Reddy

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2007 -> 01:03 PM) Where are you getting the idea that 50% of Richardson or Biden's votes will go to Edwards? Heck, Dodd's numbers have actually been going up, so I doubt he loses many. As for Richardson's voters, the the two big differences he cuts as a candidate are fiscal conservatism and an absolute stand against the Iraq War. On the fiscal side, Edwards is the last candidate they'd choose - he's the biggest proponent of higher taxes of the bunch. And as for the war, Obama and Edwards' stands are pretty much identical. Clinton is different of course, she's more in favor of sticking it out for a while - so she is unlikely to get that sway. Overall, I think if Richardson voters flee, that favors Clinton most, then Obama. Biden has been pushing his diplomatic agenda (kind of like Richardson), and plans on how to stabilize Iraq (not just when to leave). I think that aligns best with Clinton, so that's where his votes may disappear to. So tell me why you think Edwards is likely to attract voters from Richardson, Biden or Dodd. cuz thats what the polling numbers show... and i've been knocking doors and calling quite a bit and that is more often than not what i hear. "i'm going for _____ but i like edwards, he's my second choice" There's a poll that was done that shows Edwards getting 42% in the Who's Your Second Choice? question. The Dodd supporters are especially into Edwards, and I've seen the same from the Bidens and the Richardsons. Talked to one guy today who's going Richardson with Edwards 2nd. It's real.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2007 -> 12:50 PM) Sure, in a few polls. But you need to look at more than one to get an idea of what is happening. Let's look at an average of the last 5 non-ARG polls for Iowa... Obama Avg: 29.0% Clinton Avg: 28.2% Edwards Avg: 24.2% Edwards is a clear 3rd. Those five polls have margins of error that run from 3 to 5%. At 4%, Edwards just barely ties Clinton, and is still behind Obama - even under best circumstances for him. And in reality, when you average a bunch of those together, the real error probability goes down. Then there is the youth factor, as I said, they really aren't in the polls. And further, some of them have just cell phones, and many polls only call land lines. Both those biases in the polls only make Obama more clearly in front. Now, I don't think its impossible for Edwards to win Iowa - he might. But he's running third behind to powerful, well-funded candidates with serious ground games in Iowa. It would be a significant upset for him to win. but take into account the numbers for Biden and Richardson too. almost 50% of those numbers will go to Edwards and who knows - maybe even more come caucus night because most of those people, if they were gonna pick clinton or obama, would've done so already. So take those and add all that together then you're back into that statistical dead heat again, even if you split that other 50% between clinton and obama.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2007 -> 12:38 PM) Also, as far as being all rhetoric, Edwards leads the world. I find Obama to be a much more honest individual than I do Edwards, or Clinton, or really any other of the Dem candidates except maybe Kucinich. Edwards "son of a miner" schpeal is a mask for the fact that he's actually a very successful, very rich attorney. And there is nothing wrong with being that - except that he tries to act like he is something else. have you looked at Edwards' 80-page policy book? yep. all rhetoric. lemme know when Obama or Clinton have one of those.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 27, 2007 -> 12:35 PM) I think you are missing something here, about the dynamics of the Iowa population. College kids are transient, and are often not polled because their primary address may be on campus (where the pollsters won't call), or be elsewhere but they won't be at home to get it (because they are at school). What that means is, the polls that show Obama and Clinton in a virtual dead heat (or maybe a slight lead for Obama) are ALREADY missing the youth voters. And at least some of them WILL vote, even though they weren't likely to be polled. So actually, even if only a small number of those college kids vote, that is still a small number that isn't even yet reflected that will probably be heavily for Obama. what you're missing is that the dead heat is actually a 3-way one statistically.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Dec 27, 2007 -> 12:31 PM) As far as selecting the next Dem nominee he is. He may win Iowa but that's all he'll win. He has no chance to match Clinton after Iowa and everyone knows that. I don't particularly dislike him as a candidate but I honestly don't think he has what it takes to go all the way. you realize of course that the reason that this view is so widely held is because both Clinton and Obama became the media darlings day 1 because of the woman/black man thing. that immediately f***ed all the other candidates over. if you can honestly tell me that the media isnt completely slanted towards these two than you're living in a fantasy world. and if he wins iowa that creates a ton of momentum. a ton. again, this stuff is impossible to predict. but he's not Nader - he is a viable candidate with a legitimate chance which is more than Nader ever was.

right. you feel inspired. that's Obama's genius. whole lotta rhetoric that sounds amazing because he's able to deliver it with such skill and acuity, but where it counts he's got nothing. and what he DOES have is a) not AS comprehensive as Edwards plans and b ) stolen FROM Edwards and tweaked. and Edwards is not the Iowa Ralph Nader. You'll see what happens on Caucus night. Obama's got the glitz but Edwards has the grassroots - end of story. Rural voters - and there are a lot of them - side heavily with Edwards. Most people's second choice is Edwards. Edwards' supporters are most likely to actually show up at the caucus. I'm just saying we'll see. Polls only give you so much. Because in the end, all of this youth support that Obama has will shrink tremendously when the kids are just too lazy to get to the caucus on Jan 3. Why would this election be ANY different from ones of the past? The youth still wont vote. And that'll sink Obama.

