Balta1701

Just so someone replies to this, they broke into the email system of a single political party and, with the help of a willing press and a Republican Party more than happy to send out press releases about the content, turned that into one of the biggest stories of the entire election. It was used at the Presidential level, it was used at the Congressional level. The Republicans used the content of those emails to plan their ad buys in some cases since they included demographic and voter outreach information. They attacked and breached several state voter databases, to what extent we currently don't know, and it is absolutely known that they attacked voting machines as well, although at present we don't know of any cases where they were able to break through enough to change results (in some cases there may still be reason for concern, people have said systems were attacked and they haven't denied that they could have been breached). They didn't just run fake ads on Facebook, they created fake groups, used the tools of those networks (twitter included) - in Tennessee a Russian controlled group pretending to be the state Republican Party actually had more US followers than the actual state Republican party. They organized protests and events. They created memes and pushed those around - not just advertising, but a huge amount of content pushed forwards. They were able to target this material by illegally accessing user profiles through Cambridge Analytica's work, breaking FB's rules to do so and getting personal information on over 100 million US residents. This was a major attack. They compromised computer systems, broke laws all over the country, and took advantage of weak regulations on social media networks to push that content even farther forwards. On top of all that, they had the campaign manager on one of the two major candidates actually on their payroll, they had compromised the US National Security Advisor, and there's a very good chance they actually have similarly corrupted the President of the United States, who also just happens to keep leaking classified intelligence to them and acting on behalf of them in negotiations with other countries. And that's what we know about before Mueller's investigation pulls out anything big.

Note that this does not solve issue #1, and it brings in the other major issue of how many people are going to lose millions of dollars. Hence, it's one of those very difficult political ones, because it may provide everyone some benefit, but it provides a substantial group of people huge losses, and those people will invest anything they can to protect that.

If the Bravos wouldn't put that guy on the table in addition to their top guy, the Cubs offer would blow everyone away.

You still have several big issues. First of all, since so many people's health care is already tied to their employer, if you try to break that tie, you're forcing literally everyone to switch health care providers and insurance and everyone already knows that dealing with what should be easy insurance questions wastes a week of everyone's time, so no one wants to do that (hence why the previous President said the If you like your insurance you can keep it line). And second...health care is still this completely screwed up market where almost all the costs are endured for a very small group of people, the ones who are truly chronically ill. In Iowa, there's one patient in their exchange who costs $10 million per year to keep alive, so the incentive to not be stuck as the company footing that bill is huge. So, the only thing you can rely on is bargaining power of a large group; the insurer can cut their costs and give discounts in exchange for 20,000 employees being insured because they can still count on cheaper folks to balance out the expensive one if they get unlucky. The exchanges were an attempt to take the individuals who were getting screwed and sell them all as a group the same way, with the trade-off that people were penalized if they didn't buy things. So even if you wanted to break the employer link, you run into trouble because you no longer have that same bargaining power or dilution of the expensive folks.

They always make him look bad, and then they go on and win the next election thanks to him. Because sure, he looks like a fool, but there wouldn't be hearings if the witness hadn't done something bad, so we gotta report both sides.

Honestly, unlike the Cubs and Astros, the White Sox very much went "pitching-heavy" on the players they acquired in this rebuild, so if the White Sox need starting pitching, they're probably not in a position to compete anyway.

The committed a wide ranging series of crimes on this country's shores with extraordinary effectiveness, to the point that they have reshaped global politics as a consequence, and have shown every inkling to do it again due to the limited punishments compared to the effectiveness. They have recently murdered people on the soil of one of our allies using chemical weapons. Regardless of everything else, that is a profound statement about a boogeyman.

Albies would obviously have been a solid get, but for that to be a substantially better offer you have to have a comparable 2nd piece to Cease. Any ideas?

Just to note - he was stealing at well over an 80% clip before he hurt his hamstring and something like a <50% clip afterwards. He was like 50 and 10 or something like that until that injury.

They have no need for Abreu whatsoever. Soria could be another fit for bullpen depth for them.

After the last election, anyone who said a darn thing about how Hillary's emails showed bad judgment...they were used and abused and had things done to them so filthy I don't want to describe them. They used a minor thing related to how the state department couldn't handle their own email server to vilify a good public servant who would have been a hell of a lot better than this, and now the world no longer cares about email security anyway. We saw exactly how "Both sides are corrupt" played out in November 2016.

What you're missing is how they use you. How many times we heard about how terrible Hillary Clinton's email scandal was, including from you, and then all of a sudden no one cares again whether people have poor judgment about email, that's another great example. Because you need to keep balance, because both sides have to be corrupt, if 99% of people in one party defend a guy who covered up for a child molester, while in the other party someone takes too much money from a bank, we have to hear about how both sides are corrupt, when fixing one side fixes the problem. Your "both parties are corrupt" is a "but her emails".

I was there last Friday and got to watch Hector Santiago hung out to dry for like 8 runs in the 8th inning. Still got a fireworks show and some fresh ballpark guac. I'd do that again.

Papa Johns founder uses the N-word on a conference call.

2013 down the stretch. Not only was the team bad but they didn't care.

The one thing that you could do, even to make a dent in that, is require disclosure of who is paying for things. Kennedy specifically said Congress could do that. One party unanimously supported that. The other party unanimously opposed it.

So he should have been dealt to someone in the league who knew he sucked?

Leury and Yolmer are both better than some of the guys we had starting for us during the great competitive seasons of 2015 and 2016.

Hostetler's pretty new at least to his role. Paddy's been around for more than half a decade, during which time the White Sox haven't exactly set the world on fire with drafting and scouting. Maybe he doesn't deserve to be tarred and feathered like Rick Hahn, but some level of torture seems appropriate.

When he's on, I don't think there's a more fun pitcher in baseball to watch than Chris Sale. Other guys can dominate, but somehow Sale just does it with more pizazz.

The White Sox paid Robert what, $50 million counting bonuses? If a team wants to Shed $50 million, they're just not willing to give up a player of Robert's caliber to do so, and if a team only wants to shed $20 million or so, they're not willing to give up a top 50 or top 75 guy to shed that small of an amount. The financial pressures in baseball just aren't as high as in leagues where teams have to maneuver around a salary cap, the teams would rather just eat the bad contract and keep the prospect.

Have you noticed how every offseason we see this suggested and no team in baseball actually seems to be doing these kinds of deals?