NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 11:03 AM) remind me what your better alternative is? Alternative to Donald Trump? Being slowly consumed by pirahnas. Alternative to the Electoral College? I don't want to hijack the thread again with that, but I made clear earlier, a popular national vote for the Presidency/VP (and only that office) is the only equitable and logical solution, in my view. You can go peruse the predictions thread for the detailed debate about that.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:59 AM) I think that got overblown and people didn't really buy it. He was still viewed as the better person to get us going economically. Race played a factor, though, for sure. 93% of blacks voted for Obama (racists!) and 71% of hispanics. I think Bush got like 44%, so that's a huge drop. And unmarried women really liked Obama more than Romney too. [i'll leave the easy joke about entitlements alone] That to me is why the GOP has to give up on the social issues. Even if you're apathetic to gay marriage or abortion, don't make that an important part of your platform. Keep it about the economy (the conservative/capitalist philosophy is always favored over the liberal/socialist one) and the government getting too big. I disagree about the income thing being overblown... but I agree about the social issues. If you want to look at it in really general terms, the fiscal conservatism probably can win out, as long as it has some degree of reason (like being willing to put the taxes for high incomes only back to pre-Bush levels). But on the social issues, they are on the wrong side of history and all the relevant trends. They can't stay so far-right on those and expect to compete going forward. And they probably will indeed become more moderate on some of those social issues. Parties change when their backs are against the wall. They may not come right out and SAY they are changing, but they will help and promote more moderate GOP candidates in the next cycles, effectively making that shift.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:57 AM) You guys agree with Donald Trump on the Electoral College. I certainly do. Doesn't change the fact that he is an ignoramus.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 10:15 AM) The Republican model is fundamentally flawed and is currently playing a losing game. This is nothing more than an extension of agrarian v urban models that were first seen in the Hamilton/Jefferson era. Generally the US should get more diverse and become more urban. As long as the Republican party of the South wants to flip the bird to the urban population, they are always going to be starting from behind. Even Mitt Romney, a businessman former Governor of a northern state, had to completely disavow every plan that would have made him dangerous to Obama, just so that he could solidify the Republican core. On Fox news last night, they had some people who got it. But there were others who just seemed to think that it was a bad campaign and that if Romney had been more tactical he could have won. And its true Romney could have won, but his path would have been a hell of a lot easier if he could actually threaten in a state like California or New York. And its not like Republicans dont win there, its just Southern Republicans dont. The model clearly shows you can punt the Confederacy and still win more times than not. What should be even more telling for the Republicans is that they havent even nominated a Presidential candidate who was born in a confederate state (at least not post WWII and I was to lazy to go back further.) The closest (to actually being a southerner) was GWB, but hes a pretty big exception as he is a legacy of pretty influential northern Republicans. They really they just need to stop with the big govt social ideas, otherwise Id expect a bigger defeat in 2016, as the economy will likely be better and the country will be more diverse. I think by looking at this as urban vs rural, you are missing the key element that has risen dramatically since the 60's and 70's: suburbia and exurbia. That is where the battle is in the future, if you you are thinking in terms of geography. Racial demographics of course are an obvious and large factor, as are age demographics, both of which are working against the Republicans. Minorities keep picking up a couple % points of the total electorate each 4 year cycle, and younger people are overwhelmingly bringing more liberal social views into the majority. But income disparity is also HUGE, and Romney's 47% remarks were a huge blow for him.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 07:58 AM) US Cellular just sold their Chicago market to Sprint... http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/bre...story?track=rss QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 09:38 AM) jon greenberg ‏@espnchijon The Cell isn't changing, according to US Cellular statement: "Our naming rights to the ballpark are not a part of this deal with Sprint." So short term, nothing changes. But long term, if US Cellular's retrenching fails and/or they are bought at a corporate national level by another carrier, then things might get interesting.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 09:44 AM) Basebal lAmerica will come out with the White Sox Top 10 Prospects on Nov. 12 Good to know. FutureSox will do ours in January or February, prior to Spring Training but after most of the offseason moves are done.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 08:46 AM) at least it made sense for liberals to want to go to a more-liberal country. Well, there are more conservative countries out there. Most are majority-Muslim. QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 08:50 AM) It means you're "supposed to" vote for Obama so when you vote Libertarian you might as well vote for Romney since you just helped him out. Which is silly. You can't out of one side of your mouth say you want out of the two-party system, and say out the other side that a vote for a 3rd party is wasted. If you want other parties or independents to have greater voice, then you need to support them when a candidate appears that better matches your beliefs.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 08:13 AM) Brandon McCarthy ‏@BMcCarthy32 So wait, do the GOPers who are moving to Canada now just swap houses with the dems that moved there when Bush was re-elected? Love.

