- Thu, 16:49: Officially on vacation... now!
- Thu, 22:15: I would have been on the road over an hour ago if it weren't for this FUCKING RAIN
- Fri, 00:14: Rain finally took a break long enough for me to finish packing. Hitting the road 3 hours late. Grumble. At least I got to hear Hillary. Yay!
- Fri, 04:06: Made it to Mom's. Sleep now, Pennsic tomorrow.
Pennsic laundry complete, plus new mattress acquired!
I have been playing this game since 1995 AND I STILL LOVE IT EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED TIME.
- Wed, 02:27: According to CNN, Hillary Clinton now has 2,058 pledged delegates, passing the majority of 2,026.
- Wed, 02:27: As they have done in every election since they were created in 1985, the superdelegates will now back the candidate who received the most...
- Wed, 02:28: ... pledged delegates (and the most votes, by 3 million). Congratulations, Hillary! :)
- Wed, 12:12: Whoa, Clinton really swept California. Nice! :) And Nate Silver still has her winning the general at 80%. Can't wait!
Here's what I don't get - Sanders has for his entire political career been a democratic socialist, running as an independent. Then this year he decides to run for the Democratic party nomination. Now that he has, his supporters now want to change the Democratic party.
Doesn't that seem a little bit disingenuous? Why isn't he out forming his own party, or working with a party that more aligns to his goals, rather than trying to become something he's not, and then his supporters are trying to take over a party they don't identify with?
I get it - the Democratic party could be more progressive. I even agree. But by the same token, there are far more progressive parties out there (Green, etc.). Why are you trying to change something you're not?
It's like, hey, I'm a vegetarian, but I'm cool with ordering salad in your steak place. Sorry about my friends trying to shut you down and change you into a vegan joint. My bad.
Epic 8-player Cosmic Encounter. Aw yeah...
Rules Lawyer: I want to do X.
Me: You can't do X.
RL: Show me in the rules where it says I can't do X.
Me: It says you have to do X+Y as a single action.
RL: But it doesn't say I *can't* do just X.
RL: You're making me very annoyed!
If game rules don't list everything you *can't* do, then that means you can do anything? What's the point of having rules then?
P.S. Someone else later found where it specifically says you can't do X without doing Y. Just like the rules said in the first place.
I guess I done good :)
"For Bernie to win, he has to prove he can win majorities beyond the angry white male demographic. He has consistently and massively outspent Hillary in diverse states, but has failed to dent her lead among those groups. Until that changes, the outcome of this primary is not in doubt."
If anyone wants to start using Lyft (cheaper than Uber and more fun!), use my code for $50 in ride credit when you sign up - "ALANISBEST" :D
Cleanest it's been since I bought it!
Am I a terrible progressive for being sad Rubio just dropped out? On the one hand he seemed to be positioning himself as more moderate than the rest of those nut jobs. On the other hand I wanted to watch Hillary wipe up the floor with him in a debate.
And when you take a step back and look at Clinton objectively — which is admittedly difficult for many, even, or maybe particularly, on the left — that’s exactly the point. Hillary Clinton’s reputation is largely the result of a quarter century of visceral GOP hatred."
Yes, we can look at her voting record and public statements to inform our decisions of who we vote for in the primaries, but let's face it - the hatred that runs so deep is visceral, and also manufactured by the radical right.