Given the error rate of LLMs, it seems more like they wasted $258 and a week that could have been spent on a human review.
It's inflation plus 2%, nothing spectacular but still a solid win for the union.
Local races are actually important even if the electoral college makes my solid blue state federal votes worthless.
Trump knows he's going to lose and isn't wasting time with the paperwork.
Y'all seem to misunderstand, Harris already won the election months ago when Biden dropped out. It isn't defeatism to resign myself to another four years of trying to convince the Democrats to maybe stop helping boil the planet and blow up foreign kids.
Why would you tell on yourself like this?
it does seem to equate a lack of variety in choices is the same as a lack of choice
That would seem to be a fundamental point of contention there. In my perspective, a distinction without a difference is a distinction in name only. If there's no variety to a choice then it might as well be moot, the only people who have agency are the ones who constrained the window of choosable options.
Anyways, I'm happy to share my weird perspective on politics. It's always nice when folks actually listen instead of just ending the conversation by declaring me part of their opposition. XD
While I agree with you in the ideal scenario, wouldn't the end result of not voting for the lesser evil lead to the outcome where the greater evil wins anyways?
Only in the short term, because the victory of the greater evil activates people politically. That's how we got Biden in 2020, it was as inevitable as Harris' victory next month.
In that case, realistically, wouldn't a lack of a vote be practically equivalent to a vote for the greater evil?
No, abstaining is abstaining regardless. All blame directed at uncommitted voters is in reality a fault of the parties that fail to appeal to them.
The voters cannot be blamed for the lacl of choice they were given, to do so is to insist that the parties have a right to make demands of the voters rather than the other way around.
it does seem that the people who support the republicans seem to be a lot more passionate in voting for their end?
Yup. They've got a party that promotes their sense of greivance and Democrats can't match that energy without moving left and alienating their right-wing campaign financiers.
It's not defeatism, it's political realism based on an understanding that the USA is not and has never been a democracy. The only two parties that matter get to pick their constituencies and they cannot fail, they can only be failed by the usual electoral scapegoats.
And in any case, the DNC knows they're winning this election so why should they risk alienating their corporate and billionaire donors by appealing to the idealism of the youth?
Also, I don't believe in lesser-evilism. If a party can't pass an anti-genocide bar that's so low as to be subterranean, then they aren't getting my vote.
And that's the problem.
I agree, it's a very serious problem that the Democrats continue to push policy that is unpopular with young folks.
Why do they need someone to inspire them
Because elections are popularity contests.
they should also be interested and invested in their own future
They very clearly are, but there aren't any American political parties that are invested in their future. Just ones that pretend to cater to them while selling them out to the oil and weapons industries.
somehow this seems like a wild idea in the US?
Yeah, it sucks. Any time you start talking about making the future suck less, Republicans start calling you a commie socialist and Democrats kick you out of the group chat.
Discord sucks and nobody should use it.
The latter is correct.
English has a fixed adjective order:
Determiner
Quantity
Opinion
Size
Age
Shape
Color
Origin/Material
Qualifier
"Versatile" is an opinion and "modular" is a qualifier.
"The single, versatile, large, new, round, blue, local, modular thingamawidget."