jilibay voucher code free
SACRAMENTO — Before this year’s presidential election slips into gloomy history, we should pause to slam our moldy, undemocratic vote-counting system called the electoral college. If Donald Trump had to win, it’s good that he prevailed in both the archaic electoral college and the national popular vote. The popular vote should always settle who is elected president. Name one other office in America that’s not decided by who gets the most votes — from state governor down to first-grade class president. But the national popular vote doesn’t count for squat in a U.S. presidential election. All that counts is our ancient electoral college system, rooted in the Founders’ appeasement of Southern slave states. It’s beneficial, however, that Trump apparently also won the popular vote. Because now we should be able to hold a rational conversation about the evils of the electoral college without being tagged as poor-loser partisans whining that the Democrat lost despite having been favored by most American voters. There are two bad things about our electoral college system: Big states, little states, it doesn’t matter. If they’re blue or red, their voters are relegated to the cheap seats as distant spectators to the main event being fought in a few purple swing states. The blues and reds are taken for granted and snubbed The candidates don’t hear from California voters about the acute water troubles in our state. But they’re lobbied about manufacturing declines in Michigan and Pennsylvania. It’s an old cliche and true: Squeaky wheels get the government grease. It’s not the electoral college, per se, that’s the culprit. It’s how the electoral votes are awarded by the states. They’re parceled out on a winner-take-all basis. If a candidate carries a state by one vote or 1 million, it’s irrelevant. All the state’s electoral votes go to the popular vote winner. Two small states — Nebraska and Maine — are exceptions. They partially award electoral votes based on who wins in congressional districts. That makes more sense than strict winner-take-all. In California, at least 5.9 million people voted for Republican Trump. They might as well have used their ballots for fireplace kindling. All 54 of the state’s electoral votes will be awarded to Democrat Kamala Harris, who received roughly 9.1 million votes. (When the final count is in, the vote totals will increase slightly.) Same thing in Texas, only vice versa. There, 4.8 million people voted for Harris. But all 40 electoral votes are going to Trump, who was supported by 6.4 million people. Republican voters were effectively disenfranchised in California, as Democrats were in Texas. Polling has shown that the overwhelming majority of Americans — including Californians — want to junk the electoral college system and elect the president by popular vote. A September survey by the Pew Research Center found that 63% of Americans prefer that the presidency be decided by the national popular vote. Conservative Republicans, however, like the status quo — no doubt because two GOP candidates in recent years have won the presidency while losing the popular vote: Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in 2000. But junking the electoral college entirely won’t happen any time soon because it’s politically impossible. It would require a constitutional amendment. And that would need a two-thirds vote by each house of Congress — both about to be controlled by the GOP — plus ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. Red state politicians won’t sign off because Republican candidates benefit from the current nonsense. Neither would purple states because they enjoy all the attention and campaign bucks as “battlegrounds.” But there’s a way to reform the system and still retain the electoral college. Just change how the electoral votes are awarded. Parcel them out in proportion to each candidate’s popular vote in the state. In California, Harris got roughly 59% of the vote and Trump 38%. Minority candidates picked up 3%, but I’d shift their tiny amount to the major contenders for electoral vote purposes. Harris would wind up with 33 and Trump with 21. In Texas, Trump would win 23 electoral votes and Harris 17. A proportional allocation system “would make sure that every vote counts and lessen the likelihood that the candidate who loses the popular vote will become president,” UC Berkeley law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky wrote in a recent Sacramento Bee op-ed. Besides Trump and Bush, three presidents were elected in the 1880s while losing the popular vote: John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison. “The electoral college was based on the framers’ distrust of majority rule and was a tremendous boost to slave states’ political power,” Chemerinsky told me. The South fretted about the North’s larger population and the Yankees’ political clout. So the founders compromised. Slaves wouldn’t be allowed to vote, but they could count as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning members of the House of Representatives based on population. That strengthened the South in the electoral college because a state’s number of electors is based mostly on the size of its House delegation. But every state also gets an elector for each senator. And each state is entitled to two, regardless of its size — an allotment designed to dilute the power of big states. I didn’t do all the math, but it’s a safe assumption that Trump still would have won the electoral college vote under a proportional allocation system. Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar, believes the reform could be passed by Congress without amending the Constitution. But first, Americans would need to insist that they elect the president, not the states.Giants will try to snap a 7-game losing streak when they host the SaintsElectoral college system is a bad way to pick a president
