Reddy

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 11:04 AM) Illinois, Michigan, California. Illinois seems good on paper. Racial breakdown the same as the US, but at the end of the day, Illinois is probably too corrupt. See, in Iowa there's no CENTER of the state. Des Moines? Iowa City? Cedar Rapids? Yeah those are political POWERHOUSES... not... There's a much lower chance of manipulation as opposed to, lets face it, Chicago and Illinois as a whole. Michigan is similar to Iowa in demographics and lacks the latino population, if race is now the concern. I could reasonably get behind this one. California is just a messed up state all around.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 10:57 AM) As opposed to your assumption that I am Republican so I don't care about anyone but white people? You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. go check with the higher ups in your party... i think you've been had.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 10:58 AM) Better than Iowa? Most states are more representative of the country than Iowa. give me an example, son. don't just throw s*** at a wall.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 10:36 AM) btw is their some sort of support you can show me for the claim that Iowans are more rational and better informed than people in other states? The recent Santorum surge there seems to point to the exact opposite. The Santorum surge is because all the people that were voting for Bachman then Perry then Cain then Gingrich are just now going to Santorum. Listen, it doesn't help that the crop of candidates is horrible. The voters who didn't want Romney or Paul last time STILL DON'T, there just isn't a viable alternative so they're jumping from ship to ship. Not all that irrational if you don't support one of the two candidates who you saw last time. And by DEFAULT Iowans are more informed of the candidates views because they actually get to talk to them face to face. While living in Iowa (moved to Chicago in 05) I met and spoke to: Bob Graham Dick Gephardt - spoke at my house John Kerry John Edwards - spoke at my house Dennis Kucinich how many of those have you had a conversation with? I know this is obviously a biproduct of BEING first, but it's also just the reality now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 10:39 AM) Thanks racist. and there's an intelligent response. but, yep, you're a republican, so that's all you're good for.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 10:35 AM) Yeah, who cares about minorities anyway, right? Lily-white Iowa represents real America! The 'average' American is not a real person or a real set of people, and you can't assume that a state that kinda-sorta resembles that average in some ways but really doesn't in others represents a good sample of American voters. *sigh* there is NO state that completely represents a good fair and balanced sample of American voters, all I'm saying is Iowa gives you the BEST sample. If you're gonna fight this, give me an example of a politically moderate state that is full of all colors of people in the exact proportion as the entirety of the United States. One that WOULD give the best cross-section of America.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 09:40 AM) I was wondering the same thing. Iowa is way more white, and way less black, asian, and latino than the rest of the country. haha and you republicans WANT more minority input? you realize that'll make you lose right? here's the reality - 1) minorities don't vote as much as white people do, 2) there still are fewer of them, especially outside of big cities - and there is NO reason to have a first primary in a state dominated by a big city, because it will inevitably be liberally leaning. IDEOLOGICALLY Iowa is one of the most centrist, non-partisan, and rational states out there. Go ahead and look up their supreme court rulings over the years. You don't pick a dark blue or red state to hold the FIRST primary, because that will sway the rest of them. I mean, look at media coverage these days - they'd ignore the fact that the candidate won ALABAMA and they'd claim it should impact whether they win, say, Vermont.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 10:57 PM) you're all kidding yourselves if you don't realize that this is about the all mighty dollar. Iowa, New Hampshire, etc fight like crazy for these "first in the country rights" because they realize the huge amount of $ being brought into the state. Everything from TV ads, Hotel Rooms, Gas for statewide bus trips, restaurants, commercial real estate for headquarters, etc. Personally, I'd love to see a national lottery done the day after the election to determine the order of the first 5-10 states for the following presidential election. Get more states involved. Maybe Alabama would be first, or Ohio, or Minnesota. Why give those rights always to Iowa/New Hampshire? Sh*t, how awesome would it be if Hawaii or Alaska won the right to go 1st? f***ing terrible since they dont represent the majority of americans. that's why it's iowa. swing state, has a little bit of everything

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 07:13 PM) ^^^ it is SO much different in New Hampshire.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 05:43 PM) I think your first point can be rephrased as In IOWA, it doesn't matter how much you SPEND, it is how much ASS YOU KISS. They want to feel 'important' and if you don't show them whatever level of 'respect' they think they deserve, they pout and go to whoever kisses up to them the most. If they were so informed, Ron Paul would be no where NEAR the lead, would be lucky to get 5%, unless all those Iowans are secretly racist, isolationists. haha so you suggest candidates go in and make them feel UNimportant? or do you suggest that would be different in ANY other state? also, they're not racist - however they very well MAY be isolationists. There's a very big "live and let live" sentiment in Iowa. Thus why gay marriage was so quickly adopted, as well as civil rights in the 60s.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 01:10 PM) I think these 2 Dems need to get a life if this bugs them so much as to try and introduce a bill to combat it! http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/...nterstitialskip yep, democrats and republicans are both stupid. this is news?

