Makes sense. Males are largely disposable and therefore good for experimentation.
I just wont consider other hardware until its fully supported by something as seamless and smooth as the steamOS experience.
This kind of naivete is what was setting Trump up for a second term. Thank god the worlds not all like this.
Nah. Trump loses to any one but Biden.
The DNC ratfucked the primary. AGAIN! For the third fucking time. Yes they did that. It needs to be acknowledged.
And yes, they lied to you about Biden. They've been lying to you about Biden.
But at this point, those delegates are Biden/ Harris delegates. There is no changing that. We can caucus with Dems for one more cycle and beat Trump, and then wash our hands of them. But this time we need to extract real party level reforms. No more anointing. No more ratfucking. If they would open up the party, we could make it so that no republican ever gets elected to the Presidency. Ever. They are massively unpopular. But the problem is that the Democrats are also unpopular because they run their party like a fiefdom, and the voters they need don't like that shit.
I'm plugging my nose and dialing from the coconut tree this go around, but unless the Democratic party actually commits to the project of democracy within their party, this might be the last time I caucus and do their job for them.
Is this the most straightforward path to getting ice cream?
Even if we had gone to an open convention, you should have expected whomever to come out of it with a massive head of steam behind them.
Biden was and is wildly unpopular. Historically so. Maybe he recovers a bit between now and the end of days. People get rose colored glasses and all, but he was absolutely bringing the entire nation down.
That all being said, and as one who is now officially "in the coconut tree", she sure af did whip up a frenzy in 24 hours. Its like, Obama level energy on the calls rn. Just goes to show you how defective the poltical "wisdom" that we needed to stick with Biden was. I still think just about any candidate would have caught this energy, but there were real problems with almost any other candidate other than Harris. I also think they left money on the table not taking it to an open convention, but its def a trade off. 3 weeks of campaigning versus about a bil. in free advertising that an open conv would have represented? Also was an opportunity to win back some good grace with voters by injecting at least a modicum of democracy into the DNC.
But yeah. That call with the Black Women for Harris, and then the next day with Black men for Harris. I mean thats historic.
This is nuts, and I'm waiting for literally any useful polling to come out (not realistic for at least another 2 weeks), but I've been reviewing the 2016 and 2020 district maps for Florida since Friday, digging back into those results.
Hottest dumbest take: I think Florida might go for Kamala. It went Obama twice, and it was black women and black men in the state of Florida that made that happen. I wont have the data fully worked up and the redistricting makes it more difficult, but at least in the aggregate, its at lease within the MOE if we assume things to be 'fairly' similar to 2012, 2016 and 20.
The orchid you showed is not a vanilla. That is a staged shot with some other random orchid. The one I showed is from one of the many many Vanilla vines that I grow. They are not remotely the same.
The flower in the logo is very clearly a Plumaria.
Look if you dont know fuck about shit when it comes to flowers and plants, thats fine. But maybe don't have an opinion then. However if you name your OS after a plant, and then proceed to butcher its presentation, you should be prepared for push back.
No they dont.
Not even close.
The flower in the logo is a radially symmetrical five petaled flower, with overlapping petals in a whorl. A vanilla flower is a bilaterally symmetrical three petaled flower with a fused labellum/ and column. They look nothing alike.
The Vanilla flower picture I posted is from April and is literally growing on a Plumaria (which the logo obviously is). I'm going to walk outside and edit this response and add a picture from that Plumaria.
Ok. So why are we having what looks like a plumaria flower to represent a vanilla OS?
Do you need a picture of a vanilla flower?
Modifying my Qstove to take a pizza steel
Hey all,
I modified my Qstove to take a pizza steel instead of engineered stone and am sharing the results here.
Just bumping this to remind you how entirely and completely wrong you were.
No, I'm just very opposed against the rise in anti-scientific, anti-evidence based belief that I've watched rise to a fever pitch in the last several decades. I try to call it out where ever I find it, but I also think its important to understand why people engage in this kind of conspiratorial thinking. I think we under estimate how much of it is truly out of our control. Its baked into our physiology. We want to believe and our bodies aren't giving us much choice.