Patricia Kaliati Bitter with Saulos ChilimaThe upcoming week promises to be relatively quiet on the earnings front, with no major companies scheduled to release their financial results. The stock market will be closed on January 1st in observance of the New Year. This pause offers a chance to reflect on the past year and prepare for the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead. After the S&P 500 hovered above 6,000 in mid-December, major banks, including Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, have forecast that the benchmark index will reach 6,500 in 2025. The optimism is supported by confidence in ongoing earnings growth and a favorable monetary policy environment, key drivers of market performance. Read what the experts expect to see from the stock market in 2025. How high will the price of Bitcoin go in 2025? 2024 has been nothing short of monumental for the cryptocurrency industry. Bitcoin began the year hovering around $40,000, only to surge past $100,000 in December. Looking ahead, 2025 promises to be another transformative year. With President-elect Donald Trump coming into office after a pro-crypto campaign, a new era of policy and innovation may be on the horizon. Adding to the excitement in the crypto community is the influential role of Trump ally Elon Musk . Read what experts have to say about Bitcoin’s price in 2025. Key trends that will shape retail in 2025 The retail industry is undergoing a rapid transformation that’s being driven by evolving consumer expectations and new economic realities . As 2025 approaches, retailers will need to adapt to shifting dynamics . Change is on the horizon , whether it’s the slowing growth of discount stores, the rise of tech-powered dining, or the growing demand for convenience. Retailers that are willing to rethink their strategies may be the ones to thrive . Retail in 2025 will require striking a balance between tradition and innovation to capture the attention, loyalty, and wallets of the modern shopper . According to a new report from foot traffics analytics firm Placer.ai, there are some key trends that will shape retail’s 2025 playbook. You can read about those trends here. — Francisco Velasquez contributed to this article 📬 Sign up for the Daily Brief Our free, fast, and fun briefing on the global economy, delivered every weekday morning.
By MICHELLE L. PRICE WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — An online spat between factions of Donald Trump’s supporters over immigration and the tech industry has thrown internal divisions in his political movement into public display, previewing the fissures and contradictory views his coalition could bring to the White House. The rift laid bare the tensions between the newest flank of Trump’s movement — wealthy members of the tech world including billionaire Elon Musk and fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and their call for more highly skilled workers in their industry — and people in Trump’s Make America Great Again base who championed his hardline immigration policies. The debate touched off this week when Laura Loomer , a right-wing provocateur with a history of racist and conspiratorial comments, criticized Trump’s selection of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence policy in his coming administration. Krishnan favors the ability to bring more skilled immigrants into the U.S. Loomer declared the stance to be “not America First policy” and said the tech executives who have aligned themselves with Trump were doing so to enrich themselves. Much of the debate played out on the social media network X, which Musk owns. Loomer’s comments sparked a back-and-forth with venture capitalist and former PayPal executive David Sacks , whom Trump has tapped to be the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar.” Musk and Ramaswamy, whom Trump has tasked with finding ways to cut the federal government , weighed in, defending the tech industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. It bloomed into a larger debate with more figures from the hard-right weighing in about the need to hire U.S. workers, whether values in American culture can produce the best engineers, free speech on the internet, the newfound influence tech figures have in Trump’s world and what his political movement stands for. Trump has not yet weighed in on the rift, and his presidential transition team did not respond to a message seeking comment. Musk, the world’s richest man who has grown remarkably close to the president-elect , was a central figure in the debate, not only for his stature in Trump’s movement but his stance on the tech industry’s hiring of foreign workers. Technology companies say H-1B visas for skilled workers, used by software engineers and others in the tech industry, are critical for hard-to-fill positions. But critics have said they undercut U.S. citizens who could take those jobs. Some on the right have called for the program to be eliminated, not expanded. Born in South Africa, Musk was once on an a H-1B visa himself and defended the industry’s need to bring in foreign workers. “There is a permanent shortage of excellent engineering talent,” he said in a post. “It is the fundamental limiting factor in Silicon Valley.” Related Articles National Politics | Should the U.S. increase immigration levels for highly skilled workers? National Politics | Trump threat to immigrant health care tempered by economic hopes National Politics | In states that ban abortion, social safety net programs often fail families National Politics | Court rules Georgia lawmakers can subpoena Fani Willis for information related to her Trump case National Politics | New 2025 laws hit hot topics from AI in movies to rapid-fire guns Trump’s own positions over the years have reflected the divide in his movement. His tough immigration policies, including his pledge for a mass deportation, were central to his winning presidential campaign. He has focused on immigrants who come into the U.S. illegally but he has also sought curbs on legal immigration , including family-based visas. As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump called the H-1B visa program “very bad” and “unfair” for U.S. workers. After he became president, Trump in 2017 issued a “Buy American and Hire American” executive order , which directed Cabinet members to suggest changes to ensure H-1B visas were awarded to the highest-paid or most-skilled applicants to protect American workers. Trump’s businesses, however, have hired foreign workers, including waiters and cooks at his Mar-a-Lago club , and his social media company behind his Truth Social app has used the the H-1B program for highly skilled workers. During his 2024 campaign for president, as he made immigration his signature issue, Trump said immigrants in the country illegally are “poisoning the blood of our country” and promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. But in a sharp departure from his usual alarmist message around immigration generally, Trump told a podcast this year that he wants to give automatic green cards to foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges. “I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country,” he told the “All-In” podcast with people from the venture capital and technology world. Those comments came on the cusp of Trump’s budding alliance with tech industry figures, but he did not make the idea a regular part of his campaign message or detail any plans to pursue such changes.
