Leaderboard

No you are not. First of all her extra vote total can be attributed to ONE state California in fact it can be more then attributed she won California by 4.3 million she won the popular vote by 2.8 million. What I'm saying is the current system suits the US well and was designed that way. It actually encourages you to run a national campaign on the issues that are important to all Americans rather then just run up vote totals among your supporters in metropolitan areas. Almost all large countries (geographical) are run in this manner. Proportional representation is not the norm among civilized developed nations and almost all the countries where it is implemented do not have the rural-urban divide seen in larger countries. The complete list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation#List_of_countries_using_proportional_representation

The trolling comes in the form of the ridiculous and irrelevant responses you routinely come up with to deflect any criticism of Sox ownership and management. Just because you are the board administrator doesn’t mean you aren’t capable of your own brand of trolling.

There are plenty of posts on this board where i advocate what the Democrats should do in order to ensure better results. Doesnt mean i also cant advocate for a better system. Thats the key, you win with the rules that are in place to make changes for the better.

At least we’re not the totally irrelevant A’s, Mariners or Rays!! Now, on to the Josh Donaldson signing ceremony...

It was Singer-esque. Anyone that second guesses the Sox taking Rodon when he was available should just following baseball.

So you are saying votes in California shouldn’t count the same as votes in Wyoming or the Dakotas....

From his chat today: Dan Szymborski: I think it can also be a bit misleading. Some teams outsource some aspects more than others. For example, the White Sox do.

Cue reference to fans not supporting “competitive” teams in 2010, 2012 and 2016. (Note: Adam Dunn’s historically-bad 2011 and the signings of LaRoche/Cabrera/Bonifacio didn’t exactly help restore the faith.)

There is basically a 0% chance that Ruiz and Vieria are "gone". They may not be with the Sox to start 2018, but barring trade, will most definitely be in the organization as both were just added to the 40 man this year and have plenty of options. Cordell and Tilson are borderline and could go either way. I'd be shocked if LaMarre is in the organization come the Winter Meetings. This guy is not a long term piece, and while he was decent with the Sox this year, there is no reason to keep him around IMO. Also, DelmonicO has at least 1 option left, so he definitely isn't getting "released".

Best of luck to Danish. Kid was a good soldier here and had a car accident that nearly killed him. I hope he catches on with an MLB team and has a solid career.

As much as we may want to sign a Harper or Machado, nobody can know how realistic that will be even if the money is there on our side to do so? Sure the Sox should be involved, but to view us as anything more than a dark horse would be foolish against teams like the Yankees/Angels/Dodgers/Red Sox/Cubs. I think we will be more active than last season, but I still get the feeling that this offseason will feature mainly bridge type deals to help get us into our competitive window. 2019 is another pretty painful rebuilding year, as the bulk of our minor league talent won't be mlb ready until 2020.

And Michael Jordan was picked third. Any other irrelevant non sequiturs you want to waste?

Somehow I doubt there's much evidence that opt-outs keep players performing at high levels, as for example Heyward is a big flashing red sign saying that doesn't come true.

Yeah because the Republicans would have totally followed that rule if the Democrats hadn't changed it. I mean, following tradition and rules, fairness, that's totally an accurate and apt way of describing how they've treated the Supreme Court seats and it's clearly only the Democrats who are unfair. Now that's the kind of honest commentary I expect from an average Republican.

The White Sox were at the bottom of ratings last year in no small part because they're rebuilding, because they made the decision in 2015 and 2016 that they would sacrifice future years to win those years. There were games in ~2014 when the Astros had something like <1000 people tuning in, when they were playing on Sundays and the Texans season had started. Now the Astros are back to getting strong ratings across Houston, because they're a better team. Once Kopech got hurt, how many of us wanted to watch that last week? I tuned in for Hawk's last day. There's reason to believe that viewership should recover to reasonable levels in this market...if the White Sox can turn around their franchise. The worry is that the White Sox have been bad for so long that at some point, the erosion of viewers and interest will become locked in and permanent, and even if they return to winning they'll only be in the middle of the league in ratings and still rivaling the Indians and Rays for ticket sales. I don't think we've gotten there yet, but if the first wave of talent in this rebuild flops, it'll have been >a decade since the White Sox's last winning season by the time the next wave of talent arrives. By then I could legitimately seeing there not being enough people left who care to support the franchise even if they get back to winning, and that's a situation where, when the stadium lease runs out, heading somewhere else makes sense.

It is amazing how this tax fraud story and the debunking of Trump the businessman has just gone away.

At this stage, I am pulling for talent. It is stupid to think that picking 7th is better than 3rd when you are talking about 95 losses versus 100. I will worry about wins when the team is competitive again.