SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " winning " 1,747 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Why Trump's winning streak at the Supreme Court came to an abrupt end
The Trump administration won a series of high-profile victories last year, but the president has made fewer emergency appeals and is facing losses on his signature policies.
‘Jeopardy!’ Champ Jamie Ding Reveals His Winning Secret on ‘GMA’
See what he told George Stephanopoulos and the rest of the team in fun interview.
How Pittsburgh — host of this year's NFL draft — became a sports mecca
The Pennsylvania city is hosting the draft for the first time in almost 80 years. Pittsburghers say the city's passionate fanbases and winning teams make the selection a natural fit.
Josh Shapiro tests his clout in trying to flip US House seats in Pennsylvania
If Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro has his way, the Democratic path to winning back the US House will run through his state.
US special forces soldier arrested after allegedly winning $400,000 bet on Maduro raid
A US special forces soldier involved in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro was arrested for allegedly betting on that operation, netting him $400,000 in profits, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Foxes' demise 'sad to see' says title-winning captain Morgan
Wes Morgan is "sad and hurt" to see Leicester drop into League One a decade after winning the Premier League.
Keldon Johnson speaks after winning Sixth Man of the Year and Spurs are heading to Portland
Get the latest sports headlines from KSAT Sports Now, a streaming show from KSAT 12, the San Antonio, Texas leader in breaking news, weather and sports.
The Ultimate Draft Pick: CMU Showcases the Winning Power of Sports Innovation
"Powering the Future of Sport: A Draft Week Showcase," was a sports-themed day of engaging discussions, live robotics demonstrations and industry innovations on AI’s extraordinary potential to transform the future of sports.
Top 5: Fighters on the rise at UFC Vegas 116
Youssef Zalal steps into the spotlight on the strength of a career-best eight-fight winning streak that now spans more than 1,200 days.
Now what for Chelsea? Five losses in a row for manager Liam Rosenior leave few good short or long-term options
As Chelsea struggle to stay in the race for a Champions League spot, what's the path to winning and profitability for their owners?
Business News: Timothée Chalamet Joins Urban Jürgensen As Minority Partner And Creative Advisor
This marks the first time the Golden Globe-winning American-French actor and producer has taken on a partnership with a company.
Inside Missouri’s first statewide science and engineering competition
Springfield-area students earned spots at the International Science & Engineering Fair after winning top honors at Show‑Me SCIENCE.
Grads Credited on Multiple Winners at 2026 Entertainment Industry Award Shows
Full Sail University alumni were credited on winning movies, shows, and video games at 2026 industry awards, like the MPSE Awards, BAFTAs, CAS Awards, and VES Awards.
Dan Eggen, who shaped politics coverage at The Post, dies at 60
He helped guide Pulitzer Prize-winning projects, including coverage of Russian election interference in 2016 and the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
How Al Gore Politicized Climate Science
An Inconvenient Truth turns 20 next month. In the 2006 documentary, former vice president Al Gore argued that human-driven climate change was an urgent, civilization-threatening crisis. The film became a cultural phenomenon, winning two Academy Awards and making climate change one of the defining political issues of our time. I am sure that there will be many retrospectives seeking to relitigate the scientific claims in the film. But the far more important anniversary story is not about the accuracy of any of Gore’s individual claims but rather about what the film helped to unleash in the scientific community: bringing partisan politics into the institutions of science. Gore did not simply make a film about climate change: He implored the scientific community to join him in overt climate advocacy. The fuel that Gore added to the fire of pathological politicization of the climate science community is the most important legacy of An Inconvenient Truth. Almost three years after the film’s release, Gore took the stage at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)—the country’s largest and most prominent scientific organization—and delivered something much closer to a revival sermon than a scientific lecture. Gore told the assembled scientists that they could no longer “in good conscience accept this division between the work you do and the civilization in which you live.” His directive was clear:
Speakers reflect luncheon’s ‘Timeless’ theme in words, actions
MILE HIGH UNITED WAY Denver News: The theme for the Mile High United Way’s 47th Women United Luncheon was “Timeless,” and Academy Award-winning actress Mary Steenburgen, president/CEO Christine Benero and honoree Arlene Hirschfeld thoughtfully and purposefully shared how the actions of today create ripples of change that can last forever. “One of the best ways to be outside your comfort zone is to volunteer,” Steenburgen said. “Saying yes to something is […]
Pulitzer Prize winner shares historic nature of politics as U.S. celebrates 250th anniversary
Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and New York Times bestselling author Jon Meacham discussed the nature of American politics through pivotal moments in U.S. history. Meacham said that the nation was originally founded on the notion of politics as “an aspirational arena of contention,” where different interests were disputed before reaching a consensus. He added that conflicts regarding power and other matters are inevitable.
