Valsuelm

Don't be lazy, and don't waste our time. Read a thread before you comment or get out of it please.

Source? They are called Sore Loser Laws (they apply equally to both parties not just Republicans). 45 states have them; Arizona, Delaware, New York, Oklahoma and West Virginia do not. To clarify things, it doesn't apply to states that did not hold a presidential primary or in a large number of states with existing precedents that clearly establish that they do NOT apply to presidential elections. There are two states where it might matter: Texas and South Dakota and that's even assuming that one of the candidates who doesn't secure his nomination has the stones to declare and run as an independent. Thanks. I was actually unaware of the proliferation of such laws. Though, they are not surprising. Sad that Ron Paul didn't make a lot of noise about them last election go around (sad that he didn't do a number of things). Ah well. Here's a decent article summing up just some of what's wrong with such laws: http://www.rangevoting.org/BallAccess.html There are very few issues that I say this: A Constitutional Amendment to prohibit such laws is needed. The party system is corrupt as #uck, and the choke hold that the two major parties have on this nation is indeed ultimately going to prove fatal to it. Will we ever get such an amendment? Sadly, very doubtful.

Yeah ,,,,I did notice that on another article but to be fair we shouldn't just assume he is wrong or biased but you raise a very good point....its actually seems like a real and valid criticism unless he means illegal citizens who wouldn't have ID ? The entire piece is a bunch of propagandic bunk predicated on a many assumptions and a few big lies. The first paragraph holds dishonesty and it goes on from there. Also, Brookings, and most other 'think tanks', are rarely if ever a good source for much of anything, especially on economics. Such 'non *cough* *choke* -profit' institutions have agendas which tend to line up nicely with their source(s) of income, errr patrons.

In what way? Is Dystopia the right word to describe my views I looked the word up as I wasnt sure of its exact meaning an imaginary place where everything is as bad as it can beI dont think things are bad in the EU at all...I believe this is just a level of social transformation but the EU will persevere Sorry Volo but there is no middle ground here, if you dont support the sustainability of the EU in some form then you dont support the West Nothing wrong with that...but then maybe you should find common ground with Zora or Oby? I know the ME is always looking for good friends To answer your question above would take many pages, and honestly, I do not think you'd understand it. You might think you did, but you would choose to ignore a great deal of what I said as it is my experience that you do such when faced with things that fly in the face of what you believe. You are too deep and comfortably uncomfortable in the box given to you. However, to put a complex subject with a great many facets extremely simply, I will comment on what you said to Volo and say that not only is there no middle ground, supporting 'the sustainability of the EU', is in actuality ultimately supporting the destruction of much of 'the west' (Europe) insofar as it's culture, the higher standards of living, and the relative freedom it enjoys compared to the rest of the world. The exact opposite of what you think, and the exact opposite of how it is advertised to average Joe/Jane human. Very evil people are behind the E.U., and their goals are not as advertised, nor are do they have Joe/Jane European's best interests in mind. Here are the directions to a water hole, where one can find something to chew as well: A fundamental piece of the puzzle is in what Mr. Magniloquent is saying in this thread. When what he says there is elementary to you (it's really not rocket science, as I stated in that thread), and you grasp the consequences of it, then you will be a number of crucial steps down the path to understanding why I say what I say above. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and sometimes that road looks quite pretty. Especially when the well dressed puppet pied pipers leading the day, sing a song about heaven along the way.

Is this some new bad meme? Attributing quotes to Abe that he obviously never said?

Yup. Posted in jest. Mods, please delete if you delete the quoted.

Cute girl. I wouldn't cast stones, living in England, as there's certainly no shortage of wussies over there, including the afeared of Trump kind. Trumpphobia seems to be a thing.

Evil is almost always advertised nicely.

Source?

