caulfield12

Greg, one thing you've never done is articulated a legit argument for Ventura. It's like your thing for Leyland and LaRussa. Why would someone out of the government game for so long now be properly equipped for the highest office in the land, compared to, say, Al Franken or Liz Warren? Both of those politicians have consistently fought for the little guy/consumers. What evidence exists HRC "attacked" her husband's accusers??? The supposed Jewish slur?

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 07:28 PM) https://twitter.com/RealMikeTrimm/status/785538937771192320 New Podesta emails show that Saudi Arabia is funding ISIS secretly. Accuse/imply/infer/allege....not the same as showing or proving, Biden has said it more explicitly and it didn't make the news at all.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 07:28 PM) https://twitter.com/RealMikeTrimm/status/785538937771192320 New Podesta emails show that Saudi Arabia is funding ISIS secretly. Accuse/imply/infer....not the same as showing or proving, Biden has said it more explicitly and it didn't make the news at all.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/how-alex-jones-a...-181955203.html BREAKING NEWS: OBAMA AND CLINTON ACTUALLY AREN'T ACTUALLY DEMONS REEKING OF HELLISH SULPHUR. By the the way, the Jeffrey Epstein/Trump case where he supposedly was arranged to be with an underage girl is supposed to start trial December 16th. Of course, Bill Clinton and Epstein are also connected. Among the other problems Trump faces are calling Epstein a "Jew bastard" and trying to pay for the girl's abortion (allegedly).

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/ff2531ce-d1af-...17;s-maria.html Here we have a perfect example....Maria Bartiromo retweeting that Hillary Clinton supposedly called Muslims "sand n*****s" when it wasn't even close to reality https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-hillary-cl...-182710546.html Maybe the worst political ad in recent memory...attacking Clinton's health "problems"

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 12, 2016 -> 07:19 AM) Rumors are that Hahn has been for a rebuild for quite some time, but was overruled by Reinsdorf and/or KW. Regardless, if it's job security he wants, Hahn is better off going the rebuilding route and buying himself a good four years. If he goes for it again and fails, he'll be hard pressed to use the manager and players as scapegoats after multiple years of underperformance. I'm fairly confident the Sox will do some sort of rebuild, just doubt they will blow the whole thing up. He gets 2 or 2 1/2 years....if they're going close to full rebuilding. He's already shown he can't compete on the fly with a mid-market payroll.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 11:15 PM) Of course she hates the middle class. I've been saying it on here forever. She's a one percenter folks, just like Donald. They both are elitist. They both are rich. Their lives for the most part are over (not being mean here, their ages and quality of life that's coming). So you'd think they'd want to help the little guy and gal their last 10 years or so of their working lives (til 78, 80). But nooooo. Of course she hates Americans. So does Trump for that matter. FYI I don't think Obama hates Americans nor did Carter or Reagan. Bushes were kinda elitist themselves. And as an addendum by "hate Americans" I mean yes they'd do ANYTHING to stomp them if it meant them staying a one percenter. Sure they hate us. Bingo! But he doesn't see it. It's very simple. John Edwards and Al Gore in 2000 were the last two to run "populist" campaigns. Most perceived them as lacking authenticity or not being "genuine" enough. The last Republican to really address helping the middle class (and at least appear like he cared) was probably Jack Kemp, and the only modern campaign that really reached out to the poor and dispossessed (not even middle class) was run in 1968 by Robert F. Kennedy, before he was assassinated after winning the California primary. Obviously, there probably are very few Americans who believe the Kennedys are "like them" or "care about them," right? Back to HRC. Nobody ever argued she was particularly likable. Remember Obama's zinger from eight years ago, "you're likable enough, Hillary"? She does give off that impression (and her husband has the opposite charisma) of creating a perception that she doesn't care or even "hates" everyday Americans, because she's so wary of interacting with them and she has developed a paranoia going back to 1978 when Bill first won the governorship and quickly lost it (only to win again in 1982, having been chastened by the electorate)...it was at that point she started distrusting the press and feeling that taped or photographed conversations with everyday Americans would only lead to "misinterpretations" which would later be used against her. She's a lawyer, and that's how she and her husband think, so the less you say, the less likelier you are to get yourself in trouble. SEEMS QUITE OBVIOUS A THIRD PARTY REPRESENTING THE MIDDLE 50% OF THE COUNTRY (FLYOVER STATES LIKE IOWA OR KANSAS) IS THE ONLY SOLUTION. Of course, if you have three parties, you're going to continue electing leaders that have the support of a minority of Americans. That, in and of itself, could also be dangerous. But look at the Tea Party, the Gingrich 1994 Revolution, Occupy Wall Street/1% vs. 99%, Bernie Sanders, Howard Dean, etc. All of them have tried to go in the direction of splintering off one party or another...either to lead it in their preferred direction (see Democratic Leadership Council or Grover Norquist's foundation) and some with idealistic notions of creating a "third way" in American politics. All of them were beaten down or co-opted by those two principal parties.

