#no I did not forget to add the vote numbers and percentage on the first panel when first posting this shut up—- | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

walks-the-ages · 1 year

Text

"Favorite Doctor Survey" Update February 11th, 2023, ~9pm Eastern Standard Time:

[ID: a screenshot of a pie chart which has a multitude of colors in sections, the largest being labeled with percentages of 23.3%, 16.3%, 11.6%, and two are labled 7% while the rest are not labeled. there is a list of Doctor Who incarnations off to the side with color coding which trails off. end ID]

So far, we have 43 votes, and right now, the 8th Doctor is in the lead with 10 votes, aka 23.3%!

I am extremely delighted with this fact, we need more people to appreciate the Eighth Doctor ~! For anyone who is unaware of it, the Eighth Doctor is not limited to just the 1997 TV movie and a few minutes in Power of the Doctor--

--oh no, this Bestest Boy Ever has not only over a hundred audio dramas (and counting!!) on Big Finish, but also at least 74 Novels to his interation! If you do not know the Eighth Doctor yet, now is your excuse to go watch his movie on the web archive and then dive into the world of Big Finish to experience his adventures with Charley! :D

*Ahem* So, onto the next "Favorite Doctor!"

To no-ones surprise, the Twelfth Doctor, played by Peter Capaldi is holding steady in second place, with 9 votes!

There's a slight error in the graph because I realized I'd forgotten to add his actor and year to the 12th doctor listing and the answers already submitted didn't get edited, so Peter Capaldi's 12th Doctor is not just the dark teal 16.3% you see above, but also the dark blue right underneath it which is the first 2 original votes before the updated info.

In 3rd place, appropriately enough, we have the Third Doctor, played by Jon Pertwee! He currently has 5 votes, aka 11.6%!

Everyone seems to love his dynamics with UNIT, being earthbound, and his fatherly/grandfatherly relationships with his companions-- not to mention his chemistry with The Master!

Tied for 4th place, we have the Sixth and Second Doctors, each with 3 votes, aka 7% !

One, Five, Nine, and Ten each have 2 votes,

Four, The Valyard, The Shalka!Doctor, Eleven, and Thirteen all have 1 vote each,

and so far we have two write-in answers: one vote for "The Lethian Campaign Assassin" (an extremely intriguing wiki article) and one vote for the Master!Doctor from Power of the Doctor :D

Let's keep those votes rolling in! I pretty much have no time limit on this poll lol, i'll just post periodically when there's a significant number of new votes or if someone else takes the lead!

In the meanwhile if you haven't taken the survey yet, here is the link to cast your vote:

And if you'd like to see what all the hype is about for the Eighth Doctor, here is a link to a gorgeous fan-made upscaling of the movie, which was posted to the archive by the uploader-- you can stream it from the archive (make sure you set it to 1080p and give it plenty of time to buffer!)

Or, even better, download the mkv video, and use VLC media player or a similar open source program so you can adjust the playback speed to around 96% for the proper pitch and speed!

When they were doing US to UK conversion they uh. lol they fucked up the framerate so to fix it the movie was sped up on release, so watching it without adjusting the playback speed will make everyone sound like chipmunks comparison to their normal voices, but can also cause some motion sickness from the weird, fast framerate

! So I highly reccomend downloading it so you can adjust the playback speed a custom amount! Oh, and don't forget to favorite to show the upscaler some love for their hard work, they made it into a beautiful masterpiece! [ it literally looks better than my physical dvd i bought years ago lol]

If you'd like to dip your toes into some other, slightly more obscure Doctors featured on this survey, I also have a link to the 4k Upscaling of "the Scream of the Shalka", an animated Doctor Who episode from 2003, which was never continued (on screen at least; it has one short story sequel written available online, "The Feast of the Stone"!

Scream of the Shalka, in 4k HD, again, thanks to fans taking the time to upscale things!

Scream of the Shalka short story sequel:

(please note for fellow Shinigami-Eyes users, there is no transphobia in the short story, the entire BBC website is now universally marked red in shinigami eyes)

#long post #very long post #bold text #Doctor Who #described images #dw #Favorite Doctor Survey #Classic Who #Scream of the Shalka #8th doctor #Eighth Doctor #Twelfth Doctor #12th Doctor #eighth doctor audios #Shalka!Doctor

35 notes · View notes

ending-the-cycle-ask · 3 years

Note

And survey says... (🤞please work🤞)

First | Previous | Next

570 notes · View notes

flyerjobs · 4 years

Text

Professional Summary Why Does It Matter

What is a Professional Summary?

The professional summary section needs to be the first thing on your resume that an employer sees. Because of that, you want to place it at the top of the page, right under your name and contact information.

The main purpose of a professional summary is to give the hiring manager a quick overview of your skills and achievements without having to dive into the rest of your resume. You can think of it as a teaser for the rest of your resume.

It’s usually about 4-5 bullet points long. It sums up your top skills, experiences, and achievements as they pertain to a job opening.

This section has many names. Some people call it a professional summary. Others know it as a resume summary, qualifications summary, or a resume statement.

But don’t mistake it for a resume objective or profile. We’ll discuss the differences later in this guide.

Why do you need a Professional Summary?

In short, it can help you get noticed faster. Many hiring managers have to go through dozens of resumes every day. In fact, they usually only give each resume about six seconds of their time. A good professional summary is something that will catch their attention from the get-go. And if it’s written well, it will compel them read the rest of the resume.

But not all candidates can benefit from having a professional summary on their resume.

Who is it for, then?

Resume summaries are best suited for experienced job seekers who stayed in the same job for several years or held multiple roles in the same industry. In other words, resume summary highlights specific past achievements and skills. It takes time to acquire them.

But what if you’re a student or afresh graduate? At the beginning of your career, you have yet to obtain professional experience. Or maybe you want to change careers and don’t have any relevant experience in the field to which you would like to switch?

In that case, go with a resume objective. Instead of previous experience, it highlights your skills and motivation. And you have plenty of that.

How to write a Professional Summary?

Think of your professional summary as teaser for the rest of your resume. In other words, you want your professional summary to contain all the most exciting parts of your resume.

How do you do that?

Write your professional summary last. It’s surprisingly easy once you’ve already written other sections of your resume. All you have to do is cherry-pick the most impressive facts and stats.

Tailor it to a specific job opening. Star with the job listing that made you apply for the job. Carefully reread it and find the most important keywords. These are the nouns or phrases that best describe the job position, related skills, as well as the ideal candidate. Before you begin to write, think about how they intersect with your own skills and experiences. In this way, you also have a higher chance to get through the ATS systems which companies use.

The first bullet point should describe your professional title. Don’t forget to add the number of years of experience. You want to communicate your professional identity immediately. You can also write it in bold. It can look something like this: “Certified Project Management Professional with over 4 years of experience”.

Pick the 3-4 most impressive parts of your resume and reword them into snappy bullet points. Tease your potential employer into reading further. Did you win an award for the best customer service? Or hit 95 % of sales targets for five consecutive years? These are the things that deserve a mention at the top of your resume!

Translate each achievement into numbers. Each bullet point should contain at least one piece of quantifiable data. Use percentages, numbers or impressive sales figures. It gives the hiring manager a better idea of how you performed in your previous jobs. Numbers attract attention. Take advantage of that.

Sum up what you have to offer. Instead of saying what you want, keep in mind what they want. Make clear what value can you bring to the company. Look for common threads in your work history and for skills which apply most to the job.

How to write a Resume Summary if you're a Fresh Graduate?

If you’re a student or a fresh graduate, you probably don’t have much to brag about in your resume yet.

But that’s only true to some extent. Even as an entry-level candidate, you already have at least some experience and skills. You only have to find the right way articulate them and show how they pertain to the job you want.

What’s more, every other candidate for the position is probably as inexperienced as you are. After all, experienced professionals rarely apply for entry-level positions. Because of that, your primary goal is to stand out and make the employer remember you. And you can do that even if your experience is limited.

It’s not like you’ve just spent most of your life at school and learned nothing. You just need to understand how your studies intersect with the job’s requirements. But before you do that, begin your summary section by stating your field of study, degree, and GPA (if it’s above 3.0).

Once you’ve done that, think about your internships, part-time jobs, volunteer or freelance work, even your hobby projects. Look for anything that relates to the job you want, such as related coursework or school projects. Don’t forget to mention any relevant transferrable skills you’ve acquired while working on those projects.

Also, try to translate your most notable achievements into numbers. Maybe you were on the student council. You can mention how you received 2,300 votes and helped organize 5 large school events that were attended by 3,000 students.

Hired by Bupa - Business Administration Intern

An adaptable and responsible graduate seeking an entry-level position in the Business Analytics market, Business Consultancy or Financial market.

My double degree in Business and Law and my previous job as a financial controller have provided me with a well-rounded background and enabled me to develop an analytical/logical approach to tasks, software skills, and the ability to work under pressure.

In short, I am reliable, hard-working with strong attention to detail and eager to learn about new technologies and business issues. I am able to work well both on my own initiative an as part of a team as well as to travel abroad.

How to write it as an experienced Professional?

If you have 10 years of professional experience under your belt, you’ve probably developed a long list of job-related accomplishments. Your resume summary is the ideal place to showcase the most impressive of them.

Carefully reread the job advertisement and highlight any skills you already possess. See if you can think of any past accomplishments that show how you successfully used those skills in your previous job.

Are you an experienced sales and customer service professional? Sell it. Mention how you developed strategies that resulted in an over 15 % increase in new customers. Or how your rewards program reached a customer success rate of over 45 %.

See? Numbers are much more persuasive than words. Also, remember to use action words and relevant keywords.

HubSpot Director of Business Development Resume Example

Passionate Business Amplifier.

Thrives in complex market segment entry and sales and marketing launch plans for technical products and services. Founder of highly-impactful "HubSpot for Veterans" initiative.

Proven Growth Consultant and Entrepreneurial Coach for over 200 organizations. Advocate of lean startup and data-backed strategy.

Leadership spans career with direct application towards startups, Techstar accelerators, corporate business development, and government. ROI-focused relationship builder.

Lifelong teacher and learner: Startup Institute, Techstarts, HubSpot Partner programs.

Empowering others is my jam. Discovery, duration and education are my tools.

How to write a professional Summary if you’re Changing Careers?

As a career changer, try to show how you’re past experience relates to the position you’re applying for or how it can help your future employer grow.

