Gromnir

am current a package deal which includes four dogs and one cat. might not be your ideal tennant situation. although admitted, would only be ten years or so, tops. given our age and health, am gonna be able to start using principal in approx ten years and will need be less frugal. as such, by 2029 we might be able to afford living in converted & detached storage shed space in the bay area. integral to our larger retirement plan were donations o' monies to a couple charities, donations which woulda' been noticeable smaller if we tried to retire anywhere in bay area. already gave over half our property to charity which gave us a nice warm and fuzzy feel. ... had actual serious considered moving more towards gd neck o' the woods. given housing costs in memphis, we would not need make an appeal to rent out garage space. while am not much a fan o' the south, memphis has notable cultural and culinary diversity and overall cost o' living is on the extreme low side. on downside, heat during summer is similar to sacramento and there is more humidity to endure. HA! Good Fun!

spent the day working on retirement. is something weird 'bout the amount o' work am needing devote to retirement. has been a decades long process, but the actual mechanics o' finalization is soul numbing. could pay an attorney and financial planner to handle all the real work, but am too cheap to do so. am admitted facing a coin-toss decision regarding sale o' two residential properties. keep 'em as rentals avoids us some tax issues and averages us $39k a year assuming 10 month per year occupancy. have had uninterrupted full-year occupancy the last couple years, but such is hardly typical for residential in this area. costs is noteworthy as property taxes and hoa alone on the two properties combined is almost $10k per year. after additional anticipated repairs and misc costs, am looking at relative modest roi. nevertheless, have learned is nice to have at least a little real property in portfolio beyond primary residence. big negative is our knowing residential landlording is resulting in inevitability o' teeth gnashing irritation at some point and irritation runs counter to our retirement goals. got the idaho property and hawaii joint tenancy, but for various reasons, neither is counting towards our retirement plans. general 4% rule o' thumb has us being able to indefinite maintain adjusted-for-inflation 2019 yearly income o' $84k per year living off interest only if am selling properties and $79k if am keeping as rentals. could maybe live in hurl's garage in the bay area with such money, but as long as am living someplace more reasonable, am thinking we could be comfortable with such income. and while is maybe not the most enlightened business decision, am gonna keep the primary residence 'stead o' selling immediate. the border collies is the deciding factor. one o' the border collies is fourteen(ish,) has significant arthritis in hips and is going blind. the other border collie is thirteen, is mostly deaf and is near complete blind, but is still quite active. both is increasingly gassy-- what is that about? as stoopid as it may be, am not gonna sell house and move 'til border collies pass. they got a big yard and still enjoy barking at golfers. don't wanna put the old girls through a move when they only got short time. keeping primary residence also gives us more time to sell the stoopid pool table. everytime we look at the pool table, we feel a bit like max. HA! Good Fun!

had an old john deere "sowing" machine when we were young. were one o' those grain drill and seedbox thingamajobs covered with as much rust as bright green paint. never thought o' it as a particular gay contraption, though we do agree basic tailoring skills should be known by the average adult regardless o' gender. HA! Good Fun!

in and of itself, declaring a state o' emergency doesn't mean much. as we noted earlier, a President has broad authority to declare national emergencies. what is significant is the specific enumerated provisions the chief executive must identify when making such announcements. building a wall requires money in large quantities and likely the allocation o' military resources. will also require condemnation o' large amounts o' private owned land... which will certain have gd transformed into a gibbering and frothing mass o' apoplectic fury. have military step in and take private owned land were one o' those foundational Declaration' Independence issues. is also the reason you see so few red state governors from border states supporting trump on this issue. declare or continue a national emergency on terrorism when you got bipartisan support o' Congress is one thing. declare state o' emergency because Congress is in opposition to chief executive desires opens a pandora's box o' problems. use emergency to take private land and loosen government purse strings? an almost novel use o' executive power, and unlikely to survive legal scrutiny, though such a court process would be torturous long. 'course this is now very much a political issue divorced from actual issue o' building a wall and border security. nobody wants to budge or blink or whatever is metaphor o' choice. as an aside, executive orders is a much different mechanic, and President could never generate billions o' dollars or take private land with executive orders anyways. obama did abuse executive orders to circumvent republican senate, but for the most part, Congress let him do so. the increasing torpid nature o' Congress allowed for executive excesses, and (at least from democrat pov) arguable required executive action 'cause o' legislative indolence. regardless, this whole thing is nuts. early last year, with a republican house and senate, trump coulda' gotten $25 billion dollars for a big and beautiful concrete wall if he had eased daca restrictions and made legal options for immigration less restrictive. were a bipartisan plan. trump wouldn't budge. in 2019 trump wants $5.7 billion from a democrat controlled house and decides now is time for a shutdown? would love to play poker with this guy. HA! Good Fun!

