You are refusing to grasp that any law which is not realistically enforceable is not truly a law. I cannot make it simpler than that, if it is still so alien to you, please read Llewelyn.
You are refusing to grasp that any law which is not realistically enforceable is not truly a law. I cannot make it simpler than that, if it is still so alien to you, please read Llewelyn.
It is realistically enforceable, it's supposed to be enforced by the US government, they agreed to it. It's just like any other US law.
You are refusing to grasp that any law which is not realistically enforceable is not truly a law. I cannot make it simpler than that, if it is still so alien to you, please read Llewelyn.
Your argument appears to boil down to "The US government can refuse to enforce this law." But this is true of every law. Your logic, applied consistently, implies that "true laws" do not and cannot exist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
You are refusing to grasp that any law which is not realistically enforceable is not truly a law. I cannot make it simpler than that, if it is still so alien to you, please read Llewelyn.
Your argument appears to boil down to "The US government can refuse to enforce this law." But this is true of every law. Your logic, applied consistently, implies that "true laws" do not and cannot exist.
Yes, this is correct. Do you, or anyone-really, believe this to be false? If so, why?
I would like someone to explain to me the ethics of your arguement that the bill of rights and the constitution shouldn't apply to every person when they are dealing with the us government. The fact is that a lot of the constitution and the Bill of rights refers to human beings, not citizens. So tell me, why do noncitizens not deserve the same protections from the us government that citizens have?
Edit: misspoke, the constitution says little about people, but the bill of rights does.
Yes, this is correct. Do you, or anyone-really, believe this to be false? If so, why?
If you think this is true, why did you bother with the distinction between US citizens and non-citizens? Why bother bringing up who the Constitution applies to and who it does not? If the constitution is no more a true law than the UN convention on torture, what does it matter whether anyone is covered by it?
You are refusing to grasp that any law which is not realistically enforceable is not truly a law. I cannot make it simpler than that, if it is still so alien to you, please read Llewelyn.
Your argument appears to boil down to "The US government can refuse to enforce this law." But this is true of every law. Your logic, applied consistently, implies that "true laws" do not and cannot exist.
Yes, this is correct. Do you, or anyone-really, believe this to be false? If so, why?
So you are saying there are no 'true laws'? And the significance of this being? If this is what you are saying, all you have done is arbitrarily (as is true for all definitions) constructed a definition of what a true law is and it happens this defined object doesn't exist. So what does this mean?
The only conclusion definitions can be used to reach is literal statements of meaning based on the relevant definitions. In this case, 'X is not a true law' or such. But that's an arbitrary statement, you simply decided what a true law is and in doing so decided not to call it one. I don't even have to follow your definition. What is your point?
And on that note, lets talk about how one comedian act and a whole lot of Republican plagiarism (which I'm happy they did) has appeared to have diminished Trump, but given the candidacy potentially over to Ted Cruz.
I find it interesting as the arguments flair up over how horrible the primary candidate is, Republicans are left looking to one of the two candidates they also don't like. While its true that Trump is probably the worst for simply being unbalanced and crazy. Most R's really have a problem with Cruz, and I can't think of anyone outside of the beltway that pretends to like Rubio. Such a vacuum of leadership. This is the point in the cycle where a party is supposed to be able to put forward someone charismatic that can carry their banner. What does it say about a political party when they don't have any leaders?
How do you even get to this place?
I realize this comes from a relatively large anecdotal source so take it as you will: I have never so many Republican friends so disgusted with the current options of the party in....well....since I have been alive. These are mostly people who support the right due to their monetary policy, but the Republican Party is a shell of what is left.
Most R's really have a problem with Cruz, and I can't think of anyone outside of the beltway that pretends to like Rubio.
Most Republicans, as much as I disagree with them are not stupid. They realize that Cruz is completely un-electable in the general election, even more so than Trump. I don't even think he could beat Sanders, who has been gaining steam as of late.