Are you a software developer, who wants to work with a new programming language, let’s say Python? You can mention how you’ve already developed 7 mobile apps using JavaScript and HTML. Even something as small completing a Python online course on Code Academy can work wonders.

But if you still feel like you don’t have any relevant job experience, you consider writing a resume objective instead. Instead of past achievements and experiences, it highlights your transferrable skills and motivation. Moreover, it explains why you seek to switch to a different industry.

Certified Human Resources Associate aiming to leverage an extensive background in experience in digital marketing to develop a career in human resources.

Knowledge of multiple HR software programs, such as Bamboo HR and Benefits.

Results-oriented and self-driven professional with exceptional communication and leadership skills, and the ability to adapt quickly to change.

Looking for a human resources-related job within a company that offers flexibility and opportunity to grow both personally and professionally.

#Professional Summary

0 notes

davidfostercomedyblog · 7 years

Text

I’m With Kap: Why I Support Kneeling for the Anthem

I love Mike Francesa, though said love is mostly compartmentalized to his views and subsequent expressions on sports and athletes. I’ll never forget the experience of falling in love with his show as it became quickly apparent that he was in my brain, better yet, the better version of my brain, poignantly elaborating on everything I’d thought and wished I could express in a way that made every other sports talk guy sound second rate. Nevertheless, my brother and I would joke that we’d never before observed a greater disparity within one person’s IQ between one subject matter and every other in the world.

Have you ever heard Francesa discuss movies or TV shows or political climate? Before your eyes (ears) he suddenly transforms from all-knowing guru into this generic, old, white, Long Island dad, who isn’t necessarily racist but says some things that racists say, thinks Frank Caliendo is funny, and… voted for Trump.

I was once listening as one of his callers, typically cut from the same cloth pontificated on the Colin Kaepernick saga by making the point: “Football is entertainment, Mike. It’s entertainment, am I right? (red flag any time someone poses this rhetorical) We don’t need to turn on the TV at 1:00 for our favorite pastime on Sundays and have it ruined by these guys kneeling during the national anthem. It’s supposed to be entertainment.”

I held my breath in prayer that Mike would come through for me.

“That’s a great point,” Mike said, “ a really great point,” and he broke my heart.

First of all, do they even televise the national anthem before every game? I’m honestly not even sure because like most fans, I don’t tune in for the national anthem, and I’d venture a guess that up until now this caller didn’t either. I think we can all agree that the entertainment is in the actual football, so until players start wearing NAACP stickers on their helmets or perform end zone celebrations that include raising one fist as they hang a Nazi dummy from the end zone post, I’d say the entertainment compartment remains unblemished.

Mike continued in accord: “People work hard all week long, and they just want to relax on Sundays and watch football – not your political protest. And you’ll see, you keep doing it and people will stop watching, and you’ll have to get a regular job paying not nearly as much as you’re getting paid now to play a kids’ game.”

Okay…

1. Umm, no they won’t (stop watching). Do you have any idea how popular football is? I know you do. The NFL could air Black Panther rallies over the national anthem and KKK cross burnings at the Super Bowl halftime show and it would still do better numbers than any NBA finals or World Series game. If you think the mindless drones of the Midwest who worship football second only to the Lord in heaven, Jesus Christ, and Donald Trump, are going to stop watching football you are out of your Diet Coke-infested mind.

2. Can we agree that the only thing more reprehensible than getting paid loads of money for playing a kids’ game is getting paid loads of money for simply talking about said kids’ game?

3. If a five second clip of five or ten guys silently kneeling while the surrounding 75,000 others are standing in reverence compromises your ability to relax on Sundays then you should seek immediate mental health.

Obviously one is free to disagree whether there is in fact social injustice, but isn’t this part of what makes our country great, the very first amendment: Freedom of Speech? Aren’t you that much less “American” when you protest peoples’ right to protest, ironically shitting on the Bill of Rights whenever it happens to not appease your views? When Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony and Chris Paul used their platform to speak out against violence in urban communities it didn’t seem to bother anyone. Mohammed Ali and Arthur Ashe were activists whose legacies are both celebrated, and Bruce Springsteen often interrupts his actual entertainment to do the same. Why didn’t any half-wit, Jersey douche bags call in about these?

When Kaepernick first made the decision to kneel I wasn’t sure how I felt about it. I knew it didn’t offend me as an American. I just wondered what a lot of others did, whether it was the right context for the action, in terms of potential efficacy towards intention. For years it was one of the biggest stories in sports, which might indicate actualization of the first stage of efficacy.

He made it clear that his choice had nothing to do with disrespecting the troops or their families – that there are many components of a nation, and his message was in regards to just one of those components. One could equally choose to kneel in protest of the drug companies, health insurance or legalization of Monsanto poisoning our food. Or we could stand in support of the troops, our democratic freedom and land of occupational opportunity. I found this point to be thoughtful, indisputable, also personally relatable.

I grew up a huge hip hop head and was often judged and criticized, mostly by fellow whites as being inauthentic, the inverse of an Uncle Tom; but also occasionally by black people, for not having the right to culturally appropriate “their thing,” because I didn’t have to worry about getting shot by cops when I walk down the street.

I always thought this was an unfair card to pull, since as abhorrent as police brutality is, it still makes up a very small percentage of the black experience in America. I’ve lived in New York my entire life and have spent a huge chunk of time in black communities. If the people I see on the streets are in this alleged perpetual state of worry about getting shot then I’d hate to see what they look like when they’re relaxed. I think it’s horrible how authorities have often dealt with the black community, but it would be as impossible for blacks to be relegated to a perpetual state of worry or fear as it was for New Yorkers to be of terrorism after 9/11.

This is classic cherry picking, highlighting only the most tragic examples of a particular reality in order to make an accused transgressor seem as such. My hip hop appropriations being labeled as disrespectful to social inequality was as inaccurate as Kaepernick’s kneeling is to the troops or their families.

As we grow into adulthood we become abundantly aware that we are flawed, then we come to terms with accepting that the partner we fall in love with is as well. I remember how enlightening it was for me in adolescence when I first heard (white) friends criticize “white people” in broad strokes that were only somewhat tongue and cheek. This was huge for me, and so logical. Of course! We live in the diverse melting pot of New York. We should surely specify when we’re talking about white people, as there are other people in the world. Secondly, “white people” as a group have resounding flaws, as well as strengths, and it’s OK to acknowledge either or both. The same goes for black people, Hispanics, Asians and Arabs, as well as men, women, and groups of every religion. I think one of the primary red flags for stupidity is a failure to recognize the shortcomings of the group which one is inherently a part of. Much more disturbing to me than the 15 or 20 black players I see kneeling for the national anthem is how long it took to see even one white player join them.

As individuals we are microcosms of our group and/or our nation, which means if we are flawed so must be our macrocosm, which means we should take every opportunity to correct said flaws. We’re quick to honor and celebrate those of us who make great efforts to address their individual shortcomings, but equally quick to attack those who attempt the same for the group they are a part of. Colin Kaepernick is part of the black “group,” but he is also a part of America, a successful, upstanding part I might add. For this it pains me to see teams run from signing him, as fast as he’s run for so many end zones, in fear of backlash from their fan base who might oppose his peaceful protests. The Philadelphia Eagles signed Michael Vick after he was released from prison for the violent crime of torturing and killing fighting dogs. Kaepernick, conversely, is legally protesting violence with the intention of raising social awareness, and he can’t get back into the league. It should be no surprise that our society is in the state that it is. Also, fuck the Eagles.

#colinKaepernick #imwithkap #imwithkaepernick #national anthem protest #nfl

2 notes · View notes

thisdaynews · 5 years

Text

Why ‘Pocahontas’ Could Still Be Elizabeth Warren’s Biggest Vulnerability

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/why-pocahontas-could-still-be-elizabeth-warrens-biggest-vulnerability/

Why ‘Pocahontas’ Could Still Be Elizabeth Warren’s Biggest Vulnerability

Elizabeth Warren came to last week’s Native American presidential forum in Sioux City, Iowa, with, as you might expect, a plan. And she executed it perfectly.

First, the Massachusetts senator expressed sorrow for the “harm I caused,” referencing her attempt to prove he had Native American ancestry through a DNA test. Then she pivoted to her literal plan, her sweeping and detailed set of ideas to expand tribal nation sovereignty and invest in social programs benefiting Native American communities. The long list of proposals was repeatedly praised by the forum’s attendees, several of whom excitedly predicted that they were speaking to the next president of the United States.

Story Continued Below

While Warren’s campaign staff might have breathed easier coming out of the forum, her Republican antagonists have made it clear they have no intention of forgetting the episode. Shortly before Warren’s appearance at the forum, the Republican National Committee released an opposition research memo titled, “1/1024th Native American, 100% Liar,” which quoted its deputy chief of staff Mike Reed as saying, Warren “lied about being [Native American] to gain minority status at a time when Ivy League law schools were desperate to add diversity to their ranks.” A few days earlier, President Donald Trump, after lamenting that “Pocahontas is rising” in the polls, assured his supporters at a New Hampshire rally that he still has the ability to derail her: “I did the Pocahontas thing. I hit her really hard, and it looked like she was down and out. But that was too long ago. I should’ve waited. But don’t worry, we will revive it.”

Has Warren effectively addressed the controversy? In conversations I had with Democratic and Republican political strategists, unaffiliated with any presidential campaign, there was no bipartisan consensus. The Democrats believed Warren’s rise in the polls is evidence she has weathered the storm. The Republicans argued Warren remains vulnerable to charges of dishonest opportunism.

They’re both right. Warren is enjoying a comeback because she has convinced many skittish progressives that she won’t let Trump disrupt her relentless focus on policy solutions. And she has convinced many Native American leaders that her policy proposals for indigenous communities are more important than what she has said in the past about her ancestry.

But because Warren’s comeback has relied on restoring her standing on the left, she has not done anything to address concerns potentially percolating among swing voters. A detailed white paper on Native American policy has no bearing on whether a moderate white suburbanite believes Warren is of good character. And since Warren has apologized for her past claims, she remains open to the charge she was dishonest when, during her academic career, she relied on nothing more than family lore to identify herself as Native American.

That means if she becomes the Democratic nominee for president, Warren would still face a “Pocahontas” problem, one that threatens the core of her candidacy.

