mtutiger

Olson was probably the easiest to send down, just think he pitched too well this Spring.... he may have been the best of the three.

It's surprising, although I don't know how surprising it should be.... the expectations from the podcast/beat writer set seemed to assume Manning was a lock, but while Mize and Olson had flaws of their own (Mize in particular with walks), they both seemed to give up less hard contact as well in their starts. The level of competition is just higher to make this team, and that's a sign of progress.

LOL at the comment below Cody's post complaining about Manning going down because they signed two starters. Just cannot win with people on the internet

Digital World is now down 8% on the day.... It'd be hilarious if the stock tanked now that Trump is attached to it.

Hoo boy

From the article: Does not change his short term issues, but still shady as hell

This is true, although I think if Nixon did what he did today, he probably would have gotten away with it.

Oh my

Some of this is because of the competitive Senate race, but the fact that it was an either/or decision is surprising

I loved those Riley Greene dives as much as anyone, but I enjoy Parker making those catches on the run much much better lol

Even during this current administration, we are living through an impeachment inquiry that (for a variety of reasons) wouldn't be a twinkle in anyone's eye had Biden not chosen to run for office.

Unless there is a conviction in any of the criminal cases, I don't expect they will matter much regardless of the existence of this case. To the extent this one matters, it goes to more practical implications of dealing with the fallout while trying to mount of a national campaign (which will require a significant amount of $$$)

I keep going back to the fact that everyone who ends up running for POTUS amps up the scrutiny on themselves because they are drawing attention to themselves in a way that they weren't in their previous roles (either in lower level roles in government or, in Trump's case, as a private businessman). There's a reason campaigns hire opposition researchers... to find shady **** in their opponents past. Trump is not unique in this regard, and I have no idea why the volume or type of shadiness in his past, or the fact that it violates the law in this particular case, requires us to treat him by a different standard.

On Earth 2.0, where Michael Bloomberg's 2020 campaign resulted in him winning the Democratic nomination and Presidency against Donald Trump, does one believe that his finances would have been scrutinized a lot more than they were prior to running? For better or worse, when someone makes the decision to run for office, particularly POTUS, their lives are scrutinized in ways that they weren't before. This was true of all of Trump's predecessors, and it is true of his successor (see the impeachment inquiry he's currently being subjected to)

"but not panic" lol

Sportz must be loving this performance by Vierling today lol

First start I've caught of Mize this spring.... he looks really good.

To be honest, I don't know. And as far as the idea that Trump garners a higher level of scrutiny as a politician than he did when he was a private businessman, you won't get an argument from me. Either way, my point still stands. I will take the man and his posture at face value as to how he views this situation.

Donald Trump is also not easy to defend for most independents lol Again, I'm gonna trust Trump's political instincts on this.... based on the words from his team and his seven "Truths" from yesterday morning, I don't think he sees this as a positive politically, personally or professionally.

From Trump's posture on all of this, I don't think he sees this result playing out.

I guess Kevin O'Leary won't be swooping in lol

The polls don't have to be wrong for Chas's point to be still have validity.

This comports with my experience as well.