pewter

They are programmatically token predictors. It will never be “closer” to intelligence for that very reason. The broader question should be, “can a token predictor simulate intelligence?”

Yeah, that pretty much aligns with what I thought. A comment downvoted to -122.

First part is true, but irrelevant since it’s a blue district like I tried to explain to the other dude. When I say blue, I mean she more than doubled her next closest opponent (the Republican candidate)'s votes. It would be a waste of AIPAC’s money from their perspective.

Second part sounds like fan fiction because the users on Lemmy I’ve interacted with don’t sound like people who want to see a solidly blue district turn red.

That’s a primary. Different places have primaries at different times.

Yeah it does, because in the general election, she’ll be the only Democrat. That’s the purpose of the primary.

She won her primary a couple months ago and she’s in a very blue district.

This isn’t projection. They’re not saying “fascists”.

Hour vs. hour it’s the best form of transportation

You get more space, there’s no TSA, you don’t get charged for bringing luggage, you can carry on liquids, you get leg room, the wifi is decent.

But if I’m traveling a really far distance… For example, if I’m going from California to New York I’d rather go by plane. Going by train for that seems to be pretty horrible. America is in desperate need of a ground transportation that can get from California to New York quickly.

That’s odd because the only reason there’s leverage to remove Biden is because the party thought he wasn’t progressive enough in terms of Gaza.

Removing him because of his terrible debate is only politically feasible for Democrats because he has been losing in head-to-head polls since almost exactly October 7th.

I think AOC and Sanders are probably thinking of something else. My hunch, is they assume Republicans will challenge the existence of any Democrat on the ballot not named Joe Biden for some sort of rules violation, the decision will go to the Supreme Court, and the court will decide on returning 45 to the White House.

538 has Biden leading by a nose.

Can you link what you’re citing? If it’s national polling, Biden appears to be trailing by a nose.

EDIT: I think I found the link corroborating what you said.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/?cid=rrpromo

Jill Stein is in her 70s.

Maybe your app is displaying them differently, but when I looked the 3rd highest top-level comment wanted the guy to have better aim and it had 49 net upvotes

https://archive.is/uNswh

I’m archiving so you see the same layout I saw.

That wouldn’t work because some housing is much more expensive than others. It might have more rooms. It might be better built. It might be newer. At least a 5% increase cap would scale with all of those things more appropriately.

This is a weird headline generally, but it’s even weirder given that a UK outlet wrote it.

In many states the party you’re registered with is public. Who you voted for is kept private. The fact that you voted can’t be kept private in any real way if you’re voting in person.

few of us expect Democrats to lose the popular vote

Anything is possible. Long before the debate, national polling for Biden has been significantly worse than he performed in 2020 and Clinton in 2016.

Primaries are also weird because depending on what state you live in the election is often decided before you even get to vote. Imagine living in a state as big as California and having no impact on the primary.

If the general election can be one day maybe so can the primary.

Moats. I was kidding at first, but I’m now thinking lazy rivers are modern moats.

Hot take: that crime bill attack was always an interesting one to me.

In Hillary’s election she got heavily criticized for supporting it while non-conservatives supported it, Biden wrote it, Bill Clinton signed it, Bernie Sanders voted for it. I was somewhat surprised this election when people actually remembered that Biden wrote it at all. I didn’t hear much about it in 2020.

That’s not an interpretation the supreme court would agree with.