“If she’s the nominee and says, ‘Trump’s dishonest,’ that’s just the immediate counter: You’re dishonest about the most fundamental thing, who you were and how you got to your positions,” said Republican strategist Chuck Warren of the political consulting firm September Group. He is ofno relation to the candidate.

Dan Hazelwood, another Republican consultant and owner of Targeted Creative Communications, argued her apologies have missed the mark: “She’s never given the answer to the core of the Trump charge, which is: She cheated. She cheated for personal gain. She hasn’t answered that part of the attack.”

An exhaustiveBoston Globeinvestigation in September 2018 concluded Elizabeth Warren’s “claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools.” However, once she was hired, Harvard used her self-identification to help bolster its diversity statistics and tamp down criticism of its hiring practices. TheGlobereported, “Warren doesn’t have a direct answer for whether her claims … might have harmed the efforts of others to press for more diversity at the overwhelmingly white institution.”

However, these Republicans don’t believe Trump’s preferred rhetorical grenade—the “Pocahontas” slur—poses the biggest threat to Warren. “I don’t think the Pocahontas thing sticks,” Chuck Warren said. “It’s a funny line to people at the rallies, [but] it doesn’t talk much about her character. It almost makes the point trivial.”

What would be devastating to Elizabeth Warren is if Trump were able to connect the underlying concerns about her personal integrity to the integrity of her agenda. She styles herself as a warrior for the people, fighting to fix a system “rigged” against them by elites. But if Trump can convince swing voters that Warren, as a member of the academic elite, rigged a system to benefit herself, he could turn what is now Warren’s main strength into a fatal weakness.

Key to making that connection is reducing her detailed plans to cheap pandering. “Everybody loves to call her a policy wonk, but everything she is presenting is ‘buy me a vote,’” Chuck Warren said. “She is willing to say, or put on any hat, to get ahead.” Hazelwood envisions Elizabeth Warren’s platform being characterized as “putting the government in charge of everything and giving away stuff for free. … And oh, by the way, the stuff that’s going to be given away is going to be given away by cheaters.”

Warren can insist that she never won a job because of how she described her ethnicity. But that hasn’t stopped Trump from attacking her, and Democrats shouldn’t assume the president’s own record of dishonesty will protect her either. “If you give Trump a tool to equalize the playing field, which is what this does,” Hazelwood said, “he will do exactly what he did to Hillary Clinton.”

***

In several presidential elections, Democrats have seen Republican attack dogs disfigure their nominees beyond recognition by turning their strengths into weaknesses.

In 2016, Republicans turned Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of State, essential to her case that she was the most qualified for the job,into a deluge of conspiracy theories centered on her private email server. In 2004, Democratic voters thought John Kerry’s war record would protect him from challenges to his patriotism, only to have his war record baselessly but effectively maligned by the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.” In 2000, Al Gore had a reputation as a Boy Scout, until George W. Bush’s campaign used some of his minor flubs and sloppy phrasings to brand him as a “serial exaggerator.”

But when I talked to Democratic operatives who were part of some of these campaigns, and know all too well the potential dangers that lie ahead of any Democratic nominee, they praised Warren for how she, after her DNA test misstep, has seized control of her own narrative with her seemingly unlimited appetite for policy plans.

“Warren has successfully defined herself as a candidate, instead of letting others define her,” said Peter Daou, a veteran of the Kerry campaign and the 2008 Clinton campaign. Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist and former spokesman for Clinton’s 2016 effort, concurred, noting Democrats have “struggled” during the Trump era to “drive our own message and not be entirely tethered to his.”

“She’s shown an ability to do that, and that allows you to navigate his nonsense but also drive your own point,” he said.

The Democratic operatives are understandably impressed with Warren’s rise. She is theonly2020 presidential candidate to have a rise. In the Real Clear Politics poll average, no other candidate has increased his or her share of the vote more than 0.5 percentage points since May 1. Warren’s support has nearly doubled,from 8.4 percent to 15.4 percent.Since the first of the year, when Warren began the exploratory phase of her campaign at 4.3 percent, Warren’s support has nearly quadrupled.

But Warren started 2019 scraping bottom in the polls, giving her more room to rise,becauseof the Native American controversy. In early 2018, Warren was scoring in the low double-digits in Democratic primary polling. But her numbers began to sag by the fall, and the obvious cause was Trump’s repeated “Pocahontas” jabs—most prominently, his July “offer” of $1 million to her favorite charity if she proved her Native American ancestry with a DNA test.

When Warren took him up on it in October, she made her problem worse. She had let Trump dictate the terms of their engagement. Her test results—she had Native American ancestry 6 to 10 generations in the past—did little to defuse the situation. She angered the Cherokee Nation, which rejects the whole concept of DNA to determine tribal heritage. Then in February, when theWashington Postuncovered that Warren self-identified as American Indian on her 1986 State Bar of Texas registration card, she shifted from proudly defending her family lore to sheepishly apologizing for “furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship.” Her prospects looked bleak.

Her comeback began once she stopped talking about her ancestry and started talking about her plans. Progressive commentators, livid at mainstream media obsession with the Native American saga, as well as with speculation about her “likability,” pushed back by celebrating the substance and reach of her policy proposals.The Nationsplashed her on a March cover declaring, “Elizabeth Warren isn’t scared of Trump—or her own party.” In April, the feminist siteJezebelsummed up her candidacy with the headline, “Elizabeth Warren Has a Plan.” By May, it wasTimemagazine that had Warren on the cover with her common refrain, “I Have a Plan for That.”

On top of the pile of plans, many voters began to recognize Warren was much better on the stump than some had presumed, leading them to, well, like her. Before the Democratic debate in June, she was back in double-digits. The ancestry controversy went unmentioned in both summer debates. Warren otherwise avoided any serious attacks, and her numbers kept inching up.

But her rise has been propelled largely by the left flank of the Democratic Party. In one of her better poll showings, the August Quinnipiac University poll that placed her in second nationally with 21 percent, she won among “very liberal” voters with 40 percent but was well behind Joe Biden among moderate and conservative voters with 11 percent. It’s one thing to make uberprogressives forget about “Pocahontas” with uberprogressive plans, but it’s another to do the same with moderate swing voters.

***

When I asked Democratic operativeswhether Warren needs to do something different in order to connect with swing voters and inoculate herself against general election attempts to dredge up the ancestry controversy, they said no. They see in her existing campaign style and persona the ingredients for a favorable matchup against Trump.

Tracy Sefl, who handled Kerry’s rapid response operation for the Democratic National Committee and also advised the 2008 Clinton effort, sees a “powerful contrast” between Trump “impulsively shouting out these things and gleefully hurling slurs” from “a stage” and Warren’s “far more engaging and dignified” approach in which she is “literally among voters,” spending “hours worth of [time in] photo lines.” Sefl also praised Warren’s web strategy, creating a webpage—elizabethwarren.com/pocahontas—that tells the story of the real Pocahontas’ abuse and early death to raise awareness of the high rate of violence against Native American women today, mostly perpetrated by nonnatives.

Ferguson didn’t buy the Republican argument that Trump would be able to challenge Warren’s honesty. “In 2016, he was seen as a straight talker,” Ferguson said. “But in three years as president, he’s gone from straight talker to straight bullshit artist.” Therefore, “it’s hard to see Donald Trump winning a debate with anyone about honesty and integrity.”

These Democratic operatives are hardly naive about the potential power of Republican attacks. “The Republicans are excellent and skilled at taking [what] they can find in their opponents,” Daou said, “and hammer and hammer and hammer away at it, until it becomes a mainstream news story.”

Yet he graded Warren as having “passed the test with flying colors—the test of withstanding right-wing attacks.” Ferguson further argued that the Native American controversy isn’t like the Clinton email server episode. “One of the challenges of 2016 was the drip-drip-drip of the email news [and] the investigation news,” Ferguson said. “This isn’t drip-drip-drip. This is Trump beating a dead horse.”

But Hazelwood contends the old tricks can still work to drive news. “We’re all kidding ourselves if you [think Trump] can’t find people who are going to stand up and say, ‘I was wronged in this process’ or ‘I’m a Native American and I think this is still inappropriate, and she never actually properly accounted for her misdeeds,” Hazelwood said.

Most Native Americans might be disinclined to continue criticizing Warren. Mark Trahant, the editor of Indian Country Today and the moderator of this month’s Native American presidential forum, relayed to me via email that the forum’s attendees “gave her more than a warm reception.”

“She had one of four standing ovations,” he wrote, and attendees were “far more interested in the candidate’s policy proposals” than the ancestry controversy. But, he also noted, “There are a number of people that will consider Elizabeth Warren’s actions and the DNA test egregious and will never come around.”

In fact, four days after the forum, Rebecca Nagle, a Cherokee Nation member and the host of the “This Land” podcast produced by the progressive Crooked Media, published a devastating essay in HuffPost. Nagle argued Warren’s apology was insufficient because her 19th-century and early 20th-century ancestors were white people who occupied Cherokee land with military force and through broken treaties. “Warren’s ancestors replaced the truth of their complicity in Cherokee dispossession with a tale of being Cherokee,” Nagle wrote. In her view, Warren can only make things right by stating she “does not have a Cherokee ancestor and that she was wrong to claim one.”

Nagle has no interest in helping Trump. She responded to Warren supporters on Twitter writing, “Warren isn’t running against Trump, she’s running against” the Democratic field. She added: “It’s silly to think not talking about this issue will make it go away. Ppl who want Warren to be prez should press her to resolve this issue now.” But even if Nagle and most Native Americans wouldn’t publicly side with Trump in a general election against Warren, Hazelwood warns Democrats to not pretend that you can’t find those people, because a presidential campaign can.”

Whether Warren has the skills to overcome the expected attacks can only be proved in real time, and perhaps Democrats should be thankful that, as Sefl observes, Trump is so impulsive. If Warren continues to rise in the polls and becomes the front-runner, Trump won’t be able resist early engagement. In preparation for that likely confrontation, Warren might want to consider how the last successful Democratic nominee survived a major controversy during a primary.

Barack Obama, in March 2008, had to answer for anti-American sermons delivered by his pastor Jeremiah Wright. Obama’s response, the famous “A More Perfect Union” address, was not solely aimed at Democratic primary voters. He delivered a broader discussion of race relations designed to unify all Americans by encouraging a deeper understanding of coarse sentiments harbored by blacks and whites. This not only helped Obama connect with swing voters for the general election, it also helped soothe nervous Democrats who wanted to know if he could handle whatever Republicans threw at him. Warren, in contrast, has yet to tailor a message for swing voters, betting that the ambitious populism that progressives love will also resonate with voters outside of the Democratic primary electorate.

