I don’t think any credible analyst believes that Russia could take NATO.

If you can’t see the difference between Oboma and Trump I can’t help you

Your government is fundamentally different than ours. Given 2 large entrenched parties which are nearly equal in a system which is winner take all at every stage of the game any third party which gets any substantial portion of the vote splits the vote with whatever party it is most like ensuring its opposition wins.

EG imagine you wanted to grow say the green party in given district which is 51% Dem 49% Republican. If it were to wildly successful it would need to grow from 1% to a plurality organically probably over several or even many election seasons. It is unlikely to get many Republican votes because Republicans have solidarity and its positions are substantially different so by the time the green party has grown to 3% of the vote its throwing every election to the Republicans. This continues to be true at 30% because 90% of its votes come from the left. At some point you would reach changeover and become the defacto left wing party but by that time you will have found the state has gerrymandered your district to the point where you can’t win and all the money essentially millions of dollars in legal bribes is still flowing to the now minority party.

This is literally impossible to fix at the ballot box by people voting for third parties. This is why for example the green party has existed for 40 years and in all that time has never elected anyone to federal office and has in only a handful of cases held a state office wherein they run and stay green.

The US system is designed to make this impractical and it has only become more so with intensely parties making getting votes from both sides increasingly ridiculous. Anyone you would want to elect is going to have to take a stand against essentially the American nazi party in power now.

We have 2 entrenched parties. The Republicans have about half the vote. If we fracture the vote on the left even a little bit then we lose. EG for example suppose we WOULD win with 51% of the vote suppose we convince 90% of the would be democrats to vote green.

The vote is now 45.9 Green 5.1 Dem 49% Republican aaaaand we now lose for the next 100 years. This is actually the optimistic case. Even if you get a green candidate who satisfies literally everyone on the left some will KNOW this can’t fuckin work and yell at the defectors and some will dislike anything left of the dems and refuse to move so you probably get closer to 26% one and 25% the other. If carried out broadly enough you would hand an unstoppable super majority to the other side which they will use to fix it so your vote is suppressed forever.

You can’t just vote third party you have to first reform the system. The most basic plausible move is instant runoff or something similar at the state level.

So we can have Obama or Biden rather than Adolf Hitler with dementia?

Kirk was preaching ugly evil shit I don’t think you can compare him getting sniped to normal people getting hurt

what the first Civil War was fought over Slaves. Literal human resources were right up their with land as far as property value and ability to continue to earn future value. Enshrining slaves as property forever is virtually the only difference in the confederate constitution.

Lincoln was the first presidential ticket with a northern pres and vp at a time when we deliberately had an equal number of southern and northern states and a bunch of territories to be brought into the union out west. Previously it was possible for a southern pres or vp to enforce this fake equality that couldn’t last because the pres could veto and the vp could vote to break a tie. Once you break that tie you can’t put it back you can now add more northern states without issue.

What were they worried about losing as they lost ground in the house and senate again? Their property and future earnings from that property. It’s popular to quote Lincoln saying he would free none or all of the slaves if he could save the union but that doesn’t tell you what the war was about. They went to war so they could keep their slaves and We went the war so we could keep the southern states instead of having an enemy on our doorstep.

Around 84% of Republicans approve of what is clearly kidnapping murder and open fascism as we are threatening half the world, planning on invading a NATO country, and stealing oil from Venezuela. Conservatives are absolutely our enemy.

They are moving 1500 soldiers to Minneapolis to quell the “violence” which is basically people marching with signs and blocking traffic.

Ice agents are threatening to murder people and telling them they should have learned to be meek so they don’t get murdered like Goode

The logic behind not using them is either they can’t or they can’t. They didn’t kill a million russians and junk a fair chunk of their existing hardware for nothing. The reasonable perception is that they couldn’t take Ukraine and fight NATO at all whereas without NATO assistance historical or current Ukraine would have actually fallen in 3 days. Their ability to take Ukraine is therefore 100% a function of how well they can keep NATO out of it and nuking Ukraine blows that objective.

You would actually need server racks at major ISPs colocated near customers (like netflix does now) to have acceptable latency. To have acceptable performance you would need a cheap small form factor PC, a monitor, a keyboard, a mouse.

None of this is free and if not fucked up on the software side would perform fine as far as normal computing tasks by itself.

Why a phone connected to the cloud PC is shit

This would be an amazingly trash experience over wireless so you would need to dock both because wifi sucks in most people’s house AND because it would just constantly die.

Then it would ruin the battery to run it this way and on most user devices this is difficult/expensive to replace.

Many people have old phones that would perform even more poorly than average.

Your phone needs to be in your pocket and used for a million and one things not on the desk running a client to the cloud where you are editing an office document .

Oh sorry can’t listen to my music as I walk around the house because I have to fuckin undock it.

No honey you can’t use the PC its actually my phone and I’m running out the door. Let’s undock it and fuck about and make your phone the client oh wait it doesn’t work with your model for some reason? The sound doesn’t work right? oh sorry gotta run out the door.

The efficiency argument and latency are in direct fucking opposition because in order to have acceptable latency you need to have a bunch of server racks near people which absolutely ruins the economics.

Why your TV as a screen is shit

Not positioned in a useful way or with a reasonable DPI or non-shit text rendering , nowhere useful to put the keyboard that is non-awful, pure voice input to use a computer is complete trash

Conclusion

Local clients that don’t suck are going to be basic bitch small form factor PCs with ethernet and wired speakers because those things always work and always work well. If you don’t fuck them up by running complete garbage they already run windows or linux reasonably well without issue. If you need a lot of processing power for AI you can run THAT in the cloud… which is already a thing.

The very idea of simply owning a screen, keyboard, and mouse, and using Windows remotely via a subscription will likely send shivers down many of your spines — but you have to consider the trends here.

You need at minimum an ethernet or wifi adapter and a processor and a GPU to decode video and push pixels to the screen. You need effectively a local PC to rent a remote PC

Well chucklefuck you need a basic PC to act as the client. You know what kind of computer most people have? A shitty PC good enough to be the fuckin client. Why would they want to pay for a shitty pc to rent another one when they can just use the fucking shitty PC they bought at walmart for 300 for 8 fuckin years like they do now? That is $3 a month amortized beat that bitch.

Tactical nukes are relatively new

Like new if you time traveled from the 50s We literally conceived of a bazooka launched personal nuke. Generally speaking not much was actually made by anyone and is unlikely to have been maintained as they would have been deemed basically useless for decades as is very expensive to maintain.

It’s dubious that they have useful nukes available to just drop in an shell to start with. For practical purposes their nukes are fairly large and there are other considerations. Poorly maintained shit may malfunction creating additional doubt as to their military might and it might trigger additional aid by the rest of the world. They can’t actually fight NATO so actions have to be carefully calibrated so as not to bring the rest of the world or even just more of their aid into the fray lest it become even more expensive or even impossible to win.

Not using nukes isn’t holding back its not inviting armageddon.

This can actually be done with any fs that supports cheap snapshots

If you use arch and managing nvidia is hard you shouldn’t have picked arch

This would be impossible to hold we would lose it the second we stopped dumping hundreds of billions per year and would never own anywhere but islands of fascism where our troops were concentrated.

We would suffer continuous losses and the whole world except Russia and China would turn against us.

We would probably suffer economic collapse as other countries dropped dollars and exchange rates shifted against us while war creates a need for tax money which can only be raised by taxes which are unpopular or tariffs which further destroy trade.

If Congress doesn’t get behind attacking Canada Trump could only fund it by misappropriating money or raising tariffs.

Ultimately we lose Canada and end up in the next great depression