I dunno, I think writers in the US used to be able to do the same. We just have Twitter now. agreed. is not difficult to find letters from diverse american authors such as william faulkner and ursula k. le quin which will make you laugh at the wit somehow contained within the boundaries o' the polite formality o' a epistolary response. the thing is, the art o' letter writing is becoming lost. would like to blame twitter, but it started earlier, probable with advent o' email. writing formal letters were a common skill only a generation or so past. also, while it is true americans tend to be a bit more forthright than continental peers, there is also a well honored colonial tradition o' embracing the sardonic which often manifests in a wholly transparent veneer o' civility when chastising a perceived villain. one need not look far to find "best of" resignation letters from authors and political figures which is scathing rebukes couched in polite language. h.r. mcmaster's final speech as us national security advisor is maybe not particular funny, but it were a metaphorical fu to multiple persons in the white house without ever mentioning a specific name. final, we will note the enforced formality o' legal writing lends itself to moments o' genius. while Justices may indulge in overt jocularity and satire, those who do not move in such a rarefied stratosphere must needs be a bit more oblique... or at least opportunistic. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170802/00533937906/aclu-to-court-legal-to-tell-bob-to-eat-****.shtml legal writing is necessarily adversarial and highly formulistic. as such there is rare moments when brutal funny seeming abuts enforced rules o' politeness. HA! Good Fun!

design-a-weapon were a fig tier during deadfire development. reason we got so many sabres and swords is 'cause o' a double-handful o' fans who paid real money to get a personalized weapon added to the game. developers made a point to fill out a few o' the more anemic weapon categories with the dlc, but is no way to complete balance out weapon types w/o utter saturating the game with magical arsenal. one o' those live and learn situations for developers. they genuine did not anticipate fan investors gravitating almost exclusive to a couple weapon types. if there is a next time, am suspecting the developers will plan a bit better. HA! Good Fun!

am hearing the intel campus in folsom, ca is hiring... only mention as we happen to know o' three, golf course community homes, w/i twenty minutes o' intel, which ain't even on the market yet and may be purchased for a relative song. heck, one such home includes a rare and antique billiards table, sits on .45 acres o' mature landscaped property with large redwoods and backs to fairway o' an arnie palmer designed championship golf course. the property even has steel fencing, so you may be political controversial in these volatile times... something to talk 'bout at ****tail parties. HA! Good Fun! ps the fence isn't designed to keep undesirables out, but rather to keep 'em in. is only four 4.5' high, which is just high enough to deter old border collies from attacking golfers who stray too near the yard.

radical not synonymous with nazi. ... a moment ago we pictured her in a brown shirt and jack boots. now admitted, she pulled the outfit off in our imagination, but even so, the label don't work. she is a bit naive and tends to indulge in facile solutions. reminds us o' hundreds o' freshman and sophomores we knew at cal, folks exposed to new ideas for first time who sudden thought they had discovered the hidden truths and meanings o' the world. a little bit o' knowledge is a frightening thing to behold. try "stalinist." sure, is a stretch and am not thinking she would advance the notion o' the inevitability o' violent class struggle and the need to be ever vigilant 'gainst counter-revolutionary forces... yadayadda, etc. stalinist not accurate but is closer and is also having benefit o' nostalgia. wod used label to describe any liberal intellectual with whom he disagreed, which were all o' 'em 'course. when pointed out how label didn't work for folks such as ruth bader ginsburg or mister rogers, he then increased his use o' the label three-fold, as if to make a point. you don't need to be that guy. HA! Good Fun!