The Democratic operatives I spoke with may well be correct that Warren can survive any Republican-manufactured storms by simply being Warren—strong, substantive and on message. That presumes the DNA debacle was an anomalous case of Warren failing to be Warren. Yet it’s risky to assume the Republican operatives are wrong. If her reputation among swing voters gets poisoned by accusations of dishonesty, she will find that extremely hard to remedy, and as before, might respond to pressure by making matters worse.

To avoid that pitfall, she should invest energy now in defining herself as “honest.” Without direct mention of the past controversy, she could collect testimonials from her professional past vouching for her integrity and promote them in ads and on the trail. That way, when attacks on her integrity are launched in full force, she will have already fortified her defenses—and in a way that is not reliant on political ideology.

“It is risky business to look backwards for the answers to what’s ahead,” Sefl told me, cautioning against the assumption that what worked for Republicans in the past was destined to work again. It’s true that Warren is a different candidate than Clinton or Kerry. And Trump’s weakened political standing as an embattled incumbent might mean he can’t easily run on his playbook from 2016. No two campaigns are the same.

But it’s a simple fact that the Native American controversy did once damage Warren’s presidential aspirations and that her recovery has yet to reach most moderate voters. If she has a plan for reaching them before Trump does, we haven’t seen it yet.

#biggest #Foreign #Politics #Vulnerability

0 notes

democratsunited-blog · 6 years

Text

How N.H. Democrats could retake the House

https://uniteddemocrats.net/?p=5019

How N.H. Democrats could retake the House

It’s been thrown around so easily as to be nearly meaningless: the “blue wave.”

This is the rising sense – borne out through special election results both across the country and within the state – that a relatively unpopular president and an energized progressive base will lead to change in November.

Republicans aren’t buying it – publicly, at least.

“The only blue wave I know of is the one on the Pacific coast,” quipped House Majority Leader Dick Hinch at a recent press conference.

But privately, some party insiders say it’s an open possibility. And there is some history behind the idea; in this purple state, New Hampshire’s 400-member House of Representatives has seen 100-seat swings in recent elections, and flipped between the parties three times in the last decade.

With victories in 11 of the latest 13 special elections, Democrats are increasingly expressing confidence they can take back the chamber, a first since 2014.

So could they? And if they did, how might they do it? We analyzed the election results district-by-district – sorting each single and multi-member seat by total party vote share to see which ones the Democrats will need to pick off.

Democrats closed out the two-year session with 169 out of the 385 remaining members of the House. If the party manages to hold all the seats it previously won, it will need 32 more.

Here’s what recent election results say: Of the 159 sitting Republican representatives running for re-election, 35 of them are doing so in districts in which their party won 55 percent or less of the vote in 2016.

Whether the blue wave materializes is an open question. But if it does, here are some of the Republican representatives most vulnerable:

(Visit concordmonitor.com to see the full list.)

Gene Chandler, R-Bartlett

Yes, that Gene Chandler. It may seem surprising that the outgoing Speaker of the House – a two-time Speaker and 18-term representative no less – should find his seat threatened, but Carroll’s District 1 has seen a notable swing to the left in recent years. Compare 2012, when Chandler commanded an imposing 62 percent of the vote – and 2014, when he took 58 percent – to 2016. In the year of President Donald Trump, Chandler lost considerable ground, holding the seat with just 52 percent.

His Democratic challenger the last two election seasons: Erik Corbett, a former restaurant owner and ski area manager who recently sat on Bernie Sanders’s steering committee. Corbett is running a third time this year, hoping to finally close that gap. But with a higher profile following a year with the Speaker’s gavel, Chandler may yet manage to hold him off another two years.

Jim McConnell, R-Swanzey

McConnell is a newcomer to the House, but he’s quickly made his mark. An outspoken conservative, the Swanzey Republican helped found the Freedom Caucus, which enginereed the defeat of the House budget last year. And he’s already taken two unsuccessful swings at the Speaker’s office, promising transparency and a curtailment of the powers of the Finance Committee.

But none of that may matter in the heart of Cheshire County, the bluest corner of the state. McConnell, who shares his district with a Democrat, is the only realistic pick-up opportunity in the county for Democrats for a clear reason: He’s one of the only Republican representatives there at all. After earning a 47 percent overall share of the vote last time, Democrats will be gunning for the other half.

Brian Seaworth, R-Pembroke

Seaworth sits in one of the most evenly-divided districts in the state – Merrimack’s 20th, which saw an even 50 percent split among voters in 2016. He occupies his district’s seat alongside two Democrats, both of whom are running for re-election. And he’s faced upheaval before; in 2012 he was voted out as his seat turned fully blue.

Still, with only one other Democrat filing alongside the incumbents, Seaworth effectively has only one challenger: first-timer Clint Hanson of Pembroke. Hanson has plenty of credentials though, with extensive experience as a financial aid director at several New Hampshire colleges and the president of the New Hampshire School Boards Association Board of Directors. Expect a tough fight.

Brandon Phinney, L-Rochester

When Brandon Phinney won his election last year, he won as a Republican, and by a narrow 2.6 percent margin. As of last July, he’s jumped to the Libertarian party. How that affects his next race will be something to watch, especially with a new Republican challenger this time, Mona Perreault, a fiscal hawk with ideological ties to activist Jerry DeLemus.

But Phinney has a lot in his favor. The district has stayed in Republican control for the last three elections, and it voted for Trump by 10 points – though only after rejecting Mitt Romney by seven. And Phinney’s Democratic opponent, Jeremiah Minihan, has so far had a relatively low profile.

Phil Bean, R-Hampton

Phil Bean is in another district that stretches the imagination: Rockingham 21. On the left, there’s Renny Cushing, progressive stalwart, long-time representative and potential future Speaker candidate – as well as Mike Edgar. On the right: Phil Bean and Tracy Emerick, cut-and-dried Republicans. In Hampton, apparently, there’s room for everyone.

Bean, a first-time candidate, took the highest share of votes in 2016 in the four-seat district, despite facing three incumbents. But the seat was closely fought; each of the winners came within a percentage of each other, and the four runners-up were just a point or two behind. This year, Cushing and Edgar are making another go, joined by two first-timers hoping for a party surge.

Add to that another problem for Bean: He’s being targeted on the right. Bean is one of dozens of Republicans being targeted by Americans for Prosperity for voting against a “right-to-work” bill championed by the governor last year. One mailer released recently reads: “Governor Sununu supports worker rights in the Granite State, but what has Rep. Philip Bean done for us?” Bean and Emerick are part of a Republican field of five for four seats, setting the makings of an interesting primary.

Beyond the incumbents running again, Democrats have an additional handful of pickup opportunities in districts won by Republicans last year by fewer than 10 points. These are the open seats: the ones in which the incumbents who narrowly won them last year have declined to run again. To name a few: one seat in Merrimack 1, vacated by Anne Copp, R-Danbury; two seats in Strafford 4, left open by Leonard Turcotte, R-Barrington and Jackey Cilley, D-Barrington; three seats in Belknap District 2, after the departure of Marc Abear, R-Meredith, Norman Silber, R-Gilford, and Herb Vadney, R-Meredith; and a seat in Merrimack 23, left open by J.R. Hoell, R-Dunbarton.

That latter seat will prove its own litmus test. Hoell has defined himself over his four terms as a fiscal hawk to be reckoned with, wielding vast influence among a team of conservatives bordering on Libertarians in the back rows of the House floor. Such is his presence, it’s easy to forget that he won his seat just under 200 votes ahead of the nearest Democrat last election day – and behind Mary Beth Walz, the incumbent Democratic candidate. Bow and Dunbarton, like so many other towns, are ideologically complex, leaving many possibilities come Nov. 6.

Depending on how you view them, the 35 Republicans running for re-election with the weakest historical hold over their seats are either the Democrats’ best hope for flipping the House or Republican’s last bulwark in favor of keeping it.

Whether the blue wave swells as much Democrats hope it will – if it shows up at all – is unknowable. But the numbers make one thing clear: It will have to be more than a ripple for the gavel to change hands.

(Ethan DeWitt can be reached at [email protected], or on Twitter at @edewittNH.)

(function(d, s, id) var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "http://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.5&appId=650098765059090"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); (document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); Read full story here

#Democrats

0 notes

thrashermaxey · 6 years

Text

Ramblings: Wayne Simmonds, Carolina, NHL Awards – June 21

The NHL Awards took place on Wednesday night and as with most NHL awards shows, there were quite a few bad bits of comedy along with some feel-good stories mixed in. They started the show with a magic act and then a ventriloquist. I wish I was kidding.

Anyway, the winners are…

Ted Lindsay Award (Most outstanding as voted by players) – Connor McDavid

Not sure there’s a huge argument with this one. McDavid lapped the field in five-on-five points – he had more 5v5 points than Sidney Crosby and Patrik Laine combined – and was held back by an abysmal team. This is where the semantics between “most outstanding” and “most valuable” separate the Lindsay from the Hart. Just imagine what his point totals might look like next year if the power play isn’t awful.

Norris Trophy – Victor Hedman

This is another on where it wasn’t much of a surprise. Having a 60-point season with the plus/minus he did on a division winner is pretty much a lock. He’s probably number-3 in terms of fantasy defencemen behind Brent Burns and Erik Karlsson but given the team that’s employing him, I’m sure people are ready to make an argument he should be higher. Expect Hedman to be perennially in the Norris conversation. Shout out to the guy who voted Josh Manson (?) fourth (??):

Full Norris voting. Roman Josi finished seventh. pic.twitter.com/iVopwn5sEJ

— Adam Vingan (@AdamVingan) June 21, 2018

Calder Trophy – Mathew Barzal

This might have been the most automatic award of the night (though four people who voted someone else other than Barzal for first place, including Yanni Gourde). The kid is electric. Hope he’s ready to be the face of the franchise.

Not considered one of the major awards, but huge kudos to Brian Boyle on his win of the Masterton Trophy. Not only did he overcome leukemia with which he was diagnosed in the preseason, he came back and was a big part of the team that miraculously made the playoffs. A tremendous story of perseverance and dedication. All the best to him moving forward.

