Anonymous wrote:Honestly I don't see all that big a gap between Bores and Lasher policy-wise, but I don't like the fact that Lasher was Nadler's CoS (new blood is a good thing), and I do like the fact that while he probably doesn't deserve it, a vote for Bores will be interpreted nationally as a vote for common-sense AI regulation, and a victory by him will leave a bunch of other Democrats feeling less afraid to take on AI companies.

That is how I am feeling also. Bores has plenty of political experience but is not a "career politician" like Lasher. Which is my preferred profile. I never could stand Stringer and Lasher reminds me too much of him. Don't get me wrong - I think Lasher would be fine. But I think Bores would be better. I am just trying to get through all of the AI noise to make sure I fully understand where he stands on everything else. And like you noted, I don't think there are big differences between the candidates.

Honestly I don't see all that big a gap between Bores and Lasher policy-wise, but I don't like the fact that Lasher was Nadler's CoS (new blood is a good thing), and I do like the fact that while he probably doesn't deserve it, a vote for Bores will be interpreted nationally as a vote for common-sense AI regulation, and a victory by him will leave a bunch of other Democrats feeling less afraid to take on AI companies.

Anonymous wrote:The Kennedy kid Schlossberg is getting a lot of bad press.

Yes - his young age and lack of experience is shining through.

I'm still trying to figure out Bores.

The Kennedy kid Schlossberg is getting a lot of bad press.

Any updates on this? Lasher had his big media blitz but now has been quieter. Hearing more from Conway, pro/con Bores (wow, some of those ads are cray cray), and a bit of Schlossberg. Still figuring this out.