Photo of the Day, 12/9
Author: Rich Wilkins
Why Obama and Biden’s Norms Failed
This past year, in Northampton County’s vast ruby red Northern Tier there was an election to be the Magisterial Judge in the Wind Gap/Plainfield area. There were two respectable, good people running to be the new judge. One won the Republican nomination, and eventually the seat, and the other won the Democratic nomination. In the Democratic Primary, there were 1,522 votes cast. Over 10% of them (195) went to a third candidate in the race- the candidate was at the January 6th rally in 2021 that ended up ransacking the capitol (no idea if he went inside or not). This same candidate was also at the center of a legal case involving the Northampton County GOP showing home made pornography at their general membership meeting (to be clear here, as the victim). He also was reportedly saying in his campaign that he did not believe PFA’s were constitutional, and he wouldn’t enforce them (I have nowhere to link to here because the campaign is over). Even with all of that, this individual received nearly 200 Democratic primary votes. Is it possible some of them just didn’t know what they were doing? Sure. Over 10% of them? No. Some people knowingly and willingly voted for this guy.
One of the unpleasant, but absolutely true things to know about our democracy and the people participating in it is that the people don’t really trust politicians or experts anymore. It’s more pronounced on one side, but it’s not limited to that side. Politics have become almost entirely tribal, completely culturally, and more or less, emotional. Nearly every institution from the White House to the Army, to the Catholic Church, to banks, to college football powers, have been engaged in a scandal in the last 50 years that have wrecked public trust with them. No one likes banks. Organized religion has been in a decline with the public for years. No President has been willing to get into a protracted war after Iraq. Faith in institutions is gone. People tend to believe the institutions aren’t for them. Experts work for them, not for us, or something.
Whether you believe Barack Obama was born in Kenya, 9/11 was an inside job, or Trump had Epstein killed, an increasing number of people on your side agree with you. This has not been true in the past. People basically don’t believe anything their told, as long as it does fit their world view, as you can see in the polling above.
This is, in and of itself, the main reason that Barack Obama and Joe Biden ultimately gave way to Donald Trump. They ran a political party based on “managing” society right. There’s a lack of audience for that. An increasing share of the American left are also chiefly concerned with “getting stuff” from the government. If they don’t, they’re not super interested. They also aren’t interested with a government run by “experts” if it isn’t doing what they want. People don’t believe the experts. They don’t believe the institutions. They believe nutty videos on YouTube and TikTok though. You know they’d never lie to you or manipulate you, right?
Photo of the Day, 12/8
Are You Talkin’ to Me? The Good Ole’ Boys and Girls in Harrisburg Don’t Want the Voters to Choose in PA-7
Last week I met Crooksy in the flesh. I have before, but I know I was not as interested in it then. His campaign manager walked up with him at an event, outside of the actual event, and said to him “this is Rich Wilkins, the guy who writes mean things about you.” You know what, that’s sort of accurate (I write accurate things about him), and it’s actually pretty funny. I said “how do you do,” and moved along. It was cold, but cordial. That’s really all it needed to be. I have said the guy would be inappropriate as a nominee, let alone a Congressman. I stand by that.
Later on in the event, a labor “personality” from a union that backs Crooksy decided to let me know they were unhappy with my coverage of their endorsement. After questioning why I didn’t ask them first if I was right (someone involved told me, why would I?) quite aggressively, I asked a pretty straight forward question- was what I wrote wrong? Their answer- “it didn’t go down the way you wrote it.” I don’t know, if I was going to confront someone like that, I’d probably be able to just say “yes, you were wrong” when asked that. Hey though, I guess sometimes the truth is a problem for some.
Look, I have the least skin in the game of anyone in this whole shenanigan- I don’t work for anyone involved in the race. I’m not going to work for anyone in the race. While I have a preference in the race, there are several candidates I could accept if they won. It has been said to friends of mine that I’m “harming my ability to work” by being so vocal about Crooksy. Huh? I haven’t worked for an actual candidate since before my health scare, almost two years, and I’m not really trying to. I charged my last candidate gas money basically for a couple months of work, because I grew up looking up to them and just wanted to help them through. These people want to blacklist me from a job I don’t want or have? Allegedly I won’t be able to work anymore judicial races, at least at the state level. You wouldn’t believe how badly that has me torn up, I might not be able to go on here (I shouldn’t have to tell you to read that with sarcasm, but yeah.). I didn’t have people attempting to blacklist me from work I don’t do on my 2025 bingo card, but I think this is supposed to scare me or something. Listen, I was almost dead once, you’re going to have to do better than that to scare me now. At least threaten to kneecap my good leg or something, I might blink. I’ve never really socialized with my co-workers much, the ones I am friends with know we’re friends. The rest? Honestly, maybe we’re acquaintances. I find myself more and more at odds with the world a lot of these people are trying to build. My attachment level is pretty low at this point.