Shaky political science: using "simulated" elections over real-world elections
[Dear DSOS readers – this article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in early December, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting. We found that many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data, and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first three articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report, the second one analyzing a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report, and a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research]. In this fourth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we shine a spotlight on seven studies that were web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group (the ERRG is an ad hoc committee headed by New America’s Political Reform Program and joined by the American Enterprise Institute, the Unite America Institute and Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law). This research consortium has been led by Lee Drutman, senior fellow with New America’s Political Reform Program. These seven studies are simply not credible from any objective standard about how political “science” is supposed to illuminate our understanding of either ranked choice voting or politics in general. The feature that six of these seven studies have in common is that they all used surveys – artificial, simulated elections -- to attempt to say something cogent or interesting about ranked choice voting (RCV) elections. None of them used real world data from actual RCV elections – either the 1000+ elections in the US or the many thousands of elections from places like Australia, Ireland and elsewhere where RCV has been used for 100 years. While a few of these studies conclude with some mixed positives about RCV, our analysis here is content neutral. The idea that, with a political reform like RCV, you can ask respondents in a mock, artificial election to vote with that method, with only the barest of explanation about how RCV works or its likely impacts (i.e. no spoiler candidates, majority winners, voters liberated to pick their favorite candidates, coalition-building), and then ask them their thoughts/reactions about voting in that system, with fake candidates and no real campaigning, no real exposure to an actual election or actual candidates, rests on some very puzzling assumptions. The findings of these seven studies actually are contradicted by the findings from many other studies based on real-world RCV elections. These New America studies also failed to list the real-world RCV studies in their own citations, instead including those studies that reinforced their conclusions. The seven studies featured in this article were chosen because they form a cohesive cohort which precisely illustrates one of the main points of our research paper, namely that using surveys, i.e. artificial elections, or mathematical/theoretical models, instead of real-world data, is in fact “shaky political science.” Below are summaries of our analysis of five of the seven New America studies. You can read our complete analysis of all seven studies at our paper, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting.” Choosing to “Vote As Usual” by Andre Blais, Carolina Plescia, and Semra Sevi. New America. (Blais et al., 2021). This study, web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group, used two surveys in which respondents completed ballots for simulated elections using plurality, approval, RCV and point (Score) voting. In both cases the authors provided the respondents with only minimal explanation of each method. For example, the entire explanation for RCV was “For this vote, rank the candidates from your first to your last choice (you do not need to rank them all). This is called the ranked vote.” That’s it. The study did not provide any context or explanation to survey respondents about why she/he might want to rank multiple candidates. Participants were not even told that ballots would be tabulated using an “instant” runoff, not to mention any description of RCVs ability to eliminate the spoiler effect or liberate voters to rank their favorite candidates without fear of helping the “greater evil” candidate to win. That’s like taking an iPhone back in time to 1970 and asking someone if they like it better than their rotary phone without explaining how it works. Their first survey targeted states that held 2020 Super Tuesday Democratic primaries and used the real candidates’ names in the survey; the second survey used fictitious candidates. In other words, they surveyed respondents who had only ever participated in plurality elections, had no history or background with using RCV or any of the other methods, had no clue about its likely impacts, and did not communicate how the alternative methods would be counted, and then asked them: “How satisfied are you with using each system?” Predictably, the winner was plurality elections, the system used for president, Congress, gubernatorial and state legislative elections – in other words, the method they have been using, year after year, all their voting lives. With so little explanation of RCV and its impacts, this study is simply not credible in discovering anything useful about real-world RCV elections. It merely shows that a basic voter education campaign is needed when adopting a new election system. Additionally, the result contradicts many other post-election surveys following real RCV elections, asking opinions from voters who had just participated in a RCV election, that showed a great deal of satisfaction with RCV (see details on that in Studies 22-25 in our paper, as well as the four studies cited in the review for Study 28). Share Other studies on “satisfaction” and “understanding” make similar mistakes, in terms of basing their surveys on inadequate explanation to respondents and lack of education about context. How could any survey ever hope to measure accurately, in essence simulate a real-world election, without actual campaigning candidates, the media writing about those candidates, organizations endorsing candidates and voters being inundated with crucial information? More than anything, what these “studies” based on surveys show is that if you ask voters about something they don’t know very much about, and fail to adequately educate them, their responses will unsurprisingly reflect their confusion. Equally puzzling is that New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group, headed by political scientist Lee Drutman, found this to be a credible enough study that they not only published it but highlighted it in Drutman’s own discussion of research related to ranked choice voting. This pattern was