All these Sanders supporters talking about the establishment as the reason he doesn’t win. Yet none of them voted in the primaries this year. None of them wrote him in for president. Sanders won’t win because instead of going to the polls and actually voting for him, his supporters will post on the Internet about wishing they could go to the polls to vote for him.

The funnny thing about elections is that politicians do the things people vote for. Literally no one gives a shit about people who don’t vote. Everyone who sat out and couldn’t even be arsed to vote third party just helped move the country to the right. Everyone who sits at home during primaries let’s the rest of the country have its way.

Democrats don’t implement the things that you want because you don’t vote and therefore you don’t matter. Republicans don’t implement the things you that want because you don’t vote and therefore you don’t matter.

“Waah, waah, there’s only two parties.” More than half the country doesn’t vote. That’s enough to elect a third party candidate. Instead millions of idiots sat at home complaining that they can’t get everything they want today, and moving the needle is too much work.

He is currently at 72 million and in the last election got 74 million. This is the third comment in a row that I’ve had to say this. Where in the world are people getting these ridiculous numbers?

Maybe something about learning how to use apostophes or whatever.

Use infinite monkeys.

I have a fairly new, expensive (not $5000 expensive though) laptop from work. It’s quite a high powered laptop. It’s full of administration crap that constantly runs in the background using 8 GB of RAM and at least 20% of the CPU, nonstop. Daily I run out of RAM and it freezes. I have a 15 year old laptop that, without exaggeration, is faster to use and can run more programs without running out of RAM.

Never heard of Android I guess?

Require all LLMs to provide answers in the form of haikus.

I can’t figure out what you mean. The subtitle in the lemmy post goes to the same place. Within the article I dont see a link elsewhere.

Humorous, but also stupid.

I don’t know what I’m missing here, but I don’t see numbers for the race at the link provided. I just see national polling numbers.

There are 5 walgreens in a 1.5 mi radius near me. That doesn’t seem smart.

What a conundrum. On one side there is Google, a company that has become that which it sought to destroy, an evil corporation bent on making money at any cost. On the other side are the hundreds of shit recipe Web sites that write a life story about everything they did in their childhood that led to the making of this food, when all you want is the damn recipe.

No person is advantaged by having their voting power go toward a candidate they woudn’t vote for.

This person knows just enough to sound credible and still get it wrong. He says that the electoral college requires states to allocate all delegates to the popular vote winner in each state, which is not true. States can allocate delegates however they want, and at least two states allocate proportionally to how how their populace voted.

This is a critical difference, because eliminating a mismatch between the electoral college and national popular vote doesn’t require eliminating the college. Eliminating the college requires a constitutional amendment, which is difficult to achieve. The National Popular Vote Compact requires nearly as much effort, and it’s incredibly fragile, because as soon as a few states allocate all of their electors to a candidate who lost in that state, they’ll pull out and the whole thing will crumble.

The solution is for states to allocate delegates proportionally. That is in the best interest of each state, so it’s not fragile. It can be accomplished one state at a time, so it’s logistically easier. It doesn’t require huge buy in to work, just a handful of states, so it’s easier to achieve and more stable. Every mismatch better the electoral college and national popular vote in US history would not have occurred if states allocated delegates proportionally, so it solves the problem. People should start recognizing the real problem, so that we can work on a real solution.

I haven’t used Bronner’s soap in years, but unless something is radically different, that’s sawdust.

Removed by mod

These network transactions cost between 2 to 4 % for merchants, which is a cost passed to consumers by businesses raising prices. That’s a fairly large “inflation”, and certainly it seems out of line with the effort they out into it. It’s anticompetitive practices that keep it in place.

Is the implication here that you don’t use any other programs?

So you use your mouse to click on the start menu button, scroll through the menu and click again on the program? That sounds awful. I click the Windows button and type the program name.