These folks are hellbent to make sure people don’t have choices in this primary and don’t hear information about the people they want to thrust onto the voters. They had emissaries up here trying to clear the field and rally support. It didn’t work. They think if voters hear about the candidates, they won’t pick their guy. They’re probably right. What I don’t think they want to realize is, the 9-1-1 calls are coming from inside of their own house. Most of what I write is coming from people they tell it to. You think I found this stuff on my own? I dug up social media posts? I mean, this stuff is fair game, but it was given to me. It came from multiple sources. There’s more of it not yet written. The stuff I knew about the guy is stuff that quite frankly I can’t write, it lacks sources willing to talk about it. At least right now. Look, the total readership of this blog isn’t going to move this primary. I mostly put it out hoping the right reader will see it. I have no grand illusions here. If you want to spend all day mad about it, go right on ahead.
I don’t think I’ll be asking the good ole’ boys and girls out on the Susquehanna for a green light on anything. I mean, God bless, but they just don’t really matter to me. If they did, I’d be writing about them. God knows normal people would cringe if they read that kind of stuff.
The Phillies at the Winter Meetings
Well, we’ve reached judgment day. I’ve written about the Phillies off-season outlook a few times (Here, here, and here.) and even said before the season was over that a breakup could be in order. Over the next three or four days, we will see if that indeed happens. Going in, I have the Phillies approximate payroll as is at $238,098,771, just a few million below the luxury tax. Their 40 man roster has lost two (Robert and Mercado) since I last wrote, and gained one (OF Pedro Leon, from the Astros AAA roster) and now sits at 32.
There are four major free agents from the Phillies roster to watch. Kyle Schwarber is the biggest, after hitting 56 homers in 2025, and the expectation is he will get five years and somewhere between $135 and $150 million ($27 to $30 million a year). J.T. Realmuto may be the most urgent, just because of the lack of catchers even near his level, and he is expected to command two years and somewhere around $25 million total ($12.5 million-ish a year). Ranger Suarez is probably the one it will hurt the most to leave, and he’s probably looking at six years and around $160 million total ($26-27 million a year). Finally there’s Harrison Bader, who was a key pick up at the deadline to the Phillies taking off and running away from the Mets. He is expected to get two to three years in the $12 millionish a year range.
The Phillies also seem to be looking to trade away a few guys. Obviously on top of the list is Nick Castellanos and his $20 million for one more year, which the Phillies are essentially trying to just dump a few million of to whoever will take it (Maybe $2-5 million range in savings). Then there’s Taijuan Walker, who they may or may not actually want to trade him and his $18 million salary for this last season of his deal, which could actually make him an affordable, attractive option to a lot of teams if the Phillies will pay him down to the $8-10 million range. Matt Strahm ($7.5 million), Tanner Banks ($1.2 million), and Jose Alvarado ($9 million) are all possible trade pieces and all would have pretty considerable value to other teams. Alec Bohm ($10.3 million) is definitely available in the final year of his arbitration control, as could possibly be Bryson Stott ($5.8 million) or Brandon Marsh ($4.5 million). Both back-up catchers, Rafael Marchan ($1 million) and Garrett Stubbs ($925,000) are probably available once the Phillies address the starting catcher position. I would call lit a long shot that the Phillies would trade Jesus Luzardo ($10.4 million), but he is in a walk year now and we’re not hearing a whole lot about an extension yet (This makes a lot more sense if they somehow re-sign Suarez). Top prospect Andrew Painter, Aidan Miller, and Justin Crawford have not been available, and probably only are in a mega blockbuster (Think Skubal, or even Skenes here).
The Phillies have some definite needs going into these meetings. If not Schwarber, they will need a major power bat either in the outfield or to DH. Their outfield needs a makeover either way. Second base and third base could be upgraded on for sure. They need a starting catcher. They absolutely need another right-handed reliever to pitch late in games. Their rotation is probably fine, but there are question marks you’d like to sure up.