Here's the thing (once again)... Most Democrats are willing to look at HRC objectively. We're far from worshiping/adoring/coronation day in terms of opinions. In fact, I've ready a number of the "right wing" books assailing the Clinton Foundation (Clinton Cash, etc.) and find 50% of it to be interesting and at times, thought-provoking. But this whole idea of "media bias" is just sour grapes. If you've been around long enough, you remember when it was Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush as president for 20 out of 24 years, and then after Clinton you had Bush, so GOP presidents for 28/40 years, or 70% of a lifetime. It's usually a case where individual reporters/columnists/anchors tend to have a leftward lean and the corporations (see Murdoch or the Koch Brothers) and newspapers who are their bosses and run the editorial boards, so everything tends to even out over time. For many years, there was really only "right wing radio" starring the likes of Rush Limbaugh. There seemed to be 4-5 programs on the right, for every CNBC with Maddow, Matthews and Olberman. Heck, even CROSSFIRE on CNN had a very "wimpy" liberal who wasn't really much of a foil for the more aggressive right-leaning pundits who tended to dominate those shows in terms of tone and content. The irony of Citizens United is that if the GOP had any idea how to articulate a fresh and dynamic vision for the country with the built-in fundraising advantages they SHOULD theoretically enjoy, they would be absolutely WIPING OUT the Democrats right now coming after a two-term president with "mediocre" popularity numbers for most of his tenure. The reason Trump's losing isn't media bias, it's because he's a terrible candidate, and clearly so inexperience and unwilling to learn policy most GOP voters would have a large pause before punching that particular ballot. McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore (although you can argue that one) and Kerrey also lost because they simply weren't good enough candidates, and they failed to appeal to the center-right voters in the moderate 40% which make up the middle of the country and consider themselves independent or non party-affiliated. So let's stick to reality and discuss things in mature, adult fashion...something that only Ken Bone appears to be capable of at this point in time. (Heck, if you instantly could put him on the ballot, Mr. Bone would have a very good chance of winning the presidency with civil discourse having reached such a low point.)

To say Buchholz and Rodriguez are sure things is ludicrous...on the White Sox, Buchholz would clearly be a non tender candidate because of his rising salary and inconsistent performance level. Maybe another pitcher the White Sox would try to fix is Joe Kelly as an add-in if they sent Robertson? Have little interest in Pomeranz. DD should not be very confident in both Wright and Porcello overperforming again along with Pomeranz...and the Price deal looks worse and worse by the month. They still don't have an ace, unless Price can pull off a Jon Lester transformation in his 30's.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 02:08 PM) Sure. Trump is awful. He's tacky, he's annoying, he knows nothing about policy, he can't stay on subject or present a full fledged argument. Then you can just hang him out to dry when he says some insensitive stuff about women, Mexicans, Muslims, etc. You're just pulling large chunks of each demographic offended. The only redeeming part of his entire campaign is when he talks about the reality of DC in plain form and speaks about Hillary's sketchy career. Other than that he's just providing us with eye rolls and head shakes. Per usual, I have no idea what you're talking about but the young girl probably didn't want to own up to her actions or hurt the guy she cared about. Fine. And I have no idea how you can write so well about baseball for someone in their twenties but be so far off base in how you look at the world in terms of politics, but that's okay.

