I mean the polls for Biden were bad and getting worse. Harris was only down a couple points… Biden was down double digits. I hate to say it, but with the 2 point polling error, Biden had 0 path to make it. I don’t know a single state that he would have taken off of Trump.

Ah yes. Great. We’re the election conspiracy theorists now. It’s apparently democrats turn to make completely baseless accusations.

This stuff is exhausting. We want to look for every reason except for the one that matters: Democrats lost America. We need to break the party apart and start over.

Every other excuse just delays and distracts. Democrats fucked it. We can be all high and righteous as we want, but we lost 2 of 3 to Donald Trump.

Face the reality. Democrats need to reinvent themselves or they will lose to shit candidates like Trump.

Iowa itself is a lost cause. It’s 75% Republican here. We’re gerrymandered to high hell, so even if Baccam squeaks through, Iowa state legislature won’t look very blue. If it’s 60/40 Republican I’d be absolutely shocked.

But contributing one Senator nationally would be pretty neat.

If Harris gets Iowa the race is over. These races are not truly independent - they are correlated. If Harris picks up Iowa, there’s a very good chance that means she’s swept every swing state.

Right - I just mean literally any attempt to try and cater to a specific group is gonna be like this.

Both campaigns go after different groups. I just think literally anything that is contained in these are going to sound racist.

In a less charged example, both candidates try and appeal to women. Those could be viewed as sexist.

To be fair… When the article’s opening line is “In outreach to Black Men”, it doesn’t really matter what you put after. It’s going to sound bad.

It can be both things.

There are no definitive data points that should lead anyone to believe that either candidate has a significant advantage.

I’m not sure anyone who is well versed in election projections or polling would say anything other than it’s a toss up. As a heavy consumer of said data and reporting, I haven’t seen anything to the contrary.

You’re not wrong about media incentives, but they’re also not wrong that this is a very close race.

… I mean I think he’s aware of how it works. Weird Al, given his track record with respecting other people’s work even above what he is required to do, doesn’t seem like the type to ask to be a part of it and then demand it to be done his way.

I think they could make something work. SNL has its own style, but they tend to adore when they have comedic hosts who will play the goofy roles. Weird Al seems like a great fit… Musical numbers, collaborations with Please Don’t Destroy… I think it has big potential.

Technically… But there’s also a lot of waste from the 500 pack that people throw out half of. It likely evens out.

… What?

Is this some weird “victim mentality” thing?

People love to use it because it got popular and grew to mean more than the original definition to the point where it just got generic to encompass a wide range of things. It’s the same as cringe.

I thought the same thing. People are obsessed with the word gaslighting.

This seems more like textbook hypocrisy. Person doing thing talks about the harms of others doing that thing.

Omg what kind of dog is that? It’s marvelous.

This post is both insightful and troubling. Using generative AI services to simulate conversations without explicit disclosure can be seen as unethical. Some might argue that this damages the connection that users can feel towards each other, even in an online community. Such matters should be addressed in order to restore consumer trust in the platform.

(I wrote that to sound like a GenAI response, how did I do?)

Just to be clear you’re totally allowed to find someone of any gender or orientation charming without people questioning your motives :)

I think this is rather impossible to answer.

One of the biggest issues is that context changes over time.

FF7 in particular is nearly unplayable by modern standards, imo. The amount of transition times (random battles with 20 second intros and 20 second outros) and lack of QoL features make it ridiculously hard to swallow. There’s also an expectation of mindless “grinding” that has largely written out of modern games. Even the remake uses side missions, which at least have some interesting elements to them, rather than pure mechanical “go spend 2 hours killing basic enemies”.

OoT has many good things going for it, but the live controls and weird camera behavior have been largely solved by games nowadays.

If you consider them in the context of the current time, both were unlike almost anything that had been seen. And given the price/console exclusivity at the time, I’d venture that very few people actually played them at the same time in their contexts.

Both were absolute revolutions of their time, which isn’t capturable anymore. It reminds me of the movie Predator. It became the foundation for so many things, but modern movies have taken everything that Predator did and did them better. By modern standards it’s a clichéd action movie with basically no plot. Makes it hard to judge.

The saddest comparison that I can make is that they both cost 1% as much as your rent payment.

😭

Depends on the dealership. I went in and asked if I could get additional money off the car for using their financing. They say yes they gave a $1,000 credit.

I then asked how many payments did I need to make for them to get their full incentive for the loan. They said 6 months. I asked if I could pay it off after that, and they said sure, they’d have their kickback from the bank.

And that’s what we did. It was a pretty frank conversation with the dealer, they were cool, we were cool.

Hell yeah. You’ll experience in a way that’s unique, so don’t let other people tell you what to feel. It’s ok to like stuff that everyone else doesn’t like, for no reason other than you want to like it.

I mean generally it’s all correlated. It’s not perfect, but typically a 2-3 point national poll lead is close to an electoral college tie.

I have to say this is not a good take. Polls aren’t all the same, but news outlets treat them like they are. Even the same pollsters come up with slightly different numbers each time they run them.

Because there is a certain amount of uncertainty doesn’t make them invalid. We just need to be more educated on filtering the good from the bad.

You sort of have 2 options:

1. Get educated on polling errors, the statistics, and the methodologies of the polls and arrive at your own conclusions.

2. Ignore anything written by the main media outlets about polls, because looking at a single poll is really dumb.

They definitely do matter, and there’s validity to them, but they don’t claim to be the exact truth. If you know how to use them, they are quite helpful.