Florida should be the last nail in the coffin for Rubio. He will win a large share, but most estimated have Trump winning Florida, and the state is a "winner take all" state for delegates.
And on that note, lets talk about how one comedian act and a whole lot of Republican plagiarism (which I'm happy they did) has appeared to have diminished Trump, but given the candidacy potentially over to Ted Cruz.
I find it interesting as the arguments flair up over how horrible the primary candidate is, Republicans are left looking to one of the two candidates they also don't like. While its true that Trump is probably the worst for simply being unbalanced and crazy. Most R's really have a problem with Cruz, and I can't think of anyone outside of the beltway that pretends to like Rubio. Such a vacuum of leadership. This is the point in the cycle where a party is supposed to be able to put forward someone charismatic that can carry their banner. What does it say about a political party when they don't have any leaders?
How do you even get to this place?
I don't think Cruz has any kind of shot of getting 1200+ delegates, but I think he has a chance of preventing Trump from doing so. If neither candidate gets over 1000 delegates, then I think we might end up with someone not currently running for president getting the bid. I do not think the powers that be would jump both Cruz and Trump with either Kasich or Rubio, who performed so meekly against them. But if either Cruz or Trump gets over 1000 that might be enough of a mandate to force the establishment's hand. Fearing the repercussions of either a Cruz or Trump mandate, I will be cheering for Kasich in Ohio and Rubio in Florida. Go, Little Marco! Go!
I don't think Cruz has any kind of shot of getting 1200+ delegates, but I think he has a chance of preventing Trump from doing so. If neither candidate gets over 1000 delegates, then I think we might end up with someone not currently running for president getting the bid. I do not think the powers that be would jump both Cruz and Trump with either Kasich or Rubio, who performed so meekly against them. But if either Cruz or Trump gets over 1000 that might be enough of a mandate to force the establishment's hand. Fearing the repercussions of either a Cruz or Trump mandate, I will be cheering for Kasich in Ohio and Rubio in Florida. Go, Little Marco! Go!
I don't know how likely it is, but it is conceivable that if no candidate gets the required delegates the Republicans could do something where they put two of the candidates on the same ticket (ie Rubio/Cruz) and claim that combined they have the delegates to win, and therefore have a mandate. The most palatable option here to establishment Republicans is undoubtedly a Kasich/Rubio combo, but at this point I don't see anyway it works without Cruz in there unless we see a huge reversal of fortune in the next few weeks.
Polls show Kasich's numbers in Michigan have jumped since the debate, and he's apparently polling higher than Cruz and Rubio. One poll showed him ahead of Trump!
That said, most polls show Trump with a substantial lead. I'm hoping for a surprise victory, but bracing for a Trump win. Either way, it's nice to see Kasich gaining in support. Hopefully the non-Trump, non-Cruz supporters will start to back him instead of Rubio.
I find it interesting as the arguments flair up over how horrible the primary candidate is, Republicans are left looking to one of the two candidates they also don't like. While its true that Trump is probably the worst for simply being unbalanced and crazy. Most R's really have a problem with Cruz, and I can't think of anyone outside of the beltway that pretends to like Rubio. Such a vacuum of leadership. This is the point in the cycle where a party is supposed to be able to put forward someone charismatic that can carry their banner. What does it say about a political party when they don't have any leaders?
I don't think Cruz has any kind of shot of getting 1200+ delegates, but I think he has a chance of preventing Trump from doing so. If neither candidate gets over 1000 delegates, then I think we might end up with someone not currently running for president getting the bid. I do not think the powers that be would jump both Cruz and Trump with either Kasich or Rubio, who performed so meekly against them. But if either Cruz or Trump gets over 1000 that might be enough of a mandate to force the establishment's hand. Fearing the repercussions of either a Cruz or Trump mandate, I will be cheering for Kasich in Ohio and Rubio in Florida. Go, Little Marco! Go!