repeated in study after study featured by New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group. For example in Ranked-Choice Voting and Political Expression: Voter Guides Narrow the Gap between Informed and Uninformed Citizens by Cheryl Boudreau, Jonathan Colner, and Scott MacKenzie, the researchers based their analysis on a survey which found that respondents who were asked to vote in a simulated RCV election, with minimal explanation of RCV or how it works, displayed less evidence of being informed about how to use RCV effectively, with the least informed voters ranking fewer candidates. As pointed out under the study above, in a real election voters are informed by a wide variety of methods, including public education by the election administration, by interested political groups, the media, and the candidates themselves who benefit from voters being aware of how to vote in the new system. In Support for Ranked-Choice Voting across Race and Partisanship by Joseph Anthony, David C. Kimball, Jack Santucci and Jamil Scott, the researchers used respondents from different parties and races voting in simulated plurality and RCV elections, who indicated their satisfaction with each voting method. Instead of using real world election results, the authors fell back on the easy, armchair and less reliable academic research methodology of making up mock elections. As with the other studies, little explanation was given of how RCV works or what its implications might be (electing majority winners or eliminating spoilers, for example). Unsurprisingly, this study found that respondents were not very satisfied with RCV. However, when the authors added an explanation that RCV has a tendency to elect more women and people of color, they found that this greater explanation increased the preference for RCV. The more voters were familiar with it, and the more they understood potential positive impacts – surprise! -- the more they were open to switching away from the status quo. Of note, the results from this study are thoroughly contradicted by a number of other studies whose data was obtained from real RCV elections with real voters. Those studies show a great deal of satisfaction with RCV. More “fake election” research An interesting wrinkle on this “research by fake elections” approach, which only served to illustrate how unreliable such “research” can become, was taken in Ranked-Choice Voting, Runoff, and Democracy: Insights from Maine and Other U.S. States by Joseph Cerrone and Cynthia McClintock_,_ also web-hosted and funded by New America’s ERRG. It gets high marks for creativity, but an eye-roll for thinking this could possibly add anything meaningful to our understanding of real world RCV elections. This study tried to determine whether RCV, plurality or two-round runoff elections provided greater voter satisfaction and acceptance of election results. To determine that, the authors conducted a survey asking if voters were satisfied with a fictional newspaper report of an election, with three different versions given to respondents – plurality, runoff and RCV, with variations of Republican/Democrat winners and variations of “come-from-behind” winners,” i.e. candidates not initially in first place but who win the “runoff.” Again, a minimal explanation of RCV or how it works was given, and the survey showed that respondents had the greatest unfamiliarity with RCV than the other methods. The unsurprising result? Respondents were much more satisfied with “come-from-behind” victories in a traditional two-round runoff election than in RCV, even though RCV is also a runoff system but with a single round of counting. Interestingly, the dissatisfaction with RCV disappeared for those who were more familiar with RCV. In fact, among those respondents who were “very familiar” with RCV, they were equally satisfied with RCV, runoff and plurality. Surprise, surprise. Again, what this study revealed, more than anything, is not only the inadequacy of the explanation for RCV given by the authors of this study, but the failure of the research format itself, thinking that such an artificial mock election could somehow simulate what actually happens in the real world in a real RCV election. Those four studies reviewed above are fitting examples of inadequate and shaky political “science.” Other studies reviewed in our paper from the New America/Electoral Reform Research Group cohort which also used mock elections included: Ranked-Choice Voting is an Acquired Taste by Joseph Anthony and David C. Kimball. New America. (Anthony et al., 2021). Ranked-Choice Voting is No Refuge for Extreme Candidates by Melissa Baker. New America. (Baker, 2021). Also included in this New America cohort is Does Ranked-Choice Voting Reduce Racial Polarization? by Yuki Atsusaka and Theodore Landsman, which actually did use real-world election results data but applied an odd and unconventional methodology to the data which relied on shaky assumptions and non-real-world scenarios that were too divorced from reality. To determine levels of “racially polarized voting,” the researchers imagined “ethnic parties,” by which they mean political parties for each ethnic group, which was especially odd since the election data they were using came from nonpartisan RCV races. But then they made an even odder assumption, namely that since race and ethnic characteristics of studied voters were not available, the authors tried to infer that information based on who voters selected and the racial make-up of voters in each district. This amounted to little more than vague and ambiguous guesswork dressed up with a bunch of mathematical equations used to give it a veneer of scientific appearance. Indeed, it seemed to assume racial polarization in order to prove racial polarization. Based on this questionable methodology, the authors concluded that RCV doesn’t reduce racial polarization. But the premise of this study missed an obvious reality: since RCV incentivizes more candidates to run and can result in more diverse fields of candidates, one would expect more racially-polarized voting in voters’ top rankings, not less, because more voters would have someone on that ballot who represents their racial or ethnic identity and more freedom to vote for their real first choice. By encouraging more diverse candidates and eliminating the spoiler effect, RCV facilitates voting for a favorite candidate of your own race and then selecting a second choice with the best likelihood of winning. The real measure is what voters do with their additional rankings – do they consider other candidates and vote “for the best of the rest”? This study didn’t tell us anything useful about that. But readily available data shows this is common in real RCV elections, and