They also awarded the first Willie O'Ree Community Hero Award to Darcy Haugan, the head coach of the Humboldt Broncos who passed in that trafic accident two months ago. They had 10 members of the team come on stage and his wife accepted the award. It was a truly special moment and should inspire people to follow Mr. Haugan's lead in helping others before themselves.

Anze Kopitar won the Selke as the best two-way forward but the best part was they had the magician do the reveal with a magic trick and he screwed up the trick. He was supposed to reveal the cards to form a picture of Kopitar but they were all in the wrong order and no one could tell who won. Then Kopitar just walked past him:

Oh my god the magician screwed up and then got snubbed by Kopitar pic.twitter.com/gt8BGhFPus

— Pete Blackburn (@PeteBlackburn) June 21, 2018

Just amazing stuff.

Vezina Trophy – Pekka Rinne

The heavy betting favourite from Bodog came through as Rinne took home the Vezina. It’s truly a remarkable turnaround from just a few years ago. Remember that from 2012-2016, he posted three seasons with a save percentage of .910 or less, averaging .913. He’s posted a .923 over the last two years and then that wonderful playoff run in 2017. He has one year left on his deal, though, and we’re all waiting for the reigns to be turned over to Juuse Saros. It'll be interesting to see what the Preds do in 2018-19.

Hart Trophy – Taylor Hall

It was pretty close between Hall and Nathan MacKinnon but Hall won out in the end. I wasn’t going to argue one way or the other here. Both had fantastic seasons and led their down-and-out franchises to playoff appearances. Both should be commended.

But also, never forget:

Trade is one for one: Adam Larsson for Taylor Hall.

— Bob McKenzie (@TSNBobMcKenzie) June 29, 2016

As Ian pointed out in his Ramblings yesterday, rumours are that Wayne Simmonds is available in a trade. Per Cap Friendly, Simmonds has a limited NTC which has him able to submit a 12-team no-trade list. That kind of cuts things down a bit. But for the teams not on the list, he has one year left on a very cheap cap hit and is one of the elite power forwards in the game. As a net-front presence on the power play, there probably aren’t any better in the game.

Which playoff hopeful could use a player like him? Remember, this is without knowing which teams he’d have on his NTC.

Edmonton would appear to make sense because they need to rebound from an awful year but they need controllable, young players. A guy with one year left on his deal and turning 30 in August doesn’t fit the bill.

What about the Blackhawks? This is a team who believes their Cup window is still open and once they LTIR Marian Hossa, they’ll have more than enough cap space to add Simmonds. Their power play was a horror show at times last year and Simmonds can help a lot in this regard.

To me, the most sense is Calgary. This team *desperately* needs some depth on right wing. Assuming they don’t want to break up the 3M line, there really isn’t a whole lot else there. They need a guy who can play on the top line and they need a guy who can kickstart that abysmal power play. Simmonds can do both. Calgary should be doing everything they can to add him, and I say this not only as a greedy fantasy owner. The question is if they want to part with more assets given their lack of draft picks already.

Don Waddell was on Sportsnet’s Hockey Central on Wednesday discussing Carolina being ready to make some deals in the next week or so. This isn’t a surprise to anyone but Jeff Skinner’s name came up specifically while he downplayed the rumours on Noah Hanifin. He made it sound like their intention would be to keep Hanifin long-term.

With that said, a column yesterday from Bruce Garrioch at the Ottawa Sun said that Carolina had shown interest in acquiring Erik Karlsson. As pointed out by TSN’s Travis Yost on Twitter, the revelation that Carolina was one of the teams, on top of the usual suspects like Tampa Bay and Vegas, inquiring on Karlsson during the season is interesting.

Could a sign-and-trade package revolving around Hanifin and Skinner make sense for Ottawa? It would give them a proven scorer to replace Mike Hoffman that they could re-sign should they so choose, and a young, controllable defenceman that they could have on their blue line for much of the next decade. There would obviously be other pieces involved and I’m just spitballing. But a package like that could get the ball rolling on Karlsson. Just a thought.

With the NHL Awards taking place, now might be a good time to look forward to the NHL Awards of 2019. It’s prediction time!

These are almost certainly going to be wrong as we haven’t even gone through the Entry Draft yet, let alone free agency and the meat of trade season. But until we get the Draft, trades, and free agency, there just isn’t a whole lot to cover in the hockey world at the moment.

Hart Trophy

Winner: Jack Eichel

Nominees: Connor McDavid, Mark Scheifele

We saw this year that the PHWA is willing to vote not necessarily for the best player as MVP but the player who helped an underdog reach the postseason. When looking across the league, are there any bigger underdogs to reach the postseason than Buffalo? Sure, they’re getting Rasmus Dahlin in the Entry Draft, but this is a team which has been home in April in seven straight seasons and has averaged 63.4 points over the last five years.

If Buffalo were to make a huge turnaround, a lot of things have to go right: both Dahlin and Casey Mittelstadt have to be Calder-worthy, Ryan O’Reilly probably can’t get traded, Kyle Okposo has to be the player they signed in free agency two years ago and not the player he’s been since, Sam Reinhart’s production progression needs to continue, and they need to make a splash in free agency to reinforce their defence corps. They should probably add a couple good bottom-six forwards as well. I get that the East is tough, but if a few things go right, they can pass teams like Ottawa, Montreal, the Rangers, and Detroit. Depending on what happens with trades and free agency, they can pass teams like the Islanders and Hurricanes as well. It doesn’t leave them that far from playoff contention.

Of course, if Buffalo were to even make a playoff push rather than be out of contention by Christmas, Eichel has to be one of the top producers in the league. He’s coming into his fourth season (we love our Year 4 guys here at Dobber) and hopefully he’s healthy all year long. It might be a longshot that the Sabres can turn their fortunes around in one season, but we saw two stark examples of this in 2017-18, and if they can pull off the miracle, a monster season from Eichel will be a big reason why.

Norris Trophy

Winner: Erik Karlsson

Nominees: Victor Hedman, Brent Burns

This is all predicated on Karlsson being traded out of the raging landfill fire that is the Ottawa Senators organization. All signs are pointing to him having a new home for the 2018-19 season and honestly, it doesn’t matter where. There’s nowhere he can be traded in the NHL that will be a downgrade.

Karlsson has two Norris wins and two second-place finishes in the last seven years. And, honestly, it should be three wins but there was a season where Drew Doughty got a lifetime achievement award or something, so it’s not as if picking Karlsson to win is stepping out on a ledge.

In 2017-18, Karlsson managed just (and I say that laughingly) 62 points and did so on 219 goals scored by the team. But he missed 11 games and the Sens scored 30 goals in those 11 games. Karlsson thus figured in 32.8 percent of goals in games that he played. If he can go to a team like Vegas or San Jose, and play a full season, figuring in on nearly one-third of 250+ goals works out to a point-per-game season. If Karlsson is a point-per-game player on a playoff team, he walks to his third Norris Trophy.

Vezina Trophy

Winner: John Gibson

Nominees: Antti Raanta, Sergei Bobrovsky

The potential loss of Ryan Kesler undoubtedly hurts this team if he indeed misses the 2018-19 season, but he was injured and largely ineffective last year as it was. A full season from Ryan Getzlaf and Sam Steel making his way to the team should go a long way in shoring them up down the middle. Don’t forget that Hampus Lindholm started the season injured as well. Just this team being healthy, Kesler aside, should mean improvement from the Ducks. Despite the injuries last year, Gibson was still one of the best goaltenders in the league. He just needs to stay healthy himself.

Anaheim still boasts a pretty good top-4 defence corps with Lindholm, Josh Manson, Brandon Montour, and Cam Fowler. They can still ice a pretty good top-3 lines so it’s just really tinkering with depth that they need. A healthy year from this roster, and Gibson playing like he can, should have him in the Vezina conversation.

As always, goaltending is very uncertain. Feel free to throw this all in my face in 12 months.

from All About Sports https://dobberhockey.com/hockey-rambling/ramblings-wayne-simmonds-carolina-nhl-awards-june-21/

0 notes

junker-town · 7 years

Text

The List: 12 NBA MVP candidates for the 2017-2018 season

It’s not just Westbrook vs. Harden anymore. And never count out LeBron.

Last season’s NBA Most Valuable Player race was compelling theater, carried by individual stars on heroic quests to battle the combined might of superteams. The superlative runs of Russell Westbrook, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard, and Isaiah Thomas were the regular-season antidote to the inevitability of a Cavs-Warriors rubber match in the Finals.

The 2017-2018 season is already different in tone. Westbrook and Harden’s clubs have brought in star-level reinforcements. Thomas is now a Cavalier, while Kyrie Irving gets the benefit of Boston’s ascendance. A new generation of young stars will also be in the hunt for MVP validation. LeBron James, as always, will be there at the end.

This year’s field shapes up to be one of the most expansive in memory. Here are a dozen who could crack the top-5:

KEVIN DURANT: One of the more interesting subplots of last season came in March when Durant missed more than a month with an MCL sprain and tibial bone bruise. While KD was on the mend, Steph Curry reasserted himself and the Warriors hit their stride right in time for the postseason. When Durant returned, he fit right back into the Warrior machine and took over in a Finals performance that was punctuated by his game-winner in Game 3.

KD’s injury occurred right about the time people would have had to seriously consider his MVP candidacy. He wouldn’t have won, given the antipathy directed toward the Warriors in general and Durant in particular. For historical precedence, see the year Derrick Rose interrupted LeBron James’ MVP run. Still, Durant would have been a top-5 candidate on most voters’ ballots. With a career-high True Shooting Percentage, as well as a demonstrable defensive presence he might have gone top three.

There are lots of reasons why Durant won’t win this year: he and Curry will divvy up the offensive spoils, he’s not exactly the people’s champ, and the state of Warrior fatigue promises to grow even stronger. The narrative, as such, is not in his favor.

Yet, Durant will be able to play free and easy after winning his first championship and the Warriors should be even better this season, given their experience together. It would take a monster year to overcome all the other obstacles, but it’s all set up for KD to stop worrying and simply dominate.

LeBRON JAMES: This is the first time this decade when I haven’t made LeBron the presumptive favorite before the season begins. Frankly, if he and the Cavs hadn’t let up toward the end of last season he would have been number one on my ballot instead of fourth. That said as much about the quality of the competition as anything James did, or didn’t do. There’s also no question that he ceded his front-runner status down the stretch, much as he has in the past few years.

