Ben Tyson

@jdcmedlock Just replace "Nithya" with "Adam Miller" and you've got it 👌

Need Nithya to win so bad...

Adam Miller’s closing statement: “I love this city. We all agree this city is broken. The question is not do we have problems, the question is: Who is going to fix those problems? The reality is that it’s not enough to have good intentions. What we need is impact. 🧵/

Other candidates talk and posture, whether it's providing services to unhoused populations through Better Angels, or delivering jobs from his businesses, or disaster relief through Team Rubicon, @AdamMillerLA is the only candidate who DELIVERS! #fixla #lamayor

How about that, a candidate who articulates clear policy and accountability to get results, instead of throwing rhetorical red meat that divides LA and paralyzes housing production. If you want a Mayor who prioritizes Angelenos over ideological interests, join Team @AdamMillerLA! votemiller.com #lamayor #fixla

Well the audio on the livestream is terrible, but I'm still fired up to hear from a candidate that has the experience getting REAL results and who can actually #fixla! Let's go @AdamMillerLA, it's time for change!! #lamayor #debate #streetsforall

@TahraHoops @yinyang_yo_ Definitely check him out, he has real credentials a business builder, nonprofit leader that has actually seen results, and has the best housing credentials of the group: votemiller.com

@yinyang_yo_ Ok if we are talking low name recognition then Miller here takes the case because I have not even heard of him lol

I mean I certainly do not want Mayor NIMBY to win again, and the idea of Spencer Pratt being Mayor is also terrifying. Slowly learning more about Nithya Raman (I like that she has a background in Urban Planning!), but she is probably dealing with low name recognition.

@moseskagan @TheRealChudz votemiller.com

@TheRealChudz Our choice is between Raman and Bass; there is no centrist

Just attended an event for Nithya Raman (DSA member running for LA mayor). Found her talk & subsequent Q&A somewhat, but not entirely, frustrating. Do admire her for engaging in good faith. Sill trying to decide whether I prefer a potentially effective leftist to the current, ineffective one.

While I share the view that the argument is largely pointless since Amanda is correct that (A) no one makes decisions for the entire party, and (B) we need moderates and liberals in different districts and elections; I do think a stronger reply would be that the intended audience of that argument is/should be Democratic donors. Those are the people most likely to see and interact with this content, and as you astutely note, a more liberal group that incentivizes candidates to take more liberal positions across every district.

Lots of things that drive me crazy about the debate on moderation but near the top of the list is I don’t fully understand who it’s directed at.

Ironic, or maybe just iconic, timing to be listening to the episodes of @mikeduncan's (marvelously wonderful) French Revolution podcast covering the fall of the Girondins at the same time that this pops on my feed here.

@brennanmaragh Having just gone through raising 2 newborns myself, does he not know that like, books and family members and common sense exist? I feel like someone should just order him a copy of my favorite book, "Baby 411" - no ChatGPT required, lol

It's only been down for thousands of years until now; how could you possibly figure it out yourself

I'm glad for the state of Colorado, but man am I going to miss @MichaelBennet in the US Senate

Exactly

Important sub-point to this not mentioned is that, true that you likely "can't be both" in terms of good national spokes/sales person for the Democratic Party brand AND an electoral overperformer for any individual politician, but the Party NEEDS both roles. So the online discourse of "AOC is a better politician than Adam Gray because she has a bigger following" vs. "Adam Gray is a better politician because he is a better electoral performer" (which is usually just a dressed up version of "moderates are better" vs. "progressives are better") is inherently stupid. Both AOCs and Adam Grays are necessary for a functional, competitive party nationwide, and we should stop trying to lay into rhetoric that implies we need to be making a choice between one or the other.