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Dec 26, 2007 -> 05:08 PM) Hope he shows up in time for his next speech. Maybe he should by a watch with all his millions. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/polit...nyt&emc=rss every candidate is late for every event. this was a bored journalist looking for something to rip edwards with. if this is the worst you got against the guy well what's that tell you? whattabout Obama supporting Lieberman when he was running against Lamont in Connecticut? Ya know, the guy who now supports McCain?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 26, 2007 -> 03:30 PM) Just out of curiosity, have you chosen a 2nd choice, or are you Edwards all the way? no need to 2nd choice. even tho the national media's ignoring it, Edwards has a STRONG footing in Iowa. He'll get the 15% because a lot of the Dodd, Richardson, Biden and Kuncinich Supporters have him as their no. 2. we're gonna shock a lot of people come caucus night.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Dec 24, 2007 -> 01:42 AM) So, I'm planning to caucus. Any other caucusers here? me too, leading the Edwards charge in Iowa City.

i dont get why people dont like cantu - he hit .298 with a .382 OBP for the reds last year. why are people so down on the guy!?

seriously, nobody finds this as cool as i do? ok so actually this prolly belongs in the SLaM forum instead of the 'Buster, i just figured since it was military related but if anyone wants to move it - go ahead.

wow. this is pretty incredible. like in all the movies except... ya know... it's real. Video - Click Here

QUOTE(joeynach @ Nov 22, 2007 -> 02:37 PM) OVERPAID...when we signed hermanson from the NL in 2005 we gave him what 2 yrs 5 MIL. Thats what this guy should have got u cant trust pitchers who pitched in pitcher friendly parks in the NL. They get lit up in the AL. of course thats what we should have done - oh wait, except had we done that we wouldn't have signed him so... i'm good with it.

y'all know we don't really use the word thespian, right...? lol in fact, i don't think i've EVER used it in a non-joking sense...

did this need a new thread?

honestly i don't hate the deal. what you're giving up is a truly mediocre pitcher and what you're getting is: Gold Glover Improved Offense 2 draft picks Cash all that for a guy who will give you a mid 4's ERA with about 12 wins... and considering that this offseason is FAAAAR from over i'd say at this point we just have to wait and see what else happens.

*raises hand* yep, I'm a theatre major in school and i plan to become a full time (lol) actor once i graduate. I've had a couple pro gigs thus far but nothing huge. auditioned for and got called back twice for Spring Awakening on Broadway, that was pretty sweet. actually i'm in a show right now that runs through tomorrow where i play a mentally handicapped kid who's got a terrible phobia of water. challenging as hell. but it's been going really well so far and there's been a lot of great feedback!

QUOTE(max power @ Nov 12, 2007 -> 12:36 AM) In the bottom of the 9th what would you rather have? 3,4,5 or 1,2,3? I say 3,4,5. ok but thats really a moot point because thats all dependent on what happens the rest of the game.

QUOTE(knightni @ Nov 11, 2007 -> 11:08 PM) Be serious. You need a leadoff guy no matter what. no you really dont. theres a school of thought that suggests its better to put your BEST hitter first because he'll see more at bats over the course of the year and after the first inning it just doesn't matter anymore who led off. with a sick lineup like we'd have, frankly we could go with that school and be perfectly fine.

QUOTE(max power @ Nov 11, 2007 -> 06:48 AM) If it were somewhere less urban like alabama or mississippi, I would say definitely, that's why it was done. No evangelical is going to support a team with devil in the name. But Florida? Meh, I dunno. Its still the south, I don't really know. yep... rays of sunlight... cool... but guys it makes sense cuz Florida's the sunshine state. get it? get it? man, looking at it that way how could you NOT like the name? Well done I say.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 10, 2007 -> 12:37 PM) Wow, I liked their unis before but their new ones are amazing. And those hats, I'm not a hat guy but I'm going to get one of those. are you kidding me? when i see the hat i just think Tuberculosis.

dumb all around. The Tampa Bay Rays? sounds stupid. and their new uniforms are HIDEOUS. freakin look like a minor league club.

Hunter Article on whitesox.com looks like we REALLY have the inside track... seems he wants to play here over anywhere else... i'm expecting him to go to us at this point.

Bonds should just retire now. lol.

i would trade just about anything for cabrera. if that means fields fine, i'm all for it. the guy is one of the best in the game - period.