I think the marketing works because it gives you just one option that everyone automatically uses. I just downloaded a 5th messaging app from the Play Store because everyone uses something different. It is exhausting. This is one case I hate having "choices" among 100s of mediocre apps.
Cars don't come with a guarantee that it will last until you're 80 though. You go over a certain mileage, you're counting down the life of your car.
On the other hand, marriage is touted as this perfect "till death do us apart" deal.
Should weddings be sold like cars? With "your mileage may vary" and "you will have many marriages throughout your life?" Maybe then I'd agree with your logic.
> Should weddings be sold like cars? With "your mileage may vary" and "you will have many marriages throughout your life?" Maybe then I'd agree with your logic.
Sure. Mortgages come in 15 and 30 year sizes, and child custody is util they're 18.
Call it a 20 year sizing, after that you figure out whatchu need to split up and then think about the next steps.
There is absolutely nothing socialistic about any of the campaigns in the running. You're just creating a straw man.
Accruing capital almost never has anything to do with hard work or laziness. It's a lot of luck. What family you were born into, what area of the world, if you had parents growing up etc. You could be the laziest POS and have more money than you could spend in a lifetime.
Tax-funded education and healthcare is necessary to offset some of the insane luck a trust fund kid has vs kid with a single mother with debt and no inheritance in sight. So everyone can have a fair shot at participating in capitalism. Nothing remotely socialistic about it.
According to multiple reports, the vote counts entered into app and sent were not what was received by HQ. How do we know that the company wasn't paid to change the numbers on the backend? How would the numbers change by themselves? I'll be called a tinfoil-hatter for assuming malice.
We don't know that they were fine. Until Sanders campaign urged them to make a change in transparency, only the final delegate count was reported. So it could've been a dumpster fire every other time and they just obscured the discrepancies with "final delegate count"
Like all thinking adults, Bernie views Trump as a symptom of a deeper disease. Bernie has fought to fix USA's underlying problems for over four decades. Why would he care in a personal sense about the latest plutocratic figurehead? Trump's policies aren't significantly different than those of his predecessors; Bernie's policies will be.
Besides, Bloomberg is more of a Republican than Trump is. Why would Bernie care to see him elected?
What if you're an independent caucusing for one Democrat and don't care about the others? There are many on Sanders' side doing just that and it's unfair to tell them that they're bad for being skeptical of the cancellation of the most important poll and delaying the results of an election that would've gave Sanders tremendous media coverage and a bump in the polls
> What if you're an independent caucusing for one Democrat and don't care about the others?
You have a poor understanding of the American electoral process and should re-evaluate your stance in it if your goal is to affect change.
> ...unfair to tell them that they're bad for being skeptical of the cancellation of the most important poll and delaying the results...
I'm not saying they shouldn't be skeptical, I'm saying it is wrong to attack other democrats without evidence and point fingers at other candidates because you're upset that Iowa had a poorly run caucus.
I would also caution against assuming the outcome of any poll or caucus, most of all Iowa which is a tremendously difficult caucus to interpret.
I'm only telling you that they exist. 34% of Sanders voters "may not" vote for another blue candidate. 10% voted for Trump. This isn't my opinion. This is just data.
You're just peddling the probable media narrative. It's undoubtedly the worst for Bernie. He didn't get to tout his "first count" win, which would've given him a boost going into second alignment. And he would've given a victory speech which is historically equal to at least a +5 bump in the polls.