candidates act on this knowledge by engaging with voters outside their racial group. So the authors of this study failed to consider or account for what actually happens in real-world elections, and their conclusions are tainted by this failure. New America has contributed a great deal over the past 2.5 decades to our understanding of many policy areas, including politics and political reform (full disclosure: Steven Hill, one of the authors of this article and of the “Shaky Political Science” research paper and series, is a former senior fellow and former director of New America’s political reform program, 2005-2010). So it was especially disappointing that New America funded and published such a large batch of dubious studies about ranked choice voting. The stated praiseworthy goal of its Electoral Reform Research Group was to inspire new academic research about ranked choice voting that would shed light and help the public better understand the impacts of RCV. Instead, the ERRG research did just the opposite. It produced dubious research that created more confusion and misinformation. In so doing, New America’s political reform program contributed to “shaky political science.” Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS, a reader-supported digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe
The Death of Public Health
During the recent measles outbreak, the largest in more than 30 years, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. refused to clearly recommend the measles vaccine, saying instead that it was a “personal decision,” and that parents should “do their own research.” Similarly, during her recent confirmation hearing for United States Surgeon General, Casey Means was questioned by Senator William Cassidy (R, La). “You’re the nation’s doctor,” said Cassidy. “Would you encourage [a mother] to have her child vaccinated!” “I’m not an individual’s doctor,” Means said. “And every individual needs to talk to their doctor before putting a medication in their body.” In June 2025, Marty Makary, Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said that COVID vaccines for pregnant women should be a “personal choice”, even though every other country in the world recommended the COVID vaccine during pregnancy due to a higher risk for severe disease. It doesn’t end there. On January 5, 2026, RFK Jr. reduced the number of routinely recommended vaccines from 18 to 10. For vaccines that protected against influenza, COVID, and rotavirus, parents were urged to speak with their doctors—to make an individual choice. (On March 16, 2026, in a ruling by a federal court in Boston, RFK Jr.’s revised schedule was invalidated.) What’s happening? Why are public health officials moving away from making recommendations for the public? The origin of this change might be rooted in the first two years of the COVID pandemic. In 2020, during the first year on the pandemic, we didn’t have anything to stop a virus that was killing hundreds of people a day and could be spread asymptomatically. We didn’t have antivirals until October, monoclonal antibodies until November, and vaccines until December. All we could do was restrict travel, close businesses, shutter schools, and mask, isolate, quarantine, test, and social distance. During the second year of the pandemic, when we had vaccines to prevent COVID, people couldn’t go anywhere without their vaccine cards. They couldn’t go to their favorite bar or restaurant or sporting event or place of worship without proof of vaccination. Some people were fired from their jobs for refusing to get vaccinated. For many, this was seen as massive government overreach and energized what has been called the “medical freedom movement.” Indeed, a headline in the New York Times declared, “How Health Freedom Became a Winning Rally Cry.” As expressed in the comments of RFK Jr., Casey Means, and Marty Makary, the medical freedom movement focuses on the individual not the community—the opposite of public health. In an article titled “Ethics and Social Value Judgments in Public Health,” ethicists from Yale University distinguished public health from medical freedom. “Public health policies,” they wrote, “are population oriented. Because individual health affects the health of others, public health measures regulate individual behavior to achieve population health goals. All raise questions about how individual autonomy and freedom should be balanced against public health interests…which respects individuals’ sovereignty over their bodies and actions as long as their actions do not harm others.” The medical freedom movement fails to recognize that it often limits the freedom of others. For example, a parent who is afraid to send a child to school where many of the students are unvaccinated. Or immune compromised children who depend on those around them to for protection. The question then becomes “Freedom for whom?” Is it your right, in the name of medical freedom, to catch and transmit a potentially fatal infection—and in so doing, take away the freedom of others? In Four Essays on Liberty, Isaiah Berlin sums it up best. “Liberty for the wolves,” he wrote, “is death to the lambs.” Thanks for reading Beyond the Noise! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. Subscribe
Tennis duo Sabalenka and Alcaraz sweep top Laureus sports honours
Barcelona's Yamal bags Young Sportsperson of the Year accolade a year after winning the Breakthrough award in 2025.
Charlize Theron Trashes Timothee Chalamet's Future In NYT Interview
The Oscar-winning star saw dim prospects for the "Marty Supreme" actor.
Israel’s critics are winning the battle for the Democratic Party
Democratic voters turned against Israel. Now their politicians are following.
I finally figured out when to use Gemini Notebooks vs NotebookLM — here’s the winning workflow
This "sync loop" is a productivity game-changer
Sky Sports apologises after Erling Haaland calls Bernardo Silva ‘F—ing Cannavaro’
Haaland referenced the Ballon d'Or-winning centre-back after a crucial defensive header from City captain Silva in the win over Arsenal.
Computer science was once a 'golden ticket' — now it's seeing the biggest enrollment drop of any major in 6 years
Nobel Prize–winning economist Simon Johnson said AI has "substantially wiped out" coding as a reliable source of opportunity.
'The chances of you living 50 years are very small': Theoretical physicist explains why humanity likely won't survive to see all the forces unified
Live Science spoke with Nobel prize-winning physicist David Gross, who recently received the $3 million Special Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics, about the quest to unite all the forces and why humanity might not live to see a unified theory.
