Using an LLM to offer concise summaries of the major platforms and ideas of candidates would be an ideal use of the technology …if there was any way to know that the LLM is being factual and accurate and relatively free of bias in what it produces. But we have no guarantees on this.
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2026
78 points (100.0% liked)
politics
31307 readers
1917 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
And we never will, because of the fundamental ways the technology works. LLMs needs nondeterminism in order to function. It's truly a black box, which makes it a nonstarter in any discipline that demands accuracy and integrity and repeatability.
People seeking information on elections seems surprising in general. Voting based on who they hate more seems to be the norm.
When they asked Fox Entertainment News they just vote for Pedo/Nazis
Maybe this will at least shake some people that their stupid “team” doesn’t actually align with their values?
First they surrendered their knowledge, then their thinking. What is left of them now?
They rejected the evidence of their eyes and ears. They have nothing left to give.
A vote that counts 3.7 times more than mine.
That would be a really good cards against humanity card
Their bodies
How come it's all of the bad stuff and none of the cool stuff?
Capitalism.
LMAO! We’re so fucked.
Everyone gets a puppy vs diarrhea forever
They were doing this in the primary.
I was canvassing and a woman whipped out her phone and asked chatgpt which of the candidates most agreed with her. That's who she said she'd vote for.
Too many people (including my boss) seem to think AI is a magic oracle that can replace the whole messy business of ever investigating even the tiniest thing. It's astonishing how many people were apparently just waiting for the first chance to give up on doing anything at all for themselves.
People used to ask Google and use the totally unbiased first result to take a test for this...
At this point they are asking whether to vote blue or red. Like how is it even a fucking question if you aren't MAGA? Americans deserve the government they have.
It gets more nuanced than that the further along the scale of locality you go. When you get to county/city positions and judgeships, there often is no party information to go on and you have to sift through sparse local news coverage (if it exists and hasn't been bought out by Sinclair) or through individual campaign websites (again, if they exist at all). It actually takes a lot of work to make a well informed decision on the local level.