I don't know how likely it is, but it is conceivable that if no candidate gets the required delegates the Republicans could do something where they put two of the candidates on the same ticket (ie Rubio/Cruz) and claim that combined they have the delegates to win, and therefore have a mandate. The most palatable option here to establishment Republicans is undoubtedly a Kasich/Rubio combo, but at this point I don't see anyway it works without Cruz in there unless we see a huge reversal of fortune in the next few weeks.
They are going to have to put Cruz or Trump as the presidential candidate, rubio can be a VP. The simple truth is the voters don't want a "Establishment" candidate. The people showing up to vote want Trump and/or Cruz. The GOP didn't give voters what they expected so they got clobbered before the first ballots were cast. There only option is to destroy the GOP but the voters are going to go with the anti-establishment wing. They would get relegated to a 3rd party that can't even ride the coat tails of a movement.
They are going to have to put Cruz or Trump as the presidential candidate, rubio can be a VP. The simple truth is the voters don't want a "Establishment" candidate. The people showing up to vote want Trump and/or Cruz. The GOP didn't give voters what they expected so they got clobbered before the first ballots were cast. There only option is to destroy the GOP but the voters are going to go with the anti-establishment wing. They would get relegated to a 3rd party that can't even ride the coat tails of a movement.
We will see. Personally I don't count Kasich completely out of it yet. There has been a huge pushback against Trump since Super Tuesday and a lot of Republicans are waking up looking for a more "sane" option. It may be too little too late already, but if Kasich does well in Michigan and Ohio he could be back in it.
Of course the reverse also holds true. With Ohio being his home state, if he loses to Trump there and in Michigan, he's probably done. I assume that either he or Rubio will drop out after Florida/Ohio. One of them needs to go so all the not-Trump-not-Cruz voters know who to vote for.
They are going to have to put Cruz or Trump as the presidential candidate, rubio can be a VP. The simple truth is the voters don't want a "Establishment" candidate. The people showing up to vote want Trump and/or Cruz. The GOP didn't give voters what they expected so they got clobbered before the first ballots were cast. There only option is to destroy the GOP but the voters are going to go with the anti-establishment wing. They would get relegated to a 3rd party that can't even ride the coat tails of a movement.
We will see. Personally I don't count Kasich completely out of it yet. There has been a huge pushback against Trump since Super Tuesday and a lot of Republicans are waking up looking for a more "sane" option. It may be too little too late already, but if Kasich does well in Michigan and Ohio he could be back in it.
Of course the reverse also holds true. With Ohio being his home state, if he loses to Trump there and in Michigan, he's probably done. I assume that either he or Rubio will drop out after Florida/Ohio. One of them needs to go so all the not-Trump-not-Cruz voters know who to vote for.
I think you are underestimating how done the Republican voter base is with "establishment candidates" (even though Cruz should technically be considered a n establisthment candidate). Even though neither has a majority by themselves, if you were to combine their percentages against all of the other candidates, they would get the nomination (even boldly assuming Rubio or Kasich got 100% of the other's support)
They are going to have to put Cruz or Trump as the presidential candidate, rubio can be a VP. The simple truth is the voters don't want a "Establishment" candidate. The people showing up to vote want Trump and/or Cruz. The GOP didn't give voters what they expected so they got clobbered before the first ballots were cast. There only option is to destroy the GOP but the voters are going to go with the anti-establishment wing. They would get relegated to a 3rd party that can't even ride the coat tails of a movement.
We will see. Personally I don't count Kasich completely out of it yet. There has been a huge pushback against Trump since Super Tuesday and a lot of Republicans are waking up looking for a more "sane" option. It may be too little too late already, but if Kasich does well in Michigan and Ohio he could be back in it.
Of course the reverse also holds true. With Ohio being his home state, if he loses to Trump there and in Michigan, he's probably done. I assume that either he or Rubio will drop out after Florida/Ohio. One of them needs to go so all the not-Trump-not-Cruz voters know who to vote for.