Computer science was once a 'golden ticket' — now it's seeing the biggest enrollment drop of any major in 6 years. What students are choosing instead
Nobel Prize–winning economist Simon Johnson said AI has "substantially wiped out" coding as a reliable source of opportunity.
Best Meta Glasses (2026): Ray-Ban, Oakley, AR
Meta is unquestionably winning the face-wearable war. Can you trust the company? Maybe not. But these are some of the nicest glasses I've ever worn.
Physicists share the glory and the wealth after winning $3M for exploring muon mysteries
A University of Washington professor and hundreds of others who measured the muon's magnetism have won a $3 million Breakthrough Prize.
Exclusive: Adam Silver on winning the Edison Achievement Award: ‘Sports remind us that some of the most important forms of innovation are human’
The NBA Commissioner has an unlikely background to lead the league through crises and global expansion, but Adam Silver says executives should get hooped with some sports business knowhow.
Does Trump even have a political strategy?
Winning in politics means delivering on popular issues, and that is difficult for any president. Without a solid political strategy and discipline is nigh impossible.
Michael Phelps Reflects on Impact of His Mental Health Advocacy
Michael Phelps sits down with NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Llamas for a new series called Great Americans to mark 250 years of the United States. Phelps talks about his life after the Olympics and reflects on the impact that openly discussing his mental health struggles has had on others and why he says that's "better than winning an Olympic gold medal."
'"Master Harold" … and the Boys' review: An exquisite Fugard revival
"'Master Harold' … and the Boys," Athol Fugard's classic drama set in apartheid South Africa, opens at the Geffen Playhouse in a production starring John Kani, a Tony-winning interpreter of Fugard's work.
Promotion challenge the goal next season
Manager Steve Evans says his objective is to turn Bristol Rovers into a promotion-winning side next season.
Living in rent-stabilized NYC apartment; feel stuck after 5 years
Winning New York City's affordable-housing lottery got me a rent-stabilized apartment. It's too small for my family, but giving it up isn't an option.
Republican Clay Fuller sworn in to take House seat formerly held by Marjorie Taylor Greene
Republican Rep. Clay Fuller of Georgia was sworn into office Tuesday after winning a special election to take the congressional seat formerly held by Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Preston Middle School reclaims state title in Science Olympiad
Preston Middle School reclaims the Science Olympiad state title, winning its 14th since 2010 and 15th overall to advance to the national tournament.
Jonathan Groff cast in Lin-Manuel Miranda-directed musical film project
Ronks native Jonathan Groff and award-winning stage and film composer Lin-Manuel Miranda — who shared the Broadway stage in "Hamilton" — are back together again, set to work on a
LaMelo Ball's layup, Miles Bridges' block at buzzer give Hornets win over Heat
LaMelo Ball made a layup with 4.7 seconds left in overtime, Miles Bridges blocked Davion Mitchell's attempt at a winning layup at the buzzer, and the Charlotte Hornets beat Miami 127-126
NBA play-in: Coby White 3, late LaMelo Ball layup propel Hornets in OT thriller past Heat
White sent the game to OT with a 3 as Kon Knueppel watched from the bench. Then LaMelo Ball redeemed himself with a game-winning layup in the final seconds.
NYC Health + Hospitals/Carter Expands Award-Winning Rehabilitative Care as New Outpatient Service - NYC Health + Hospitals
New York, NY — NYC Health + Hospitals/Carter, the only Long-Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) in New York, today announced it will begin offering
The economic game of chicken between Iran and the US is about to enter a dangerous new phase
Iran has been winning its economic game of chicken with President Donald Trump.
30 Under 30 Europe Entertainment 2026: Mau P, Marisa Abela & Other Breakout Stars To Watch
The future of sports is already here thanks to these young all-stars who are winning on and off the field.
30 Under 30 Europe Sports & Games 2026: How Ellie Kildunne, Eberechi Eze And More Turn Competition Into Commercial Success
Ellie Kildunne, Antoine Dupont and Eberechi Eze are taking their winnings off the field. How these young leaders and more are changing sports, games and business for good.
Microsoft is testing OpenClaw-like AI bots for 365 Copilot
The Verge is about technology and how it makes us feel. Founded in 2011, we offer our audience everything from breaking news to reviews to award-winning features and investigations, on our site, in video, and in podcasts.
‘Come From Away’: West Springfield production tells 9/11 story of kindness
The Tony and Grammy-Award winning production will be staged at the Majestic Theater April 16 through May 31.
Student view: Celebrating learning as much as winning
Navya Bhardwaj will graduate on May 3 with a bachelor’s degree in computer science and engineering and minors in data science, and computational mathematics, science and engineering. She is president of MSU Women in Computing and served as co-director of SpartaHack.
Blind Boys of Alabama to perform in Provincetown
The Blind Boys of Alabama, Grammy-winning gospel legends, will perform in Provincetown to benefit WOMR radio.