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 04:16 PM) A few years back, when the IL governors' race was between Blago and Judy Baar Topinka, I wrote in Abraham Lincoln. Those were less attractive options than the main event today, but not by too much. yeah, that was just a horrible choice. Worse than any governor or Prez election I can ever remember. Truly needed an option for death.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 01:55 PM) Let's see if Hahn scoops up the big 6'10 Andrew Brackman from the Reds. Former 1st RDer hasn't seen success since 2010, but if Coop can hone his control issues, he should be worth a look. Do a Phil Humber number on him. QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 02:22 PM) It's going to take more than fixing the control. He couldn't get guys out in A ball last year. Sounds a lot like a guy we had in the system until last year, Garrett Johnson.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 04:14 PM) http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/...day.php?ref=fpb Why allow them to ask for ID if it isn't required? This was only ever going to lead to problems and solves nothing. Have to agree, that is just stupid. Like Don't Ask Don't Tell for voters.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 04:13 PM) Damn. People must really be sick of Obama if they are hiring Romney to replace him. My guess is people are firing Obama more than hiring Romney. Bolded answers your previous question.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 02:33 PM) Open-source is arguably more beneficial from a security standpoint. Any system, be it physical or cyber, has countless vulnerabilities both known and unknown. Getting those systems poked and proded in the public realm can bring many of those vulnerabilities to light. And, as with any aspect of cybersecurity, step one is physical security--without access to the physical voting machines, all of that "hacking" is useless. http://jps.anl.gov/Volume3/Paper1_Loughlin.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_software_security And I strongly disagree. Also, this isn't code that is already exposed to the internet via connections like other software, the comparisons aren't as valid. QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 03:54 PM) Well, I truly was an undecided voter heading into the poll just now. I voted for Obama. I'm sick of having to base my decision on who I think is the best of 2 bad candidates. I can't remember the last time I was fired up about a presidential candidate. But of all the Soxtalker's I think I was the only undecided voter heading into today and I did vote for Obama though I do think he's been a poor leader. Or a very blah leader at best. I think Romney is a scary guy who gives me a weird vibe. He just does. I won't offend the world and say I voted for Obama cause he is a Sox fan and Bears fan, but that is one positive in his corner at least. Romney said nothing during the campaign that made me think he'd be good. Obama I feel ran a poor campaign. He sort of was campainging sort of was President. He didnt seem to care to get any message out IMO. Knowing me as you all do, are u surprised I voted for the Big O today? To me, this election and 2008 were better in terms of the options available, than either 2000 or 2004 (which I think were a true low point).

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) The ballot machine software should be 100% open-source and publicly financed. Open source I think is a horrible idea. Why not just put a sign up that says "please hack us"? Better to have the source code reviewed by a nonpartisan agency for all new versions that come out? No print-outs, just software analysts looking for problems and testing, then turning the machines back over. That also gives you the benefit of being able to check for software changes (via object compares) on machines in actual use later.

The voting machine problems are so easily solved, or at least putting it clearly to the voter to do it right. Machines should be electronic, but generate TWO paper receipts to view (some machines have none, some have one). It should print them side by side next to the monitor. You can check the electronic selections against both receipts. One receipt tape gets locked into the box, the other gets printed for the voter, with a bar code on each to match them later if need be. There then should be random checks done here and there, of paper receipts vs electronic results, after the tallies. Any discrepencies can then be reported. Do all that, and you make the whole thing transparent, and make it very easy for voters to feel confident in their votes.

The more I think about it, the more confident I am that Quintana will be traded. Classic sell-high, not to mention the rotation is so heavily left-handed. Probably Thornton traded too. Those plus some prospects will probably go, bringing back a RH starter and a 3B in some fashion.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 11:14 AM) Lots of funny business going out there with the polls Sometimes it is hard to tell which things are user error and which are legitimately troubling In the modern era of immediate "news", I think part of what you are seeing is just the small % noise that was ALWAYS there, probably even worse before. While the Twitterverse and its cohorts can be incredibly annoying, one pleasant side effect is that it keeps some of the B.S. from happening, for fear of exposure.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 09:23 AM) I actually like the message a lot. Your civic duty is way bigger than just showing up at the polls every four years, though we can't even seem to handle that. QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 09:28 AM) I agree with what you say in this post, but that's not the message I got from the fb quote. That seemed like a boiler-plate "don't vote" message designed to discourage people from voting because the system is 'corrupt.' The idea that not-voting will actually somehow make the system less corrupt/dumb/whatever is pretty silly, unless you're actually advocating for revolution. Pretty much my take. That post you added was awful and ignorant. Saying people should take it seriously makes sense of course, and I totally agree. Saying if you vote you don't get to talk about changing the system is laughably stupid.