Capricorn Daily Horoscope Today, December 06, 2024 predicts a job offer soonAutomobile Seat Frame Assembly Market Outlook and Future Projections for 2030
Short Interest in Aeries Technology, Inc (NASDAQ:AERT) Declines By 16.4%Share Tweet Share Share Email In a world where access to STEM education remains uneven, two high school students, Dheeraj Tallapragada and Vedant Sagare, have taken it upon themselves to bridge the gap. They founded Phase 1 Research , an organization that is redefining global education by providing students from under-resourced communities with access to research opportunities, mentorship, and the tools necessary to succeed in a technology-driven world. Their achievements are nothing short of extraordinary. Despite their age, Dheeraj and Vedant have created a global platform that has impacted over 200,000 students worldwide , connecting them to 2,000+ mentors who are experts in cutting-edge fields like machine learning, molecular biology, and bioinformatics . These mentors, many of whom are graduates of elite universities or leaders in Fortune 500 companies, work with students to cultivate their research skills and guide them on their educational journeys. The Mission Behind Phase 1 Research Phase 1 Research began with a clear and ambitious mission: to democratize STEM resources and opportunities for students in underserved regions. “The whole point is to expose students to research,” Dheeraj shared in an interview with The Independent News . “These are the first steps—the first phase.” The organization’s name reflects this ethos. Phase 1 Research aims to provide students with the foundational support they need to explore their potential and gain the confidence to pursue higher-level academic and professional opportunities. Through their relentless determination, the founders have built partnerships with some of the most prestigious organizations in the world, including Salesforce, BlackRock, Altos Labs , and even the Malian Ministry of Education . Bridging the Gap with Technology One of the most impactful initiatives led by Phase 1 Research is its effort to address the digital divide. The organization has facilitated the donation of over 5,000 laptops, monitors, and PCs to students in need, ensuring they have the tools necessary to participate in research and STEM learning. In the summer of 2024, Phase 1 Research took its mission further by organizing a research camp in India, where 2,500 students gained hands-on experience in environmental sustainability projects. This initiative not only equipped participants with technical skills but also sparked their passion for addressing real-world challenges through innovation. A Global Impact The numbers speak volumes about the impact Phase 1 Research has had. With 10,000+ students actively engaged in research projects and 200,000 individuals impacted globally , the organization is setting a new standard for what is possible in STEM accessibility. It has also facilitated the publication of over 500 research papers , providing students with opportunities to showcase their work on an international stage. Dheeraj and Vedant’s ability to inspire action extends beyond their peers. By rallying support from mentors, educators, and corporate leaders, they have created a movement that transcends age and geography. “Age shouldn’t limit impact,” Vedant emphasizes. “If you have a vision and the drive to make it happen, people will believe in you.” A Vision for the Future Phase 1 Research is more than just an organization—it’s a testament to the power of youthful determination and innovation. By creating opportunities where none previously existed, Dheeraj and Vedant have paved the way for a brighter future for students in underserved communities. Their story is a powerful reminder that age is no barrier to making a difference. As Phase 1 Research continues to grow, its founders remain committed to their vision of a world where every student has the chance to unlock their potential through STEM education. To learn more about Phase 1 Research and its inspiring founders, visit p1research.org . Related Items: Dheeraj Tallapragada , Phase 1 Research Share Tweet Share Share Email Comments
Russia says US using Taiwan to stir crisis in Asia
Earlier this week, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA” or the “Agency”) released its long-anticipated final guidance (the “Guidance”) on predetermined change control plans (“PCCPs”) for devices that utilize artificial intelligence/machine learning (“AI/ML”) software. FDA’s stated goal for the Guidance is to “to provide a forward-thinking approach to promote the development of safe and effective AI-enabled devices,” and it represents notable progress in the Agency’s scramble to keep with – or at least prevent being too far outpaced by – the rapid pace of AI/ML innovation, as used in digital health technology. A. The AI Challenge FDA’s primary challenge in regulating AI-enabled device software functions (“AI-DSF”) has been that the self-modifying nature of these functions simply does not fit within the Agency’s long-standing framework for medical devices, including, more specifically, medical device modifications . Since the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, FDA has kept a relatively firm grasp on post-market device modifications by requiring manufacturers of legally-marketed devices that originally required 510(k) clearance, De Novo classification, or premarket approval (“PMA”) to submit a supplemental 510(k) notification, De Novo request, and/or approval application for post-market modifications that significantly change or modify the device design, components, method of manufacture, or intended use (i.e., modifications “that could significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, or major changes or modifications in the intended use of the device”).