Good luck!

Liberals solve the problems that cause voters to die. Conservatives push for the status quo, even if the status quo kills the voters. The more deaths, the more people move towards the liberals. What, right now, is killing Gen Z?

Gen Z males have been raised in this “men need to be the alpha dog - don’t let anyone talk down to you - don’t respect anyone” mindset throughout high school. Then, when they get out into the real world, that mindset lead them to flunk out of college, not hold down a job, and not be able to get/keep a girlfriend. With no education/money/girlfriend’s house and housing prices through the roof, they have to move back in with there parents who:

A) Are liberal and thus blame it on there attitude, which makes them even more conservative

B) Are conservative and blame it on trans-mexican-CRT-cowfarts, which makes them bond more with their parents.

How do we fix this?

The hype should go the other way. Instead of bigger and bigger models that do more and more - have smaller models that are just as effective. Get them onto personal computers; get them onto phones; get them onto Arduino minis that cost $20 - and then have those models be as good as the big LLMs and Image gen programs.

Wow, they are buying ads but haven’t made any new content since 2012?. Must be a desert bus for hope promotion.

“We can’t push policies that cause deflation! That will cause people to put off buying things and cause a economic recession, which will cause more deflation leading to a neverending ending spiral! Lets just hold inflation to 2% per year and hope people’s jobs eventually given them raises.”

We have been putting off buying things for years! Houses, cars, cloths, food - if the price goes down, no one will go ‘oh, I’m going to wait a bit longer and see if it goes down more’. No, we will buy like crazy! Every administration that ruled over this inflation spike - be them left wing or right wing - has seen their electoral chances tumble. But god forbid we see even a hint of deflation.

Either they run into the filibuster in the senate and it stops most of this, or we finally do away with the filibuster and when the democrats come in to clean up after 2/4 years of disaster, we don’t have the filibuster stopping all the good ideas the democrats are suppose to support.

I seen to remember a bunch of 14th amendment lawsuits that got shut down by SCOTUS a few days before primaries started.

People: “We don’t want old!” Biden: “I still got this!” Debate. “Maybe I don’t.” Harris: “I’m not old!” People: “Good enough!”

In 2016, Trump needed to win three states that were coin flips to win the race. With that, pollsters said he had a 1 in 8 chance. Trump took those coins, glued them together (the states had correlated outcomes) and then flipped the 3-coins-glued-together and got all three to land heads. So instead of a 1 in 8, it was a 1 in 2.

I thought the 13th amendment of 1812 didn’t pass?

Moscow: “Trump ordered that October suprize a month ago, Demetri, where is it?”

Demetri: “Relax, voting doesn’t start until next Tuesday. I plan of bomb blowing up on Monday before.”

Moscow: “Voting is this Tuesday, not next!”

Donald Trump trails with an estimated zero votes…

Yes, the system works!

Does anyone know if “already voted” people are included in prospective voter polls? If they are excluded, we might be seeing a shift in polling towards Trump because his supporters vote day-of more than Harris voters.

But isn’t Gannett a conservative company? Is this good news, like if Fox News or OANN says they won’t endorse a candidate?

What, pray tell, do you think the Russian P-tape is? It has nothing to do with urine. The letters that follow the P are E D and O.

I was just explaining this concept to someone about the 2016 polls: all the posters thought of PA,MI, and WI as independent. Each had a 50% chance of going to Trump and he needed all three to win. So they projected him winning at (1/2)^3=1 in 8 chance of winning. Then they found out that those three were correlated.

I would say if Trump wins WI he wins PA and MI; and if Harris wins PA she wins WI and MI; BUT, if Trump wins PA he is not guaranteed a win in WI nor Harris winning WI guarantees a PA win.

What happens if there is a projected tie, but then we have a faithless elector?

Imagine the shit show if Trump secured enough republicans to vote for him in a tie breaking scenario, and then they open the ballots and see one Trump vote go for Romney or something.

“men should get to vote for their wives” = “Let’s promote mail in voting! Who cares about voting privacy, it’s easier, thus we will get a higher turnout!”

This is why I don’t like mail in voting: People other than the voter can tell the person how to vote. It is just blatantly obvious in this case.

Pokemon Go to the polls!