QUOTE (JUSTgottaBELIEVE @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 02:13 PM) But if you are the Red Sox why not sign a guy like Reddick to complement JBJ and Benintendi in the OF? Aren't they basically a lock to sign Encarncion too? He easily replaces Ortiz's production. Hitting might get you there but pitching wins in October and right now the Red Sox have a big problem there. They can't trust their current ace to give them a quality start in a playoff game moving forward. Their issues were on full display over the past week and simply standing pat will not get it done. Also, regarding fan favorites, I think Benintendi is quickly turning into just as much of a fan favorite as Betts so why is it a given they would be willing to part with him if they really care about that kind of stuff? You also have to figure out where to play Sandoval and Moncada. Fan favorite as a rookie with limited time vs. clear Top Five MVP candidate are not quite the same...but if it does perhaps cause them to undervalue JBJ internally, then fine.

Has to be Boston, Texas, LAD, Cardinals, NYY, Astros or Pirates. It's not brain surgery. Gauge their initial interest, solicit opening packages/groups of prospects, play Boston and NYY against each other with a few media leaks and get a deal done for Sale by mid December.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:56 PM) I think you parroted some widely-understood premises. This is obviously an area where the current leadership of the GOP loses young people including myself. Consent is where the progressives lose a lot of men. If a man or woman get in a car drunk and get pulled over either will be held accountable. Regardless of their feelings the next day, the have to deal with the consequences. If a man and a woman get in a bed drunk, only the man could be held responsible. If the girl sobers up and sees that the guy she f***ed wasn't Prince Charming and has regret all of a sudden she's thinking "was I raped?" where as if a man f***s Rosie O'Donnell when he's drunk he just gets made fun of by his friends. I am not offering this as testimonial evidence but my example: when I was a senior in high school there was this girl who was a junior who everyone considered the best looking girl in their grade. Gorgeous little blonde girl. Her and her boyfriend broke up during the week but they were probably going to get back together in a few days like young people tend to do. She shows up at the party, upset about her ex and hits the water bottle filled with vodka and ends up flirting and hooking up with my bestfriend, a black kid. They made out, and only made out, on a pool table in the middle of the party (classy, I know). When her boyfriend found out and was livid, she cried rape because she was "forced." Word traveled fast and my guy took a lot of s*** for it when he did absolutely nothing wrong. I know it's impossible to have a nuanced conversation about rape allegations without getting called names, but people aren't always honest and presenting yourself as a victim often deludes people from holding you accountable for your actions. To act as if every rape allegation is legitimate is ridiculous. And, of course if your best friend was Zach from Saved by the Bell, nothing would have happened to him, right?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:49 PM) It's a good argument if you're just talking about the past few elections though. There was definitely dirt in them (eg Swiftboating), but nothing like 2016. Look at Willie Horton in 1988...and the way Atwater ran those campaigns, albeit there were code words back then and vague insinuations. Numerous (some likely innocent) prisoners had to die in Arkansas solely so Bill Clinton wouldn't be labelled as soft on crime. Even HRC was using terms like "super predator" to classify minorities (even though she won't ever admit it).