That’s entirely his right as a four-time winner and three-time champ. Still, only Bill Russell and Michael Jordan have won five MVPs (Kareem has six), and LeBron is entirely capable of joining that company if he wants it badly enough. He and the Cavs are also playing for their future this season, which adds a bit of urgency to the campaign. Doubt him at your peril.

GIANNIS ANTETOKOUNMPO: Up until last season when Russell Westbrook won the award, there was no historical precedent for a player on a mid-level small-market team winning MVP. Of course, Russ had a lot more history than Giannis and a lot stronger narrative. On the other hand, Giannis himself is a historical precedent.

We really have no idea how good he’s going to be, but enough people have suggested to me that he’s a top-5 player already to slot him high into this mix. Part of me wanted to make Giannis the pick just for kicks, but the feeling here is that he and the Bucks are a year away from seriously contending.

KAWHI LEONARD: Is it ok to be worried about Kahwi? Can we acknowledge that missing the entire preseason and the beginning of the regular season with an injured quadricep that began to manifest itself last season is a bit problematic? I’m officially concerned. The one thing we know is that the Spurs won’t rush him back into the lineup, which will be good for his long-term prognosis but not great for his MVP candidacy in this crowded field.

RUSSELL WESTBROOK: Last year’s winner will be judged on an entirely different set of criteria this season. It will no longer be enough to dominate the box score and rack up triple doubles. Points and production will be secondary to the overall health and wellness of this makeshift superteam in Oklahoma. How Russ interacts with Paul George and Carmelo Anthony will define his season. He’s perfectly capable of blowing up the box score and keeping everyone happy. If he does both, then he’ll move right back up the MVP rankings.

JAMES HARDEN: You have to feel for Harden who might’ve been a two-time MVP if it weren’t for historic performances from Curry and Westbrook. Like Russ, Harden will be judged on how he interacts with a superstar teammate. Unlike Russ, who remains OKC’s unquestioned floor general, Harden will be adjusting to life with another ball-dominant guard in Chris Paul. Like Russ, Harden is absolutely capable of managing the transition and thriving with his new teammates. That will be as important, if not more so, than accumulating numbers.

STEPH CURRY: Oh, it’s just the two-time former MVP healthy and well adjusted after winning yet another championship. It’s easy to forget about Steph, but he’s good for a half-dozen annual reminders of his greatness. I’d move him up if it wasn’t for Durant.

ANTHONY DAVIS: Not many noticed after the Pels struggled through another lost season, but AD put up career-highs in points and rebounds while playing 75 games. Lord only knows how he and Boogie Cousins will interact for a full season, but AD is an MVP in the making. Some day.

JOHN WALL: The player many consider the best point guard in the East is primed for a huge season and the Wizards are just dangerous enough to push for 50+ wins and maybe even a run at the top spot in the conference. Lots of things would have to happen for Wall to move into the top five, but it’s possible.

KYRIE IRVING: The Celtics’ offense could be terrifying this season and Kyrie stands to benefit the most. If he puts up video game numbers in Brad Stevens’ system and the Celtics make a run at the top spot in the East, he could sneak into the top five. He and Wall are basically battling for the same slice of the vote share.

KARL-ANTHONY TOWNS: One of these years KAT is going to dominate the league from start to finish. That year is probably not this year, but he belongs in the conversation.

JOEL EMBIID: The ultimate “why not?” pick. Let’s say Embiid plays 70 games and gets the 76ers into the playoffs. Let’s say he dominates 2,000+ minutes the same way he devoured those 786 minutes he played last season. NBA Twitter can dream.

THE FIELD: Chris Paul, Jimmy Butler, Kyle Lowry, Gordon Hayward, Damian Lillard, Rudy Gobert, Blake Griffin.

0 notes

typologycentral · 7 years

Text

[SJ] Am I an ISFJ or ISTJ?

When I first took the test, I got ENTJ but I never got to analyze it, I just took as fun. Then I started taking it seriously, and found out that even though I may share some ENTJ's characteristics, I'm still far away of being one. I read all the descriptions in the 16personalities web page which in my opinion the test is to bias, but found myself to connect with the ISFJ by reading its descriptions and mostly its strenghts and weakenesses. Then I started to investigate more, and learn of the cognitive functions and started seeing them, at first I did not understand them very well since their explanations were to vague. I still have problem defining a concrete example of these. I also saw youtube video from a guy called Type Tips which shows some photographs of the different mbti types based on socionics taken by a Russian Psychologist called Filatova. My smile related the most to ISFp (SOCIONICS)/ISFJ(MBTI), but problem is my smirk isn´t that large, is a bit shorter. To make it simple: I usually don't like to take a forced direct picture, cause you either have to smile or be serious, so I rather smile to feel comfortable with myself. I prefer indirect photos that catch a real and not make-up event. My natural smile is closed, (I dont like to show my teeth) a small smirk and usually one side bit larger than the other. I could define it as happy and comfortable smile. Also tranquil eyes looking directly to the camera. Thing is when I was little I was so distracted that I did not even look at the camera but then started to learn to look at it when being taken a picture. My second relation to the Socionics smiles was the ISTJ but their smirk is littler than mine. Things about me that may help you determine my type? I like to write. I am not a professional writer as in I need to write better to consider myself an author. My stories are always inspired on something or sometimes it comes out of my mind. My stories are mostly non-fiction and I never apply feelings to it, it is more practical and sometimes I add a joke to it during the narration or dialogue between characters. I mostly narrate than make speech between the characters, as if telling an anecdote. Close relatives have said my stories are good, and to even prove it, I was ask in school to write a fanfiction and the best two students would win. Of course, the vote was from the teacher itself and maybe I was against rookies. I really want it the prize, and I got it. The teacher told me he likes the way I narrate. Writing comes easy to me, ideas. Once I start writing, ideas start coming in, sometimes I might get stuck. I have great grammar, and often correct my friend's spelling mistakes. I have great short-term memory for numbers (total payment, percentage in a test, etc.) but after two or three days I will forget it since it wasn't important. I can remember non important details in an event, mostly speech (someone said something but it wasn't that important) of course, I do not remember the exact words bu t know what it was about. I am passive agressive, and my moral alignment is neutral good. A friend once said that a thing she likes about me is that I am nice to everyone (as long as you don't hurt me physically is ok or deeply, it's ok). I like martial arts and like fighting but not in means of violence, so yeah, I hate bullies and always find peace before fight in a conflict. Fighting is just to practice and improve upon my martial arts skills which are really low. People such as bullies, law and rule brekers, rebels, immature people who don't care about their school grades, I usually think of them as stupid. If I was to have a friend who suddenly tries to do something I am against with adn then gets in trouble, I won´t defend him since it will be breaking a value important to me. I have my own set of values and follow the rules and like to take a few or absolutely no risks; if I do the opposite, I feel uncomfortable. With close relationships, especially friends and family(father, brothers sister, not including uncles, grandpas, etc.): I tend to listen but I am also eager to talk as in to share my opinion. I talk a lot since I extent myself too much or repeat words (I do not get to the point) (do not assume I may be an extrovert since I talk too much, I also listen since this helps me learn from people). With my close friends, I like to be funny and prank a little, without hurting phisically, not to molest my friends is just a way to entertain myself and show some happiness to them. I mean, I listen and formulate my thoughts and then speak when is my turn but since I don´t get to the point, my speech is too long. Also when speaking new ideas come in so I speak even more. Honestly I like to talk longer rather than be assertive and to the point. I must avoid repeating words or sentences as I just did above. I express my opinion and though on a certain topic easily among closed friends, in public I rather say something short and non important or say nothing. I value my closed friends and family. I feel hurted emotionally when being insulted, but I don't cry unless I feel guilty for myself or if I get hurt physically (realy hurt). I can sometimes being stubborn on trying to be right and defending a point of view. Once, I am proved with great logical argument and concrete evidence that I am wrong, I accept it and say sorry. I usually say sorry for everything when doing something wrong (of course when I know I was wrong). Another thing about me is that wnen in a conflict and argument, I interrupt when someone makes a bad assertion of me since I think it is unncessary since not being real and hate hearing things that are not real, but it is also my fault, and I must let the person finish. I am a patient and impatient person (depends on the situation and how many times it has happened and with whom). Other things about me: I like reading comics, and friends (I called some of them friends since I had a relationship with them before, but I do not talk them as usually as with my closed friends which are more important although family comes first, as long as they treat me good which as far as today, nothing uncomfotable has happended) in school regognize and say my name when I see them (maybe its because I was nice to them, and they appreciate it that). When a person is being hurted emotionally and mostly physically, I tend to feel uncomfortable and go to help that person and give him specific concrete advice as if to say "You must defend yourself, or you'll get hit harder". I help a person when he/she really needs it for example: The person drops something and it is out of reach, I pick it up and give to him. Someone forgot something, I keep it with me and give it until I see him/her. But for example, a person trying to fix a car but she is struggling, I won't be the type of person that asks "Do you need help? Can I help you?, I simply don´t help and ignore because I believe you need to learn to solve things by yourself and become independent. When friends ask me for advice which is rare, I give them advice based on past experience and what I think is the right thing to do, but honestly I prefer that people get me away from their personal conflicts (there is a reason why psycologists exist, and I am not one of them). I like chess, xiangqui, shogi, and basicaly strategy games that require a lot of use in the intellect. I hate strategy games that require economy and army maangement, I prefer implementing ideas meaning tactics and strategy. A perfect game of strategy would be one that requires the use of many weapons and the manipulation of the battlefield. When thinking, I hate being sitted down all the time so I get up and start moving around (in my house of course, outside I would be seeing weird), this mode of thinking energizes me and helps me think faster and ideas come easily. When I am interacting with my friends I dont think a lot, but when I am alone I tend to think a lot. I make up imaginary conversations set in the future about a certain topic with closed friends (not all) or family (not all) but usually dont happen. Sometimes I make this but in a past setting that already happened in real life but a few things were missed to say during that moment and day. I am not good nor so bad at future forecast, it simply isn't in my nature, but when I do make a future forecast, it is based on past experiences or things I have seen before. Some friends say I am weird and unpredictable. Maybe I am just not good socialzing. I have great grades, honestly school is easy if you really want to learn and care about your future. I use facebook rarely, mostly whatsapp which has an importan use. I have facebook since two , three, four, five years ago and have not posted a single thing. The only thing in my profile, is my profile picture (my first one and I have not change it) and very very few persons celebrating my birthday and me replying "thanks". I do not use Instagram, Snapchat or any other useless and boring social media. Twitter is not boring and useless but I do not like it, so I do not have it. One last thing to say is that ISFJ are easygoing, and I tend to be easygoing. When I am interested in a topic (very interested), I investigate a lot and stay addicted for a long time (could be months or even a year). I proscrastinate too much and usually do my homework late, since organizing a schedule for me is complicated since I have a hard time following it. I think this all I have to say: So, what do you think my MBTI is ISFJ or ISTJ? If you think I am another type besides the options I am providing you, feel free to type in. If you think I miss something, tell me please. It would be an honor if you could justify your answer, and please stay abscent from biased interpretations and myths about types. Sorry for the long text but I really want to know my type. Thank you for your answers. Have a nice day (If I was to talk in person I would smile here but I only use emojis with closed friends) and end all my conversations in a period and NO, I AM NOT ANGRY. So if I say OK. it means Ok without the period. Again sorry for the long text and thank you for your answers especially those that were justitfied with concrete logical examples and evidence. http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92052&goto=newpost&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=tumblr

#Myers-Briggs Type Profiles

0 notes

celticnoise · 7 years

Link

I love good books, good movies and good TV. I love it when someone can create a fictional world that you can jump right into, and believe in whilst you are there.

