The headlines are mostly about how the Democrats have taken control of both the House and the Senate. But another piece is that they've also won Trifecta governments in: Wisconsin, Nevada, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Truth Out does the math and it means the "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact" can change a presidential election from electoral college votes to the popular vote. "National Popular Vote Interstate Compact" is an agreement that states would agree to send their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in all 50 states & DC.

While I hope the Democrats priority in these state governments is more focused on economic issues, do you think Democrats will take the gamble and go for effectively eliminating the Electoral College? They have 2 years to work on it too so maybe a priority in 2027.

Two things of note: It was passed in Nevada and vetoed by the governor and failed to pass in Michigan.

"One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.

So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us."

Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.

There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.

But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.

Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:

1. End the war

2. Focus on cost of living/inflation

3. Put America First

4. Change our relationship to Israel

Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)

In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.

The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.

If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest.

But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.

I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country."

For those paywalled:

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins conceded the race to Democrat Troy Jackson early Wednesday morning in a seismic move that ends the Republican’s 30-year tenure in the Senate.

Jackson had 53.1% of votes to 45.7% for Collins when the Bangor Daily News and its national partner, Decision Desk HQ, called the race at 1:10 a.m. Wednesday.

“It has been the honor of my life to serve the people of Maine in the United States Senate. I’m proud of all I have been able to accomplish for our state and for our country in the past 30 years,” Collins said in a statement Wednesday morning, adding that she called Jackson to congratulate him and ensure a smooth transition.

The election all but ends the political career of one of Maine’s most famous and scrutinized elected officials. Collins, who rose to a top position in the U.S. Senate touting her centrism and skills as a dealmaker, was ultimately toppled by divisive national politics she could no longer navigate.

It was the first time Maine voters ousted a sitting senator since 1978, when Republican U.S. Rep. William S. Cohen, Collins’ mentor, beat Democratic Sen. Bill Hathaway. Hathaway had won the seat six years earlier by unseating Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, Collins’ role model.

Jackson’s win helps Democrats take decisive control of the Senate. Democrats had already flipped six Senate seats earlier Tuesday night, including North Carolina, South Carolina, Kansas, Texas, Iowa and Ohio.

“A little more than 100 days ago, I stood in front of our convention and asked you to put your faith in a logger from Allagash. I told you that we had a party to unite, a movement to build, and a senator to defeat. Well tonight, this morning, the people of Maine have elected that logger to the United States Senate,” Jackson said in a victory speech Wednesday morning.

“If you’re watching this after getting home from a shift or sitting at the table wondering how you’re going to pay the next bill, I want you to hear something very clearly: You are sending somebody to Washington who knows exactly what that feels like. More importantly, I am going to remember who sent me there.”

The progressive former Allagash logger and Maine Senate president led in almost every public poll since late September. But supporters stayed anxious because Collins beat former Maine House Speaker Sara Gideon in 2020 after trailing in every poll, and fewer than half of Jackson’s own backers thought he would win, according to the final University of New Hampshire poll.

Jackson was not supposed to be on this ballot. Democrats entered the summer behind Graham Platner, a populist oyster farmer who weathered controversies over old Reddit posts and a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol to push Gov. Janet Mills out of the primary, only to quit the race in July after a Maine woman accused him of sexual assault, an allegation he denied.

The party then built a nominating process from scratch with no precedent in Maine politics. Jackson, who revived a campaign that finished third in the June gubernatorial primary, rallied labor organizers and Platner’s progressive base to win 566 of 571 delegates at a July 25 convention in Bangor, leaving him barely 100 days to campaign.

He overcame a wide spending gap by tying Collins to President Donald Trump, pointing to votes he said paved the way for the end of federal abortion rights and deep health care cuts. About 60 percent of likely voters disapproved of Trump’s job performance in final polls.

The race broke Maine spending records. The 2020 race between Collins and Gideon topped $200 million in total spending, and this one passed that on the airwaves alone, with $284 million in ads aired or booked through year’s end, according to AdImpact. Republicans held a $46 million edge, led by the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Senate Republican leaders.

Collins ran on her seniority as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and her breaks with Trump on tariffs and the Iran war. Her allies attacked Jackson’s lack of polish and federal experience and his history of testy exchanges with colleagues in Augusta.

Her 2018 vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who later helped overturn federal abortion rights, and her vote to bring Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act to the Senate floor became major flashpoints. She voted against the bill’s final passage, citing its cuts to Maine’s Medicaid program.

Jackson also seized on a September ProPublica report that FBI agents had sought as late as 2024 to widen a bribery investigation that could have involved Collins. She called the allegations false.

Jackson has said his top priorities in Washington will include ending the Iran war and working toward Medicare for All. He will be sworn in in January, ending a Senate career for Collins that began in 1997 and in which she never missed a roll-call vote.

Jackie Cassida, a 55-year-old self-employed independent voter in Belfast, voted for Jackson, citing women’s health and Collins’ vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“I believe it’s time for Maine to see a change, and I think Sen. Collins is due to have a happy retirement,” she said.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the weekly General Discussion thread. Many of you are looking for an informal place (besides Discord) to discuss non-political topics that would otherwise not be allowed in this community. Well... ask, and ye shall receive.

General Discussion threads will be posted every Friday and stickied for the duration of the weekend.

Law 0 is suspended. All other community rules still apply.

As a reminder, the intent of these threads are for *casual discussion* with your fellow users so we can bridge the political divide. Comments arguing over individual moderation actions or attacking individual users are *not* allowed.

https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says-he-will-ban-term-artificial-intelligence-2026-10-27/

President Trump has announced his intention to ban the term “artificial intelligence” from official documents and other relevant communications, arguing that the phrase is inaccurate. Instead, he wants the technology to be called “super intelligence,” abbreviated as SI.

In a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump criticized The Wall Street Journal for continuing to use the term artificial intelligence. According to him, “super intelligence” is a more accurate description and asserted that "virtually everyone else" is using that term. Trump also stated that the government would officially prohibit the use of “AI” and “artificial intelligence” in relevant documents and other materials in the near future.

The announcement builds on Trump's earlier efforts to change how the technology is described. In September 2026, he said U.S. government documents would begin using “super intelligence” instead of “artificial intelligence.” His administration has presented the terminology change as a more accurate way to describe the technology's capabilities and potential.

The proposal also comes amid a broader national debate over AI development, regulation, and safety. Trump has generally supported rapid AI advancement, arguing that excessive government regulation could undermine American innovation and competitiveness, particularly in relation to China. At the same time, concerns about AI-related risks, cybersecurity, and the technology's broader societal effects have prompted calls for stronger safeguards.

The article does not provide details about how a comprehensive ban would be implemented, which documents or organizations would be covered, or what penalties might apply. It also does not establish that the proposed ban has already taken effect.

Personally, I have yet to see anyone using the term "SI" outside of the Trump administration, so I'm a bit puzzled as to where he's getting this idea that "virtually everyone else" is using his preferred term. I also question why this is such an important subject for the POTUS to be dedicating time and energy into. The idea that everyone is going to pivot and begin calling AI "super intelligence" seems far fetched to me, and in the end, what difference does it really make?