I think you are underestimating how done the Republican voter base is with "establishment candidates" (even though Cruz should technically be considered a n establisthment candidate). Even though neither has a majority by themselves, if you were to combine their percentages against all of the other candidates, they would get the nomination (even boldly assuming Rubio or Kasich got 100% of the other's support)
One hundred percent correct. I can tell you I vote in the primaries for the republicans always, I voted for the party guy in the general election and am very disappointed. I am in paul ryan's district and am unlikely to vote for him next time he is up for election because of how hard he has been on trump and cruz. The man is a shill and I am done with it. You are here for my vote it is time to shut up and get in line with me, not the other way around.
This was late in coming. Up to my neck in schoolwork, treading water to make it into the next semester. It's a timeline of our involvement in Syria.
We have a stronger military than the afghanis. We can give as good as we get, and that's not something Russia would want to risk.
I honestly have no respect for the fools that would try to attack us (whatever their reasons, be it anger, dyed in the wool fanaticism, be it a misplaced sense of revenge for rather vacuous reasons), hence me denigrating them as ****** ***********. At its basest, G v E is trite; they're labels that are mostly subjective (there is objectivity to them, but not in this instance). But, if someone attacks my country or threatens my values, I'll immediately look at them as evil if they're overly violent about it.
Michigan goes to Trump and deals a HUGE blow to Cruz, who finished behind Kasich.
Mississippi might be the first state where Trump actually gets 50%+ of the vote. Unfortunately, Mississippi is one of the few states where 50+ doesn't get all of the delegates.
Kasich, I am not sure what to make of. A better showing in Michigan than I thought, but in other states, he is barely scraping the barrel (7% in Mississippi, and really wasn't that good on Super Tuesday).
Wow, Trump is absolutely killing it tonight. I don't care to read the last 47 pages thoroughly, but from what I glanced the conversation has been MOSTLY civil. A big change from what I'm used to on Reddit. I'll pay more attention to this thread as I've been looking for a place where I won't be slandered and called every name by leftists in the book since I became public with my supporting Trump.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
Wow, Trump is absolutely killing it tonight. I don't care to read the last 47 pages thoroughly, but from what I glanced the conversation has been MOSTLY civil. A big change from what I'm used to on Reddit. I'll pay more attention to this thread as I've been looking for a place where I won't be slandered and called every name by leftists in the book since I became public with my supporting Trump.
Wow, Trump is absolutely killing it tonight. I don't care to read the last 47 pages thoroughly, but from what I glanced the conversation has been MOSTLY civil. A big change from what I'm used to on Reddit. I'll pay more attention to this thread as I've been looking for a place where I won't be slandered and called every name by leftists in the book since I became public with my supporting Trump.
Why do you support Trump?
I am not sure if they ever said they were supporting trump? I will give a reason or two I support Trump. The first is illegal immigration and how it ties in with jobs. While not the only factor for lower wage growth it is certainly part of it. We are very developed economy so most of the job growth is in the upper middle class and above. So that leaves everyone without the right college degree or just a high school education with depressed wages. People become commodities because you have a line around the block looking for a job. If you get rid of the illegals wages will go up. The reason is there is less competition for the jobs so the companies need to be more generous. While there will be less buyers most companies are orientated at selling to the middle class and above or corporations with global products. illegal immigrants don't buy homes new cars the fanciest tech gadgets starbucks etc. This helps out the lower middle class and above. The socialist answer is higher minimum wages but that artificial inflation destroys jobs. Also we have fiat money so prices will just rise to meet the wage increase, if they but in price control people will not be able to keep the doors open on low margins unless they are massive businesses. The capitalist answer is more free trade makes the economy stronger and we grow more. We do grow more but the trickle down effect stops at the upper middle class. Once you leave the upper middle class most people fall of into the working poor. Globalization and free trade are the root cause of this disparity of growth. While every income class is more wealthy in real income terms than they were over the last few decades more people fall into lower income brackets(to be fair more people are also upper middle class and their growth in both percentage and real terns out strips the working class and below). So while the poor in the USA are objectively much better off than they were, too many are now the poor vs middle class and are now not better off.