I also enjoy writing fiction, and one of the most important things to remember as a fiction writer is that even in that Godlike poise you have rules to follow.

Every story must have an underlying structure, order, and it must take place in a physical universe which follows certain laws.

In order to establish your world these rules have to be established early on.

The limitations of the powers must be apparent to the audience, and must be respected as iron laws of the universe, like gravity. No surprises, people. There are few things worse than the movie where the hero, at the end, suddenly displays a hitherto unknown talent that “saves the day.”

Literary critics call that deux ex machina … the God from the machine.

It was a frequent staple of the stage plays they used to put on in Ancient Greece; it’s most blatant physical manifestation was a chair that would come down from the sky and pick the hero up and take them away to safety at a crucial moment. In other words, it’s cheating.

We saw one of those this week, with the Sports Direct announcement.

It came just in time to muddy the waters as Sevco prepares for its first game in Europe. I know for a fact that UEFA have been asking for more clarity on their financial returns. So much of what goes on over there is shrouded in the dark. Now along comes this “sky chariot” carrying them to unknown millions. The media has done its bit. At Ibrox they expect the SFA to do theirs, assuring UEFA that this puts the club on track for FFP and the chance to turn all those directors loans into shares.

No wonder Ashley got out of town.

Ashley had started out wanting to take the club forward, to modernise it, to give it a kick-start.

He had plans, perhaps even big ones. We’ll never know. But it all soured under King and his people. It all went by the boards. He’s wanted to cut those shares loose for a long time; he knew hanging onto them was becoming increasingly dangerous to their value.

Last season, Sevco came within a few percentage points of passing a new shares resolution at the AGM.

McCoist got blamed for that, if you recall.

One of King’s ridiculous claims this weekend was that the club now had the ability to get that issue through … in fact, anyone with even a rudimentary grasp of math knows that 9% of the shares isn’t an effective blocking mechanism against a requirement for something to be passed with a 75% vote share.

A board which was open and transparent and set out a plan could already have passed that threshold with room to spare … it has been made easier for King’s board to secure that number, but it was never impossible.

Ashley can do the math.

He probably expected the board to pass that measure last year. He probably couldn’t believe his luck here. The Puma intervention was like a deux ex machina for him too. He even got King to find him the mugs to take his £2 million in shares, a valuation that will absolutely, positively, fall through the floor when that share measure passes. The dilution in valuation of every share already out there is inevitable. Club 1872 have already been royally grafted; they just don’t know it yet. But it’s coming.

They celebrated this, in spite of sinking £1 million into it.

And that money went to Ashley, of course. Not a penny of it went to the club, not one cent. Their shareholding nudged up a notch. If and when the share issue is launched either the value of those shares will collapse or their voting power will. And they’ll be expected, of course, to buy more.

My favourite fantasy moment was when King made a bunch of our titles, and every other club in Scotland, disappear as if by magic.

Talk about a god from the machine; they have no real plan to stop ten in a row, but he’s bought himself four extra years in which to do it. How about that for a piece of work? Even I have to give the swine credit for that one.

Fantasy money is being spent too, of course. It, too, has been conjured out of thin air. King claims it’s coming from the other directors, in the shape of soft loans. By my reckoning that puts the total value of these loans at over £20 million. If converted to shares it might – just might – satisfy FFP requirements for a year, but it is an idea fraught with danger on its own. Because there can’t be any magic trick here; a share issue is heavily regulated and scrutinised.

None of those current board members can afford to take their stake to where they’d be required to make an offer for the rest.

To get value for their money, those shares must be preference shares.

There are legal limits on the number of those a company can have, as it would confer a major disadvantage on all other shareholders.

I personally don’t see how it can be done, that these people get value for those loans without pushing them over a threshold. The only way it works is if their loans are converted to shares first and those shares are then sold to the fans and others.

And of course the issue with that is that these guys get their money back, but not one penny of the cash goes back to the club itself.

The press is content to ignore all of this.

The numbers don’t add up. King’s comments about our “two in a row “ and his assertion that we should be further ahead aren’t so much a deux ex machina as they are the “dead cat” made famous by the political strategist Lynton Crosby; something you throw onto the table to distract everyone in the room.

Because those ridiculous comments are what made the headlines, and that’s important because otherwise even our jaded hacks, guys like Jackson, banned from Ibrox, with no love for King, might be asking questions to which this joker has no answers whatsoever.

The retail story, on its own, has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese; no-one believes Puma were happy with the last two years. Nobody is convinced that Ashley has suddenly discovered altruism or that King scared him off. No-one accepts the story about how they were too late to register strips when that deadline hasn’t expired yet. No-one realistically thinks the new deal will last just one year; Sports Direct has made Sevco dependent on them long term and there is probably a contract somewhere which bears that out.

I could go on.

There are plenty of questions to answer.

No-one is asking them.

Instead there’s the fantasy; that Sevco have, in a week, solved all their problems. That they are now on the level of a healthy Rangers. Forget that Rangers was no more able to sustain long term losses than they are; we’re supposed to believe this garbage.

This was a week that would have stretched credibility in a George RR Martin book. Magic, which we did not realise existed in the world, has transformed the picture at Sevco, making King into a conqueror and genius and putting the club on a stable foundation.

And we’re supposed to believe in it.

Who are they trying to fool?

Us or themselves?

Cause we ain’t buying any of it.

http://ift.tt/2rTCl75

#CelticNoise #Celtic #CelticFC #TheCelticBlog #News

0 notes

universeinform-blog · 7 years

Text

Pa. universal internet law needs update (editorial)

New Post has been published on https://universeinform.com/2017/03/16/pa-universal-internet-law-needs-update-editorial/

Pa. universal internet law needs update (editorial)

The internet, for accurate or sick, has emerged as a nearly crucial software, touching just about every element of our lives, from communications to trade.

And training.

The internet hasn’t new wireless wi-fixed wireless how teachers method their jobs, but it has wi-fi some of the way they use to teach college students, replacing backboards with Chromebooks and drugs with, properly, drugs.

Yet in some regions of York County – and Pennsylvania, and us of a, for that count – get right of entry to broadband provider is missing. Now, which could appear like wireless-international trouble, and to a degree it’s miles, but for lots dad and mom and college students, it can stifle their educations, making, at the least, preserving up with their classmates inconvenient.

The sizeable majority of York County has got right of entry to broadband services

Whether or not it is DSL or cable or satellite tv for the pic, but some of York County’s greater rural areas are close out, forcing mother and father and students to take every so often intense measures to get connected.

This is in spite of a 2004 nation mandate for telecommunications businesses to make certain that broadband carrier is universal to be had. Glaringly, it isn’t. And due to the fact that 2004, the notion of what constitutes high-velocity internet has wi-fixed wireless. The law has to be up to date, something that country Rep. Kristen Phillips Hill, R-York Township, has taken up.

Consistent with the country Department of Financial and Network Improvement, the wallet of rural southern York County are close out with regards to high-velocity internet access. U.S. Census facts from 2015 suggest that 4 percentage of the county’s populace has got right of entry to broadband most effective via telephones or a mobile warm spot. That is better than the countrywide average of 6 percent, but it is nevertheless sizeable wireless.

This effects a spread of elements of rural lifestyles, from farmers being not able to quick get right of entry to modern-day market facts or to shop around for the wi-fi wireless expenses on system or commodities,

To college students being not able to do their homework at home. it’s approximately plenty greater than being able to observe a viral video of a cat gambling the piano.

In parts of southern York County, parents only have to get right to entry to high-speed net provider thru their clever telephones, the most pricey access to the web. Once they burn through their month-to-month statistics allowance, the prices add up speedy. Other parents have taken to riding to the faculty after hours and sitting inside the car parking zone whilst their children get right of entry to the faculty community. Others have taken to having their youngsters do their homework at corporations or eating places that provide c084d04ddacadd4b971ae3d98fecfb2a carrier. (Delta Pizza is among them, and proprietor Sal Ferranti deserves credit score for being extra than accommodating, permitting children to do homework at his eating place without having to make a buy.

Ordinary Income Might be A very Bad Concept Even if Small-Scale Pilot Programs Display It Running

Perhaps you’ve got heard the decision for a ‘Popular Earnings’ to prevent poverty and convey a bit greater to the proverbial aim of equality. Nicely, it turns out many nations are considering this and some have already got any such factor. Maximum folks in capitalist international locations hesitate on the concept of the sort of concept, as it’s miles a disincentive for the ones at the bottom to climb up and out of poverty. Nevertheless, you would be amazed how a whole lot traction this Idea is getting into even first global nations, even though the scheme has ‘socialism’ and huge authorities written throughout it.

There was a thrilling article at the Mashable Website titled; “eBay founder backs exams to give humans unfastened cash,” through Patrick Kulp on February nine, 2017 which stated:

“The Concept of Frequent simple Profits has observed growing guide in Silicon Valley as robots threaten to notably trade the character of work. eBay founder Pierre Omidyar is the trendy tech bigwig to get in the back of the concept. His philanthropic investment firm introduced it’s going to provide almost 1/2 million $$ for taking a look at an organization in Kenya. The questioning is that one of this application would relieve monetary pressure as automation technology significantly reduces the call for labor.”

Okay, however, a restrained Regular Income project will not reason substantial inflation while if an entire us of a does it, it could be a disaster

How inflation works isn’t an unknown quantity or obscure idea, it’s far simply Economics 101. There has been a thrilling podcast from CATO Institute on why this may not paintings and why oldsters are pushing for it. Properly, I notion we defeated socialism inside the United states currently with the election of Donald Trump, reputedly now not, or apparently many so-known as highbrow elites did not get the message.

Interestingly enough this has additionally been a subject inside the Eu as of overdue – even point out of it at the Davos international financial Forum in 2016. It seems we have an international socialist schedule, despite the fact that we have visible whole chaos in nations that take a robust financial socialist stance, international locations inclusive of the PIIGS of the EU (PIIGS – Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain), Venezuela, Ecuador, Argentina, and others. It’s no longer that it is not a pleasant issue to do to help your fellow man or have a protection internet to defend the poor, it’s miles just that socialism doesn’t work.

Here in the US we’ve watched Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton inside the last election promote a widening of gifts from the government in exchange for votes and furthering the Nanny Nation motif, that too is a dead-cease, simply as the concept of Conventional Profits is, particularly in an area of high productiveness and foundational claims of free organisation and self-reliance. Please do not forget all this and assume it.

The way to Begin An internet Commercial enterprise

Recently I’m getting precise friends and household asking me The way to Begin An internet Enterprise. It isn’t brain surgery, however, it isn’t always easy maths too.

Beginning An internet Business is absolutely similar to Beginning a physical Enterprise, with the exception that the price is lots lower and accordingly can be the chance.

Once I nation it is quite very similar like a physical Business, I moreover suggest you want to be entrepreneurial, so you can ‘smell’ the requirements internal a marketplace and to own a vision. Are entrepreneurs born or breed? I do now not realize. Things I consider is, in case you sense you’re, you are.

So, in case you’re entrepreneurial and desire to discover ways to start A web Business, read on…

The first step: In no way reinvent the wheel

Believe me. The majority of the clever and innovative ideas you are able to recollect happen to be made by using any other individual on-line, in a few manner. in case you sense you’ve got an extraordinary net Enterprise idea, it clearly implies that you’ve dirty enough research.

So, for the ones who have any net Commercial enterprise concept, the very first component you ought to do is the thoughts to Google and type in positive keywords associated with your enterprise concept. Absolutely test all of the top websites that provide similar products or services. What this means is you may need to check out their goods Or solutions and find out their benefits and drawbacks.

Subsequent, you need to assess individuals advantages and drawbacks and are available forth with a miles higher concept.

Sports activities Regulation in Cyprus

The Sports activities industry is turning into an increasing number of commercialized and globalized. As a result, athletes, coaches and different stakeholders engaged in the Sports activities industry are in search of an expert prison guidance so that to safeguard their rights and maximize their income. Sports Law is a rising place of Law this is immediately interconnected and overlaps with a selection of prison disciplines, consisting of agreement Law, employment Regulation, tort Law and defamation, corporate Regulation, immigration Law and privateness rights.

The assistance of an expert lawyer who has a radical understanding of the aforementioned areas of Regulation is vital each for experts inside the Sports enterprise (i.E. Athletes, coaches, physiotherapists, and so on.) and different stakeholders, along with the governing boards of game clubs, traders, and many others.

Buyers: Sports are not limited only to the regulations of the playing discipline as they may be intertwined with society and economy, particularly with leisure and marketing industries. As an end result,

Sports can be a profitable vicinity of investment, through sponsorship and advertisement. On the one point of view, Sports activities released opportunities for investment in areas inclusive of broadcasting rights, that’s related to the area of Highbrow Assets Regulation. On the opposite point of view, Sports installed a brand new vicinity of advertising and marketing that develops opportunities for funding in areas which includes sports golf equipment’ shares as the general public of game clubs have grown to be corporations.

Athletes, Sports experts, and golf equipment: The continuous mobility of athletes and different Sports professionals among teams together with the complexity of the contracts includes a variety of criminal concerns. As an end result, a criminal illustration of athletes, recreation specialists and golf equipment is crucial. Attorneys are capable of assisting you on subjects related to agreement Regulation, breach of contracts, transfers, and so on.

Earlier than signing an agreement, athletes and other recreation experts, need to ensure that they’re aware of the various clauses and provisions. The word that a settlement between a game professional and a membership might be difficult in breathing. For example, in case a sports club in Cyprus does not honor its engagement regarding its responsibilities closer to the athlete/sports expert, then the athlete/recreation expert may additionally put up a claim for treatments and/or damages to Cyprus Courts or FIFA’s Dispute Decision Chamber. Therefore, The assistance of an expert attorney is necessary.

0 notes

peterinpa · 7 years

Text

Why ObamaCare Failed (P.S., it didn't!)

Since it passed on a strict party line vote (thanks, Senator Mitch for always saying NO!), Republicans have assaulted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as a government takeover of health care. We should be so lucky. Now that they are in charge, the first legislation they promise to pass is a complete repeal. Over the weekend, Trump told the Post that he's close to a plan that will provide coverage for all. A couple of points before we buy more snake oil from The Orange One. 20 million of us have purchased coverage through the ACA. that doesn't include those who live in the 31 states plus DC who qualified for Medicaid under the expansion provision. The last number I saw on that was about 11 million. There are an additional 52 million Americans who would be turned down for coverage under health insurance plans because they have a preexisting condition. Yep, even employer plans could exclude those people, and most did. Last year, the percentage of Americans who did not have health insurance fell to an all time low of 10%, down from over 16% in 2013. This was not a government takeover of health care. In fact, the ACA was a REPUBLICAN plan, first proposed to counter the Clinton plan way back in 1994. That's right. This is the plan Republicans suggested for nearly 20 years until Obama embraced it as the only way to expand coverage. Then the McConnell Doctrine of just say no kicked in. In fact, Mitt Romney successfully implemented it as governor of Massachusetts. Let's also not forget that Republicans have historically opposed any safety net suggested by the Democrats. They opposed Social Security under FDR as socialism. When LBJ created Medicare? Republicans accused him of a government takeover of health care. Same thing with Medicaid. When they realized that the Civil Rights Act was going to happen, and LBJ needed a few votes to counter the southern Democrats that wouldn't vote for it, they finally came on board with that. Begrudgingly. And LBJ knew that the Democrats would forever more lose the South. There are several flaws in the ACA. First, it relied on penalties for those that fail to purchase insurance as a means of enticing everyone to purchase coverage. But the Democratic Party abandoned its principles long ago to regain power and milk the cash cows that go with it. While they had majorities of both houses in Obama's first two years, those majorities had been won by running conservative democrats in gerrymandered Republican districts. That relatively small group of conservative Democrats forced the watering down of the penalty provisions in a vain attempt to win reelection. They also opposed any public option. The end result is that the penalties are too small to entice that last 10% into the system. The whole program was set up to make sure that healthy individuals purchased insurance, to balance out the risk pool of those unhealthy persons who had been shut out of the employer system, we're not poor enough for Medicaid, and who would flock into the ACA. Which they did. But because the healthy ones took a calculated risk that paying the penalty was cheaper than getting insurance, the risk pool was never broad enough to avoid the premium increases we started to see last year. The major flaw in the entire system is that it is FOR PROFIT. Insurance companies are in it to make money. Most hospitals are in it to make money. Labs are in it to make money. Our health care system is built on capitalism and stockholder wealth. The ACA did nothing to change that, which is why it was first proposed by Republicans. It utilized the existing for profit insurance industry. The Republicans were very effective in casting this as a government takeover, the truth be damned. And Democrats were afraid to defend it, lest they risk losing those conservative seats, and thus lose majority power in Congress, and the money that follows it. But they abandoned their soul when Bill Clinton came forward with the idea that they couldn't win the Presidency without steering the party towards the middle. More on that later. Beside the fact that the ACA actually DID increase coverage, extend eligibility for kids under 26, make sure that you could get insurance ANYWHERE even if you have cancer, and eliminate lifetime maximum payouts for expensive treatments, it also funded best practice research so that we have more ways to improve care, and mandated pilots around bundled payments, so the for profit system can't nickel and dime us to death. And what was wrong with the "public option"? Well, it would have allowed us to buy into Medicare at cost. Medicare has been hailed as a very effective insurance system, and it is because it has huge volume that can be used to negotiate better payments, is used to encourage better outcomes like reducing secondary infections acquired in hospitals, and provided universal coverage for those 65 and over. I chuckle when I talk to people that rail against the ACA as a takeover of their healthcare, and adamantly oppose a public option. What about Medicare, I say? The response invariably is What! Don't touch my Medicare! The Republicans effectively trashed the ACA as a takeover, and the ones with public healthcare generally bought it hook, line and sinker. So it's no wonder that they fell for the snake oil salesman. Paul Ryan has wanted to turn Medicare into a voucher system for years. That would mean you get a voucher for say $1k a month, and you can buy any insurance you want. From for profit companies. Sounds good at the start, but the vouchers won't keep pace with premiums, so eventually seniors won't be able to afford it. He sells it as "universal access". Guess what language Trump is using to say what he wants to replace the ACA? Yep. Universal access. But it doesn't mean universal coverage. Beware the snake oil salesmen. They are dressed up as Republicans, and we've turned our government over to them. If there is money to be made, these Republicans will support it. The Democrats did too. Because it's all about getting power now, keeping that power, and following the cash cows that support it. Final thought. My guess is that there will be a ton of smoke and mirrors around this salesmanship of repeal and replace. Universal access will be touted as the savior, but I also suspect that the final repeal bill won't roll back the ACA until, oh, 2019. They will say they want time for those with coverage under the ACA to adjust and set up the new system. But they simply want the reality to be delayed until after the mid term elections. Because universal access will not provide universal coverage, and the possibility of seeing millions lose coverage just might endanger their reelection in 2018. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Add in the unlimited cash cow called Citizens United, and here we are.

#republican hypocrisy #obamacare #us politics

0 notes