!!

Here’s a good comparison of the two states’ voting laws:
https://www.9news.com/mobile/article...b-bda4dca81ab8

Anyway, really looking forward to the game. Gonna be a blast. You guys have fun overreacting about other people overreacting about something.

[Shockm]

True, CO requires ID the first time you vote by mail, but not every time.

Here’s a good comparison of the two states’ voting laws:
https://www.9news.com/mobile/article...b-bda4dca81ab8

Anyway, really looking forward to the game!!!

You are too trusting of your news source. You need to fact check everything they say because almost every news source gives half truths.

Of course, if you are registered, and you vote in the next election, you don't have to re-register (You are automatically registered if you vote).

However, If you and your state don't require any identification or signature to vote in person and for sure on an absentee ballot, that is just NUTS. No wonder people suspect CHEATING is happening. At least I know that Kansas is doing the basics right to limit cheatin.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

You are too trusting of your news source. You need to fact check everything they say because almost every news source gives half truths.

Of course, if you are registered, and you vote in the next election, you don't have to re-register (You are automatically registered if you vote).

However, If you and your state don't require any identification or signature to vote in person and for sure on an absentee ballot, that is just NUTS. No wonder people suspect CHEATING is happening. At least I know that Kansas is doing the basics right to limit cheatin.

Who says I haven’t fact checked? I said it was a good comparison, not perfect. But it’s a great place to start the process.

Well, we do require identification, and signature verification, so I guess we’re not “nuts.” That’s pretty cool. What’s also nuts is suspecting something is happening with very little evidence that it’s actually happening. Like, that’s some tin foil hat stuff, man.

Anyway, I don’t want to get pulled into this convo too far. Just thought I’d drop in and leave a nugget or two because the topic was relevant to where I call home. I’ll let you guys get back to your doom and gloom. Thanks for letting me crash the party if only for a little bit.

I’m hoping for seats in the lower deck outfield. Thanks Georgia!!!

[Shockm]

Who says I haven’t fact checked? I said it was a good comparison, not perfect. But it’s a great place to start the process.

Well, we do require identification, and signature verification, so I guess we’re not “nuts.” That’s pretty cool. What’s also nuts is suspecting something is happening with very little evidence that it’s actually happening. !!

I know that without minimum safeguards, you have no idea that Cheating isn’t happening. What do you advocate? The Honor System?i shouldn’t have to prove that Cheating is happening. The State should have safeguards that their voter registration rolls are up to date so no dead people, illegals, etc., are voting. If not, that State and it’s Citizens are a perfect example of NUTS.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

True, CO requires ID the first time you vote by mail, but not every time. Boy, I forgot doing that 14 years ago. Crazy!!! I must have Alzheimer’s or something for me to have forgotten something of such major importance when it was SO recent!!!! Put me in the slammer I guess!!!!! Golly gee willikers!!!!!!!

Here’s a good comparison of the two states’ voting laws:
https://www.9news.com/mobile/article...b-bda4dca81ab8

Anyway, really looking forward to the game. Gonna be a blast. You guys have fun overreacting about other people overreacting about something.

Might be the only good baseball you get to see in Denver this season... ;)

[wufan]

True, CO requires ID the first time you vote by mail, but not every time. Boy, I forgot doing that 14 years ago. Crazy!!! I must have Alzheimer’s or something for me to have forgotten something of such major importance when it was SO recent!!!! Put me in the slammer I guess!!!!! Golly gee willikers!!!!!!!

Here’s a good comparison of the two states’ voting laws:
https://www.9news.com/mobile/article...b-bda4dca81ab8

Anyway, really looking forward to the game. Gonna be a blast. You guys have fun overreacting about other people overreacting about something.

Right...it’s not a big deal. So why is the Georgia law racist and Colorado is not? That’s the argument.

[wufan]

Who says I haven’t fact checked? I said it was a good comparison, not perfect. But it’s a great place to start the process.

Well, we do require identification, and signature verification, so I guess we’re not “nuts.” That’s pretty cool. What’s also nuts is suspecting something is happening with very little evidence that it’s actually happening. Like, that’s some tin foil hat stuff, man.

Anyway, I don’t want to get pulled into this convo too far. Just thought I’d drop in and leave a nugget or two because the topic was relevant to where I call home. I’ll let you guys get back to your doom and gloom. Thanks for letting me crash the party if only for a little bit.

I’m hoping for seats in the lower deck outfield. Thanks Georgia!!!

You’re distracting from the fact that Georgia is being punished for white supremacy for no valid reason and gloating that you got the benefit.

[pinstripers]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-democrats-are-stuck-in-1964-11617747282

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Might be the only good baseball you get to see in Denver this season... ;)

Ain't that the truth! Traded our best player and 50 million bucks for a handful of, well, what I'm sure are fine baseball players. I'm not sure anyone in the clubhouse actually wants to win games, they just want fans to show up, drink beer, and watch the visiting team play.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

You’re distracting from the fact that Georgia is being punished for white supremacy for no valid reason and gloating that you got the benefit.

Actually, I'm not. Lighten up Francis. I'm merely having fun and poking the bear. I'll spare you any future posts on this topic so you guys can get back to debating white supremacy and cancel culture, but hear me out.

Most of the time these days I just avoid the political threads on this fine forum but I had to chime in and have some fun on this one because of the relevance to where I live. My highly unscientific (ie somewhat but not totally inaccurate) estimation concludes that approximately 90% of ShockerNet political thread participants are extreme far right wing, with about 8% being not-as-extreme far right wing. The remaining 2% are a mixture of trolls, folks with no discernable opinion, and an occasional lefty who accidentally wanders in to this hornet's nest of conservative conspiracy theories and grievance politics that define the Trump-era Republican Party and ShockerNet political discussions.

In my experience, here's how a typical ShockerNet political discussion (or Facebook or Twitter for that matter) goes for me:

ShockerNet: [debating (ie complaining about) something the Democrats have done]

Rocky Mountain Shock: Hi there. Here's what I think about this topic.

SN: That's a liberal viewpoint. You liberals are destroying 'Murica! My pappy once told me the only good liberal is a dead one!

RMS: Wow, well um, OK. With that in mind, I would like to point out that I'm not a liberal.

SN: But you're advocating the liberal view on this.

RMS: Sure, I might agree with some liberal (or leftist, or whatever you call them this week) points on this issue. But I also understand and agree with conservatives on a lot of other issues, a lot of which aren't controversial cultural issues that you guys debate (ie complain about) a lot. I think both sides are right on many things and both sides are wrong on many things. I chart my own course politically. But I do consider Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt my political heroes, and among the more modern day figures I look up to include John McCain, Jeff Flake, John Kasich, and Larry Hogan.

SN: But those guys are either dead or they don't support Trump, which means they're not conservatives. Liberals are awful and you're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Ok fine, I'm destroying America. How am I destroying America again?

SN: Look, here's 417 sources I've cited that show why.

RMS: Wow, that's a lot. Do you rehearse for this stuff? Look, I have a job, a life, two whiny children and a nagging wife, and I watch a lot of old Shocker games on YouTube, so I don't have much spare time to comb the internet for exhaustive sources of information. Here's a measly two links advocating an alternate view.

SN: Those are liberal sources. Just so you know, liberal sources include any TV news station anyone has ever heard of except for NewsMax, Fox News when they're having a bad day, all magazines, any newspaper, the National Science Foundation, NASA, practically any scientist, PBS, NPR, any journalist who has ever lived and those not yet born, the CDC, anything and everything from Europe, any websites that I disagree with, practically any university study, and Matt Damon.

RMS: Surely you must agree that whether a source is liberal or conservative, there are points they can make that are valid. Data, of course, can be manipulated and skewed to support a particular viewpoint, but data is different from the interpretation of it and one needs to make a distinction between those two things whenever you're educating yourself on an issue.

SN: Liberal sources!!

RMS: So why don't you like liberals anyway?

SN: Well, they're narrow minded, impossible to reason with, never listen to what I have to say, and they cram their view down my throat. They're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Oh, the irony is...(sigh)...well...anyway, it's been nice discussing this with you. I'll just see myself out now.



Again, thanks for allowing me to crash the party. As for the merits of the Georgia law and the reaction to it, I think there's a lot of overreaction on both sides. Claims of voter fraud which prompted the law to begin with are largely debunked or frivolous, calling into question why the law was necessary to begin with. The law itself is not as bad as some folks are making it out to be. Conservatives' reaction to the lefts' reaction to the law has been just as dumb as the left's reaction. The irony of the right calling for boycotts of the MLB while at the same time they point out the ridiculousness of cancel culture is really rich. So both sides are claiming the other one is stupid, but the truth is they're both simultaneously being a horses' ass. So that's my honest take.

[ShockTalk]

Actually, I'm not. Lighten up Francis. I'm merely having fun and poking the bear. I'll spare you any future posts on this topic so you guys can get back to debating white supremacy and cancel culture, but hear me out.

Most of the time these days I just avoid the political threads on this fine forum but I had to chime in and have some fun on this one because of the relevance to where I live. My highly unscientific (ie somewhat but not totally inaccurate) estimation concludes that approximately 90% of ShockerNet political thread participants are extreme far right wing, with about 8% being not-as-extreme far right wing. The remaining 2% are a mixture of trolls, folks with no discernable opinion, and an occasional lefty who accidentally wanders in to this hornet's nest of conservative conspiracy theories and grievance politics that define the Trump-era Republican Party and ShockerNet political discussions.

In my experience, here's how a typical ShockerNet political discussion (or Facebook or Twitter for that matter) goes for me:

ShockerNet: [debating (ie complaining about) something the Democrats have done]

Rocky Mountain Shock: Hi there. Here's what I think about this topic.

SN: That's a liberal viewpoint. You liberals are destroying 'Murica! My pappy once told me the only good liberal is a dead one!

RMS: Wow, well um, OK. With that in mind, I would like to point out that I'm not a liberal.

SN: But you're advocating the liberal view on this.

RMS: Sure, I might agree with some liberal (or leftist, or whatever you call them this week) points on this issue. But I also understand and agree with conservatives on a lot of other issues, a lot of which aren't controversial cultural issues that you guys debate (ie complain about) a lot. I think both sides are right on many things and both sides are wrong on many things. I chart my own course politically. But I do consider Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt my political heroes, and among the more modern day figures I look up to include John McCain, Jeff Flake, John Kasich, and Larry Hogan.

SN: But those guys are either dead or they don't support Trump, which means they're not conservatives. Liberals are awful and you're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Ok fine, I'm destroying America. How am I destroying America again?

SN: Look, here's 417 sources I've cited that show why.

RMS: Wow, that's a lot. Do you rehearse for this stuff? Look, I have a job, a life, two whiny children and a nagging wife, and I watch a lot of old Shocker games on YouTube, so I don't have much spare time to comb the internet for exhaustive sources of information. Here's a measly two links advocating an alternate view.

SN: Those are liberal sources. Just so you know, liberal sources include any TV news station anyone has ever heard of except for NewsMax, Fox News when they're having a bad day, all magazines, any newspaper, the National Science Foundation, NASA, practically any scientist, PBS, NPR, any journalist who has ever lived and those not yet born, the CDC, anything and everything from Europe, any websites that I disagree with, practically any university study, and Matt Damon.

RMS: Surely you must agree that whether a source is liberal or conservative, there are points they can make that are valid. Data, of course, can be manipulated and skewed to support a particular viewpoint, but data is different from the interpretation of it and one needs to make a distinction between those two things whenever you're educating yourself on an issue.

SN: Liberal sources!!

RMS: So why don't you like liberals anyway?

SN: Well, they're narrow minded, impossible to reason with, never listen to what I have to say, and they cram their view down my throat. They're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Oh, the irony is...(sigh)...well...anyway, it's been nice discussing this with you. I'll just see myself out now.



Again, thanks for allowing me to crash the party. As for the merits of the Georgia law and the reaction to it, I think there's a lot of overreaction on both sides. Claims of voter fraud which prompted the law to begin with are largely debunked or frivolous, calling into question why the law was necessary to begin with. The law itself is not as bad as some folks are making it out to be. Conservatives' reaction to the lefts' reaction to the law has been just as dumb as the left's reaction. The irony of the right calling for boycotts of the MLB while at the same time they point out the ridiculousness of cancel culture is really rich. So both sides are claiming the other one is stupid, but the truth is they're both simultaneously being a horses' ass. So that's my honest take.

I have always considered you as "left of center" or a moderate left. I hope that statement is not off base to you (feel free to correct me). IMHO, I think there are four, somewhat distinct, larger groups that are on here: 1) Trumpers, who may or may not be far right, 2) Libertarians, 3) moderate rights, and 4) moderate centrists (depending on issue, may be right or left of center). You might even fit into that group. Smaller in number are those who I'd say are "disenfranchised moderates/rights" that now lean mostly left and get in battles with the Trumpers and those who may have been tea partiers. I hope you were not trying to describe wufan in your post above as, for me, you missed the target if so. I will also say that those 4 major groups I mentioned on here, generally tolerate each other, even if they do not totally agree with each other. I feel there are very, very few on here that are, and always have been, far left. They seldom post.

Edit: Just saw that you edited your post (not going to reread), so I'm going to make an assumption that you didn't change the general meaning/tone.

[wufan]

Actually, I'm not. Lighten up Francis. I'm merely having fun and poking the bear. I'll spare you any future posts on this topic so you guys can get back to debating white supremacy and cancel culture, but hear me out.

Most of the time these days I just avoid the political threads on this fine forum but I had to chime in and have some fun on this one because of the relevance to where I live. My highly unscientific (ie somewhat but not totally inaccurate) estimation concludes that approximately 90% of ShockerNet political thread participants are extreme far right wing, with about 8% being not-as-extreme far right wing. The remaining 2% are a mixture of trolls, folks with no discernable opinion, and an occasional lefty who accidentally wanders in to this hornet's nest of conservative conspiracy theories and grievance politics that define the Trump-era Republican Party and ShockerNet political discussions.

In my experience, here's how a typical ShockerNet political discussion (or Facebook or Twitter for that matter) goes for me:

ShockerNet: [debating (ie complaining about) something the Democrats have done]

Rocky Mountain Shock: Hi there. Here's what I think about this topic.

SN: That's a liberal viewpoint. You liberals are destroying 'Murica! My pappy once told me the only good liberal is a dead one!

RMS: Wow, well um, OK. With that in mind, I would like to point out that I'm not a liberal.

SN: But you're advocating the liberal view on this.

RMS: Sure, I might agree with some liberal (or leftist, or whatever you call them this week) points on this issue. But I also understand and agree with conservatives on a lot of other issues, a lot of which aren't controversial cultural issues that you guys debate (ie complain about) a lot. I think both sides are right on many things and both sides are wrong on many things. I chart my own course politically. But I do consider Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt my political heroes, and among the more modern day figures I look up to include John McCain, Jeff Flake, John Kasich, and Larry Hogan.

SN: But those guys are either dead or they don't support Trump, which means they're not conservatives. Liberals are awful and you're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Ok fine, I'm destroying America. How am I destroying America again?

SN: Look, here's 417 sources I've cited that show why.

RMS: Wow, that's a lot. Do you rehearse for this stuff? Look, I have a job, a life, two whiny children and a nagging wife, and I watch a lot of old Shocker games on YouTube, so I don't have much spare time to comb the internet for exhaustive sources of information. Here's a measly two links advocating an alternate view.

SN: Those are liberal sources. Just so you know, liberal sources include any TV news station anyone has ever heard of except for NewsMax, Fox News when they're having a bad day, all magazines, any newspaper, the National Science Foundation, NASA, practically any scientist, PBS, NPR, any journalist who has ever lived and those not yet born, the CDC, anything and everything from Europe, any websites that I disagree with, practically any university study, and Matt Damon.

RMS: Surely you must agree that whether a source is liberal or conservative, there are points they can make that are valid. Data, of course, can be manipulated and skewed to support a particular viewpoint, but data is different from the interpretation of it and one needs to make a distinction between those two things whenever you're educating yourself on an issue.

SN: Liberal sources!!

RMS: So why don't you like liberals anyway?

SN: Well, they're narrow minded, impossible to reason with, never listen to what I have to say, and they cram their view down my throat. They're destroying 'Murica!

RMS: Oh, the irony is...(sigh)...well...anyway, it's been nice discussing this with you. I'll just see myself out now.



Again, thanks for allowing me to crash the party. As for the merits of the Georgia law and the reaction to it, I think there's a lot of overreaction on both sides. Claims of voter fraud which prompted the law to begin with are largely debunked or frivolous, calling into question why the law was necessary to begin with. The law itself is not as bad as some folks are making it out to be. Conservatives' reaction to the lefts' reaction to the law has been just as dumb as the left's reaction. The irony of the right calling for boycotts of the MLB while at the same time they point out the ridiculousness of cancel culture is really rich. So both sides are claiming the other one is stupid, but the truth is they're both simultaneously being a horses' ass. So that's my honest take.

Soooo Georgia is racist????

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I have always considered you as "left of center" or a moderate left. I hope that statement is not off base to you (feel free to correct me). IMHO, I think there are four, somewhat distinct, larger groups that are on here: 1) Trumpers, who may or may not be far right, 2) Libertarians, 3) moderate rights, and 4) moderate centrists (depending on issue, may be right or left of center). You might even fit into that group. Smaller in number are those who I'd say are "disenfranchised moderates/rights" that now lean mostly left and get in battles with the Trumpers and those who may have been tea partiers. I hope you were not trying to describe wufan in your post above as, for me, you missed the target if so. I will also say that those 4 major groups I mentioned on here, generally tolerate each other, even if they do not totally agree with each other. I feel there are very, very few on here that are, and always have been, far left. They seldom post.

Edit: Just saw that you edited your post (not going to reread), so I'm going to make an assumption that you didn't change the general meaning/tone.

You're probably more accurate in your categories of posters than my highly unscientific estimation. You have always seemed to me to be in the moderate right camp and a more level headed poster than others. Wufan as well--I was merely replying to his/her post, not attempting to categorize him/her. I believe you are correct about me--somewhat left of center in a lot of cultural topics that are frequently debated here. Slightly right of center on topics such as free trade, individual liberty, and some other more traditional conservative values. I hate that politics has invaded the culture wars--that tends to skew some folks one direction or another from where they stand on traditional policy.

Perhaps I lurk on the wrong threads, but I get turned off pretty quickly when I scroll through and all I see is people bashing folks on the other side of the political spectrum. No matter where we lie on the spectrum, I believe we all have the same genuine desire to see the country succeed. The older I get, the less patience I have for folks who call lefties libtards (or the myriad of unflattering nicknames), or who call righties racists (or the myriad of unflattering nicknames). I see the former A LOT on here. Not every liberal is AOC, not every conservative is MTG. This country won't be able to solve many of its problems until we figure out we're all on the same side.

[wufan]

You're probably more accurate in your categories of posters than my highly unscientific estimation. You have always seemed to me to be in the moderate right camp and a more level headed poster than others. Wufan as well--I was merely replying to his/her post, not attempting to categorize him/her. I believe you are correct about me--somewhat left of center in a lot of cultural topics that are frequently debated here. Slightly right of center on topics such as free trade, individual liberty, and some other more traditional conservative values. I hate that politics has invaded the culture wars--that tends to skew some folks one direction or another from where they stand on traditional policy.

Perhaps I lurk on the wrong threads, but I get turned off pretty quickly when I scroll through and all I see is people bashing folks on the other side of the political spectrum. No matter where we lie on the spectrum, I believe we all have the same genuine desire to see the country succeed. The older I get, the less patience I have for folks who call lefties libtards (or the myriad of unflattering nicknames), or who call righties racists (or the myriad of unflattering nicknames). I see the former A LOT on here. Not every liberal is AOC, not every conservative is MTG. This country won't be able to solve many of its problems until we figure out we're all on the same side.

My pronouns are in my bio.

[ShockerFever]

Lot of effort given for wanting to “stay out of the way”.

And like it or not RMS, you’re not center. You’re undoubtedly left of center. Hope that doesn’t offend you, but it does seem to bother some people, like Cold for instance, for just admitting that they sit on the left side of the aisle. It’s a weird insecurity thing that I get but don’t get.

There’s been just as much name calling and virtue signaling on the left side of the fence here too. Maybe it’s you that doesn’t like that there are so many opinions that are opposite of yours that you can’t stand and you are feeling bothered by it. Another example that you are left of center.