[1] However, regulating AI-DSF, which are designed to constantly self-modify, clearly requires a different approach. FDA has publicly contemplated such an approach since at least 2019, when it published its first discussion paper on the subject.[2] Now, almost six years later, FDA’s first final guidance is here. B. New PCCP Framework The Guidance begins by acknowledging that the development of AI-DSF is an “iterative process” and that its new PCCP framework is designed to provide a “reasonable assurance” of safety and effectiveness. Rather than requiring AI-DSF manufacturers to receive clearance and/or approval for significant modifications after a device is legally marketed, FDA will require that AI-DSF manufacturers include a PCCP with the initial marketing submission (i.e., 510(k) notification, De Novo request, or PMA application). As part of the pre-market review process, FDA will review the PCCP “to ensure the continued safety and effectiveness of the device without necessitating additional marketing submissions for implementing each modification described in the PCCP.” Rather than review each modification as it occurs – which would be impossible to monitor and assess – FDA will review the human-defined objectives (i.e., algorithms) intended to guide the technology’s ongoing self-modifications. The Guidance outlines FDA’s recommendations on the content of a marketing submission for a AI-DSF PCCP, which generally includes: (i) a detailed description of the specific, planned device modifications (i.e., the “Description of Modifications”); (ii) the associated methodology to develop, validate, and implement those modifications in a manner that ensures the continued safety and effectiveness of the device across the intended use populations (i.e., the “Modification Protocol”); and (iii) the assessment of the benefits and risks of the planned modifications and risk mitigations (i.e., the “Impact Assessment”). At a lengthy 49 pages, the Guidance goes into granular detail on each of the three elements of a PCCP (i.e., Description of Modifications, Modification Protocol, and Impact Assessment) but caveats that manufacturers should not rely on the Guidance for a “a complete description of what may be necessary to include in a marketing submission for an AI-DSF” – that is, FDA is careful to clarify that the PCCP is only one piece of a marketing submission for an AI-DSF.[3] The PCCP requirement outlined in the Guidance is broad and applies to both automatic AI-DSF modifications (i.e., modifications that are implemented automatically by software, also known as “continuous learning”), and manual AI-DSF modifications (i.e., modifications involving steps that require human input, action, review, and/or decision-making and therefore are not implemented automatically). Although the Guidance does not explicitly state as much, it is presumed to apply to all future marketing submissions, as it does not include any indication that the requirement would apply retroactively. C. Looking Ahead There is no doubt that the fate of FDA policy, especially policy that is implemented solely through informal guidance (rather than notice-and-comment rulemaking) is a bit up in the air in the face of the incoming administration, which has promised big changes and is centered on a platform of de-regulation. In what may have been an attempt to insulate its new policy from reversal during the upcoming administration, the Guidance goes to great lengths to detail all of the stakeholder input that FDA received and considered in constructing the proposed framework between 2019 and 2024 – a move that we usually see when the Agency issues a final rulemaking, but is less common in informal guidances. However, given that FDA’s first discussion paper (addressing the need to regulate AI-DSF in digital health technology) was published during the previous Trump administration, coupled with the greater push to regulate AI across all industries, this is a rare subset of FDA’s regulatory scheme that could enjoy largely bipartisan support. It remains to be seen whether the upcoming administration will memorialize FDA’s PCCP policy via formal rulemaking, or whether regulators and other key stakeholders will, instead, call on Congress to set the policy for AI-DSF. Either way, the policy outlined in the new Guidance stands, at least for now, and manufacturers of medical devices that utilize AI/ML should begin integrating the preparation of Modification Descriptions, Modification Protocols, and Impact Assessments into their overall product development plans. FOOTNOTES [1] See 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) . [2] See Proposed Regulatory Framework for Modifications to Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML)-Based Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) – Discussion Paper and Request for Feedback . [3] See, e.g ., 21 CFR 807.87 , 21 CFR 860.220 , 21 CFR 814.20 .Why world is paying dearly for absurd 76-day gap between Trump’s win & him taking office...are we now headed for WW3?