Sox list: Chicago White Sox RHP: Shane Lindsay (AAA), Henry Mabee (AA), Matt Zaleski (AAA) C: Damaso Espino (AAA) SS: Tommy Manzella (AAA), Ray Olmedo (AAA), Greg Paiml (AA) OF: Greg Golson (AAA), Cyle Hankerd (HiA), Conor Jackson (AAA), Jose Martinez (AA) A couple names there are interesting. Conor Jackson and Jose Martinez. Jackson was filler, but did pretty well, might be a guy they want to keep around for future callup in an injury situation. Jose Martinez was highly touted at one time, but just hasn't put it together with the bat, and the Sox do have some talented OF's that they don't need to protect. Should be interesting to see if the Sox sign either one. The rest are pretty uninteresting.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 08:01 PM) After 3 days of volunteering I saw my first Red Cross team today. (and by team I mean a girl and a guy driving a Red Cross truck) Guess what they were doing? Photo ops. Not helping. Taking pictures of the truck in front of torn up homes. Glad NBC raised $23 mill for those douchewads. On the one hand, I am impressed you have decided to volunteer to help out with this situation. Not many people make that level of effort, and I think it is fantastic. On the other hand... I think your characterization of your highly localized work with an ad hoc political group being somehow superior to the Red Cross is, well, ridiculous. The Red Cross can't pick a spot to work - they have to do things across the entire area. Tooting your own horn on this is all well and good, but I think you have no concept of reality in terms of what Red Cross, FEMA, or any other large scale work that is being done regionally. They may be doing well, or poorly, but you truly can't have any real idea from where you are standing.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) Stolen from a facebook post... "I've withheld political talk, but I'll say this just once.... If you vote, you cannot complain about the political and electoral system, or its results. You are saying that the current political and electoral system - with all its exaggerated rhetoric, lack of evidential and coherent reasoning, and corruption by finance - is nonetheless sufficient to 'buy' your voice. The act of voting, your 'buying-in' to the system, removes any incentive for fundamental change in the way we elect politicians and conduct political discourse. Your vote says that 'you can be had' by things as they stand; that the fear of short-term consequences on some issues (abortion, gun rights, gay rights, taxation, etc.) is so strong that you cannot hold out for long-term benefits. You therefore cannot complain about our short-sighted and dysfunctional system - along with all the hysteria, the rhetoric, the corruption - because you have acted to enable its perpetuation. You have endorsed it. The irony is that voting is perceived as a mechanism for change. Voting doesn't cause change; social movements with a sustained vision cause change. There are better ways to make progress, although they're not as easy and convenient as voting... they require actual thought and work instead of self-satisfying, knee-jerk emotionalism, and they lack the mechanism of social reinforcement (peer-pressure) to support them. I implore you to be brave and consider how best to craft this world into a better place. That is all." I'm sorry, but, that is just moronic. Particularly the bolded. In fact, I think you can make a good argument for the exact opposite.

I"m going to close this puppy up, and we will use the Election Day thread. We can look back at people's predictions here.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 11:40 PM) People are really underestimating the loss of AJ. You're taking a .280 hitter with 27 dingers out of the lineup, where the hell are we going to get that production from? Not from AJ. He had a hugely aberrant year, at age 35. You really think he does that again at age 36? Possible, sure. But highly unlikely. I love AJ, and I would prefer him back for another year or two, but if the team has to choose between investing in 3B and C, it is 3B without a doubt. Why? Because AJ's OPS's over his entire Sox career until 2012 have been in the 688-769 range. Flowers can approach that, and may even beat it. At 3B on the other hand, the in-house alternatives are Brent Morel and his shining .612 career OPS (.420 last year), or Carlos Sanchez who is 20 years old and isn't a natural 3B. I think you are overestimating what AJ would give you for the next 2-3 seasons.

Turns out he won the MLBPA Comeback award as well.

Today's the day. What time do they start releasing actual numbers again? I think it is after West Coast polls close, right? They don't wait for Alaska and Hawaii, from what I recall.