California Republicans caught between Trump loyalty and winning swing districts
California Republicans embrace Trump at their convention while candidates in competitive races keep him at arm's length to win over voters.
McGeeney feels there's 'much more' in Armagh
Armagh manager Kieran McGeeney feels there is "much more" in his team but "I'm all for playing badly and winning" after their extra-time victory over Tyrone.
As Swalwell’s campaign unravels, his rivals in California governor’s race scramble for an opening
The sexual misconduct allegations against Rep. Eric Swalwell are damaging his hopes of winning the governor’s race, with former allies revoking their endorsements and a growing list of prominent Democrats telling him to withdraw.
Athletics finding reasons to celebrate while Mets looking for answers
The Athletics went viral with a new home run celebration Saturday as they locked up a winning road trip to New York.
Depleted Grizzlies wrap season against resting Rockets
The Houston Rockets finally had displayed signs of consistency that seemed to validate their standing as a contender in the West, with an eight-game winning streak confirming as much.
Republicans are torn on following Trump's lead in governor's race
Republicans have a rare, if slim shot at winning the governor’s mansion in deep blue California — but risk blowing it if they’re divided.
ENTERTAINMENT: WAC hosts Australian Chamber Orchestra
The Australian Chamber Orchestra is premiering “Horizon,” a new work it commissioned from Pulitzer- and Grammy-winning composer John Luther Adams, on its current tour. It includes an 8 p.m. concert Saturday at Fayetteville’s Walton Arts Center
“AI polls” are fake polls
A few weeks after Donald Trump’s second presidential win, I took the train up from London (where I was living at the time) to Oxford to attend a conference on polls and forecasts of the 2024 election. Most of the attendees were pollsters or academics, but I also watched presentations from Aaru and Electric Twin, two companies that do what is interchangeably called synthetic sampling, silicon sampling, or synthetic audiences. Stripped of startup jargon, that means they use large language models (LLMs) to simulate responses to public opinion polls by having AI agents take on the role of survey respondents. I had already heard of Aaru thanks to some articles with eye-catching headlines like “No people, no problem: AI chatbots predict elections better than humans” in the months leading up to Election Day. The founders were making some big, some might even say far-fetched claims, such as: “within two years, we will simulate the entire globe — from the way crops are grown in Ukraine to how that impacts production of oil in Iraq, trade through the strait of Malacca, and elections for the mayor of Baltimore.” When Semafor asked Aaru’s cofounders — Cameron Fink and Ned Koh — about my boss, they said “we respect all those who came before us.” Nate (as he so often does) shared his thoughts on Twitter: Fink and Koh were relatively good-natured about this back-and-forth when we spoke at Oxford. They even offered to mail me one of the t-shirts featuring Nate’s quote they apparently had made. I never took them up on the offer, which I now somewhat regret. These synthetic sampling companies fell off my radar for a while, but they do still exist. In fact, Aaru recently received a $1 billion valuation. Is what they’re doing anywhere close to the most important frontier in AI development? Not by a longshot, especially when Anthropic just developed a model so adept at exploiting software vulnerabilities that it’s only being released to 40 companies. Still, silicon sampling is increasingly finding its way into public polling. Axios reported in March that “a majority of people trust their own doctors and nurses” based on findings from Aaru — without mentioning that the “people” in that sentence were actually LLMs. Around the same time, the Public Sentiment Institute “boosted” their online sample of 373 real survey respondents with 114 AI agents.1 (Spoiler alert: even the co-founder of Electric Twin doesn’t think that’s a particularly defensible approach.) Polling companies like Qualtrics and Ipsos are also developing synthetic data panels. So, what should we make of these … “polls”? Let’s get one thing out of the way: whatever they are, they’re not polls in the way that term is usually defined. Subscribe You can’t replace polls with AI On one hand, using LLMs to essentially make up fake survey respondents sort of sounds like the dumbest idea ever, one that will at best imperfectly replicate real polls while introducing all sorts of biases. On the other hand, with LLMs improving at a remarkable, perhaps even alarming rate, maybe that means I’m a dinosaur at the ripe old age of 24 because I still want to rely on polls that talk to actual people. I’m not going to argue that synthetic samples are completely useless. In fact, as I’ll return to later, there is evidence that some techniques can replicate topline survey results quickly and cheaply. But the marketing from certain companies can be slightly optimistic. “No traditional poll will exist by the time the next general election occurs,” said Fink in 2024. We’re just 206 days away from the midterms, and based on the fact that I still have to collect a bunch of polls every day, I’d say he should have run that prediction by a sample of AI agents before the interview.2 To see why synthetic samples can’t replace polls, here’s a quick primer on how they work. The simplest version of these models involves taking a LLM (like ChatGPT or Claude), giving it a demographic profile (e.g., a white, college-educated woman who lives in Utah and makes $70k a year), and then asking it to respond to a survey question. You repeat that process a few thousand times using different demographic profiles and end up with a sample of synthetic survey responses. The actual models used by private companies are more sophisticated than this, usually because they incorporate more hypothesized demographic characteristics for each agent and provide them with extra information. Aaru, for example, feeds agents a diet