mtutiger

You didn't hear that from me.

Will it???

It'll land closer to 48%, fwiw

More: And, frankly, he's probably right. The rest of the GOP ticket statewide aside from Walker won

Warnock called winner by CNN

De Kalb just dropped... 92-8 Warnock. Those are Saddam numbers lol

There isn't gonna be a Senator Walker lol

Need to see more of Atlanta...

Gonna be an early night in Georgia

Arson Judge just lit Jon Heyman ablaze lol

Arson Judge about to light fire on the NL West haha

The starting pitching market is crazy

He's also buddies with Bryce, iirc

You do concede the point that a shutdown of freight rail traffic would have harmed a lot of workers in the broader economy, correct?

The market just seems slow more broadly as well and might pick up whenever the big names start coming off the board

I almost view his comments as a sign that they aren't interested in going bottom of the barrel on starters (ie. Mike Pineda or Jose Urena types) and are more just willing to accept what they have internally to fill whatever gaps they have. Long term, it's the right move, but it's no doubt a leap of faith in the short term.

Reese Olson looks like the most likely Wentz / Hill for this year IMO. Although your question may be more focused on guys not currently on the 40 man roster.

Hoo boy

I don't know, nor can control, what others say or do. Nor do I particularly care, I'll leave you to dabble in hypotheticals. Just don't see how it plays out differently under Trump, or any other administration for that matter. Can you be more specific about what you would do to "put more pressure" on the railroads? What would you say publicly to compel them to move off of their terms? It's a leverage problem; people barely think about the railroad industry and, for years, it was always funny to hear people muse about how "railroad are dying".... they are very much not dead and are vitally critical for getting goods from point A to point B. The supply chain issues of the past couple of years are just a taste of what it is like when that cog in the economy isn't operating at 100%, the cog just not working for days at a time would be devastating to the American economy. It would impact goods getting to shelves at the grocery stores, commodities such as metals and lumber getting to manufacturers (which would likely negatively impact a lot of blue collar union workers in other industries, I might add), coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming or other areas getting to coal power plants that are still in use (without which may lead to pressure on our energy grid). Those are just a few examples of the second-order effects that would come from even just a few days without the rails operating, it would touch just about every American in one way or another. So again, that's the decision: that or enforcing the deal. And I'm guessing just about everyone in that position, including Presidents Ewsieg or MTU or whoever, enforces the deal. That doesn't mean that railroad workers shouldn't get sick time or that Presidents shouldn't expect criticism for whatever decision they make when given two bad choices, but any logical person in that position is going to take the option that doesn't bring about economic catastrophe.

I like that they are doing these updates now

I wouldn't say that I'm "making excuses" for everyone. Literally just a couple of posts ago, with respect to the administration's position, I said that there were no good options on the table here and, with that comment, it's implied that choosing the least bad option still comes with criticism and complaints. That's part of being President of the United States - you have to take a lot of slings and arrows. I take this particular issue seriously because it's one of the rare times where something comes up on the political board that intersects a bit with the work I do professionally. I figured that we were having a discussion about the contours of why this is happening and the issues that were facing the administration, as well as members of both parties in Congress, and why they approached it the way they did. If you want to have that discussion, great, but I don't see the "media bias" angle you are advancing. And to your original post, I don't see how this particular action, in totality, suggests that the GOP is the "party of the working man" given that only 6 of it's 50 in the Senate were willing to back workers on this issue. Regarding Trump, I would say that if he were still President, this probably plays out the same way it did with Biden. Probably every President in recent memory, tbh. And I'm guessing if we had President Ewsieg in charge, he'd probably not go with the option that tanks the American economy as well, despite the moral implications involved. It was a tough decision, but rail traffic in the United States is vital to keeping the American economy moving. Without it, there would be a lot of pain and suffering as well.

The reasoning is pretty mundane - after negotiations on the the current deal between the administration, management and labor representatives (which was just enforced), each of the 14 unions were then given time to vote and ratify the new agreement on their own. In other words, actual membership was given time to vote on whether to ratify the agreement. Some unions did in fact ratify while others did not, but ratification would have required all of them to agree otherwise they would have struck in solidarity with one another. When that process did not work, it kinda left us at this juncture.