Michigan goes to Trump and deals a HUGE blow to Cruz, who finished behind Kasich.
Mississippi might be the first state where Trump actually gets 50%+ of the vote. Unfortunately, Mississippi is one of the few states where 50+ doesn't get all of the delegates.
Kasich, I am not sure what to make of. A better showing in Michigan than I thought, but in other states, he is barely scraping the barrel (7% in Mississippi, and really wasn't that good on Super Tuesday).
We've really been seeing a continuous worst-case scenario for the "anyone but Trump" camp. Rubio surges in Iowa, then falls flat on his face in New Hampshire. Kasich seems basically out of it, but then is invigorated enough by New Hampshire to keep his campaign going. Cruz is mostly cruising along at a level just high enough to keep him interested but just low enough for him not to actually have a chance of winning. And now this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Michigan goes to Trump and deals a HUGE blow to Cruz, who finished behind Kasich.
Mississippi might be the first state where Trump actually gets 50%+ of the vote. Unfortunately, Mississippi is one of the few states where 50+ doesn't get all of the delegates.
Kasich, I am not sure what to make of. A better showing in Michigan than I thought, but in other states, he is barely scraping the barrel (7% in Mississippi, and really wasn't that good on Super Tuesday).
We've really been seeing a continuous worst-case scenario for the "anyone but Trump" camp. Rubio surges in Iowa, then falls flat on his face in New Hampshire. Kasich seems basically out of it, but then is invigorated enough by New Hampshire to keep his campaign going. Cruz is mostly cruising along at a level just high enough to keep him interested but just low enough for him not to actually have a chance of winning. And now this.
The truth is simple, as much as republican party wants anyone but trump or cruz the voters like those two the most. The party establishment is not used to being told to shut up and eat your vegetables.
Wow, Trump is absolutely killing it tonight. I don't care to read the last 47 pages thoroughly, but from what I glanced the conversation has been MOSTLY civil. A big change from what I'm used to on Reddit. I'll pay more attention to this thread as I've been looking for a place where I won't be slandered and called every name by leftists in the book since I became public with my supporting Trump.
Why do you support Trump?
I am not sure if they ever said they were supporting trump?
since I became public with my supporting Trump
?
The first is illegal immigration and how it ties in with jobs. While not the only factor for lower wage growth it is certainly part of it. We are very developed economy so most of the job growth is in the upper middle class and above. So that leaves everyone without the right college degree or just a high school education with depressed wages. People become commodities because you have a line around the block looking for a job. If you get rid of the illegals wages will go up. The reason is there is less competition for the jobs so the companies need to be more generous. While there will be less buyers most companies are orientated at selling to the middle class and above or corporations with global products. illegal immigrants don't buy homes new cars the fanciest tech gadgets starbucks etc. This helps out the lower middle class and above. The socialist answer is higher minimum wages but that artificial inflation destroys jobs. Also we have fiat money so prices will just rise to meet the wage increase, if they but in price control people will not be able to keep the doors open on low margins unless they are massive businesses. The capitalist answer is more free trade makes the economy stronger and we grow more. We do grow more but the trickle down effect stops at the upper middle class. Once you leave the upper middle class most people fall of into the working poor. Globalization and free trade are the root cause of this disparity of growth. While every income class is more wealthy in real income terms than they were over the last few decades more people fall into lower income brackets(to be fair more people are also upper middle class and their growth in both percentage and real terns out strips the working class and below). So while the poor in the USA are objectively much better off than they were, too many are now the poor vs middle class and are now not better off.
So why Trump? He's not the only one hard on immigration. Why does Trump specifically work for you? Which is to say really, why is a plan like 'ban all Muslims' a good idea to you? To me, it seems an unnecessarily discriminatory way of doing the same old ineffective filtering. It's not like Muslims can be diagnosed by a blood test or something, it's quite easy to simply lie about being or not being part of any religious group. It also does nothing to address the problem itself, it only stops from it being a problem for you.