Here’s what I’d like to see:
- At least one major bat signing. Yes, this can mean Kyle Schwarber and I’ll be happy if it is. I would be completely fine with it being Kyle Tucker, Cody Bellinger, Alex Bregman, or even Eugenio Suarez. Look, Schwarber was a great signing and a fan favorite in Philly but he’s 32, he only can play DH, and he’s another lefty in a line-up full of lefties. If they bring him back, they need to add some right-handed bats elsewhere to balance this line-up out better. Bellinger, Bregman, and Tucker all profile a little better over the life of a five year deal, and Suarez is said to only be seeking a three year deal. The Phillies absolutely need one of these guys though.
- They must leave with a catcher. I was not as crazy about Harry Ford (traded from Seattle to DC) as others, as his defense and power have real question marks, and I hated the price (five years of a controllable lefty reliever are nice). The Phillies either need to re-sign Realmuto or get creative on the trade market and find a two to three year solution fast. Realmuto’s price doesn’t sound crazy and the Phillies might be well advised to just pay it. Perhaps once you do, you look around for more help at the catcher position that is younger.
- They need to trade for at least one more offensive upgrade. With lefty relievers, a starting pitcher(or more?), and a few 20-something position players on their roster available to move, let alone prospects, the Phillies have the fire power to bring in a right-handed bat somewhere that represents an upgrade, regardless of what happens with Schwarber. Jarren Duran is probably at the top of this list, but he’s not the only guy available out there. They can be an infielder or outfielder, either way the Phillies just need a hitter who deepens their lineup and offers some protection for their big bats. Basically someone to do what Castellanos didn’t.
- Whether they trade for (preferable, probably) or sign (probably a rough market) a right handed arm to pitch late in games, they need someone to team with Kerkering as a right-handed set-up man. A bullpen with whoever the addition is, Kerkering, and two of Alvarado, Strahm, and Banks would look very good for the regular season.
- Figure out a way on Ranger Suarez. Yes, I know, it’s not a “need.” But it is. You have no idea what will actually happen with Wheeler yet. Nola is a question mark after the worst year of his career, and five seasons ahead on his contract. Luzardo is in a walk year, and you probably need to re-sign him regardless. Painter hasn’t thrown an MLB pitch yet and may start the year in AAA. Walker is what he is, which is serviceable but far from what you want pitching a big game. Ranger Suarez is who he is at this point, a very reliable playoff rotation arm that isn’t quite as durable as you hope for, but is clutch when you need it. Move the money around and make it happen.
They’re not going to get all of this done here and now. Last year they acquired Luzardo right before Christmas. They also should not be afraid to throw Crawford into the line-up opening day to fill one line-up spot, and Aidan Miller later down the road in the season at either second or third. Now is the time to be a bit daring with what you can do with Bohm, Stott, and possibly even Marsh (though a .280 hitter in the outfield is a nice piece), as they have been unwilling to extend any of them so far. There is no sense holding them until free agency and letting them walk, the Phillies aren’t getting compensatory first round picks when they lose them.
Running it back is not an option. I will not be super excited if all they do is bring back players who were here in 2025. They have tried the group as is for four years, and they have not had a parade down Broad Street yet.
Photo of the Day, 12/7
Who Belongs in the CFB Playoffs?
Well, now that we know who won the conferences, it’s time to debate who belongs in the College Football Playoffs. I’ll start by saying I think this is the dumbest system possible, and too many teams get in. Yes, you read me right. I do not think putting more and more teams in to have more and more games is fun. The point of a playoff is to crown the best champion. Generally if I had my way, we wouldn’t be having arguments about the eleventh and twelfth teams. Teams that far from first really shouldn’t get a shot. In fact, if I really had my way, it would be more simple than that. Conference champions and teams that lost zero or one games would be in. Everybody else enjoy the Pop-Tart Bowl.
So, by my standard, Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Duke (LOL), Ohio State, Oregon, Texas A&M, and Ole Miss are in the conversation. With all due respect to JMU and Tulane, and Group of 5 team really should have went undefeated to get in. My system is not the system though. The top 5 conference champions get bids. So Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Tulane, and JMU get bids. Ok, fine, whatever. Other than winning a ridiculous conference title (more on that later), there is no human logic that can make an argument for Duke being in the playoffs. So after those five, Ohio State, Oregon, Texas A&M, and Ole Miss are locks to me. That leaves three spots that frankly will go to teams I don’t believe deserve a shot.
