I mean, this guy must live in an insane bubble if he doesn’t understand that this will help Mamdami more than if he had endorsed them. I am sure NYC voters will just rally around a guy who, through funding, owns its allegiance to billionaires.

deleted by creator

This. I mean the primary responsibility of schools is to teach and certify academic achievement. They should never withhold certification on non-academic grounds.

I mean, yes, but by the same token beer is far less lethal than whiskey. Our response to that is to sell beer in pints and whiskey in smaller glasses. Just wondering why such an approach would be impossible for drugs.

I do not think they will pass a constitutional amendment, so if Trump runs this will end up in court. I would like to see SC struggling to handle Obamas and Trumps case together.

Matters at least a bit. For instance, Musk has signalled his interest in buying OpenAI. He will find it far harder to get the money for it now that Tesla shares have nosedived.

More generally with Tesla it is difficult to make a business case for the existence of the company right now, since Musk alienated his entire potential consumer base. I wouldn’t be surprised if the company gets sold into parts in the text two years or so.

Corporations and their owners thought that Trump would boost the stock market through tax cuts. Instead the market is tanking due to his moronic tariffs and Russia-appeasement strategy. Now that it’s clear he won’t be making them money they have rediscovered their “morals”.

That’s a fair point. To my understanding the science is not clear if transition started pre-puberty, though I think it is pretty clear if transition happened after puberty. You are also absolutely right that in practice the problem (if you consider it as such) concerns very few cases. I think my only point was that having an open (instead of a men’s) section would circumvent both the possible exclusion of transgender people, and the controversy of those born as men, participating in women’s competition.

Many sports are divided in a women’s and an open competition. In the open competition any genetic advantage goes (hence the name open), whereas the women’s competition is restricted to people with a specific trait. In such a context I think it’s totally valid to restrict the women’s competition to “born with vagina”. Transgender (both M->F and F->M) can continue to compete in the open section.

Sports that are instead divided in a men’s and women’s section are more problematic, because they may completely block transgender people from competing at all levels, which is very exclusionary. I don’t see a particularly good solution for these sports, apart from changing sections to “open” vs “women’s “.

Finally, I do not see a role for genetic testing (born with vagina, but XY for instance). People make life decisions based on the gender they believe they are. Takebacks based on genetic tests that could occur in far advanced stage of an athlete’s career is completely unfair.

I am really lost here. Is the idea to attract the exact same (super niche) readership as the wall street journal? We know from this election that there are very few voters in this domain, since this is exactly the type of voter Harris tried (and failed to) attract.

Somewhat ironically we have gone from the very bad outcome of for-profit media, to the even worse outcome of newspapers as personal vanity projects for out of touch billionaires.

Rather unfortunately, the mass deportations was one of the most popular parts of Trump’s platform. Everybody knows mass deportation comes with concentration camps. It’s not that his voters are unaware of it, they actively love it!

Yes, that’s why social media should I.) allow downvoting, ii.) use an algorithm that reduces the prominence of downvoted posts and iii.) actively remove bot accounts that attempt to game the voting system. Most social media do none of these things, and in fact push controversial takes.

Wow, that’s some special nitpicking, and hyperbole. Saying that something should become stronger does not imply that it is currently strong. For instance, I think that you could build a stronger argument. See what I did there?

As for the statement that the economy is worse than it has ever been, I guess the Great Depression would like to have a word with you (among many other times).

The Kamala campaign was very careful to NOT say that the economy was doing great. It was Biden who essentially had this as his campaign strategy. I wonder why this piece of misinformation is so persistent on this platform. It is always mentioned by people without reference to a source.

Let me add a reference to break this spell: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/25/harris-opportunity-economic-plan-middle-class

Of course there’s a difference. Among others vaccines might soon be banned. Think also about women’s healthcare (abortion etc.). But yeah, if you are thinking about systemic positive change she likely would not have done much.

Yes clearly, but bizarrely during the campaign season voters did not list healthcare among there primary concerns, caring more about immigration and the economy.

To be fair, the price of eggs will likely be more affected by bird flu which will spread uncontrollably, since Trump will abolish all common sense regulations.

They are taught to few the world as a zero sum game. What they do not realise is that they are the losers.

I would be very interested in understanding how boys are treated differently now then when I was young (millennial here). Why are gen z men so upset?

That’s rich. How could one ever think in this election that Kamala was the emotional one. She made one joke about his crowd size and he went completely off the rails.