It is realistically enforceable, it's supposed to be enforced by the US government, they agreed to it. It's just like any other US law.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Yes, this is correct. Do you, or anyone-really, believe this to be false? If so, why?
Edit: misspoke, the constitution says little about people, but the bill of rights does.
If you think this is true, why did you bother with the distinction between US citizens and non-citizens? Why bother bringing up who the Constitution applies to and who it does not? If the constitution is no more a true law than the UN convention on torture, what does it matter whether anyone is covered by it?
So you are saying there are no 'true laws'? And the significance of this being? If this is what you are saying, all you have done is arbitrarily (as is true for all definitions) constructed a definition of what a true law is and it happens this defined object doesn't exist. So what does this mean?
The only conclusion definitions can be used to reach is literal statements of meaning based on the relevant definitions. In this case, 'X is not a true law' or such. But that's an arbitrary statement, you simply decided what a true law is and in doing so decided not to call it one. I don't even have to follow your definition.
What is your point?
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I realize this comes from a relatively large anecdotal source so take it as you will: I have never so many Republican friends so disgusted with the current options of the party in....well....since I have been alive. These are mostly people who support the right due to their monetary policy, but the Republican Party is a shell of what is left.
Most Republicans, as much as I disagree with them are not stupid. They realize that Cruz is completely un-electable in the general election, even more so than Trump. I don't even think he could beat Sanders, who has been gaining steam as of late.
Florida should be the last nail in the coffin for Rubio. He will win a large share, but most estimated have Trump winning Florida, and the state is a "winner take all" state for delegates.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
I don't think Cruz has any kind of shot of getting 1200+ delegates, but I think he has a chance of preventing Trump from doing so. If neither candidate gets over 1000 delegates, then I think we might end up with someone not currently running for president getting the bid. I do not think the powers that be would jump both Cruz and Trump with either Kasich or Rubio, who performed so meekly against them. But if either Cruz or Trump gets over 1000 that might be enough of a mandate to force the establishment's hand. Fearing the repercussions of either a Cruz or Trump mandate, I will be cheering for Kasich in Ohio and Rubio in Florida. Go, Little Marco! Go!
Donald Trump: 384
Ted Cruz: 300
Marco Rubio: 151
John Kasich: 37
Available: 1,585
To Win: 1,237
Total: 2,427
I don't know how likely it is, but it is conceivable that if no candidate gets the required delegates the Republicans could do something where they put two of the candidates on the same ticket (ie Rubio/Cruz) and claim that combined they have the delegates to win, and therefore have a mandate. The most palatable option here to establishment Republicans is undoubtedly a Kasich/Rubio combo, but at this point I don't see anyway it works without Cruz in there unless we see a huge reversal of fortune in the next few weeks.
Polls show Kasich's numbers in Michigan have jumped since the debate, and he's apparently polling higher than Cruz and Rubio. One poll showed him ahead of Trump!
That said, most polls show Trump with a substantial lead. I'm hoping for a surprise victory, but bracing for a Trump win. Either way, it's nice to see Kasich gaining in support. Hopefully the non-Trump, non-Cruz supporters will start to back him instead of Rubio.
Civil war, duh.
=P
They are going to have to put Cruz or Trump as the presidential candidate, rubio can be a VP. The simple truth is the voters don't want a "Establishment" candidate. The people showing up to vote want Trump and/or Cruz. The GOP didn't give voters what they expected so they got clobbered before the first ballots were cast. There only option is to destroy the GOP but the voters are going to go with the anti-establishment wing. They would get relegated to a 3rd party that can't even ride the coat tails of a movement.
We will see. Personally I don't count Kasich completely out of it yet. There has been a huge pushback against Trump since Super Tuesday and a lot of Republicans are waking up looking for a more "sane" option. It may be too little too late already, but if Kasich does well in Michigan and Ohio he could be back in it.
