By the way, I don't understand the title of this thread. How does that graphic support the idea that everyone's a Libertarian? I'm sure there's plenty of people that don't support the separation of church and state, or would like to ban all guns. How would they be libertarians?

I consider myself a Libertarian (or 'Liberal' as the closest equivalent here in Europe is typically called, the polar opposite from the 'Liberals' in the US as far as economic policy is concerned), but US Libertarians are too dogmatic for my tastes (and to be effective), a bit more pragmatism would suit them well. Same goes for conservatives, by the way. It's always important to remember that the end goal is not to prove the superiority of a given political philosophy, but to continuously increase the quality of life of your citizens. Once in a while that means you'll have to deviate from abstract theoretical ideals.

Specifically, it doesn't help if Libertarians "believe in generously helping those in need" if they don't correct for the fact that a good deal of the population is more selfish than them, and thus a correction via legislative means (aka a social security system) is an absolute must-have in a modern day society. The smallest feasible government possible is not the same as a small government.

Especially in Hells Bells, he's struggling to bring the rasp in a controlled way. His voice tends to 'overshoot' the higher notes at the end of lines that need to be delivered with power, making him sound pitchy as hell and uncontrolled at times (and honestly, for all the problems he's had with his voice in the past, to my recollection Axl was very rarely off pitch in GNR)

It's by no means really bad as such, but the way it's been declining is what worries me. I just hope the 5 shows he still has to do don't show a further decline and he gets to have some rest afterwards. It's also worrying to read that Axl apparently doesn't seem to be able to measure himself, if it's true that he keeps asking AC/DC to add more shows.

As much as I would like to see him take the nomination, it would be wholly undemocratic for him to win the vote via super delegates. I like that he's still in the race, as it allows him to keep bringing his progressive message, trying to get Hillary to pick up as much of his platform as possible. It's also wise for him to stay in, just in case the republicans or media finally manage to make their slander campaigns against Hillary (Bengazi, email scandal) stick for some reason.