Dam8610

I'll believe Republicans will cede power for the betterment of themselves and the country when I see it. They've jumped down the Trump rabbit hole, and they'll ride it as far as the electorate tells them is acceptable.

Which is why Democrats should be working vigorously to change perception #2. They don't seem to care, though.

And Facebook.

Lots of reasons to be excited there, and the scary thing is this article made no mention of Eloy Jimenez, Luis Robert, or Alec Hansen. I have a feeling these articles are going to be very hard for you guys come June and July.

If you think I think social issues are unimportant, you need to think again. Every issue is important, but since the conservatives will insist on extracting something for every bit of good done, priorities are needed to maximize the good being accomplished in each trade-off. Much like everything else in this country, we're well past the point of diminishing marginal utility on fighting for social issues, and we've practically traded our economy away for them. To maximize the good that can be accomplished, a focus on economic issues is likely the best path forward at this point in time.

Yes, we also have to get up to par with the rest of the civilized world on higher education and healthcare by treating these things as rights granted to citizens rather than privileges afforded them. This is why I feel economic issues are the most important to prioritize. All three of these items (minimum wage, at a minimum tuition free college, and nationalized healthcare) are economic issues that are going to have a huge impact on large swaths of the population, regardless of age, gender, race, creed, etc. over the next 20 years. Those impacts can be positive or negative for those people and the country as a whole, depending on the policy implemented.

His swing looked less loopy and more smooth and straight on the 2 run HR highlight I saw. Swing path seemed to be improved and there didn't appear to be any wasted motion to it.

The minimum wage was originally intended to be a wage on which a full-time worker could support a family. Today, the average full-time minimum wage US worker would need to pay roughly 90% of their income to afford the rent on a 2 bedroom apartment. Further, there is no state in the union in which said worker would pay less than 50% of their income for rent on a 2 bedroom apartment. Gradual improvement that still leads to people becoming homeless and starving may seem good enough to you, but it doesn't to me.

Oh boy, you got me, $10.10 sure is $15. Also, I see that article brimming with commentary from senators about a living wage. You might try understanding what you're arguing against before arguing against it. It makes formulating the argument easier.

You're confusing criticism for a proclamation of wrongdoing. I pointed out three issues that I think are problematic for the Democratic party, Balta pointed out the one of those three where they'd in fact gotten it right, and said I owed the Democratic party an apology. I stated that I didn't because Bernie sponsored the bill, you called that "an impossible standard", and I said that while I appreciated the Democrats supporting the bill, it's obvious that it's not a position they'd support without the events of the 2016 election, nor does it address the other two issues I brought up. I'm not saying Democrats can't be right, I'm saying I'm not going to give them much credit for being right if they're dragged to the right position against their will. It's the same way I feel about Republicans and their "evolved" positions on same sex marriage. I don't think that's unreasonable. I understand the strategy and actually support it, the point where I disagree with the Democratic party is that they view this strategy as an end where I view it as a means to an end. Yes, get the most progressive candidate you can get now, but keep working, keep knocking doors and changing minds, and primary those that aren't progressive enough out, and replace them with more progressive candidates. You'll recall Bernie was a firm supporter of a 50 state strategy, and it appears the Democrats have listened to that advice. That said, I believe the DNC should be more open to supporting primary challengers and getting candidates like Marie Newman to oust candidates like Dan Lipinski. No wiggle room? For me, there's quite a bit of wiggle room. I think Conor Lamb is a perfect example of this. He's stated that he's not necessarily with the Democrats on many social issues, but he's about expanding the power of unions and taxing the wealthy to pay for public services and societal needs. I'd take a House and Senate full of Conor Lambs, even though the Republican party tried to paint him as a Republican in Democrat clothing. To me, that's a much more apt description of Manchin or Donnelly than it is of Lamb. Again, the "End stop." is my problem here. That shouldn't be the "End stop" goal of the Democratic party. It should be the "Phase 1 of 6" goal. Fine, get the majorities any way you need to, but continue to educate and move people toward more progressive policies so they'll see that their conservative legislator with a (D) behind their name isn't good enough and vote them out with a quality primary challenger supported by the DNC. You misunderstand a disagreement over what accomplishes policy goals effectively as a lack of empathy. For example, prison and law enforcement reform are very near the top of my priority list. I consider these to be economic issues, but considering that African Americans are disproportionately affected by the biases inherent in the criminal justice system today, correcting this issue would correct a HUGE social problem. This is where, rather than encouraging this divide as the Democratic party has done, they should be educating the public as to how fixing the economic issues will fix the social issues, especially considering these issues are on their party platform. That's another big problem I have with the Democrats, they seem to prefer to foster this divide to keep their corporate donors happy over doing the right thing and adopting the overwhelmingly popular progressive positions. That also supports the evidence I showed before that we're living in an oligarchy. As I already stated, I don't disagree with the strategy, I disagree with viewing it as an endpoint as the Democratic party seems to and as you've articulated in this post. The above needs to be step one, not the end.

To me, you embody a lot of the problems I have with the Democratic party. You disingenuously pretend like you're interested in a discussion of the issues only to stop abruptly when you feel you've "made your point", ignore any valid points made by me along the way, and attempt to reduce me to a stereotype that you can easily villify. This reminds me of how the Democratic party pays lip service to progressive viewpoints, but rarely, if ever, acts on them, or the alienating smears of the Clinton campaign of the "Bernie Bro" and the "basket of deplorables", or how the party leadership feels it has the right to tell voters that their votes don't matter (which is an argument that has been made in open court by DNC attorneys). You, like most of the Democratic party, communicate that you feel your viewpoint is the only reasonable one and people can either get on board with it or leave. That perception of attitude is what has caused many voters to abandon the Democratic party. This could all be a miscommunication, but having spoken to several psychologists, sociologists, and communications specialists on the issue, the responsibility for the message communicated belongs to the sender. None of this is meant to be an attack, it's actually meant to help, but I've tried to have this discussion several times with several mainstream Democrats, so I won't be surprised in the slightest when you try to reduce this to some talking point narrative, belittle my viewpoint, and point out the obvious truth that on most issues, Republicans are worse. Being the better of two evils isn't something of which to be proud.

If I'm Madrigal's hitting coach, I'm making him watch a minimum of an hour of Jose Altuve at bats every day.

I watched this video and was concerned about his swing mechanics as well. Then I found a video of Jose Altuve in High A with very similar mechanical flaws. He just needs to correct in the same manner. Altuve still does the high leg kick, but his set is now much more of a plant than a reach, which is what has allowed him to tap into power that people didn't think he could have. If Madrigal makes the same mechanical adjustment, we might expect similar results.

He's feasting on KC and doing terrible against everyone else. Let's see some production against other teams before we talk Matt Davidson and future in the same sentence.

Maybe they'd give the Sox a decent prospect for him? Probably not, but it's nice to dream.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing they're doing it, but let's not pretend it wasn't Bernie's idea that they're being dragged kicking and screaming into. I'll read further, but my initial thought is it seems like corporate welfare (because it's a grant program, large corporations will be the most eligible for those grants) tailored to appease the masses, and it's a half measure because it's a "pilot program" that won't be available everywhere. It certainly doesn't accomplish the same things Bernie's proposed program does, because his covers the whole country and is project focused, much like FDR's program. In short, it looks like Booker is desperate to seem more progressive to set himself up better for a 2020 presidential run.

Trade Davidson to KC. Clearly he needs to play 81 games there. Get a prospect for him.

Not really. Who sponsored S. 1242? The Democrats are being dragged into progressive territory against their sincerest wishes.

It's not an "impossible standard" to refuse money from the private prison industry or other large companies that would create potential for conflicts of interest, nor to create or cosponsor legislation raising the minimum wage to a living wage and indexing it to inflation. So why has no Democrat done those things?

That's one of many reforms needed. Our voting system needs to be a lot more like Australia's, where voting is mandatory and done by ranking candidates on your ballot.

Yes. They literally go out and chant "Blood and Soil" and "Jews will not replace us" (Nazi slogans in 1930s Germany) in swastika armbands and MAGA hats. This is not exaggeration, it's observed behavior. These are literal white supremacists that support Trump. The benefit he gets from not talking about the black hero that stopped the white supremacist shooter is his base stays happy with him.

If ever there was anyone who could hit .300 with a 40% K rate, it may be Yoan Moncada. To be clear, I don't think he'll hit .300 with a 40% K rate, but he's at .264 with it right now.

Words are great but empty without action to back them.

You're trying to figure out how Democrats could stop taking money from the for-profit private prison industry, fight for a living wage, or have a platform that offers a clear alternative to GOP corruption? No wonder the Democrats can't win elections consistently.

Has any team in recent memory assembled the level of pitching talent in their organization that the White Sox have? Let's just look at what they have: Pitchers with Ace Potential Carlos Rodon Michael Kopech Reynaldo Lopez Lucas Giolito Alec Hansen Dylan Cease Pitchers with #2/#3 Potential Dane Dunning Ian Clarkin Spencer Adams Pitchers with Backend Starter Potential Carson Fulmer Ricardo Pinto Jordan Stephens Jordan Guerrero A.J. Puckett Lincoln Henzman Kade McClure Pitchers with Relief Potential Nate Jones (HL) Aaron Bummer Jace Fry Zack Burdi (HL) Thyago Vieira (HL) Brian Clark Ian Hamilton (HL) Ryan Burr Victor Diaz Danny Dopico Tyler Johnson (HL) Kevin Escorcia Matt Foster J.B. Olson I'm certain I've forgotten some here, but basically the ideal is that at least 3 from category 1 live up to billing, at least 1 from category 2 lives up to billing, and at least 1 from category 3 lives up to billing. Also, all the pitchers that fail as starters become relief options, so you're looking at about 16 pitchers to fill 5 starting slots and 25 pitchers to fill 7 relief spots (the 11 in the starter categories that don't pan out as starters plus the 14 listed relief names. If ever a team was capable of fully stocking its pitching staff from within, it's this team.