Of course the reverse also holds true. With Ohio being his home state, if he loses to Trump there and in Michigan, he's probably done. I assume that either he or Rubio will drop out after Florida/Ohio. One of them needs to go so all the not-Trump-not-Cruz voters know who to vote for.
I think you are underestimating how done the Republican voter base is with "establishment candidates" (even though Cruz should technically be considered a n establisthment candidate). Even though neither has a majority by themselves, if you were to combine their percentages against all of the other candidates, they would get the nomination (even boldly assuming Rubio or Kasich got 100% of the other's support)
The GJ way path to no lynching:
One hundred percent correct. I can tell you I vote in the primaries for the republicans always, I voted for the party guy in the general election and am very disappointed. I am in paul ryan's district and am unlikely to vote for him next time he is up for election because of how hard he has been on trump and cruz. The man is a shill and I am done with it. You are here for my vote it is time to shut up and get in line with me, not the other way around.
This was late in coming. Up to my neck in schoolwork, treading water to make it into the next semester. It's a timeline of our involvement in Syria.
We have a stronger military than the afghanis. We can give as good as we get, and that's not something Russia would want to risk.
I honestly have no respect for the fools that would try to attack us (whatever their reasons, be it anger, dyed in the wool fanaticism, be it a misplaced sense of revenge for rather vacuous reasons), hence me denigrating them as ****** ***********. At its basest, G v E is trite; they're labels that are mostly subjective (there is objectivity to them, but not in this instance). But, if someone attacks my country or threatens my values, I'll immediately look at them as evil if they're overly violent about it.
Mississippi might be the first state where Trump actually gets 50%+ of the vote. Unfortunately, Mississippi is one of the few states where 50+ doesn't get all of the delegates.
Kasich, I am not sure what to make of. A better showing in Michigan than I thought, but in other states, he is barely scraping the barrel (7% in Mississippi, and really wasn't that good on Super Tuesday).
The GJ way path to no lynching:
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Why do you support Trump?
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I am not sure if they ever said they were supporting trump? I will give a reason or two I support Trump. The first is illegal immigration and how it ties in with jobs. While not the only factor for lower wage growth it is certainly part of it. We are very developed economy so most of the job growth is in the upper middle class and above. So that leaves everyone without the right college degree or just a high school education with depressed wages. People become commodities because you have a line around the block looking for a job. If you get rid of the illegals wages will go up. The reason is there is less competition for the jobs so the companies need to be more generous. While there will be less buyers most companies are orientated at selling to the middle class and above or corporations with global products. illegal immigrants don't buy homes new cars the fanciest tech gadgets starbucks etc. This helps out the lower middle class and above. The socialist answer is higher minimum wages but that artificial inflation destroys jobs. Also we have fiat money so prices will just rise to meet the wage increase, if they but in price control people will not be able to keep the doors open on low margins unless they are massive businesses. The capitalist answer is more free trade makes the economy stronger and we grow more. We do grow more but the trickle down effect stops at the upper middle class. Once you leave the upper middle class most people fall of into the working poor. Globalization and free trade are the root cause of this disparity of growth. While every income class is more wealthy in real income terms than they were over the last few decades more people fall into lower income brackets(to be fair more people are also upper middle class and their growth in both percentage and real terns out strips the working class and below). So while the poor in the USA are objectively much better off than they were, too many are now the poor vs middle class and are now not better off.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The truth is simple, as much as republican party wants anyone but trump or cruz the voters like those two the most. The party establishment is not used to being told to shut up and eat your vegetables.
?
So why Trump? He's not the only one hard on immigration. Why does Trump specifically work for you? Which is to say really, why is a plan like 'ban all Muslims' a good idea to you? To me, it seems an unnecessarily discriminatory way of doing the same old ineffective filtering. It's not like Muslims can be diagnosed by a blood test or something, it's quite easy to simply lie about being or not being part of any religious group. It also does nothing to address the problem itself, it only stops from it being a problem for you.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice