· Fact-checked before it aired. Unconfirmed claims from this segment are not shown.
James Talarico, Texas' Democratic U.S. Senate nominee, voted against Texas' 2023 ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors and supported amendments that would have weakened it, including one treating a parent's refusal to affirm a child's gender identity as abuse. But he has said he opposes gender-reassignment surgery for minors, and the claim that he will “vote to trans your kids” overstates his actual record. This is a joke about AI being trapped on a Delta flight, not a factual assertion. This is an opinion about AI use in modeling and investing, not a factual claim.
Fact-check
VERIFIED MISLEADING
James Talarico, Texas' Democratic U.S. Senate nominee, voted against Texas' 2023 ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors and supported amendments that would have weakened it, including one treating a parent's refusal to affirm a child's gender identity as abuse. But he has said he opposes gender-reassignment surgery for minors, and the claim that he will “vote to trans your kids” overstates his actual record. This is a joke about AI being trapped on a Delta flight, not a factual assertion. This is an opinion about AI use in modeling and investing, not a factual claim.
Talarico will vote to trans your kids https://t.co/FZ7kUJz9CH
EThis is AI & Builders, and we're starting with Elon Musk using X to litigate a Texas Senate race.
EHe posted that James Talarico, the Democrat running for Senate, 'will vote to trans your kids.'
SPolitiFact checked it—Talarico voted against Texas' ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors, but he's also said he opposes surgery for minors.
SSo 'will vote to trans your kids' is not his record. It's a campaign caricature.
EBut come on, Sloane—he did vote against the ban, and critics say he backed amendments that would've treated a parent's refusal to affirm a child's gender identity as abuse. That's more than a caricature.
SThat's a real policy fight, and his vote is fair game. What's not fair is implying he wants surgery for children.
EOkay, the verb is crude. But in a Senate race, the cruder headline travels further.
SAnd that's exactly why we correct it here. You can oppose his policy without inventing a vote he never promised.
EFine. Then I'll stick to the record, and that's what I'll say.
SRight. Now, on something more in our lane—Elon also replied 'True' to a post about AI modeling.
SThe post from Aaron Burnett said not using AI when modeling should be considered negligence, like FSD for investment decisions.
EI actually half agree. If you're running money and you refuse to use modern tools, you're giving up an edge.
SBut calling it 'negligence' is a legal leap. A model can hallucinate; you still need a human to verify.
EPeople make bad decisions too. The standard should be: did you act reasonably? If every competitor uses a tool that catches what you miss, that's relevant.
SI'm not saying ignore it. I'm saying you can't sue someone for not using an AI model that might have been wrong.
ENo, but you can lose clients. And this post says in a year or two it'll be obvious. That's the direction.
SMaybe for pattern-matching. For actual judgment, I want a person who can explain why, not an FSD analogy.
EThat's fair. AI for screening, human for final call. I'll take that.
SAnd before the hour's out, we'll see if anyone ships an agent that can fact-check Musk's posts in real time.