is difficult to believe it is already 2019. feels like 2008 and the financial crisis is only a couple years removed. regardless, congrats on the new home... assuming your offer were accepted. am actual in reverse situation as is shady-- am selling. am selling a whole bunch o' stuff. our plan were to retire this year, but the recent market nosedive has made us hesitate a bit. the amount o' money we lost in last month and a half has been burtonesque. will still likely retire, but we got three more residential properties we wanna unload 'fore we decide for certain. spring is a prime selling period in this area, and am wanting to get in on the boom before another possible bubble burst. however, even with the business losses we has been carrying forward since 2011, the capital gains on those remaining properties is gonna kill us. got 'em for almost nothing. would still have more than enough to retire, but we got kinda set figures am wanting to leave to st. jude children's hospital and the national breast cancer foundation. and we got an 1890s six-leg brunswick alexandria with the original slate plates sitting in our personal home which am having no idea how to unload. seemed like a good idea at the time we acquired the table. HA! Good Fun!

good luck. keep in mind, statistical, first home ownership tends to last less than 5 years. folks tend to trade-up or move or whatnot. something to consider when deciding on the kitchen or bathroom remodel. HA! Good Fun!

and thank goodness it is working as intended. can't imagine the mess we would be in if chief executive or legislature could functional act unilateral. HA! Good Fun!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BiLQtVJVEs is possible the most common sorta trump lie. he states stuff as fact based on what he believes could be or should be true. make up statistics. make up sources. make up findings and conclusions and... were a discussion earlier on boards where we noted trump made up mit data 'bout climate change. made up wrong claims 'bout mit conclusions regarding rate o' climate change. why? well, the guys at mit is smarty, and climate change as a result o' human behavior is a hoax, so obvious the mit guys is rejecting human causation arguments, right? trump then states as fact and invents numbers to support. is weird. oh, and jic, reagan border wall views were not aligning with trump. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/21/what-ronald-reagan-actually-said-about-border-security-according-history-not-donald-trump/?utm_term=.1cb0ef3ad307 “Rather than talking about putting up a fence, why don’t we work out some recognition of our mutual problems, make it possible for them to come here legally with a work permit,” he said. “And then while they’re working and earning here, they pay taxes here. And when they want to go back they can go back.” these kinda lies from trump is just so pointless... save for fact a large % o' his base not only believes the misrepresentations but defends such silliness... adds insult to irony by adding in a claim o' "fake news!" is not the lies which bother us... which is exact what bothers us. have become so numb and fatigued by constant trump fibs we hardly even notice or care. trump has been so consistent mendacious we have a hard time working up any real emotion regarding individual mistruths. through deflection, false equivalency and simple fatigue, have been worn down to point where we simple accept the new status quo. HA! Good Fun! ps as to the myth 'bout shutdown saving money http://time.com/money/5494004/government-shutdown-costs-trump-border-wall/

you specific compared d&d saving throws to poe/deadfire miss/graze/hit/crit mechanic as an example o' what you meant by differentiated system, but again, if you have given up on such silliness, then progress has been made. if we are simple fine tuning deadfire to get to point where players is seeing arcane casters as effective and even potent, then am pretty sure such has already been achieved. as for armour, am not seeing a point. again, you were using to identify a difference, and deadfire attacks is already resolved with multiple defenses. is not actual a differentiation in mechanics. point out burn v. pierce armour is not mechanical different in any meaningful sense, and clear ain't analogous to d&d saving throw v. thac0. are you asking for a special wizard-specific defense? deflection/fort/ref/wil/wiz? wouldn't call such a new mechanic. would call it unnecessary, but... HA! Good Fun!