Everyone seems ready to give Oklahoma a bid, and given that they beat Alabama in like the last month, they should get one over the Crimson Tide. I’m sorry that your conference has a ridiculous tie breaking system (still beats the ACC and Mountain West), Alabama is not better than maybe the fifth best team in the SEC. That leaves us with two spots for Miami, Notre Dame, Alabama, Texas, BYU, and Vanderbilt to argue over. For me, first things first, all the three loss teams are no’s. These teams are very good, but the season as a whole should mean something. That takes us from 4 to 2. BYU is out because the Big 12 is basically just the island of misfit toys right now, lacking a signature brand name team, let alone a group of them. Do we really think the conference is good? I don’t. Texas Tech might be, and they murdered BYU. Vanderbilt is a nice story and had a nice season. They’re wildly overrated. They’re probably the 7th best team in their conference, and 7th best teams don’t belong in. Yes, they beat everyone they should. That’s nice. Maybe the Gator Bowl this year? This leaves us with Notre Dame and Miami. I would put both of them in.
There’s going to be a lot of whining by SEC fans and media to give them like seven slots. Let’s talk about the SEC for a moment, and what they really did this year. Since getting sent home without their lunch money by Notre Dame last year, Georgia went 8-1 vs. the SEC, and 4-0 vs. Marshall, Austin Peay, Charlotte, and Georgia Tech. Since losing last year’s Las Vegas Bowl to USC, Texas A&M went 7-1 vs. the SEC, and 4-0 against UTSA, Utah State, Notre Dame (probably the conference’s best non-conference win), and Samford. Ole Miss lost their coach to a dysfunctional conference rival, but went 7-1 in the SEC, and 4-0 against Georgia State, Tulane (not bad, but G5), Washington State, and Citadel. Since losing last year’s Armed Forces Bowl to Navy, Oklahoma went 6-2 in the SEC, and 4-0 against Illinois State, Michigan (good win), Kent State, and Temple. Alabama came up a little short in last year’s Reliaquest Bowl to Michigan, but since they’ve gone 7-2 in the SEC, and 3-1 against Florida State (awful loss), Louisiana-Monroe, Wisconsin, and Eastern Illinois. Texas wants you to credit their brutal schedule, but they went 6-2 in the SEC including a disgusting loss to Florida and a blowout to Georgia, and 3-1 against Ohio State (spoiler, they lost), San Jose State, UTEP, and Sam Houston. Then there’s Vanderbilt, who went 6-2 in the SEC, and then piled up 4 wins against powerhouses Charleston Southern, Virginia Tech, Georgia State, and Utah State. Among the seven “powerhouses” in the SEC three won remotely relevant non-conference games. This conference is good because the bottom half of the conference stinks and these seven teams beat the hell out of teams no better than the bottom half of any other conference. The only reason you think the SEC is good is because you always think the SEC is good. It’s not. At most, it should get four bids. Nothing this conference did this year suggests that it was really that much stronger than any other conference.
So no, I wouldn’t even consider Alabama, Texas, or Vanderbilt for the playoffs. The committee will probably put Alabama in though, because of ESPN and cash. My guess is they will put Notre Dame in over Miami, for basically similar reasons. Notre Dame should get in first out of the three, because they’re the best team. Their wins over USC (who beat Oklahoma’s best win, Michigan), Pitt (Miami’s best win after opening night), Boise State (Mountain West Champions), and Navy (the team right behind Tulane and North Texas in the AAC) are basically better than the entire “good” group of SEC teams non-conference wins, other than A&M’s win over themselves (And A&M is in, period). Alabama had two really bad losses in their three, and while you can try to excuse one of them as an extra game with Georgia, it’s a game the conference plays for no reason (they don’t have divisions anymore, and they should) just to make cash. Sorry, that’s the truth. Miami is only in this conversation because of an opening night win over Notre Dame, which to me is more of a negative for Notre Dame than a positive for Miami. We watched Miami all season, we can see what they are. They lost a mid-October game to a very mediocre Louisville team and an early November game to a similarly mediocre SMU team. It was a bit late in the season to be losing to mid teams like them. They couldn’t even make their conference’s hilarious title game, won by an 8-5 Duke team. They did win ten games though, like Alabama, and they beat Notre Dame (Like A&M) and Florida (who Texas somehow lost to). Miami got worse as the season went on, but I would still put them in as the tenth best team in the country, with the two group of five teams getting to play a game as the 11 and 12 teams.
If I actually could pick the full 12 team field, it would be Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Ohio State, Texas A&M, Oregon, Ole Miss, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Miami, BYU, and Alabama. Since we have to put the G5 teams in, I’d make it Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Ohio State, Texas A&M, Oregon, Ole Miss, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Miami, Tulane, and JMU. Since I’m being realistic and this is probably already bought and paid for, I’ll say Indiana, Georgia, Texas Tech, Ohio State, Texas A&M, Oregon, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Alabama, Notre Dame, Tulane, and JMU. This is no way to pick a champion, but I don’t think that’s what’s driving this conversation anyway.
