Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 177

Thread: All Star Game out of Atlanta

  1. #141
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    What corporate sponsors? Are those corporate sponsors pulling out bc of 81 regular season games there?
    Not sure of the exact ones and I'm not sure how big the threat was.

    Just saying, that's what they did. MLB made a financial decision, not a political one.

  2. #142
    Senior Member William Tecumsah Sherman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    907
    vCash
    3100
    How does the Georgia law compare to other states where the MLB participates?

  3. #143
    Senior Member Ari Gold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    West coast
    Posts
    4,734
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tecumsah Sherman View Post
    How does the Georgia law compare to other states where the MLB participates?
    Georgia law is easier to vote than the blue state of Delaware.. the only reason this is an issue now is for the number electoral votes.

    And how “American “ of MLB to pull out of Georgia , while they played baseball in Cuba just a few years back.

    It’s silly and ridiculous

  4. #144
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,098
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
    Beaver - I think this thread and its links answer most of your questions. I don't want to clog up the thread with a Todd4State length post****
    Disclaimer - Yes I know this is from a staffer from Fair Fight Action (Stacey Abrams organization) - but it is the best line by line break down of the negative points of the law that I've seen
    So anytime I read through things like this there a a few lens through which it can be viewed. (1) Is it written to stop a loophole that could happen or has happened (2) They're out to get me (3) It's to benefit a certain group at the expense of another.

    Taking it tweet by tweet as they group things together:

    1) Most of these are aimed at not letting special interest groups fill out ballots for people and send them in. The idea of this I'm perfectly fine with because I'd prefer to not have people voting for other people or influencing votes. The first two on the list are a little concerning not so much because I don't think someone shouldn't be allowed to challenge but when you open it up to individuals you're going to just get a ton of bogus claims you have to go respond to. Still I don't think there is really anything really nefarious here that would really restrict voting. Am I missing something?

    2) This is all election board mumbo jumbo that I can't really say what the impact would be, if any. However it's all post-ballot casting so while this may have its flaws it doesn't restrict voting

    3 & 4) More election board stuff that I can't really say why they feel the need to change it. Could be a good change, could be a bad change but I can't really understand the impact here. If Democrats won control of the legislature are these still all bad? I only ask because if the continued reference to "GOP". I'd rather read this is a "bad" way to do things other than it put election in the hands of the evil GOP. But once again I don't see anything that overtly restricts voting unless this gives certain people power to choose voting locations, number of machines there, etc.

    5) This one is a little meatier and it's hard to gauge without knowing specifics. For example the tweet states that 20K provisional ballots were done in last election. How does that compare to previous. How many of those are done out of precinct? I would have to think that out of precinct provisional ballots make up a good chunk of "iffy" ballots. I don't really mind the sworn statement piece but can see where limiting it to 5-7 could be slightly limiting. I'm guessing that's there because normally the poll working would sent someone to the correct precinct, but late in the day there may not be a chance to get there. I don't really see this as being overly suppressive.

    6) Drop box stuff is a little meatier, but I need more knowledge. For example when would you use a drop box vs. mail? It might not be nearly as restrictive as it sounds. I don't mind removing them after early voting access b/c why would they even be there after the deadline? The availability could be an issue, but as mentioned earlier if they can mail it then it might not be that much an issue. Inside vs. outside seems like a weird rule and having manned security vs. surveillance is a bit cost increase. I wonder how much box tampering (if any) there was last year. I can't see the point of some of these changes unless there were issues at places last year. You could at least make a basic argument that this is more restrictive, but I don't think it's making it massively more restrictive to cast a ballot.

    7) More meat stuff. Shortening the request timeline is neither here or there. It's still 2.5 months which is a lot of advance time. Stop date of 11 days out vs. 6-7 is somewhat restrictive. Not sure if this is suppression tactic or simply a way to insure less votes arrive past election day. Could be argued either way. I'm behind voter ID laws so personally I don't have an issue with this so long as getting state issued ID is easy enough. 41 and 42 I don't quite follow but I certainly don't have a problem with 42 requiring DOB. It's required on every other form in the universe I sign.