Former US President Jimmy Carter Dead at 100Once again, quarterback Patrick Mahomes and the Kansas City Chiefs used their late-game magic to pull off another thrilling road win on Sunday. With 1:46 remaining in the fourth quarter, Panthers running back Chuba Hubbard rushed for a one-yard TD and converted on the two-point try, giving Carolina a 28-27 lead over K.C. However, Carolina left too much time for Mahomes. On a 1st-and-10 at K.C.'s 45-yard line, Mahomes' 33-yard scramble put the Chiefs into field-goal range. Two plays later , Chiefs kicker Spencer Shrader made a 31-yard field goal before time expired, securing a 30-27 victory. MAHOMES. 33-YARD RUN. : #KCvsCAR on CBS/Paramount+ : https://t.co/waVpO8ZBqG pic.twitter.com/HbrtvTfb6n CHIEFS WIN ON A LAST-SECOND FIELD GOAL! #KCvsCAR pic.twitter.com/OHMwGqbm4G The Chiefs improved to 10-1 following the win. Eight of their victories have been by one possession. The Chiefs still have plenty of work to do. As of Sunday, ESPN's Football Power Index rates the Panthers (3-8) as the third-worst team in the league. However, a quarterback like Mahomes usually gives a team a strong chance to win even when it underperforms. The three-time Super Bowl champion had 17 fourth-quarter, regular-season comebacks entering this matchup, according to Pro Football Reference. That is the ninth most among active players.
Richard Parsons, one of corporate America's most prominent Black executives who held top posts at Time Warner and Citigroup, died Thursday. He was 76. Parsons, who died at his Manhattan home, was diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2015 and cited "unanticipated complications" from the disease for cutting back on work a few years later. The financial services company Lazard, where Parsons was a longtime board member, confirmed his death. Parsons' friend Ronald Lauder told The New York Times that the cause of death was cancer. Parsons stepped down Dec. 3 from the boards of Lazard and Lauder's company, Estée Lauder, citing health reasons. He had been on Estée Lauder's board for 25 years. "Dick was an American original, a colossus bestriding the worlds of business, media, culture, philanthropy, and beyond," Ronald Lauder said in a statement on behalf of the Lauder family. David Zaslav, the CEO of Time Warner successor Warner Bros. Discovery, hailed Parsons as a "great mentor and friend" and a "tough and brilliant negotiator, always looking to create something where both sides win." "All who got a chance to work with him and know him saw that unusual combination of great leadership with integrity and kindness," Zaslav said, calling him "one of the great problem solvers this industry has ever seen." Parsons, a Brooklyn native who started college at 16, built a track record of steering big companies through tough times. He returned Citigroup to profitability after turmoil from the global financial crisis and helped restore Time Warner after its much-maligned acquisition by internet provider America Online. Parsons was named to the board of CBS in September 2018 but resigned a month later because of illness. Parsons said in a statement at the time that he was already dealing with multiple myeloma when he joined the board, but "unanticipated complications have created additional new challenges." He said his doctors advised him to cut back on his commitments to ensure recovery. "Dick's storied career embodied the finest traditions of American business leadership," Lazard said in a statement. The company, where Parsons was a board member from 2012 until this month, praised his "unmistakable intelligence and his irresistible warmth." "Dick was more than an iconic leader in Lazard's history — he was a testament to how wisdom, warmth, and unwavering judgment could shape not just companies, but people's lives," the company said. "His legacy lives on in the countless leaders he counseled, the institutions he renewed, and the doors he opened for others." Parsons was known as a skilled negotiator, a diplomat and a crisis manager. Although he was with Time Warner through its difficulties with AOL, he earned respect for the company and rebuilt its relations with Wall Street. He streamlined Time Warner's structure, pared debt and sold Warner Music Group and a book publishing division. He also fended off a challenge from activist investor Carl Icahn in 2006 to break up the company and helped Time Warner reach settlements with investors and regulators over questionable accounting practices at AOL. Parsons joined Time Warner as president in 1995 after serving as chairman and chief executive of Dime Bancorp Inc., one of the largest U.S. thrift institutions. In 2001, after AOL used its fortunes as the leading provider of Internet access in the U.S. to buy Time Warner for $106 billion in stock, Parsons became co-chief operating officer with AOL executive Robert Pittman. In that role, he was in charge of the company's content businesses, including movie studios and recorded music. He became CEO in 2002 with the retirement of Gerald Levin, one of the key architects of that merger. Parsons was named Time Warner chairman the following year, replacing AOL founder Steve Case, who had also championed the combination. The newly formed company's Internet division quickly became a drag on Time Warner. The promised synergies between traditional and new media never materialized. AOL began seeing a reduction in subscribers in 2002 as Americans replaced dial-up connections with broadband from cable TV and phone companies. Parsons stepped down as CEO in 2007 and as chairman in 2008. A year later AOL split from Time Warner and began trading as a separate company, following years of struggles to reinvent itself as a business focused on advertising and content. Time Warner is now owned by AT&T Inc. A board member of Citigroup and its predecessor, Citibank, since 1996, Parsons was named chairman in 2009 at a time of turmoil for the financial institution. Citigroup had suffered five straight quarters of losses and received $45 billion in government aid. Its board had been criticized for allowing the bank to invest so heavily in the risky housing market. Citigroup returned to profit under Parsons, starting in 2010, and would not have a quarterly loss again until the fourth quarter of 2017. Parsons retired from that job in 2012. In 2014 he stepped in as interim CEO of the NBA's Los Angeles Clippers until Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer took over later that year. "Dick Parsons was a brilliant and transformational leader and a giant of the media industry who led with integrity and never shied away from a challenge," NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said. Parsons, a Republican, previously worked as a lawyer for Nelson Rockefeller, a former Republican governor of New York, and in Gerald Ford's White House. Those early stints gave him grounding in politics and negotiations. He also was an economic adviser on President Barack Obama's transition team. Parsons, whose love of jazz led to co-owning a Harlem jazz club, also served as Chairman of the Apollo Theater and the Jazz Foundation of America. And he held positions on the boards of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, the American Museum of Natural History and the Museum of Modern Art in New York City. Parsons played basketball at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and received his law degree from Albany Law School in 1971. He is survived by his wife, Laura, and their family.