Photo of the Day, 12/6
Photo of the Day, 12/5
The NCAA Expanded Their Football Playoffs and Created a New Monster
Imagine creating conferences for college football that are so big that you can’t play everyone, then not creating divisions to instill some sort of order and understand to what we’re watching all year, then still trying to crown a regular season champion using a title game- what could go wrong? Then imagine creating a playoff bracket so big that you can have three to five SEC and B1G Ten Teams make it. You’d have a total mess, right? Like imagine a world where the ACC Champion doesn’t make a twelve team field?
Well, the NCAA delivered you a real mess to enjoy. I’ll start by saying I’d have a playoff system with just a couple of conference champions, because how can you be the National Champion and finish like fourth in your own league? I get it though, no one cares about finding the best team, you all just want to have fun and have your schools get even more money. Hey, that’s understood. This is what you get then.
The ACC is an utter embarrassment. How in the blue hell does 7-5 Duke *win* the tiebreaker with 10-2 Miami (I know, both went 6-2 in conference, but what kind of stupid tiebreakers did you set up?) to finish second in the conference regular season and get a chance to go beat 10-2/7-1 Virginia for the conference title? This is batshit. Why do you have a conference of 17 teams with no divisions to begin with? Then you have the six game deal with Notre Dame where you pay them $20 million for three or four games where they play on the road against your teams, basically because it adds about $10 million to your TV deal for all 17 teams (each). Look, should it be a good thing to have your conference play more nationally televised games on both Notre Dame’s and the ACC’s networks, where you play better competition? Sure. That is until Miami predictably wins against them in week 1, only to be a complete disappointment losing to sub-standard teams during the season, while Notre Dame stacks up five blow out wins against your teams and clearly passes the underwhelming Hurricanes. Everything about this conference is just madness, right down to SMU blowing an easy shot at the title game in the late hours of a Saturday night at Atlantic Coast Conference rival, California.
Then you have the SEC and Texas, who lost their third game weeks ago and now wants us to forget all of that and give them credit for beating a couple of conference foes during the year. Of course, they leave out that they got killed by Georgia and lost to an awful Florida team when they tell the story. Alabama has two losses, but even if they lose a third on Saturday, the playoff committee conveniently moved them up a spot or two to justify putting them in as a three loss team. Sure. Best of all is Ole Miss though. You go 11-1 and don’t make the conference title game (which we could also say about Texas A&M), then your coach is like “fuck it, I’m out” and leaves you ahead of a potential home playoff game, only go to a conference school in the state next year that can best be described as dysfunctional.
Notre Dame? You mean the team that lost their first two games by 4 points and kind of found new ways to lose each? Sure, they played 10 power 4 games, and sure Boise State, Navy, Arkansas, and USC end up as their “good” wins, but really who did most of their detractors win over? You can’t tell me Navy or Boise might not beat SMU. Both played Notre Dame reasonably similar or better than Pitt, who almost won the ACC. Look, I agree, Notre Dame did not beat a real murder’s row, but they probably did as much as all the other contenders, and well, they lost to two pretty good teams. Not Florida State. Not Florida. Not Louisville. They are not clearing a high bar, and frankly losing to Miami is only arguably a good loss. But yeah, they are clearing the bar we have.
Are my going to write about the Big 12? No, I’m not. I’m still amazed that a relatively good coach wanted to stay at BYU over Penn State. In a world with justice, he’d now lead his team to a win over Texas Tech, and then we can just put both in as participation trophies to lose in week 1. But we’d all feel good about it.
The B1G really was only decent this year. Go ahead, get mad. Three teams belong in. Another three are pretty decent, but not playoff teams. After that, slop. But I want to talk about Penn State for a moment. Wtf? Have we really reached the point that literally no one wants their money and their job? I get it, it’s hard to play Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Oregon, and Washington. You have an astronomical budget though and they’ll pay you out the ass. But you’d rather stay at Louisville, or go to South Florida, or even go to UCLA (Ok, for the beaches, yes). If their season isn’t bad enough, this humiliation is awful. Seriously, just hire Chip Kelly at this point, I dare you. #TrustInChip
I’m not even going beyond this. I’m actually cheering for Duke to make a complete circus spectacle out of this. Let’s figure out how to get like six unqualified shmuck teams in. What could be more fun?
Apocalypse Vibes 