Lol, for real? Getting sidetracked down the Trek rabbit hole, but I'll bite. How many episodes are either based around or include sub plots of drama between someone like Kirk and Spock in ToS or Picard and Data in TNG where they discuss or have conflict subsequent to the value of manual work vs having something done by the computer? Think of a classic scene - Riker makes eggs by himself for Pulaski, Worf, Geordi, and Data and they're terrible (except for Worf declaring them "delicious)". The point being made though, that it's still meaningful to Riker to do that and share the meal with his friends, because he made it himself; because there's value to it. So many Pulaski scenes with this theme in Season 2 TNG. Point being, if you watch that scene and think the lesson is "well Riker really should have just used the replicator," then not sure you're really grasping the morals beneath the surface of the show... Don't think it takes a particularly supple mind to grasp that :)

@bhtyson It takes a supple and flexible mind to reinterpret Star Trek as a cautionary tale about reliance on technology. Hats off to you, sir. 😂😂😂

Unfortunate to see @Noahpinion, one of my favorite posters, miss the most important critique of AI. As usual with the wonk-crowd, he focuses on the policy based arguments against AI, instead of the emotion of more philosophical arguments. Because he cites Star Trek in his argument, I can stick with that to make the point (puts on Trekkie hat). In the 3rd season episode, "Booby Trap", the Enterprise becomes ensnared in an ancient piece of technology that sucks the power from their ship. After trying numerous calculations and simulations with the ship's computer (aided as Noah would point out by a generative AI image of another scientist), they realize the answer is to (Spoiler Alert!) shut off the engine and computer completely and rely on their own manual steering and intuition. The moral of the story being, that technology is not always the best solution to our problems. And despite Noah's argument that Trek showcases the justification for AI, the series is littered with stories on the danger of over-reliance on technology. So we come to the real argument against AI as seen in both Stark Trek and the Twitter insults he highlights of posters mocking him for supporting AI. In a more civilized counter-argument, consider it the "Stoic Critique" if you will, where easier does not always mean better. We do not have to adopt a primitivist mindset or lifestyle to believe that technology which makes life easier does not necessarily make it better. Manual effort, human struggle, and friction similarly do not necessarily make things better, there is an emotional and rational connection to the belief that those aspects of life create virtue. Seeking a robot to make your life easier is fine, but I argue that AI skepticism is very simple to understand, and justified to a degree when you first recognize that virtue based mindset. The idea of struggle and human effort as crucial and necessary actions to live virtuously and achieve a more meaningful life. As in Star Trek, this does not mean we need to abandon technological progress or even AI, but does provide reason to accept it with skepticism and even reluctance, to safeguard against the real danger posed by the loss of virtue and meaning in our lives.

@mattyglesias That would be a horrible design, lol. I get wanting more housing and residential buildings / density near the beach here, but why would you also want the congestion, pollution, etc from the commercial center of the metropolitan area there?!? 🧐

Other factor I didn't see mentioned that is easy to forget is that NV is actually much smaller population wise than other swing states. So (A) much less margin for error if a group of supporters starts to feel pain and potentially defect, and (B) electeds there are more likely to hear from voters / groups directly since there's just less of them to compete for attention. Similar effect in NH as well. Not saying it explains the double defection in both states on its own, but its a compounding factor for Senators representing smaller populations.

Ok thanks gang. Seems like the answer is tourism.

Does anyone smart about NV know why Cortez Masto & Rosen are so much squishier on stuff like this than other swing state Dem Senators (Kelly, Gallego, Ossoff, Warnock, Slotkin, Baldwin). Do shutdowns really disproportionately affect NV that much more than those other states?

And I don't care what your shade of political persuasion or belief it: more people should be willing to entertain and engage in this kind of self-reflection. Regardless on whether you agree with her on issues, politics, or strategy - this attitude shows the power and true wisdom that comes from awareness and self-knowledge. It's no surprise to me that of the online posting cadre, Cassie is one of the few with actual, real world accomplishments to go with her beliefs and articulate / intelligent posting. Very very impressive both online and IRL, and I tip my hat.

This is a really nice summary of why I can't stand the recent online conversation about strategic recommendations for the Democratic Party and candidates. 98% of people posting on social media about this just talk past each other, instead choosing to invent conflict rather than focusing on common ground, and it's massively annoying and frustrating to watch. A classic example of this was the "discussion" on the Deciding to Win graph on social media followers vs. election performance. Everyone immediately pivoted to methodological issues to relitigate the moral superiority of "left vs. center" instead of realizing no matter how you graphed it or which 2016 candidate you supported, the conclusion was still largely consistent: large social media following is now causally linked to election performance. Talk about a teeth gritting facepalm to watch that "discourse" on my timeline. 🤦‍♂️ If we're coming to the same conclusions but then STILL arguing about the differences in how we're reaching those conclusions, maybe the problem isn't with the Party but the people litigating the Party... Just some food for thought. 🤔