PK htiw klaw eriF

I am paying more than that by a good deal. But it isn't about the 'rich' not paying their fair share, it's about the fact you cannot grow any wealth below a certain income level, while those at the top are able to grow their wealth extremely fast. The point of the post was the deficit, that little barb about who is paying what was just an aside. But this is about the budget deficit. The money for it ain't gonna fall from the sky(well it is, because the US is most in debt to the US because shell games used to borrow at lower rates) and has to come from somewhere. Big corporations and Wall Street guys can pay very little % in tax while reaping the lion's share the state's benefits and they pass the burden on to the Hurlshots of this country. Why shouldn't someone like me who currently pays a lot less than the average be able to say these rich ****s ain't paying enough when in a decade I'll likely be where Hurlshot is and I'll be impacted by any austerity measures enacted in response to the budget deficits?

That's gonna go over real well with those whose problems were her policies.

I don't know how you guys do it in Texas, but how how difficult can it be with going to a polling station, show ID, get a paper ballot, write down the number of your candidate in a booth, drop it in the box and exit? There were machines. Only six of them, and they were slow because you had a circular thing to scroll with that didn't work very fast. A good number of the candidates were running unopposed so it was a bitch to scroll through. Then there was the staff, they were looking up names in a book and it took then a while for most. It's inefficient as hell and probably would be better served with a drop ballot or something. I was lucky to have free time, if I had to work that day I probably wouldn't have been able to cast by vote. I drove by it after hitting a liquor store and the line had spilled off to block one lane of the street.

The issue with Bernie is that a lot of support comes from independents rather tha democrats. Even with open primaries they would be less likely to vote, and with the utter trainwreck primary voting was it when wouldn't surprise me if quite a few left after 15 minutes. Seriously, it took me over an hour to vote and there were less than 10 people ahead of me. It's horribly mismanaged and needs to be streamlined to not **** over those with jobs.

I go back to BGT because with SCS the combat is fun. I mean there's definitely stuff it could do better, like HLAs(I use refinements because vanilla are too bland) and spell variety(no vanilla Divinitation spells past 7 IIRC) but it's just fun in spite of all that. PoE, despite introducing mechanics I'd agree with in theory, doesn't match BGT in terms of fun. So until someone makes another rpg like BGT that's fun I'll probably keep going back to it.

What are those insane HP numbers? Enemies in BG1 with over 500 HP? ...So what, dragons in that mode probably have literally thousands of HP in BG2? Yeah, it seems to add tedium rather than challenge. And if I wanted tedium I'd just play PoE. Anyways I'm planning on jumping into Underrail when I have time.

Nationwide results/margin of victory 2008 -Obama 18,107,587; 1828 1/2 pledged delegates -Clinton 18,045,829; 1726 1/2 pledged delegates 2016 -Clinton 15,571,643; 2184 pledged delegates -Sanders 11,888,779; 1804 pledged delegates Looks to me that the margins of victory numbers are pretty self-evident. And these don't include superdelegates. Half of a delegate? Are they superpositioned schrödinger's delegates among the democratic party? Who's playing Asuka in this allegory? America.

Whelp guess the primary ride is over. Looking forward to massive disillusionment and a very unpopular president.

Well ****, as expected Shillary got the nomination. Unless we all die or the FBI party van comes knocking the next POTUS will be Thatcher 2.0 or a reality star with ****ed up hair. Because Capitalism has been the global economic system since industrialization and revolutionary movements over the last century have been socialist. I'd say the left-right dichotomy has evolved past it's origin, particularly concerning ideology. It's not very clear outside of philosophy circlejerks and would probably make more sense labeled as pro/anti property, but I don't have the means to change that. I'd say it's irrelevant, because radicalism and traditionalism are contextual. They don't tell us much about what an ideology is about, and in different contexts radicalism becomes the traditionalism of another. A dichotomy based on support or opposition to property is clear in identifying what an ideology is about, and as such more useful outside of context than traditional or radical.

Some guy claiming another DNC error for his registration If even half these claims are true, the ****s in charge of registration are either corrupt or incompetent.

That has to be the most special snowflake version of the left-right dichotomy I've heard. It is?No, that has to be some anon telling me that anything furthering the reptilian agenda against the gods was leftist. The unifying aspect of Leftism is opposition to property. The various ideologies don't agree on how to oppose it or even what exactly constitutes property and socialism, but they do have opposition to property in common. Left = anti-property/right = pro-property. It makes sense because it is a binary quality you can't waffle on. The issue with your interpretation of the left/right dichotomy, aside from what constitutes adherence to tradition, is that anything from insurrectionary anarchism to Keynesian reformism to monarchism would be considered left-wing in liberal republics. It doesn't convey anything about the goals of said ideologies other than they weren't the prevailing ideology of the founding powers of a state, where as the property distinction has a more universal meaning and doesn't require context of current states founding ideologies to label an ideology.

That has to be the most special snowflake version of the left-right dichotomy I've heard. But if the country was established as a break in tradition(from monarchism to republicanism), wouldn't that mean it was (your conception) of leftist from the beginning? If not, if hypothetically the US fell and was reorganized as a monarchical dictatorship, would a movement to topple that and restart a republic be left-wing?