not our hangup. however, if you have finally realized how silly were separate mechanic nonsense, am pleased. if you wanna talk only 'bout buffs or nerfs to already existing mechanics instead o' new and different mechanic, then am relieved you have seen the light. inching towards daylight? congrats. and yeah, automatic grazes will vast increase effectiveness o' debuffs and cc. durations is reduced 50% on a graze, which may still result in extreme debilitating debuffs lingering with a high int caster. poe were actual offering kinda the best example o' this wackiness. petrification were op. solo rogues were able to quick kill the adra dragon 'cause they only needed get a graze on their petrification traps to easily kill the beastie. a graze debuff is still a debuff, which then makes subsequent debuffs attacks more likely to hit and crit. inability to generate enough accuracy to overcome defenses is what current leads to a graze as 'posed to a hit. a graze occurs on an attack targeting appropriate defenses 'tween 25 and 50. so now graze occurs 0-50 for wizards spells? is your serious suggestion? will/fort/ref is simple three o' the defenses. change defense numbers how? to make hits and crits even more difficult? as for armour seasonal example: create jakob mantova's robe of chains as a new armour. a vallian merchant known for unscrupulous business practices used his entire accumulated family wealth to acquire the services o' an animancer who would extend his life beyond death. berath intervened and now jakob is cursed to an existence trapped between rymrgand's realm during the day and eora at night. during nighttime hours, mantova, appearing as a horrific fampyr dressed in a robe of rattling chains, haunts the living members o' his family, warning them o' the dangers o' unfettered acquisition o' wealth. "business?" cries the undead thing, wringing its hands. "mankind was my business. the common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. the dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!" if released from his torment, jakob will disappear leaving only his robe of chains as evidence of his passing. robe of rattling chains: excellent armour with base ar 12 and lightning ar 8. +55% recovery penalty. 1x per rest grants barring death's door. 1 per encounter it will cast chill fog centered on the wearer when hit by a crit. 10 penalty to any stealth checks made by the wearer as the robe's noise is not only physical but spiritual in nature and may be heard even by those who are deafened. call it a robe. give it a robe appearance. doesn't matter. armour has basic qualities removed from type. same basic maths. HA! Good Fun!

automatic graze is not a new mechanic. is silly and broken as it would magnify the usefulness o' ccs and debuffs, particular with high int casters, but is nothing new. and your armour comment makes no sense, if am understanding. deadfire armour types is nothing but labels. armour provides ar and recovery penalty. mechanics for armour is unified. HA! Good Fun!

such comparisons from limited and arguably unrelated games is also a hasty generalization/false analogy fail. *shrug* the thing is, you are always gonna run up against ie/ad&d fans. get folks to understand how is possible to like ie/ad&d in spite o' mechanics is almost impossible. HA! Good Fun!

Maybe unifying spells and attacks shouldn't have happened in the first place. Diablo 3 did push magic closer to weapons - Want to cast powerful spells? Equip a huge weapon! Path of Exile didn't. Path of Exile defeated Diablo 3. Perhaps bringing magic and weapons closer isn't the way to go. you might be correct. 'cause less intuitive, straightforward and simple is always a good starting point. wait, that doesn't make sense, does it? HA! Good Fun!

