SLAG-91

The last 3rd party candidate to win a state was George Wallace in 1968. As much as I'd love to see a "Madam Secretary"-style Conrad Dalton emerge as a viable 3rd party candidate, I just don't see it with this particular iteration. Their (No Labels) best chance to win states are ones with fairly small populations that supported Ross Perot fairly heavily in 1992 (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada, Maine, Kansas...upper Midwest, Rocky Mountains and a couple of isolated New England states that aren't navy blue Democrat). The most frustrating part is that the two primary options we have are both stale-dated, and are just begging to be seriously challenged. I guess we'll see how it unfolds.

I think I'll pass on the dinner options...

She is blatantly and openly anti-American. "Some people did something" re: 9/11 was just her showing her true self. All of that in evidence, and her district composition will ensure her return to Washington as long as she wants. In her own way, she's as embarrassing as Boebert and MTG.

I've got a soft spot for long-suffering franchises, so it was a little painful watching the Lions piss down their leg in the second half. Chiefs-Niners again... I've got KC fatigue at this point, so I guess the 49ers winning would be slightly less obnoxious.

Preach. It's like having a sequel to Caddyshack 2. That movie blew ass, and there would have been no reason to think another one with the same cast would have been any better.

I can't get the damn thing to copy from my phone, but I'm pretty much at the ordered pair (0,-3). I don't really like the wording of some of the questions (if a question had "always", for example, I pretty much disagree with that at a minimum...I definitely work and live in the shades of gray), but it's still a decent big-picture poll.

Have never had a problem with electronic voting...I get a printout that I can review, and then I submit that for scanning. Every last one of those machines, though, if they aren't already, should be subject to multiple tests to ensure accuracy and reliability. It should be happening right now, actually, wherever it is that they may be used. Don't wait until the last week of October to find out that some of them don't work. If they're broken, get them fixed. Have paper ballots ready in case there are issues with the machines on voting days. I wonder if any voting locations still use the butterfly ballot like the one used in Palm Beach County, Florida in 2000. Now THAT was a flustercuck, and made for a surreal few weeks.

Trying to relitigate 2020 as a basis for selecting a candidate in 2024 is rock-eating idiocy, but the GOP appears to be slavishly devoted to this course. If they're happy trotting Trump out there again to take another L in the general, then the GOP deserves all of the mockery that will be coming.

They're leaving a mushroom stamp on the Cowboys' collective foreheads today.

It just underscores what an absolutely disgraceful pairing we're looking at this fall when it comes to being compos mentis. One is a self-aggrandizing opportunist who can only belittle others with stupid nicknames, the other has been a self-aggrandizing D.C. blowhard since leisure suits were in fashion. He didn't have as high a profile as the other for many years, so his dumbassery was not front and center most of the time...and he's operating at about 50% of his rather mediocre peak efficiency. They were s*** candidates in 2020, and they are no less turd-like four years later.

The part that I bolded is one where I think we missed the boat, and I think the Three Mile Island reactor failure in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986 significantly kneecapped nuclear power as an energy alternative.

Hard to find much wrong with any of those suggestions. One that I adopt on a personal level is "institutional neutrality". The statement that universities do not need to develop a foreign policy is absolutely correct. Whatever my opinions may be on various issues of the day, those stay at home, and anyone trying to push my buttons on those while I am at work gets shut down pretty quickly. Regarding viewpoint diversity, the shift from college faculties being more heterogenous in terms of viewpoint to now being primarily liberal/leftist has been at least three generations in the making, and shifting it back toward equilibrium is going to take a long time, if it happens at all. I will say that when I was at Auburn in the late '80s/early '90s, I felt like my history/psychology/English professors didn't lean to either extreme. I remember Dr. Henson, a history professor who I liked very much, for his understated sarcasm, and a vivid description one day of how he felt (he put it, and I quote, "like a small rodent crawled inside my mouth and expectorated"). He reminded me of my dad, and I never had much of a sense one way or the other of my dad's politics, either. The DEI movement is one that, in my view, is framed with words that, on their surface, one would have no issue with whatsoever, but the implementation has served to divide, isolate and create hierarchies of aggrieved parties, which is not productive at all. The question "Where are you from?" is not racist, and framing it as such is a disservice to statements that actually are racist. His suggestion to shine a light on these departments and have them justify their dogma is a good one.

True, but it is a good option for students that maybe aren't all that academic, but have good work ethics. The more jobs our economy can generate that allow people like this to earn a decent living, the better. I've never been on the "everyone needs to go to college" train. There are scads of young people that have been convinced that this is the only path, but it's not one they're prepared for, they incur significant debt trying it, and have little to show for it besides loan payments. I had a few graduating seniors last year that spent half of their day at our district's vocational campus getting certified to be welders. They were not interested in going to a 4-year school, so doing that is a better option than McDonald's after graduation.

I feel like I was born about 15 years too late to be in this profession. I am a strong believer in the hand-to-brain connection that is developed when learning mathematics, especially early on. I don't have to stop and think about what 8 x 12 is because I (we) were made to write those multiplication tables over and over and over again in the third grade. To use a baking analogy, I think many educational philosophies that are being pushed now are trying to put icing on cakes that are half-baked, and some of these philosophies have wandered far away from the actual teaching and learning of how the mathematics works. There is so much technology out there that has been developed to simplify some of the more complicated arithmetic, but there is little understanding by younger people (and, to be fair, more than some of the teachers) of how one arrives at an answer that a calculator spits out. I'm not sure this genie can be put back in the bottle, because kids get access to technology at increasingly younger ages and the pushback is not insignificant when it gets taken away from them in order to teach a concept. Example: Solving quadratics is frequently taught now by just memorizing steps on a graphing calculator, and once you take that calculator away, a sizable number of students are helpless. But, the realities of the current environment are that standardized test scores are the be-all, end-all and these shortcuts are done out of a need of self-preservation. Teachers and departments are judged by these standardized test scores. Whether students truly know anything or not is subordinate to that result. With the advent of ChatGPT and other AI sources that are becoming more prevalent, the only work that I trust from students is the work that is done in front of me during class. The AI advancements and trying to evaluate student work effectively may be the thing that pushes me to hang it up and look for something else to do.

A very telling (and distressing) nugget of information presented in that graphic. I wonder what that breakdown looks like for 2020-2023...I have the feeling it will look at least that imbalanced toward the intersectionality buzzword topics.

Good for UW, their defense held up when it had to. Two fantastic games today, and I'm good with the outcome of both.

This is the definite trend line, and whether UW holds on or not, their coach deserves to get roasted.

If you kneel it, you have zero risk of the worst case scenario, and the clock continues to run. They screwed up, and may pay a heavy price for it.

Washington went full stupid on that last possession...why they didn't kneel it on 3rd down is embarrassingly dumb. They're hanging on for dear life now, and was completely avoidable.

I'll take this outcome.

I don't understand that at all. ETA: Not sure Michigan called a timeout there after all.

Was hoping they'd take at least one more okay to score to make them burn their last timeout, but you can't be real picky about when you score.

This might well be Michigan's last time with the ball coming up.

Hot knives and butter come to mind... embarrassing so far.

I doubt the Orange Bowl has ever had a 20-point favorite...I think Nebraska was a double-digit favorite over Miami in the OB of Jan. 1984, but nothing close to 20. Might be a better game than we think, but I don't hold out much hope for this one.