To some extent, its physiological. There is a physical pleasure that comes from "believing" things even when we don't have evidence for them. "Believing" in things creates a dopamine cycle. Even further, some people are psychologically pre-disposed.
Look at how cults and relgions function: secret knowledge, in-group/ out-group selection, 'leaders' who protect or are connected to some "other", it goes on and on.
We're monkeys who are hard-wired to find patterns, which even if wrong, could be useful. We tell ourselves stories that are "convincing" to believe in these patterns. Our brains give us a pleasurable "bump" when we find one, even if its objectively wrong or easily dismissed by evidence. It takes substantial time and discipline to untrain yourself from this, and humans get extreme discomfort from "not knowing" things. We hate that. We'd rather a wrong knowing than confidence in our "not knowing". And its not just that we don't like not knowing; its physically painful. And then there are some of us that are more subject to these forces than others, and because of how self-selection works in online communities, these tendencies are allowed to exacerbate.
We're really starting on the back-foot when it comes to the "truth" as humans.
Learned flash in the 90's to make terrible games.
"Every view point that disagrees with me is a bot!"
-Shit people in cults say
MN Polling: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/minnesota/ MN polling at a toss up (keep in mind Trump almost always outperforms his polling).
Another fun one, Jersey is now a swing state: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/new-jersey/
Monte Carlo approach to looking at Bidens chances.
This is an approach I've been using since last November to put Biden's polling in a historical context. I'm using the Gallup approval rating dataset because its the longest, deepest single source dataset where the same question "Do you approve or disapprove of the way [current president's name] is handling his job as president?". Its been going on since the 40's, but has remained extremly predictive of the next president.
Previously, I presented some results (March) in the c/Politics community where using this approach, I said that Biden had between a 5-15% of winning the election. At that time, Biden was polling higher and there was more time between now (then) and election day.
I've re-run the simulation with updated numbers and am presenting them here.
First, get the mean and standard deviation of how approval ratings for past presidents have typically changed leading up to an election based a 30 day window around the current date. I then compare them to a 30 day window at election day, and get back a distribution of shifts: the typical range over which a presidents approval might change between now and the election
Next, I calculate a mean and standard deviation of approval ratings for incumbent Presidents who win their second term. We kind-of have to stick with incumbent presidents, based on the nature of the data. There really is no way to ask the Gallup pole question of non-sitting presidents or candidates.
Using these two distributions, I take a sample from the 'shift' distribution, and add it to Biden's current polling.
I then calculate the probability this new polling value would have come from the "Incumbent presidents who won election" distribution, effectively giving us the probablity, that based on extant polling, Biden can get into an approval range not-disimilar to Presidents who won re-election. Based on this approach, I'm getting an average probability of Biden winning the election at around half a percent. This is down substantially from March, where I had him at at between 5-15% probability of winning. At that time, he was both polling better, and there was more time between March and the election for him to improve.
Using this approach, a Biden victory is currently standing at between a 5 and 6 sigma event. To put it into context, last years historic rate of ice-melting in the arctic was also a five sigma event.
Bonus figure:
The distribution of Presidential polling for sitting presidents who did not win re-election:
New Nate Silver predictions are out as of today. Figures reproduced here for those who lack access (all using data provided by Nate Silver)
So I'm going to try and stay true to Nate's blog-post, but I see his predictions as too important to be pay-walled (especially consider how 538 basically isn't 538 any more since they don't use Nate's model). All of the figures in this post are my own and made using Nate's data and were made in R using ggplot. Just simple reproductions for the purposes of discussion. I didn't do all of them, just the big headline figures.
If you are in Dark Mode (as you should be) you may have to right click the figures and look at them in a separate tab.
Figure 1: Who is ahead in the polls.
Figure 2: Who is ahead in the polls (inset to recent weeks).
Table 1: State and national polling.