am dismissing as "imaginary" 'cause it is not gromnir's experience using even mediocre built aloth on potd. am dismissing as imaginary 'cause almost nobody save you is having same problem. am dismissing as imaginary 'cause when developers speak o' frustrations o' players via twitch and message board feedback, of all the possible stuff which comes up, caster accuracy is not one. has been noted via multiple asides in twitches how developers feel play w/o a wizard is a kinda self handicapping... is a way to make playthrough a bit tougher. am not gonna simple cave to popular feedback on issues particular as this board is less than representative o' the average deadfire gamer, but if pretty much everybody posting shares an opinion, then we gotta at least consider the possibility o' a general feels argument with much support. add on developer and our own extensive personal experience, and am further inclined to recognize your observation for what it is: imaginary. as an aside, we will note how given developer changes and our own increased meta knowledge, we have been able to get companions other than aloth to produce near equal big damage numbers as the wizard. maia example, were initial a bit o' a disappointment for us when we played deadfire. for a dps character, she weren't doing fantastic dps. obsidian altered the ranger class post release and we discovered perfect gear loadouts to make her more effective so now she is doing fantastic damage, but am still using aloth as kinda a benchmark for efficacy. heck, have found our self underutilizing aloth empowers as it feels like overkill in most encounters. even so, with meta knowledge, aloth has stood out less from the rest o' the companions insofar as efficacy is concerned, which am s'possing is actual unfair to aloth. haven't spent near as much effort attempting to optimize a pure deadfire arcane caster as such seems like kinda a default setting. "What I despise most in the PoE system is that spells go through the same resolution as attacks do." change basic maths all characters current use is indeed creating a new system. you are clear calling for more than a simple buff and have pointed to the d&d system as a example o' such done right. so, give an actual example o' a new attack resolution for casters, and be specific so we may see how easy such would be to add to deadfire. if is difficult to imagine easy, then is probable not easy. if the problem were low level casting accuracy for wizards, would be ez to imagine adding an inherent accuracy buff to low-level spells and/or low-level casters. specific buff numbers would be subject to argument (and is indeed wholly unnecessary) but figure out how to implement a flat accuracy buff to casters and or specific spells would not require much mental gymnastics. so, do similar and be specific with your call for alternative attack resolution. show us how we were being hyperbolic with a concrete example which would not be difficult to implement and would not muck up multiclass. will wait. HA! Good Fun! ps am not understanding your armour example. in deadfire, adding an integrated and secondary armour mechanic is what many in this thread is complaining 'bout. penetration. poe dr were complained 'bout by enough fans such that obsidian made a change, but instead o' making a change to dr, obsidian instead added the penetration mechanic which, particular in the beta, had potential to largely nullify weapon or spell damage. buffing accuracy had negligible impact on penetration and there were exceeding few deadfire options for increasing penetration or decreasing armour. now admitted, penetration is indeed integrated into deadfire attack resolutions, and is modified by crits and grazes... although grazes were exceeding rare in initial deadfire release, seeming only available through specific talents or through a singular priestly spell. yeah, am actual stretching to make penetration into a genuine separate mechanic, but such is illustrative o' just how difficult your task in coming up with a seperate caster mechanic will be. penetration were an initial bust and has taken substantial efforts by developers to make it less bad. so, is now your turn-- come up with genuine unique, insular and discrete mechanic for casting which avoids problems with multiclassing and is better than were obsidian penetration efforts and nevertheless still works w/i deadfire overall system.

a nonsense solution to an imaginary problem. am admitting there is a whole list o' poe/deadfire problems, but caster accuracy is not one o' 'em. early during the beta there were indeed a problem with spell penetration, but such were addressed. beta spells were consistent ineffective 'cause o' insufficient penetration. however, if you cannot generate caster accuracy, am curious what in the heck you are doing. aloth is typical one o' our high-damage companions regardless o' party composition and am only ever playing potd. the elf wizard is even more valuable with debuffs and cc.... effects which use same maths as damage spells. furthermore, the solution o' creating a complete separate mechanic for casters to address the s'posed paucity o' caster accuracy makes even less sense. if the problem were caster accuracy, then obvious solution would be a buff to caster accuracy. create seperate mechanic which would obvious cause more bug opportunities and make multiclassing more problematic, is... pointless. other than a slavish devotion to d&d norms, am seeing no reason for inserting a separate mechanic for spells. HA! Good Fun!

as an aside, am complete baffled by suggestion o' using national emergency to build the wall. not complete surprised, but is nevertheless confounding. executive powers for national emergency to do an end around on Congress is a curious claim and am having a hard time believing any Con law attorney would recommend such to the chief executive. is possible he read on breitbart or heard on fox news that national emergency is a solution? am admitted not even sure what all entails "build a wall," but is not like building a kid's treehouse in the backyard. at the very least, gonna need condemn and take land from americans on a large scale, which is gonna be a multiyear process. and is not as if the fed runs steel fabrication and concrete supply companies, so is trump planning on taking from private american companies? national emergency won't instant fill government coffers, so how is trump gonna pay for all the takings? declare a national emergency to build on an enormous and complex scale w/o money is... even if trump could convince Court o' a national emergency, which is probable the easiest part as executive discretion is broad, such executive powers does not magical confer money to the executive. the emergency powers is not made up by trump as he sees fit but rather is needing be already legislated powers conferred 'pon the President, and the chief executive must specific enumerate which emergency powers he intends to utilize contemporaneous with declaring a national emergency. trump could force steel and concrete producers to sell to the government, but he would still need pay. following is most relevant case, for any willing to read, but is not a helpful case for the chief exec. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/343us579 for those wanting meat and potatoes... "when the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb.” HA! Good Fun! ps keep in mind, trump had a plan to plunder $450 million discretionary monies for defense last year to get started on wall and were soundly rebuffed. even if trump somehow acquired every defense discretionary dollar, he still winds up woeful short o' $5 billion. kill big defense projects as a solution? *chuckle* and is still gonna lose likely Court battle considering youngstown sheet & tube co.