MOREHEAD, Ky. (AP) — Isaiah Smith ran for a career-high 205 yards on 31 carries and scored a touchdown and San Diego beat Morehead State 37-14 in a season-ending contest for both teams on Saturday. Grant Sergent threw for 184 yards and two touchdowns for San Diego (8-3, 6-2 Pioneer Football League) which ended the season with a four-game win streak and winners of six of seven. The Toreros finished in sole possession of second place in the PFL behind Drake (7-1), which clinched the league outright with a 49-10 win over Stetson on Saturday. Drake beat San Diego 30-28 on a walk-off field goal on Sept. 28 in Des Moines, Iowa. Bryce Patterson threw for 133 yards and a touchdown and James Louis ran for a touchdown for the Eagles (7-5, 5-3). ___ Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP collegebasketball: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-basketball-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-basketballVerizon Communications Unusual Options Activity
The first anniversary of Javier Milei’s government finds Peronism united but disorganised. With the few governors who survived the 2023 elections trying to pass by unnoticed, the centre of attention moves to Buenos Aires Province where the opposition party maintains its main figures. Today, they barely manage to share a photo (without even posing) and are far from resolving their differences. The image is old. Peronism already understood for the 2019 election that unity was the path. Now it is repeating: unity, unity, unity. If any possibility of returning to power exists, it is only together. But differences also exist and the path towards the next elections is not so clear. At last Monday’s meeting of the Buenos Aires Province branch of the Partido Justicialista (PJ), in which leading figures Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Sergio Massa and Axel Kicillof all participated, they tried to project a scenario of harmony. There were some hitches because, in reality, nobody wanted a genuine debate. It was much like a Christmas dinner, in which no member of the family is ready to ruin the get-together, preferring to hold their peace. As a guest at the meeting, new national PJ chair Cristina Fernández de Kirchner mentioned the need to understand that the political enemy to combat is President Javier Milei. But then she also spoke of the infighting in which Kirchnerism has been trapped for some months now. “I’ve often heard being told to back Axel. When I made him [my economy] minister, I supported him, while half the Cabinet cursed me and when I chose him as gubernatorial candidate, I supported him, while half the mayors cursed me,” she complained. At the end of her speech when the meeting was already winding up, Buenos Aires Province Community Development Minister Andrés ‘ ’ Larroque asked to take the floor. There were no longer any microphones but Máximo Kirchner gave him one anyway. Larroque said: “Nobody had any doubts about support in 2019 but I’m asking for support now with Milei in government and Axel as the option for the future.” That’s where it all ended. The most vocal critics of the current Peronist leadership in the hands of CFK and Máximo Kirchner in Buenos Aires Province were not present. Avellaneda Mayor Jorge Ferraresi and national deputy Victoria Tolosa Paz preferred to stay away. The latter had complained at the February meeting that there were no representatives of Kicillof, nor was he invited. Now that he had showed up, she decided not to. This sector of Peronism, which has Ferraresi as its most visible face but which includes other mayors such as Mario Secco (in Ensenada), promises to present their own lists in the next election. Unity in Buenos Aires Province is proclaimed but not assured. The differences are not just over leadership and future electoral candidates. As Perfil has already anticipated, the leaders cannot agree over how Buenos Aires Province should go to the ballot-boxes next year. Fernández de Kirchner believes that next year’s midterms, when the list of national deputies will be elected by a single paper ballot, should be held on the same day the provincial categories are elected by the traditional system. What the former two-term president is proposing is the nationalisation of the elections, so that the citizenry will go to the polling-booths to definitively endorse the Milei administration or not. She assures that if the voting is on different dates, the focus will be on BA province, centring on tales of crimes and other provincial problems. Massa also goes for concurrent elections on the same day with different systems. He recalls that if many provinces had not held their elections on different dates last year, Unión por la Patria might have clinched the three extra percentage points to win in the first round. In La Plata they do not think likewise: “Sixteen governors cannot all be wrong and a bunch of idiots,” as they say about the different provincial election dates to which they are accustomed. They do not fear a provincial focus to the election because they assure that in a clash between Kicillof and