Table 2: Who is favored to win the Presidency?
Figure 3: How each candidate's chance of wining has changed.
Figure 4: Probability of Winning Presidential Election.
Keeping everything editorial out of the post. These are basic reproductions of Nate Silvers recent post using data he provided, to support having a discussion.
Majorities of voters express dissatisfaction with the candidates. And 63% of voters describe both Biden and Trump as “embarrassing.”
The rise of UAW President Shawn Fain has been met with alarm in powerful corridors
> The federally appointed monitor tasked with overseeing the United Auto Workers, Neil Barofsky, is ratcheting up his conflict with UAW President Shawn Fain, announcing another investigation into the union leader who rose to national prominence amid the successful “Stand Up Strike” against the Big Three automakers. > > Yet newly unveiled documents suggest Barofsky’s pursuit of Fain has less to do with concerns over union self-dealing and more to do with the politics of Israel-Palestine. > > Barofsky was appointed in 2021 as the result of the Department of Justice-led consent decree put in place in lieu of prosecution of the union itself for rampant corruption, following prison sentences for two consecutive UAW presidents.
The decision to withhold such enormous sums of money is one of the most concrete examples of the fallout from President Biden’s poor debate performance at the end of June.
> Some major Democratic donors have told the largest pro-Biden super PAC, Future Forward, that pledges worth roughly $90 million are now on hold if President Biden remains atop the ticket, according to two people who have been briefed on the conversations. > > The frozen contributions include multiple eight-figure commitments, according to the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the situation. The decision to withhold such enormous sums of money is one of the most concrete examples of the fallout from Mr. Biden’s poor debate performance at the end of June. > > Future Forward declined to comment on any conversations with donors or the amounts of any pledged money being withheld. A Future Forward adviser would say only that the group expected contributors who had paused donations to return once the current uncertainty about the ticket was resolved.
Jeffries meets with Biden as discontent grows among House Democrats
Key quotes:
> House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) met with President Biden Thursday night to relay the sentiments of the House Democratic Caucus regarding his reelection bid, as concerns grow within the ranks about the incumbent’s ability to beat former President Trump in November. > > The meeting — revealed in a letter to colleagues Friday morning — came after Jeffries spoke with a large swath of House Democrats in the two weeks since last month’s debate, which prompted concerns about Biden’s viability at the top of the presidential ticket. . The meeting took place after Biden’s high-stakes press conference that evening, a source familiar told The Hill. > > Jeffries said he passed along the “full breadth” of thoughts he heard within his caucus.
U.S. Reps. Earl Blumenauer and Adam Smith have also called for Biden to drop out, though not to resign. Other Oregon and Washington Democrats have been noncommittal.
Not sure if this violates rules, but this is breaking news and the primary source. Local news video.
17th house Democrat calls for Biden to step down. Post NATO-news conference, 6:30 Pacific Time
Donald Trump’s jailed former adviser dragged Joe Biden’s recent performances.
Key quote:
> Even from behind bars, Steve Bannon’s message is clear: Republicans want Joe Biden to stay in the presidential race. Why? Because they know it will be better for Donald Trump. > > In an email interview with Matthew Boyle from far-right Breitbart News, the former Trump adviser was asked what he made of the Democrats sticking with Biden amid widespread criticism of the president’s performance in last month’s debate and the calls for him to drop out of the presidential race. > > “So we got the candidate we want … and the country is stuck with a nonperforming cadaver,” Bannon replied.
Pelosi moving behind the scenes to get Biden to reconsider presidential run
Key quotes:
> Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is working furiously behind the scenes to put pressure on President Biden to reconsider his place at the top of the 2024 ticket, according to a number of Democratic lawmakers familiar with her efforts. > > The Speaker emerita is talking to a broad swath of House Democrats — from front-liners in tough districts to hardened veterans with institutional clout — to pump the brakes on the notion that Biden should definitively be the party’s nominee heading into November, these lawmakers said. > > Pelosi has not said Biden should exit the race, but the lawmakers said she harbors deep concerns about Biden’s ability to defeat former President Trump, and she’s fighting to prevent the party from rubber-stamping Biden’s candidacy before there’s a broader discussion about the potentially damaging consequences of that decision.