apologies for double-post, but is unrelated to previous post, so am asking for some latitude regarding board posting etiquette. AP all-pro team is something a little off 'bout jj watt getting first team as edge rusher and second team as interior dl, particular as am thinking a couple other guys deserve interior line recognition over watt. we got a few additional quibbles, but overall is not too much cause for disagreement. HA! Good Fun!

hasn't. free exercise is alive and well. establishment is different 'cause is government. government doesn't get free exercise. keep in mind, these cases always happen at the margins. why protect hare krishnas and satanists and scientologists? at opposite end, why give a darn about a ww1 memorial which is maybe a bit gaudy in scope, but is not offensive and don't genuine hurt anybody? the jewish rabbi or catholic nun has, at times, faced considerable persecution for their religious practice in this country and if law don't protect satanist or tom cruise, then is tough to explain how it protects sister mary rita. sure, a war memorial shouldn't offend any but most oversensitive schnook, but what does gd feel 'bout government support o' religious affiliated schools? state legislature passes law to help support struggling religious affiliated schools with a grant o' XX million dollars-- wherein only a couple o' episcopalian schools could possible qualify. am betting fewer people would be in favor o' the school support action by government, but given the vagueness and broadness o' the establishment clause, how do you read law so it prevents school funding but allows cross monuments to remain? both involve taxpayer money being spent on obvious religious stuff, yes? is always good to think o' the next guy when hearing 'bout some o' these silly cases. when nazis is getting first amendment protection, thinks o' how same decisions is protecting naacp as well as equal and/or gay rights activists. when war memorials is being targeted for religious advancement, thinks how skeevy government actors might use broader protections to deny benefits to jews or catholics. cases is always at margins, so results which is representing law o' the land is often silly or plain unreasonable to any ordinary person. the thing is, the law has gotta protect everybody, protect 'em equal. a common sense approach always sounds good... at first and until one realizes such is no longer adhering to notions o' rule o' law. leave decisions up to judges and legislators to handle these issues on a case-by-case issue will result in unfairness as is no longer law but rather individual judgement which decides right and wrong. HA! Good Fun!

well, this has been an issue since founding o' the US. madison and jefferson were much opposed to Congress hiring a christian chaplain... but there is a christian chaplain who does a prayer before sessions o' Congress. images o' moses adorn the US supreme court building, but such images is specific related to moses as a secular lawgiver. most often, the State has common sense enough to avoid such entanglements given the long history o' such conflicts. the so-called lemon test is used in such cases: "three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. first, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, board of education v. allen, 392 U. S. 236, 392 U. S. 243 (1968); finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion. walz, supra, at 397 U. S. 674." the Court tends to bend over backwards to make stuff fit the lemon test. multiple current Justices has expressed their frustration with the lemon test even though it is the law o' the land. more recent, the Court in a plurality opinion complete ignored the lemon test. took a gestalt view and determined the following display were not violating Establishment Clause. please note the stars o' david and eagle with flag motif included in the display-- were deemed inclusive rather than exclusive. additional, those who erected the ten commandments display made efforts to work with local religious organizations to come up with a non-devise display and the setting o' display itself did not seem to invite religious contemplation or meditation. were a touchy-feely concurrence by J. Breyer which gets most quotes. the current giant cross case happens every so often and there is much wailing and moaning. just to make clear, the typical resolution in such cases is that the cross is removed-- present case is only at issue 'cause it appears it will go to SCOTUS. and no, arlington cemetery cross displays is not in danger o' being removed due to this case, however, am admitting the giant cross case will be interesting to watch if for no other reason than to see how the Courts decide. lemon, van orden or something else? aside: maryland cross is a little different than a few other such cases. when the original maryland cross display were erected, it were on private land. didn't become part o' public land until 1961, more than thirty years after it were original erected. reason the cross were acquired by government were 'cause o' traffic concerns. the cross were original designed and constructed by private individuals, but such folks did not complete the monument-- were american legion who finished. american legion is chartered by Congress. HA! Good Fun!