- In Iowa it doesn't matter how MUCH you spend, it matters if the people have MET you and how they feel about you. I feel like that's a pretty good barometer. Better than the rest of the primaries where you base a decision off a tv ad. - In Iowa the voters are, thus, more informed. - Higher percentage of people turn out Why NOT Iowa?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 02:27 PM) Iowa is so NOT worthy of that money. Time for a different state, or better yet, several states, to be first. read my dad's book: http://www.whyiowa.org/ Buy it on Amazon!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 10:07 AM) Unless elected officials forge signatures to get them on the ballot in a state anyway... obviously most of the GOP campaigns weren't even organized enough to do THAT. That's saying something.

QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 27, 2011 -> 12:22 AM) SS I am certainly conflicted here, but shouldn't voters in every state have the option to vote for any of that party's candidates? Why should one state be given the choice of nine candidates and another state only two? I see Rex's point that a candidate should show some organization in a state, but if someone can win a stae without much organization,doesn't that say a lot about that candidate? the point is that it's the states decision how they want to make the rules, and all y'all federalists should be happy that it works that way! listen, if Newt and Perry's organizations were SO BADLY run that they didn't realize they needed more signatures to get on the ballot that's just too bad for them. The other candidates knew. This is a safeguard against badly run campaigns - which is the hallmark of a candidate that doesn't deserve to be in office.

just watch his scouting videos... kid is a BEAST. 500 foot home runs Vertical jump better than Derrick Rose Athletic as hell Cannon for an arm Hits a HR to Left, then Center, then Right back to back to back. I officially want him. Here's One

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 22, 2011 -> 04:36 PM) Everytime the Royals seem to make progress, then boom, they take two steps back. JJ is an upgrade over Soria. Relievers are thirty times easier to come by, and if Jurrjens stays healthy it's totally worth it.

QUOTE (whitesox901 @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 04:46 AM) Ditto for me. aaaaah i see what you did there.

QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Dec 22, 2011 -> 05:52 PM) I'm glad he kept it underwraps too as to not make excuses for his 2011 failure. I think we all deep down root for DUNN, but I cannot cheer on professionals who have devoted their lives to this art who fail at it. I think DUNN will win "Comeback Player of the Year!" GO SOX! I, uh... don't really think it's all that deep down. If you're a sox fan you sure as hell should be rooting for Dunn. Makes us a significantly better team if he's doing well.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 22, 2011 -> 10:39 AM) There has to be a middle ground here. Carter's note sounds like he wants to take him to dinner. You don't have to say "Good riddance and hope you go soon as well", but you don't have to blow kisses in his ear either. he didn't actually do that now did he? he wished him success. That's it. How else do you greet a new ruler? This is so dumb to be arguing over.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 08:14 PM) Because "Avoiding nuclear war" is also a useful priority. thank you. Jenks, this is exactly why John Bolton was a terrible ambassador. Principles will get you blowed the f*** up. It's all a game. Always has been, always will be.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 10:16 AM) Thats another factor as well. Our team may actually be pretty decent as is (even without TCQ). We all know, in the AL Central, if your decent your likely a contender for the division. I'm all for keeping Danks for the first half! thats. thats. just silly. you'd rather try and "contend" with this piece of crap team than trade a valuable chip and get badly needed young talent. You'd rather have Danks value be as LOW as possible when we trade him. K. Got it.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 19, 2011 -> 03:38 AM) Daniel Cabrera never had the success Volquez did a couple of years back. Volquez has had ONE good season out of what, 6 or 7? baseball is full of guys who were a flash in the pan and fizzled out. Remember how good Garland was one year? Remember how good Loaiza was one year? Remember how good Contreras was one year?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 18, 2011 -> 11:02 PM) Volquez has talent. He just needs to get his stuff under control. He still struck out nearly 9 per 9 last season. Plus, his HR/FB was abnormally high (20%), so I'm sure he'll be better off at Petco. Daniel Cabrera had talent too

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 18, 2011 -> 09:00 PM) I would say over the next 5 years, Danks will average out to about $6 million a year more than Latos which is $30 million more expensive. Again, its not as if Latos will be making minimum for 5 years. He's going to get paid pretty well fairly soon. ohhhkay 30 million MORE than Latos. on this you are correct.