this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
147 points (99.3% liked)

politics

26665 readers
1997 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Asked whether two "unconstitutional" acts make a right as Democrats look to counter GOP redistricting efforts, Ken Martin said, "In this case, I would say yes."

Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin defended California’s redistricting efforts while criticizing Republicans’ own efforts as unconstitutional.

“If they’re going to do this and continue doing this nonsense, which is unconstitutional and illegal, we’re going to be forced to do it ourselves in other states,” Martin said in an interview with NBC News, referencing GOP redistricting efforts.

Asked whether two unconstitutional acts make a right, Martin said, “In this case, I would say yes.”

His comments come as Californians will decide Tuesday whether to approve the state’s Prop 50 ballot measure, which would allow the state to redistrict to favor Democrats in the midterm elections. The move came in response to Republicans’ redistricting efforts in Texas to favor the GOP, which sparked redistricting battles in state legislatures across the country.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Bringing AI into redistricting would be a nightmare. AI is not objective, it’s trained on biased datasets and that bias is reinforced by the bias of whomever created it or wants to shape it to their will.

We already know how to do nonpartisan redistricting, and many states (including CA) already have a nonpartisan committee in charge of it. But since elections are managed by state and local governments, and explicitly not the federal government, it would take something like a constitutional amendment to make it required nationwide. That’s also why states like CA will temporarily use different maps this cycle (if all goes well tomorrow), because CA being fair and TX cheating doesn’t help the nation as a whole reflect its actual population. Might as well force the fairness by cheating like them. It’s a shitty stopgap, but they’ve left us no choice.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

AI can't even transcribe text properly. Pls don't let it into government decision making. Just it being included in inputs is fucking us over.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

AI is like a blender. If you put shit into the blender, that's what you'll get out.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Except unless you're gonna train your own models, you really can't avoid shit being put into it.

And as a personal rule, I generally avoid any blended cocktails with noticeable amounts of excrement in them.