but they would have fears largely opposite o' yours. regardless o' what most americans know, reality is governing in the US tends to happen at local and state level... as were original intended. am suspecting the founders, while lacking any sorta unified vision or voice, would breathe a sigh o' relief. however, the fed is far more representative than anything the founders expected. the fed is far more political than were ever intended. sure, some folks such as patrick henry insisted to bitter end that a fed weren't necessary, but the current federal government would be unrecognizable not only 'cause o' its sheer size, but also 'cause o' how representative it is. state and local were s'posed to be representative. fed were intended as not only limited in scope, but a limit on the seeming inevitable tyranny o' the masses. 'course the founders were ignorant o' history yet to come, and so they didn't realize how ineffectual their fed, as imagined, would handle actual problems o' the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. the amendment process, coupled with a practical deference to necessity (and arguable a wee bit o' corruption,) has led to a national government much different than intended, but one capable o' building interstate highways, maintaining large standing military bodies, and sending men to the moon. sadly, while every american school kid is taught how wonderful is democracy, few actual learn from the warnings o' the founders and as such is predictable we end up with an unpopular populist president shutting down government 'cause of negative feedback from a small number o' radio talk show hosts and a Congress driven by an interminable reelection cycle which exposes 'em to less than altruistic motives o' pacs and superpacs. as to gd question o' when the executive slide became inevitable, am gonna suggest it were doomed from the start. president were intended as a largely apolitical office. as long as you had a guy like washington in the office, a guy with universal approval and lacking overt political motives, the chief executive worked as intended. am personal not a fan o' the washington presidency, but the people were able to accept, as a matter o' faith, that when first president put down the whiskey rebellion, he were doing so for what he believed to be the good o' the nation and not insular party or personal reasons. but how many such guys could possible exist? all you needed were one thomas jefferson to blow away the veneer o' civility and impartiality and the people would begin to demand a greater say in the appointment o' such a political office. btw, the seeming inevitable injection o' representative influence into the apolitical executive is why we fear for the Court. scalia, for example, were approved unanimous by the senate on the basis o' his qualifications. is no way a scalia gets unanimous senate approval in 2019. the Court has become more activist in recent decades, and the people, through their representatives, have thus demanded greater say in what has become viewed as an increasing political office. more representation, while resonating with elementary school notions o' democracy, is not necessarily a good thing for the fed, and were clear a fear o' the founders. unlike injurai, we do not claim to know the history o' the US. history is an art and after reading the conflicting and often nonsensical first-hand accounts o' seeming well-known events, is difficult for us to claim true knowledge o' much o' US history. thankful, history were not our guide in the present context. what actual occurred in 1787 and beyond is immaterial to question o' what the founders believed in 1787. sure, the authors o' the federalist papers mighta been pranking everybody, but seems unlikely. read what founders wrote is a bad way to claim knowledge o' history, but is a good way to gauge what were their beliefs at the time. but again, 'cause the most important point appears to be getting lost, the issue is moot. simple amendment process won't work for changing senate, and there has never been anything simple about amendment process. need unanimous state approval, so issue is doa. HA! Good Fun!

don't have to define it. our point is the founders were actual afeared o' it. by implementing a federal system, they were attempting to put limits 'pon representation. judiciary is appointed by a president who is himself not popular elected, but rather is chosen by a collective o' wise persons whose only purpose is to choose a chief executive. those appointments by the chief executive must be approved o' by the senate, which has been noted already, is the portion o' the legislature more insulated from the fickle whims o' the people. etc. the US system may be fundamental wrong (depending on point o' view,) but is not busted as it works as intended... at least insofar as article 1 is concerned. wanna argue how much representation is good? wanna play with defining representation? have at it. moot in any event as senate cannot be altered save by unanimous state consensus. maybe a couple o' law professors and constitutional law experts imagine whether this particular cat is dead before it is observed, but doesn't change fact the poor cat ends up in same state regardless o' the imagination, genius and subtlety o' the big brains contemplating the question- cat dies. senate is 2 per state. HA! Good Fun!