of news and information they’d be likely to consume, while Electric Twin incorporates their customers’ proprietary data about the audience they’re trying to replicate. The way Ben Warner, the co-founder of Electric Twin, explained it to me was “we have a large amount of data on […] for instance, 5,000 people. Can we make an accurate prediction of how they would respond to another question?” Still, it should be obvious why synthetic samples can’t replace polls. Polling is fundamentally a data collection process. We might use surveys to make predictions by feeding them into election forecasts, but the main purpose of a poll isn’t prediction, it’s gathering new data about what people think and how they feel. Silicon sampling, on the other hand, produces no new data. It’s simply a model: you input LLM training data, demographic prompts, and a bunch of other information, and it spits out a prediction for what a poll would say. We love models here, but models aren’t polls. That difference is an important philosophical sticking point for most pollsters I talk to. “I think politics should stay away from [synthetic sampling], because we’re trying to […] represent the voice of the people,” said Natalie Jackson, a vice president at GQR Insights. Democratic pollster John Hagner told me: “I think I’m just incredibly skeptical of this idea. I don’t think it’s research. At that point, you’re asking the machine to tell you what you already believe.” Hagner has seen some presentations of early synthetic sampling experiments, but so far, “if it’s being used in a campaign, people are keeping it incredibly quiet.”3 But Eli, I hear you saying, aren’t polls themselves increasingly governed by modeling decisions? Indeed they are: pollsters’ choices on which sampling method to use, how to define their likely voter models, and how to weight their samples can and do lead to dramatic differences in the results they publish. Aaru even referenced these limitations in the methodology statement included with that maternal mortality “poll” — although I’m using the term “methodology statement” loosely here, because it doesn’t really explain how the model works at all. We can ignore the (frankly preposterous) implication that synthetic sampling isn’t subject to a separate set of biases. The important point is that there’s still a meaningful difference between using weighting and other statistical techniques on actual polling data and using a model to predict what a poll would say. The latter is far closer to election forecasts or techniques like MRP — potentially useful models, but not a replacement for polls.4 To be fair, other synthetic sampling companies are perfectly happy with the distinction between polls and models. Warner compared polling and synthetic sampling to different tools in a toolbox. “The mistake I think we make is we think that these new tools should either work in exactly the same way or somehow replace these old tools,” he said. “Rather than thinking of it as, okay, so we’ve always had the hammer, we’ve always had the screwdriver, now we’ve got a saw. But don’t use a saw to try [to] do the job of a hammer.” A quick comment from Nate Eli didn’t ask me for a comment — rather rude of him, don’t you think? But since I’m editing this story, I figured I’d add a few quick thoughts rather than putting words in his mouth. Beyond the frequently misleading marketing, what bothers me about the AI “poll” hype is that as AI tools make statistical inference cheaper and/or better (note that these are not synonyms) that actually increases the comparative value of collecting original data. You might be able to train a model to make a reasonable estimate of what some hard-to-reach poll respondent would say — say, a young Black man who voted for Trump. (Such a person checks a number of boxes for a voter who is usually hard to reach in surveys.) Indeed, this is closely related to what models like the Silver Bulletin forecast already do. They essentially smooth out the kinks in noisy survey data by making inferences based on past voting patterns or national polls or surveys of other states. But you don’t actually know what these voters think unless you’re reaching them directly. If there’s a shift in opinion among this subgroup, you’re not going to detect it. So if I were running a campaign, I’d invest more in going the extra mile to find a representative sample of those voters. And then I’d hire some smart quants — or Claude? — to figure out the implications for campaign strategy based on proprietary data that my competitors didn’t have access to. -Nate Silver Are these models any good? If synthetic surveys are just a new type of model, the next obvious question is whether the models are at least accurate. The answer very much depends on who you ask. On one end of the spectrum, you have the maximalist argument that synthetic sampling is more accurate than actual polls. “It’s an incredibly challenging problem to go to someone and say ‘hey, we’re going to be more accurate at predicting human behavior than you, even when you talk to your customers directly’,” Koh recently told CNBC. In his view, synthetic sampling isn’t a saw to polling’s hammer, it’s “magic.” There’s certainly evidence that synthetic samples can replicate certain survey toplines. But if Aaru does have any examples of their approach outperforming the polls, they’re keeping those to themselves.5 Aaru’s 2024 election model, for example, had Kamala Harris leading in Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on November 4th. And although they’ve since taken down their forecast page, they gave Harris a 50.5 percent chance of winning the race on November 2nd.6 After the election, Fink told Semafor he was happy enough with those results because they were “within margin of error,” a term that is completely meaningless when applied to a “sample” of AI agents. And of course, Aaru says their models have improved since 2024, so supposedly now they’d be more accurate than the polls? Still, their stronger argument is on cost: “We are significantly faster and cheaper than traditional polling, and still more accurate,” said Fink. The first two claims are