• 9 Posts
  • 541 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 20th, 2023

help-circle

  • It wasn’t the same thing, all three of them were different plans using different justifications based on different laws. One was a blanket forgiveness based on laws allowing for adjustments of student loans in emergencies. One is need based or other circumstance based forgiveness based on a much earlier law giving the department of education wide latitude to make adjustments. And one was adjustments to the income based repayment plans based on the laws establishing those (this has happened many times in the past, such as the establishment of the PAYE and REPAYE plans).

    It’s especially egregious that judges are blocking the SAVE plan, as many similar adjustments have been made to income based repayment plans previously with no one taking any issue.








  • “Google, nobody called from Google. One of the things like doing a show like yours, your show, you know, you see it on Fox, but when you really see it is all over the place, they take clips of your show that you’re doing right now with me and if I do a good job, they’re gonna vote for me, they’re gonna vote for me because it’s not just on Fox, it’s on Fox is a smaller part of it. You’re on all over this, those little beautiful cell phones you’re on, you’re all over the place. You have a product, you have a great product. You have a great brand. So you have to get out, you have to get out, you have to do things like your show and other shows and Google has been very bad. They’ve been very irresponsible and I have a feeling that Google is gonna be close to shut down”

    Can anyone help? I don’t have a senile narcissist to English translator!


  • https://www.nbcnewyork.com/paris-2024-summer-olympics/olympics-boxing-imane-khalif-xy-chromosome-italian-boxer-quit/5662035/

    Look number one, whether or not she is xy has not been confirmed. It was reported by a Russian controlled organization only after she beat a Russian fighter, and they haven’t actually released their results or methods.

    Second, what the posted article is referring to, if she was indeed xy (which is just suspect Russian heresay at this point), is androgen insensitivity syndrome. Meaning she wouldn’t be able to derive benefit from testosterone anyways. This is also different from trans individuals on a number of levels. Though Russia of course sees it as beneficial both for smearing anyone that beats their own athletes, as well as stoking popular lgbt hatred in their own country.

    The only story here is Russia co opting international sports organizations for their own purposes once again, just like when they had state organized doping of their athletes that went all the way to the top involving the flipping FSB. Now they are also using it to try and spread fear and hate of trans individuals, even though it wouldn’t be trans in this case it would be intersex if what they said is true, and we have no actual confirmations that she is intersex anyway. I’ll believe it when an organization not controlled by Russia shows it (and even if they were correct it’s very likely she wouldn’t be deriving any advantages from it).

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2024/08/03/olympics-2024-khelif-russia-boxing/a7e9ff36-5191-11ef-9728-3037305a6b0f_story.html

    They’ve made similar unsubstantiated claims against another boxer. They still haven’t released any specifics of their testing, and they only made these claims after they claimed world championship titles in each case. What a coincidence.

    I doubt either of them is actually xy. This Russian boxing organization was banned by the international community for good reason.


  • On July 23, 2016, ahead of the 2016 Democratic National Convention, the 2016 DNC Rules Committee voted overwhelmingly (158–6) to adopt a superdelegate reform package. The new rules were the result of a compromise between the Hillary Clinton and the Bernie Sanders presidential campaigns

    Ultimately, the DNC decided to prevent superdelegates from voting on the first ballot, instead of reducing their numbers

    People keep seeming to forget about the super delegate reform Bernie fought for. They are still there now, 15% of all the delegates (a lot of the super delegates being democratic elected officials like members of congress since that automatically gives the status). But they can’t vote in the first ballot any longer. They could only vote in a contested election in subsequent ballots, after all the other pledged delegates are unbound as well.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

    Even before those reforms, they never really made a difference in any convention, except possibly 1984 when they helped push Mondale from a plurality to a majority by voting for him on the first ballot.

    I’m not personally in favor of them at all, but it’s not nearly as bad as it’s made out to be sometimes. If we go to an open convention though, unless there’s a majority choice on the first ballot, they may play a role on subsequent ballots.


  • Yes, that’s true. The poll averages themselves haven’t moved much either though. And the reliance on the fundamentals forecast has me nervous, but they definitely do it for a reason. When they developed the models and looked at poll history the pattern they found was the fundamentals had a big influence on what the polls would look like closer to the election and the eventual result. Polls closer to the election are more predictive than the fundamentals. Polls farther away from the election less so. There’s at least some reason to think things have changed enough maybe the fundamentals aren’t as fundamental for this race, but I guess we won’t know until afterward.


  • Exactly, I think because races have been so close lately, and the probabilities are ending up close to 50% often, people sometimes unintentionally conflate them with poll numbers. 53% to 46% would be a massive poll lead. For probabilities though in this situation it’s the same as saying they have even odds of winning. Look at those massive 95% confidence intervals, the race is in a statistical dead heat. It’s kind of remarkable how steady it has been despite all the wild events that have happened.







  • They try to get you to submit articles to them (usually for a fee too). But they’re kind of sham journals with no peer review or standards who no one actually reads. They’ll publish pretty much anything without even looking. They have bots that just mass email every corresponding author in every paper published just begging for submissions to their journal. Whenever an article is published in a reputable journal, one author has to have contact information publicly listed so they can answer any questions about the paper, and these predatory journals just scrape that info. It’s bad, so many emails every day.


  • Okay I’m not saying she’s the best choice, wouldn’t be my preferred choice, but also this is a poll run by the Daily Mail. I can’t even find any pollster reputation ratings for them. I also can’t find any of their methodologies published online, which is also sketchy. And knowing what we all do about the Daily Mail anyways, this should all be taken with a massive truckload of salt.

    Edit: Ah found it, it was run by J.L partners, ranked 145 on five thirty eight pollster rankings for reliability (1.6/3 stars for reliability with a transparency score of 4.2/10). And again, without the methodology being published who knows. The pollster themself, James Johnson, is also a former senior advisor to Theresa May and the UK conservative party.