I find you adorable in how tightly you stick to the extreme right's story. "Hillary is a criminal!" Cried the right, "where's the charges?" asked everyone else. "The wall will work!" cried the right, "But how will it be paid for and what laws will we have to suspend to build it?" asked everyone else "The election is rigged!" Cried the right, "Ok, then how is Trump the GOP frontrunner, and Sanders still in range to take the election from Hillary?" asked everyone else. You can rationalize a lot of things, but I sincerely doubt that Hillary being a "criminal" will every come to pass. And for a constitutionalist, you seem to ignore "Innocent until Proven Guilty" being a tenant of the Constitution (as established in Coffin v United States), and just blithely run around declaring guilt without evidence (beyond the rhetoric that has been spouted by those on the right since they realized Hillary was the presumptive nominee in last May) Calling Hillary criminal is not exclusively the purview of 'the right'. Saying elections are rigged is not exclusively the purview of 'the right'. 'Far', 'moderate', or 'close'. In fact, people on both sides of your polarized world do both, especially in regards to the latter. 'Criminal' has more meanings than just those in regards to illegality. Insofar as those particular meanings go however, being a criminal is not reliant on being convicted in a court of law that one is such, in fact the most successful criminals usually never even see a court of law. So technically then, we're all criminals no? It's illegal to go past the speed limit, but we do it. Thus we're criminals. Your attitude that somehow she's guilty of something that nobody has indited her for, or provided concrete proof beyond "yeah, this thing is something that happened" with vague projections from the conservatives as to the illegality of it all. From the rumblings we're hearing, the reason for anything she may have done is because, the State Department as an apparatus failed at it's job of supporting it's boss. Respectfully, you're the one who needs to wake up a bit. You act like Sanders hasn't caused any waves politically in this campaign and that everything is rigged for Hillary. And yet over the course of her campaign she's been forced to skew much further left than she'd want to try to keep the demographics that she was winning, while Sander's has done nothing but gain momentum. Meanwhile the republican side wishes it was Rigged because every person I talk to when the subject does come up, is ashamed to be affiliated with the Donald. The reason I turn you into a stereotype (which to a degree you are) is because you slavishly adhere to the NRA and general republican talking points in a way that makes it incredibly easy. If you ever really vocalized a political opinion beyond "Red good, blue bad, guns good!" we might be getting somewhere, but as it stands you've yet to get away with the easily stereotyped talking points found on Fox News and in WoD's posting history. You want to be taken seriously? Fine, provide credible evidence to 9/11 being an inside job, or Benghazi being Clinton's "Fault, or that she's a criminal who's committed treason. Back up your talk with more than just a talking points memo or somebody else saying something. Find the in context quote, do some work. And before you ask, I do, just when I actually want to be serious about a topic with somebody who has something to say. You're delusional kid. Most of what you say above is straight out of lala land. The most simple to refute is I am no fan of the NRA, very rarely watch FoxNews, and have never in my entire life said 'Red Good'. I'm not sure if I've ever even mentioned the NRA on this forum,, but I've stated many a time (even recently) my stance to at least some degree on the other two. Also, if 'every person [you] talk to when the subject does come up, is ashamed to be affiliated with the Donald.', you obviously haven't spoken to too many people, as folks who are proud to be affiliated with him are pretty common. In regards to the rest, I'm not going to waste my time. You clearly won't drink if you're lead to water.

Oversimplification, and myth. Europe is very relevant in the world. Saying otherwise is foolish.

Likely will exist... Divinity: Original Sin 2 is on the way.

http://www.progressivestoday.com/chaos-sjw-students-crash-students-trump-meeting/

Stop posting here. Go find ye a nice lady of European heritage and have some kids, many of them. Make sure you're relevant in the future!

I know you joking but the EU is very important and relevant The EU is an example of how many other similar blocks of countries outside the EU can create political unions to achieve economic prosperity for its citizens For example the African Union wanted to achieve what the EU has done Some of the "negative " realities of being in the EU are certain issues all Western countries in some way or the other has to grapple with ...you are held to a higher standard and there is an expectation how the EU needs to conduct itself that leads to domestic frustration as its only the EU that is trying to adhere to a higher moral ground For example the obvious development around all these refugees arriving in the EU....many people in the EU feel they have some sort of obligation to take in these refugees. It will vary from country to country but IMO why should the EU have to do something that not even countries in the ME are doing? I have said this many times but its a bizarre situation were Sunni Muslim countries in the ME like Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar wont take any refugees yet the EU thinks it has to But I still believe the EU will ultimately become stronger from all this as degrees of multiculturalism are a good thing, it just needs to be managed If ever there was a cheerleader for dystopia, you are he.

What a beautiful thing democracy is in a nation with a King!

- An officially Blizzard supported WoW server with Vanilla, BC, or WotLK (pre ICC nerf), preferably the first two. - A new Chrono game with the same team of lead designers and music composers as Trigger had, with 100% creative license. (I'd actually buy a console system just for this)

The guys at Obsidian probably deserve it tbh Whatever the guys at Obsidian may deserve, there's nothing in that post that indicates he was talking about them.

A 2E Ravenloft game ala the IE engine based primarily on the classic original module, would be absolutely awesome.

I understand what you're saying, and you're right. However, the voters generally do not choose who the delegates are. What Volo is getting at is the whole voting process by Joe/Jane Voter is to at least some degree (varying depending on the state and party) pretend. 'Let the masses think their vote matters!' is somewhat the new 'Let them eat cake!'. It's been that way for a very very long time. Most just have never realized it, but it has never been more clear the way this election is unfolding, and a lot of folks are waking up to this unpleasant reality.

"Ukrainian 20-year old silicon girl" LOL So sad, there are many legitimately beautiful women out there in Ukrainian land. To be supplanted by siliconed superficial. Alas. I kinda like Oby's input. When it doesn't make absolutely no sense whatsoever it usually is amusing. It's even sometimes insightful, albeit rarely. Even moreso than many who post here regularly are capable of. Keep talking Oby!

Inconsequential.

I'd bet a very sizable amount of money that the red party will not be in the White House if anyone but Trump is the nominee, no matter who the blue party puts up.

Has Val ever expressed any support for the wall? Nope.