Milei, the Buenos Aires Province governor leads by several heads in his own territory. Besides, in La Plata they say that the 84 Peronist mayors all want their elections on a different date to the national. But the PJ stays mum. “It was not the time to discuss it but I don’t know why they are in such a hurry if it can be worked out in April. It’s still not known whether there will be PASO primaries or whether they will be eliminated and they want to impose voting which will only occasion chaos for the people of Buenos Aires Province,” say sources in La Plata’s government house. Fernández de Kirchner, meanwhile, on Wednesday formally took over the national PJ leadership. In this first year of the Milei government, Peronism barely lost three seats in the Chamber of Deputies and avoided any exodus in the Senate (a positive balance bearing in mind the disintegration it suffered after the defeat against Mauricio Macri). But the PJ chair aims to bring into line those in the opposition caucus who in recent votes benefitted the Milei government with carefully timed absences and votes. It won’t be easy. Some of those legislators respond to Peronist governors who until now have preferred to maintain good links with the Casa Rosada. Unión por la Patria only managed to hang onto six provinces in last year’s election, of which only four of their provincial heads resist: Axel Kicillof, Gildo Insfrán (Formosa), Ricardo Quintela (La Rioja) and Sergio Ziliotto (La Pampa). In contrast, Osvaldo Jaldo (Tucumán) immediately placed his deputies at the service of the Casa Rosada with Raúl Jalil of Catamarca following suit. Ads Space Ads SpaceWatch: Patrick Mahomes' clutch scramble helps Chiefs avoid upset vs. Panthers
Giants will try to snap a 7-game losing streak when they host the SaintsShiba Inu (SHIB) Price Prediction: Will SHIB Skyrocket to $0.000054 as Consolidation Ends?Home Bargains shoppers are rushing to get hold of a rare Cadbury chocolate bar that has been slashed in price. Cadbury's has brought back its Dairy Milk Mint Crisp bar. The bar features Cadbury's classic milk chocolate, filled with crispy mint pieces. Cadbury's said earlier this year that the treat had been axed from shelves and it had 'no plans to reintroduce it'. But the bar is currently being sold in Home Bargains stores. The 360g bar can cost up to £4 in some stores but eagle-eyed shoppers have spotted it selling for just £2.49 in Home Bargains. READ MORE: Exact amounts benefit payments will rise in 2025 including Child Benefit and Universal Credit Don't miss the biggest and breaking stories by signing up to the BirminghamLive newsletter here . One customer shared the news on HotUkDeals, The Sun reports. They wrote: "An amazing bit of choc’ for an amazing price." It seems shoppers can only grab the chocolate bar in store as it is not available online. The bar is limited-edition so may not remain on shelves for long. A spokesperson from Mondelēz International said: "Our Christmas range will be available far and wide across the UK and Ireland. You can purchase our products from a variety of retailers." They added: "Please check with your local retailer to confirm which products they have in stock and when to avoid disappointment." The Dairy Milk Mint Crisp bar also appears to still be in stock at Tesco , Asda and Ocado.All the signs Michelle Keegan was pregnant as actress announces she is expecting first child with husband Mark Wright
BERKELEY, Calif. — Kayla Williams scored 21 points and California handed No. 19 Alabama its first loss 69-65 in the ACC/SEC Challenge on Thursday night. Ionna Krimili, who had 19 points, made three free throws in the last half minute to seal the win for the Bears (8-1), who never led by more than six, that coming when Krimili made two free throws with 26.6 seconds seconds to play. Christabel Ezumah then made 1 of 2 from the line for Alabama, making it 68-63 with 19.1 seconds left but Krimili, who came in 25 of 28 from the line for the season, missed two free throws. Zaay Green scored inside for the Tide before Krimili missed her third straight free throw before icing the game with six seconds remaining. Mara Suarez added 16 points for Cal, which picked up its fourth win against a 2024 NCAA Tournament team and the highest-ranked win since beating No. 13 Arizona on March 1, 2020. The Golden Beas haven't been to the NCAA Tournament since 2019. Green led Alabama (9-1) with 28 points, Essence Cody added 13 and Karly Weathers had 12. Cal was up 14-13 at the end of the first quarter but a 15-2 run put Alabama on top late in the second quarter. Cody scored six points and Green had five. But the Bears scored the next eight points and trailed 32-25 at the half. Green and Cody both had 13 points. Alabama was up 41-36 after Sarah Ashlee Baker's three-point play almost three minutes into the third quarter but then the Golden Bears reeled off 11 straight. Krimili had a 3-pointer to tie it and Suarez followed with a 3 for the lead. Williams scored the last seven points of the half for Cal for a 54-50 lead heading into the fourth quarter. The only other meeting between the