Re: Implosion
 

I am glad for you that you are unfireable.

Re: Implosion
 

I'm pretty certain I speak for most of the board when I say there are two material goals that we all work for: becoming unfireable and having fuck-you money. Everything else is just for shits and giggles.

So, thank you.

Re: Implosion
 

Well, then we're both 50% of the way there. Do you round up?

Re: Implosion
 

I wish.

Re: Implosion
 

I round down. Allows me to complain endlessly.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Which means "quite a bit."

Seriously, this stuff is cuckoo. These things are defined and -- and here's the important part -- measured consistently (subject to periodic methodological changes).

That you might prefer a different definition does not make the one used "wrong" or "worthless." And again -- the important part -- in no way undermines a time series based on them.

Seriously, are you suggesting that there's something wrong with how GDP is measured that makes comparing this year to last year impossible? That's, literally, insane.

Re: Implosion
 

This is true of every President. But tell me again how you know for certain what DC will let Trump do on taxes.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

The cynic in you is undoubtedly partially right. But let's also keep in mind (1) this would actually be logistically complicated, (2) potentially massively expensive, and (3) depending how it was done, further destabilizing to the financial system.

Also, as with the mortgage interest deduction, it would also likely skew pretty heavily toward the relatively affluent.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Poor Mitt Romney. Another defenseless victim of a hostile takeover.

Re: Implosion
 

Honestly, had the campaign gone differently, I suppose I could have voted for Kasich, in the sense that I could hold my nose and vote for yet another disappointing candidate in the line of McCain and Romney. I certainly did not expect in the field of 17 that Cruz would be in it to the last. It is no surprise that Sebby is a Kasich fan, as Kasich appeared to be well-stocked with a virtually limitless supply of hallucinogenics, firm until the last that He would pull it out in Cleveland, despite his own affirmative actions to his detriment.

I could even have respected him, had he dropped out at an appropriate time. If I did not have to accept that Trump got 37% or so of the vote, I would be surprised that people would vote for someone so clearly delusional in large numbers, but I clearly have lowered my expectations of the voting public going forward.

ETA: It has been very interesting to see how GOP politicians are responding to Trump. I was fairly disappointed that both the current Governor of Texas and Rick Perry both doubled down on uniting, particularly since I used to give Perry credit for being the first of the candidates to call Trump a cancer on conservatism. That's not just a minor ideological difference. Saying he would consider VP dashed my hopes for Texas secession, which are always simmering just below the surface. I expect Cornyn will go the same way. Rand Paul was also a disappointment.

OTOH, Lindsey Freaking Graham not only had the backbone to endorse Cruz, whom he clearly despised, and has doubled down on Never Trump. Paul Ryan was a surprise, even if he was just giving cover to other House members who need it. Ben Sasse remains my hero. The Bushes won't endorse. The only R nominee even going to Cleveland is Bob Dole. It's like Bizarro World.

There is some talk, though I know it is idle, of the delegates, or some portion of them pulling a 1948 and walking out and reconvening somewhere else and putting up a 3rd party in a few states. Rick Perry had been the dream candidate for that movement, and so I assume it's now dead on the vine, but it seems somehow fitting that the maneuver that gave us the Dixiecrats and their objection to equality, would be used against Donald Trump and his dog whistle to the alt-right.

Absent a delegate walkout in Cleveland, I will have to pin my hopes on whoever comes out of the Libertarian convention later this month.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Good riddance to a congenital zero. I've known mollusks with more charisma.

Seriously. Mitt isn't the man in the grey flannel suit. He's the actual suit, somehow come to life. The American Dream, straight out of a 1964 Brooks Brothers' catalog: Shiny teeth, granite jawed grin, Brylcreemed Hitler Youth haircut. "Can I sell you some life insurance, mam?"

Mitt Romney is a teetotaling Brett Marmalard - a creature of staggering absence, in every regard -- a thing so dull it's not at all hyperbole, and indeed fact, to note the most interesting thing about him is his unusual underwear.

Gone, and quickly forgotten. Five or six years from now, we'll have all had pimples we recall more quickly (and perhaps fondly) than Mitt Romney.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Forget this. We'd bore the board. It'll take forever, we'll never agree, and -- I'm already bored.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Perhaps (I don't see logistical problems, and I think it would have paid for itself, and then some, over time). But it would have blunted all this inequality talk of today by paring the wealth disparity you get after an extreme recession/quasi-depression, and it would have given us real growth.

And we could have made the forgiveness work like a progressive tax, to favor those who need it over those who don't.

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
 

My favorite Republican.