    8) 43-45 I'd like to see more explanation of why these changes were necessary. I don't really mind 44 honestly as I can get some logic behind that one. Not sure why reducing the other windows is automatically bad, there are some benefits there as it just gets it all over with faster as well.

    9) These last ones I can see partial logic behind as many would reduce potential tampering. The voting machine issue is only for non-general elections anyway.

    So basically I just read through the list of everything bad by a biases source and still think that anyone who would refer to this stuff as Jim Crow is an idiot. Is everything in here good? Almost assuredly not, but there is no massive vote restriction in here either. Am I missing something that's right under my nose or is this a massive mountain out of molehole stuff and because Biden used the words "Jim Crow" everyone just believed him and ran with it?

  5. Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,830
    vCash
    3400

  6. Senior Member QuadrupleOption's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    876
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Rex54 View Post
    So you like the worst aspects of both left and right. Literally the most contemptible "type" on the political spectrum.
    Hey, in case no one's pointed it out - you're a douche.

  7. #147
    Senior Member Tbonewannabe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    10,652
    vCash
    3500
    Quote Originally Posted by Irondawg View Post
    So anytime I read through things like this there a a few lens through which it can be viewed. (1) Is it written to stop a loophole that could happen or has happened (2) They're out to get me (3) It's to benefit a certain group at the expense of another.

    Taking it tweet by tweet as they group things together:

    1) Most of these are aimed at not letting special interest groups fill out ballots for people and send them in. The idea of this I'm perfectly fine with because I'd prefer to not have people voting for other people or influencing votes. The first two on the list are a little concerning not so much because I don't think someone shouldn't be allowed to challenge but when you open it up to individuals you're going to just get a ton of bogus claims you have to go respond to. Still I don't think there is really anything really nefarious here that would really restrict voting. Am I missing something?

    2) This is all election board mumbo jumbo that I can't really say what the impact would be, if any. However it's all post-ballot casting so while this may have its flaws it doesn't restrict voting

    3 & 4) More election board stuff that I can't really say why they feel the need to change it. Could be a good change, could be a bad change but I can't really understand the impact here. If Democrats won control of the legislature are these still all bad? I only ask because if the continued reference to "GOP". I'd rather read this is a "bad" way to do things other than it put election in the hands of the evil GOP. But once again I don't see anything that overtly restricts voting unless this gives certain people power to choose voting locations, number of machines there, etc.

    5) This one is a little meatier and it's hard to gauge without knowing specifics. For example the tweet states that 20K provisional ballots were done in last election. How does that compare to previous. How many of those are done out of precinct? I would have to think that out of precinct provisional ballots make up a good chunk of "iffy" ballots. I don't really mind the sworn statement piece but can see where limiting it to 5-7 could be slightly limiting. I'm guessing that's there because normally the poll working would sent someone to the correct precinct, but late in the day there may not be a chance to get there. I don't really see this as being overly suppressive.

    6) Drop box stuff is a little meatier, but I need more knowledge. For example when would you use a drop box vs. mail? It might not be nearly as restrictive as it sounds. I don't mind removing them after early voting access b/c why would they even be there after the deadline? The availability could be an issue, but as mentioned earlier if they can mail it then it might not be that much an issue. Inside vs. outside seems like a weird rule and having manned security vs. surveillance is a bit cost increase. I wonder how much box tampering (if any) there was last year. I can't see the point of some of these changes unless there were issues at places last year. You could at least make a basic argument that this is more restrictive, but I don't think it's making it massively more restrictive to cast a ballot.

    7) More meat stuff. Shortening the request timeline is neither here or there. It's still 2.5 months which is a lot of advance time. Stop date of 11 days out vs. 6-7 is somewhat restrictive. Not sure if this is suppression tactic or simply a way to insure less votes arrive past election day. Could be argued either way. I'm behind voter ID laws so personally I don't have an issue with this so long as getting state issued ID is easy enough. 41 and 42 I don't quite follow but I certainly don't have a problem with 42 requiring DOB. It's required on every other form in the universe I sign.

    8) 43-45 I'd like to see more explanation of why these changes were necessary. I don't really mind 44 honestly as I can get some logic behind that one. Not sure why reducing the other windows is automatically bad, there are some benefits there as it just gets it all over with faster as well.

    9) These last ones I can see partial logic behind as many would reduce potential tampering. The voting machine issue is only for non-general elections anyway.

    So basically I just read through the list of everything bad by a biases source and still think that anyone who would refer to this stuff as Jim Crow is an idiot. Is everything in here good? Almost assuredly not, but there is no massive vote restriction in here either. Am I missing something that's right under my nose or is this a massive mountain out of molehole stuff and because Biden used the words "Jim Crow" everyone just believed him and ran with it?
    Biden sounds like he just got info from a message board and did the knee jerk reaction. Honestly, it is the same as President Trump except he is on the Left instead. The biggest thing that seems to be driven into the ground is requiring ID is voter suppression. Almost all states require this so is it all of the other stuff that is supposed to be "Jim Crow like"?

  8. #148
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    1,738
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    What corporate sponsors? Are those corporate sponsors pulling out bc of 81 regular season games there?
    Corporations have no right to control the people and culture but that's exactly what happens in our illegitimate system. And the conservatives are too programmed with "bidness good gubmit bad" to do anything and the left sets their guns on the working class with wrongthink about bourgeois social issues.... Keep voting for them though! They'll keep laughing at you all the way to the bank.

  9. #149
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Rex54 View Post
    Corporations have no right to control the people and culture but that's exactly what happens in our illegitimate system. And the conservatives are too programmed with "bidness good gubmit bad" to do anything and the left sets their guns on the working class with wrongthink about bourgeois social issues.... Keep voting for them though! They'll keep laughing at you all the way to the bank.
    The golden rule is that the people with the gold make the rules
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  10. #150
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    A wonderful old Minnesota peacenik named Dick Bernard writes a blog called “Thoughts Towards a Better World.” His most recent post, a curtain raiser in advance of the recent State of the Union message, eventually worked around, as Bernard often does, toward the importance of peace and the foolishness of war.

    Bernard brought up a quote from Nazi bigwig Hermann Goering that I don’t recall having ever seen, although it packed a punch when I read this week).

    Field Marshall Goering — one of Hitler’s earliest, longest lasting associates, the top German military figure during World War II, and for a long-time Hitler’s designated successor —was the highest-ranking Nazi to survive the war and be tried, convicted and sentenced to death at the Nuremberg Tribunal (although he managed to kill himself with a cyanide capsule the night before he was to be hung).

    Gustave Gilbert, an American psychologist fluent in German, worked as a translator with the Nuremberg Tribunal and interviewed Goering in the days between his conviction and his suicide. Gilbert then wrote “Nuremberg Diary,” a 1947 book based on interviews with Goering and other Nuremberg defendants.

    Gilbert asked Goering how it was possible to build and sustain public support for a war effort, especially in Germany, which had barely recovered from the still recent disaster of World War I.

    Here’s Goering’s reply:

    “Why, of course, the people don’t want war,” Goering shrugged. “Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.

    “But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”

    “There is one difference,” [Gilbert] pointed out. “In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”

    Oh, that is all well and good, [replied Goering] but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  11. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,440
    vCash
    3700
    Pretty sure sexy Rexy is none other than Dan the man who was banned

  12. #152
    Senior Member Commercecomet24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    24,719
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawgfan77 View Post
    Pretty sure sexy Rexy is none other than Dan the man who was banned
    Ah, I see someone else had the same thought. I concur.

  13. #153
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    72,078
    vCash
    10439
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawgfan77 View Post
    Pretty sure sexy Rexy is none other than Dan the man who was banned
    Dan was more left leaning. Rex hates both sides, our country, and his mom

  14. #154
    Senior Member William Tecumsah Sherman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    907
    vCash
    3100
    Estimated $100 million in losses to city/state by moving all star game.

  15. #155
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    72,078
    vCash
    10439
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tecumsah Sherman View Post
    Estimated $100 million in losses to city/state by moving all star game.
    Be interesting to see what type of contracts were signed with truist park and the venders. Mlb may be on the hook for some of that.

  16. #156
    Senior Member William Tecumsah Sherman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    907
    vCash
    3100
    It?s hard to trust everything you see, but I believe New York voting laws are similar to what Georgia just did. Will yankee stadium host another all star game?

  17. #157
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,098
    vCash
    3200
    My biggest complaint here is we went from a President that just said random made up stuff for which he was vilified to another that just states random made up stuff (jim crow in this case) and he?s not called to the carpet for it.

    Then corporations and the like jump on board. Am I out of line for saying the President probably made a lot of this get out of control by validating it?

  18. #158
    Senior Member BrunswickDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Home of Slay, GA
    Posts
    11,916
    vCash
    1746501
    Quote Originally Posted by Irondawg View Post

    So basically I just read through the list of everything bad by a biases source and still think that anyone who would refer to this stuff as Jim Crow is an idiot. Is everything in here good? Almost assuredly not, but there is no massive vote restriction in here either. Am I missing something that's right under my nose or is this a massive mountain out of molehole stuff and because Biden used the words "Jim Crow" everyone just believed him and ran with it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnson85 View Post
    None of that is particularly evil. There's plenty in it that is bad. But a lot of what they are claiming is so terrible is pretty standard.

    For example, it's always been illegal to photograph your completed ballot just about everywhere, because they don't want people selling votes. To keep the same "protections", they are doing the same thing for votes cast outside of the voting booth.

    The SOS stuff is primarily driven by having a SOS that they don't trust. Their current SOS kept silent while major news outlets were mischaracterizing a conversation involving Trump; I can understand not wanting him to have much power. Maybe the current SOS's shortfallings made them look at the set up and realize they had too much discretion vested in one official, leaving too much room for abuse. Maybe they are pitching a hissy fit and changing a bunch of provisions that are fine because of one bad SOS that won't be there long term. Regardless, not exactly Jim Crow.

    Thte sanction powers for improperly sending out VBM applications seems entirely appropriate?
    Neither of y'all have bad points. The best I can say is the political history of Georgia (and MS) points toward the parties using rule changes like these punitively and abusively. Honestly, if Dems were recommending similar changes after the 2018 election I would have my same doubts about motives and how the changes could be abused for political gain. Especially when those changes are so obviously geared toward stripping a Constitutional Office or power. The power the SOS has is vested in by the voters of Georgia. If the voters of Georgia have an issue with how the election was handled - they will vote him out. Political side-lining is one of the reasons that Georgia has as many state-wide officials who are elected as we do - SOS, Labor Commissioner, Sec of Ag., Public Service Commission, Attorney General, and State School Supt. - all of those were at one time appointed positions that are now elected state-wide. It allows the voters to hold those positions accountable instead of a singular party or powerful Legislator or Governor.
    "After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
    - Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18

  19. #159
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,098
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
    Neither of y'all have bad points. The best I can say is the political history of Georgia (and MS) points toward the parties using rule changes like these punitively and abusively. Honestly, if Dems were recommending similar changes after the 2018 election I would have my same doubts about motives and how the changes could be abused for political gain. Especially when those changes are so obviously geared toward stripping a Constitutional Office or power. The power the SOS has is vested in by the voters of Georgia. If the voters of Georgia have an issue with how the election was handled - they will vote him out. Political side-lining is one of the reasons that Georgia has as many state-wide officials who are elected as we do - SOS, Labor Commissioner, Sec of Ag., Public Service Commission, Attorney General, and State School Supt. - all of those were at one time appointed positions that are now elected state-wide. It allows the voters to hold those positions accountable instead of a singular party or powerful Legislator or Governor.
    I do agree that the most impactful changes are with the SOS and election board stuff but while that probably has numerous cans of worms potentially does any of that do anything to restrict voting. I have no baseline knowledge of how this stuff works. I love a good healthy debate about this kind of stuff and if something is helping rig an election a certain way it certainly needs to be called out.

    But we can't have the media spouting off about how untruthful Trump and how that riled up hate and punitive culture and then go and do the same thing here. Don't tell me you're going to make it better and then go make it worse.

    Like this is equally stupid and is making it worse:

    https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...ve-asg-georgia

  20. #160
    Senior Member BeardoMSU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The gettin' place
    Posts
    18,677
    vCash
    53100
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    Dan was more left leaning. Rex hates both sides, our country, and his mom
    Lol!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.