chasfh

Dingler's already under control for the next five seasons, so, what kind of extension do you want to see?

I do pay for Spotrac, but the only reason is because I got a gift card for re-upping with my TV provider, and unlike most Internet services with subscription-based options, they accept it. I regard gift cards like that as free money, so I use the few gift cards I do get for the kinds of things I would never ever buy with my own earned money. Lately it’s been Internet subscriptions like Spotrac and MLB Trade Rumors, another website that accepts gift cards as payment. I am getting another gift card in the mail soon, so I will probably re-up with them, because why not, it’s free money.

I wouldn’t say I have different views of him now than I did during the criminal administration he was part of, but I will say I miss the days when it was he who was the apotheosis of evil.

He knew. He absolutely knew.

There is no actual thinking. There is only primal response.

When JD finally does leave his family and take up with Kirk, it will be hailed by MAGA as a match made in literal Heaven.

Please tell us the trade you want to see. Where are we trading Skubal to, and which of their guys are we getting back?

There is only one guy I can think of who would gladly empty out the top of the farm system for one year of a Cy Young winner who would likely leave the following year, and that guy doesn’t work here anymore.

If we trade Skubal, our trajectory will go backward, not forward. I can hardly imagine the ****storm that would rain down on Harris if he were to trade Skubal and we miss the playoffs next year.

I don't know why you even try.

Right, although. consider carefully what it is I am saying. I am not saying that communist states routinely practiced open democracy. They did not. What I am saying is that the concept of communism is not mutually exclusive from the concept of democracy. It is possible to practice both of them simultaneously, which means communism would have to work hard in the marketplace of ideas to win votes. This is something Trumpian corporate socialism cannot do, which is why they are working feverishly to strangle democracy in its bed.

That makes sense, since 68% of Illinois' population lives in the nine-county Illinois portion of the Chicago–Naperville–Elgin Metropolitan Statistical Area.

I believe they do promote themselves as "The #1 news team on Comedy Central".

It would have to be substantially more than one dollar more.

I don't even know that extending a catcher after his rookie season would be a good idea, unless he were at least Bill Freehan-level or higher, and we're talking maybe among top twenty in history. And even so, too many bad things can happen to catchers along the way, much more than any other position.

I would not extend him any time soon.

I could be talked into this. He just walked away from three years and almost 60 million, so anyone who seriously wants to sign him will need to pay way, way more than this. It will probably have to be higher than his 5/102 deal the Mets signed him to. What are the chances he will want to come to Detroit over the Dodgers or Mets or Yankees or Red Sox or Giants or Cubs?

It occurred to me maybe a year or so ago that as reprehensible as MTG and her views are, she is not the bridge troll that Lauren Boebert is. Of course, that's a super low bar.

Chicago has been run by Democrats since well before I arrived here in 1996, and it has improved immensely in the past 30 years, with crime in particular having gone down by over half, and it wasn't even bad here when I arrived. So, now I know by firsthand experience that you have no idea what you are posting from your bubble about.

I don't think I have ever asked you guys anything about this before. I have shares in a company that is connected to the administration and is considered very reprehensible. You can probably guess which one it is. (You can guess but I will not confirm either way.) When I bought the stock, I thought of them as a good AI play, nothing more. I had no ideas about who they are or what they might engage in. Now I do. My stake in the company has gone up by 14x (yes, that is fourteen x) in the two-plus years since I bought it and is poised to go up even more. Ethically, I would never buy the stock today, but I already have it in hand. The question is whether I should sell out of it immediately to cut all association with them. On the one hand, I shouldn't be supporting this company at all with my money. If my association with them entailed my giving them x amount of money every y number of time periods, then it would be an easy call: stop giving them my money. Done and done. On the other hand, they've already gotten all the money they were ever going to get out of me over two years ago. I have not put any more money into the company, and they are not getting another penny from me anytime in the future. They already have all they're gonna get, so whether I sell today or a year from today , it will still be the same amount of money they will have gotten from me either way. It's just that now the value of the stake I gave them my money for has exploded literally exponentially. So whether I were to sell the stock I own in them for $10,000 or $100,000 or $1,000,000, that would not change the amount I put into the company. That part is fixed and done and over with. So, while I am loathe to claim any ownership stake in this company—such as that "ownership" is, anyway—I am leaning towards hanging onto the stock as long as it's going up so I can extract as much money out of them as I possibly can when I do sell, and I may then turn around and try to do something good with the original stake, something that's opposed to how they are helping the regime. I actually have implemented a series of trailing stop limit buys to sell it as the price drops through a series of trigger points. The price has not even threatened that first trigger, though, and the triggers keep rising with the stock price. If any of you were in this same position, how would you handle it?

Declined since when?

Fun fact: communism and democracy are not mutually exclusive ideologies.

I wonder whether, after the end of Game 6 when Barger seemed way too anxious to score like RIGHT NOW by getting too far off the bag on the short fly ball to Hernandez and then getting doubled off second to lose the game? I bet the Jays were taking way shorter leads because that loomed large in their minds and they were over-correcting.