Interesting, but this line in particular caught my attention. Despite popular belief, America has been pulled to the right for the past 30 years. That has to change. On what planet has America been pulled to the right? Not this one, because America has always been fundamentally on the right in terms of governance and the state since inception. This hasn't changed because the function of the state is still primarily the preservation of property and the dominant ideology is liberalism, albeit conservative and Keynesian strains. If I had to guess the shift of the Democratic Party from New Deal/Keynesian reformists to whatever the Republicans were two decades ago and the Republicans from to Chicago School to Chicago School with more Austrian influences. We haven't had a leftist president at all. The closest we had were the progressives and FDR, and that new deal and square deal stuff was mostly to appease the labor movement who were ready to lynch the owners of capital. The only serous leftist candidate for President we've had was Debs and he's been gone a long time. The interventionist policy has historically been used to prop up anti-socialist governments, the economy is thoroughly capitalist in America, and the right has managed to control the political process completely. If you think the left has gotten anything it wants, let alone has been steering, you probably have confused Keynesian Liberalism for Leftism. The organized Left in the US is dead. The reformists have fallen to complacency and the insurgents have been shattered by Cointelpro. It could very well come back , likely in an anarchist form, with the current economic turbulence and authoritarian measures enacted to protect the interests of the bourgeois, but it isn't alive now.

Here's what some California voters think

Yesterday's hell doesn't make today's any less unpleasant. We lost the draft, now we've got surveillance on a massive scale. I can marry my gf without worrying about going to jail, but there's a far-right on the rise(like the Golden Dawn in Greece) that could really cause some damage. And you're almost 40 if you aren't there already. You've got a steady job and a wife with a steady job that combined pay well enough to take care of two kids and go on RV vacations. You aren't ****ting gold, but from what I gather from your posts on an obscure video game forum you're doing pretty well. Most of my peers are not. People who graduated in the top 5% of my high school and did very well in college can't find jobs that are good enough to rent an apparent. The jobs that they do get rarely give them more than 30 hours a week. The only ones working full-time are the ones who stumbled into a specialized labor job(like myself), and in those cases the pay still isn't enough to do anything long-term. We're one economic crash from another Depression and the things that caused the last one haven't been fixed. The Middle East is a powderkeg waiting to blow and while Best Korea wouldn't start a Nuclear Holocaust they'll be larping like they want to.

Yeah, and you don't have to worry about being drafted, you get to go to college regardless of your parents education, and you get to live tweet the entire thing to the world. Aren't you even in a biracial relationship? How easy do you think that was 50 years ago? And that college is what a high school education was to my parents, except it's so expensive my peers are in crippling debt to get it. And the jobs available when they're done don't pay well enough for then to sustainably pay off the debt. And all this is assuming that the latest trade deal or H-1b visa doesn't allow our mastersglorious job creators to pay some poor fellows from thirdworldistan a starvation wage even less than mine while I get let go. "Muh iPhone" is a hollow concession to this economic reality.

I'm 24, today is my "back in the day". Low wages and fighting 50 other college graduates for a bad job is my reality.

We've had stagnating wages for years, flight of production to third world **** holes, a sham of a republic where a cabal of powerful individuals control politicians and policy rather than voters, and an increasing surveillance state designed to keep the people in check so they don't injure their betters. If you want to pretend we live in a glorious golden age because someone can retweet vapid nonsense from an iPhone after their shift or that a third party is all that's needed to fix the political system then go ahead and fiddle Nero.

What's the flag to the left? I have never seen that one before. YPG.

I got no idea what all the drama in this thread is but all your ideologies are dumb and the likely president is going to be a corporate whore who sells the working class out with trade deals and concessions to the rulers of this world. It ain't gonna get better through an election or petition and we're stuck with it until the crash that destroys everything.

Mate if I wanted to impugn propertarians all I would have to do is link to a /pol/ thread or bring up the "Holohoax" issue of Reason. I posted Gandalf gone wild because that's the foot the Libertarian party put forward in an election where Republicans have their most disliked candidate in quite a long while and would have likely jumped on the LP train. And because it's hilarious. But if you would rather talk about widespread appeal of libertarianism(the US hypercapitalist version at least, not the original anarchists) OK. It ain't gonna happen. You've had Ron Paul run in two presidential races espousing libertarian values on a huge stage and that has come to nothing. You've had the same thing with Rand, and will likely will in 2020 to little success. All Gary Johnson would bring to a debate is "drugs and gay's are cool, **** taxes and rules(except certain ones we like)". In a climate where workers are increasingly opposed to free trade(which last I checked libertarians liked), where an increased wage is being popularized and a certain segment of burgerland is viewed as paying too little taxes by the masses, where mass immigration isn't viewed favorably, and when the guy who would normally be screeching about gays has said he's fine with transbathrooms Gary Johnson ain't gonna bring anything that's going to interest voters.

Always.

Because the two party system is a consequence of our election system. And the two parties are owned by corporate interests looking to further their interests. Social media and meme magic can't match the power and resources that comes with the two party monopoly, at best they can work within it to shift the overton window. Trump and Bernie didn't go independent or some non-Big2 party, they had to go through the Big2 parties to get anywhere. Their relative success reinforces the two party system, not undermines it. And then we get to the fact that as private entities, the Big2 are more than able to change rules to ensue who they prefer wins the primary. Expect superdelegates or minimum year party membership or something else to come about to stop another Sanders or Trump by the next presidential election. The biggest surprise for the general would be record non-participation. There's no white knight riding in to save the election.

Only for the cycle to return the next election. At this point a strong(over 10% of the national vote) showing for a candidate would just lead to blaming said candidate for spoiling it for whichever Big 2 candidate lost. Johnson will be no different, Republicans will blame him for Trump losing and next election the Libertarian candidate won't break single digits in the hypothetical situation where he grabs more than %10 of the vote. It's enough show a pattern. We've had the Big2 parties dominate presidential and congressional politics for over a century. It's not going anywhere and the choice between one Goldman Sachs employee and another isn't much of a choice.