schools came in a Thanksgiving tournament in Chicago in 2000 with the Tide winning 76-63. Cal plays at Pacific on Saturday. The Crimson Tide have a long break before playing Murray State at home on Dec. 15.Avior Wealth Management LLC lowered its stake in shares of The Clorox Company ( NYSE:CLX – Free Report ) by 6.2% in the third quarter, according to its most recent 13F filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The firm owned 1,027 shares of the company’s stock after selling 68 shares during the period. Avior Wealth Management LLC’s holdings in Clorox were worth $167,000 as of its most recent SEC filing. Other institutional investors and hedge funds have also modified their holdings of the company. B. Metzler seel. Sohn & Co. Holding AG bought a new stake in shares of Clorox in the 3rd quarter valued at approximately $1,579,000. Prospera Financial Services Inc grew its position in Clorox by 3.1% in the third quarter. Prospera Financial Services Inc now owns 4,549 shares of the company’s stock worth $742,000 after acquiring an additional 135 shares in the last quarter. Caprock Group LLC increased its stake in shares of Clorox by 9.2% during the 3rd quarter. Caprock Group LLC now owns 2,841 shares of the company’s stock worth $463,000 after purchasing an additional 239 shares during the last quarter. Aviance Capital Partners LLC raised its holdings in shares of Clorox by 2.7% during the 3rd quarter. Aviance Capital Partners LLC now owns 3,080 shares of the company’s stock valued at $502,000 after purchasing an additional 80 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Baron Wealth Management LLC acquired a new stake in shares of Clorox in the 3rd quarter valued at $250,000. 78.53% of the stock is currently owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors. Insider Activity In related news, EVP Angela C. Hilt sold 1,733 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction dated Friday, September 6th. The shares were sold at an average price of $165.52, for a total value of $286,846.16. Following the sale, the executive vice president now owns 13,471 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $2,229,719.92. The trade was a 11.40 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which is available through this hyperlink . Corporate insiders own 0.57% of the company’s stock. Analysts Set New Price Targets Get Our Latest Analysis on CLX Clorox Stock Up 0.1 % Shares of CLX opened at $169.30 on Friday. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 11.08, a quick ratio of 0.62 and a current ratio of 1.00. The company has a 50-day simple moving average of $162.78 and a 200-day simple moving average of $148.48. The Clorox Company has a 52 week low of $127.60 and a 52 week high of $171.35. The firm has a market capitalization of $20.96 billion, a P/E ratio of 58.99, a P/E/G ratio of 3.13 and a beta of 0.41. Clorox ( NYSE:CLX – Get Free Report ) last posted its quarterly earnings results on Wednesday, October 30th. The company reported $1.86 EPS for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of $1.36 by $0.50. The firm had revenue of $1.76 billion during the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $1.64 billion. Clorox had a return on equity of 316.08% and a net margin of 4.78%. The company’s revenue for the quarter was up 27.0% on a year-over-year basis. During the same quarter in the prior year, the firm posted $0.49 EPS. On average, equities research analysts expect that The Clorox Company will post 6.85 earnings per share for the current year. Clorox Dividend Announcement The firm also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Friday, February 14th. Shareholders of record on Wednesday, January 29th will be issued a $1.22 dividend. This represents a $4.88 annualized dividend and a yield of 2.88%. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Wednesday, January 29th. Clorox’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is presently 170.04%. Clorox Profile ( Free Report ) The Clorox Company manufactures and markets consumer and professional products worldwide. It operates through four segments: Health and Wellness, Household, Lifestyle, and International. The Health and Wellness segment offers cleaning products, such as laundry additives and home care products primarily under the Clorox, Clorox2, Scentiva, Pine-Sol, Liquid-Plumr, Tilex, and Formula 409 brands; professional cleaning and disinfecting products under the CloroxPro and Clorox Healthcare brands; professional food service products under the Hidden Valley brand; and vitamins, minerals and supplement products under the RenewLife, Natural Vitality, NeoCell, and Rainbow Light brands in the United States. Featured Articles Want to see what other hedge funds are holding CLX? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for The Clorox Company ( NYSE:CLX – Free Report ). Receive News & Ratings for Clorox Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Clorox and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .
- Previous: jilibay vip slot games
- Next: jilibay voucher code free philippines