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:46 PM) Not sure if this is sarcasm but with each passing day the polling and support looks worse for him. And the same exact things were said about Goldwater in 1964 or McGovern in 1972. At least they both had a basic grasp of public policy and could articulate coherent arguments in a debate setting.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:38 PM) Again the difference is the incivility IS the political process today, versus it being a part of political process at times. An argument that campaigns were much more civil (compared to today) from the 1820's through Lincoln isn't going to stand up to objective historical analysis...look at 1968, for another example. It's not unlike Greg's the country is falling apart argument. We see what we want to see and block out all evidence to the contrary that doesn't confirm our strongly held bias.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:31 PM) LOL, you seriously think people would have kids to get a $1,000 TAX credit and ultimately lose money in the process? Jesus Christ thats moronic. This goes back to seeing the worst possible attributes in the "other" side. Perception. Brett, are you honestly responding to this tax credit and picturing a single white mother in Appalachia, Mississippi or even on an Indian reservation? A single mother from the Rust Belt whose husband worked in a factory and they divorced after he lost his job and couldn't find anything more than minimum wage jobs to replace it? Or is that mother black or Hispanic (likely an illegal immigrant)?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 01:23 PM) I like the best rap. People tell me my music tastes are great. White people cannot be racist if they like rap/hip hop/R&B and have at least 3-5 African-American friends on Facebook.

Here's the thing. HRC is flawed...some of the recent revelations coming out about the DNC and Clinton campaigns vs. Bernie Sanders and his (young) supporters makes me cringe. She's much cozier with the banks and free trade tenets than she lets on in public, for example. The difference in the two campaigns is one side is mostly divided on ideological grounds (Hillary is a one percenter), that's mostly an economic argument about what we truly believe about the efficacy of income redistribution in America. On the other side, you have roughly 1/4 to 1/3rd of the likely Republican voters filled with hate and vitriol for foreigners, for black people (especially Obama), for Hispanics, for the LGBT community, misogynistic attitudes towards women, etc. Greg, you may feel ethically/morally that HRC is corrupt and even should be arrested, but, as an American...can you honestly not see the difference? Is it simply that being branded a racist for being Republican (and not a Trump supporter) is what upsets you the most, being lumped in with the deplorables now instead of being able to hide behind a veneer of Ayn Rand rugged individualism and self-reliance? Or perhaps you perceive the Democrats as hating religion/God, and you believe that's worse than the different "ism" versions of hate coming out of the Trump campaign? That it's all somehow even because just as many Dems are atheist and "hate" God in your perception?

http://people.com/politics/clinton-advisor...t-leaked-email/ Chelsea for President 2024 campaign not off to a roaring start.

Except the Braves made the playoffs 14 consecutive years....the White Sox have never even managed to go back to back in their much longer franchise history. And Braves' fans have had a number of seasons to enjoy since that string ended as well. Not to mention two new stadiums in the past 20 years.

By the zinger (not the semi-delicious snack cake) argument, Lloyd Bentsen vs. Dan Quayle should have given the Dems the 1988 election...

See Bushes, Jeb. Like her mother, her charisma and energy levels are quite low. Chelsea has a non-zero chance ofvrunning for president, but nobody's going to be clamoring for her in the Democratic Party. Her husband losing so much money for hedge fund clients by betting on the Greek financial crisis with "inside info" already almost disqualifies her from getting out of the starter's block.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Oct 9, 2016 -> 07:48 AM) Hindsight is 20/20 but why would Bochy roll with Shark? Who else could they have gone with? Moore, Blach or Suarez...but managers usually go with the horse who got them there all season...and maybe Moore's numbers weren't a good match for the Cubs' line up. Maybe just a managerial hunch going against his former team? His intuition as a manager was just fine in 2010, 12 and 14. It's arguable. Moore's peripherals were 5-10% better, roughly. Blach also has pitched well doen the stretch, but inexperienced.

There's a huge risk you don't get much more than Sanchez and he turns out to be a one hit wonder like a Kevin Maas or Shane Spencer. A year ago he was part of a major package, now he would comprise 75-80% of that deal individually. It's one your scouting department has to get 100% right. Failure means multiple heads will roll. Getting 3-5 players from Boston seems like the better risk, because you only need a couple of those players to be above average regulars (2.5-4 war) rather than Sanchez having to be a perennial All Star at catcher. Of course the other issue is getting back more than one of Bradley, Benintendi and Moncada. JBJr means you are rebuilding on the fly and probably have to keep Frazier unless he completely tanks.