Note: This is a "breaking" story, as in, its been leaked and is just now showing up on multiple outlets.
If Democrats want to choose a new nominee, experts don’t believe the Heritage Foundation can stop them — but that may not be the point.
Key quotes:
> President Joe Biden and his campaign are insisting he will stay in the 2024 race, despite a rough debate last week in which he looked feeble and struggled to complete his thoughts several times. With Democrats increasingly unsure that Biden should remain the party’s nominee, the conservative Heritage Foundation is pledging to try to block the Democratic Party from replacing Biden on the ticket in key swing states. > > In a June 21 memo, the Heritage Foundation astutely predicted that Democrats might wish to force out Biden “if he freezes at [the] debate.” Noting that “the mechanisms for replacing him on ballots vary by state,” the memo says: “There is the potential for pre-election litigation in some states that would make the process difficult and perhaps unsuccessful."
Speaking on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe,' former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sends President Biden a rare public signal about the election.
Key quotes:
> Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, one of the most influential voices in President Biden’s sphere outside of his family, sent a rare public signal Wednesday morning that suggested she is trying to nudge him to consider dropping out of the election. > > “It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run,” she said on MSNBC. “We’re all encouraging him to make that decision because time is running short.” > > Pelosi sandwiched her comments between praise for Biden and his record. But Pelosi is notably careful and calculating in her public comments and well aware that Biden has repeatedly and forcefully said he has already made that decision. She spoke on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Biden’s favorite cable news show and the same venue where on Monday he gave one of his most defiant declarations that he would remain in the race.
In a video, ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos tells someone in New York that he doesn't think Biden 'can serve four more years.'
Vulnerable House Democrat calls on Biden to step aside in 2024 race
Key quote:
> Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.), a vulnerable House Democrat, is calling on President Biden to step aside in the 2024 race, becoming the eighth lawmaker in the lower chamber to publicly urge the incumbent to withdraw. > > Ryan — who represents New York’s 18th Congressional District — told The New York Times in an interview published Wednesday that he does not believe Biden is the strongest Democrat to take on former President Trump in November. > > “I’d be doing a grave disservice if I said he was the best candidate to serve this fall,” Ryan told the Times. “For the good of our country, for my two young kids, I’m asking Joe Biden to step aside in the upcoming election and deliver on the promise to be a bridge to a new generation of leaders.”
Democrats lose ground in 6 states with election forecaster’s postdebate shift.
Key quote:
> Biden’s defiance against calls for him to leave the presidential campaign after last month’s debate have only worsened his chances in November, Cook Editor-in-Chief Amy Walter wrote. > > “Biden was losing pre-debate. Now, he’s losing by a bit more,” she said, adding that the possibility Biden leaves the race at this point is “remote.” > > Citing postdebate polling, Cook announced it will move Minnesota, New Hampshire and Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District from “Likely Democratic” to “Lean Democratic.” The group also moved Nevada, Arizona and Georgia from “Tossup” to “Lean Republican.”
President Biden has two events in Pennsylvania on Sunday as he and his staff remain defiant against calls to drop out.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., argued Vice President Kamala Harris could win “overwhelmingly” against Donald Trump but said it’s up to President Joe Biden to decide the fate of his campaign amid calls to drop out after his poor debate performance.
The quote:
“Given Joe Biden’s incredible record, given Donald Trump’s terrible record: he should be mopping the floor with Donald Trump. Joe Biden is running against a criminal. It should not be even close. And there is only one reason it is close. And that is the president’s age.”
Sen. Mark Warner Forming a Group Of Democratic Senators To Call On Biden To Drop Out
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) is attempting to assemble a group of Democratic senators to go to the White House on Monday and ask that Joe Biden exit the presidential race, according to two people with direct knowledge of the effort.