undeniably true, but the third brings us to the opposite end of the spectrum. Both Jackson and Hagner are skeptical that these models are reliable for anything beyond replicating common survey toplines. “I just […] don’t think the machines are what we want when we’re looking for nuanced views. My example on this is people in Arizona and Nevada in 2024 who voted for Trump and voted for expanding abortion in their states on ballot initiatives,” said Jackson. Hagner identified another issue. Maybe the synthetic respondents, like sycophantic LLMs, are inhuman in one important way: they’re too nice. “The reports that have come through at the meetings that I’ve been at are that the early experiments on this, they cannot get respondents to be as racist or sexist or, frankly, as negative as human respondents,” he said. Academic research mostly agrees on this point. While there are some papers that show promising results when using LLMs to replicate polling data, most show that LLMs suffer from various quirks like producing too few “don’t know” responses and can seriously overpredict the favorability of politicians like Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. They also seem to struggle with too little variation between demographic subgroups, so the difference in predicted opinion between Democrats and Republicans, for example, is too small. When I asked Warner about these studies, his response to these papers was that just because academics can’t get synthetic sampling to work doesn’t mean that the technique doesn’t work in general. “Actually, the argument is, okay, yours does not [work]. That does not mean […] for this complex set of machinery, which uses a lot of investment, a lot of time, a lot of money, you can’t get it to work.” Cards on the table, I’m somewhat sympathetic to this argument because academics aren’t exactly great at making election forecasts. Usually, the people with skin in the game are the most accurate. Warner’s argument is that the approach Electric Twin takes — which includes, for example, making multiple predictions for each synthetic respondent using different models and prompts and subsequently averaging those to get a final prediction in a sort of ensemble forecast — produces better results than the simpler academic models. Warner shared a comparison between his method and the method from a recent academic paper with me, and Electric Twin was indeed able to get more accurate replication. But even still, he acknowledged that synthetic sampling “is not a crystal ball.” “If you asked me, do I think using other data sources will be more accurate than asking somebody who they will vote for, I would probably say no. But if you asked me ‘would your system be useful for our turnout modeling today?’ I would say yes.” For better or worse, it looks like the method is already getting more popular in the market research world. Most of the clients Aaru touts these days are businesses like EY and McDonald’s. And AI will probably begin to pop up in other parts of the political polling process. Pollsters are already using it to code open-ended survey responses, and some firms, like YouGov, are testing using LLMs to ask survey respondents questions. More worryingly, one danger to actual polls is that AI agents can be used to infiltrate online surveys. Most online polls use various checks to prevent that from happening, but there’s conflicting evidence on how effective those filters are and how prevalent AI agents currently are in online panels. If those agents ever become impossible to detect, it might spell the end of online polling, but the solution isn’t to replace all of your respondents with ChatGPT. Silver Bulletin is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a subscriber. Subscribe 1 That particular poll obviously doesn’t meet Silver Bulletin standards for aggregation. But we exclude all Public Sentiment Institute polls from our averages because we classify them as an amateur polling firm. 2 You could argue that Fink meant the next presidential election, but (a) I’m also confident we’ll still have real polls in 2028 and (b) in that case he should have asked an LLM to define “general election.” 3 Quick caveat: that’s reporting from a Democratic pollster. It’s possible that Republicans are more willing to use AI in political campaigns. 4 Indeed, Silver Bulletin does not include “polls” produced by MRP in our forecasts or averages, and we think it’s extremely misleading when their practitioners describe them in a way that suggests original data had been collected among a large number of states or Congressional districts. 5 A recent report from Aaru and EY did show two examples of a synthetic estimate being closer than a survey to a real-world benchmark — but I’d take those findings with a grain of salt because the report reads more like an ad and didn’t involve any sort of prediction being made ahead of time. 6 For comparison, our odds for Harris on the same day were 48.2 percent.
Burnley XI vs Brighton – Predicted lineup and team news
Burnley host in-form Brighton today, aiming to narrow a ten-point gap to Premier League safety.The Clarets have moved closer to relegation after winning only once in 22 league games. Manager Scott Par...
FSU softball falls to Stanford on walk-off grand slam
The Stanford Cardinal beat the FSU with a walk-off grand slam to snap their 25-game winning streak.
Al Gore to Keynote 2026 Hollywood Reporter Sustainability Event
Marking the 20th anniversary of his Oscar-winning documentary 'An Inconvenient Truth,' the former vice president will headline the April 23 ceremony honoring TV dramas for their sustainability achievements.
Masters 2026: Rory McIlroy winning a green jacket has only made him more dangerous at Augusta National
McIlroy started slow on the first nine, but confidence allowed him to 'keep swinging' his way to the top of the Round 1 leaderboard
Can AI dream of electric sheep? The team behind the award-winning 1000XResist on their next game
We talked with Remy Siu, the Creative Director behind the award-winning 1000XResist, about their upcoming AI-centric game.
Elissa Slotkin is testing whether winning in Trump country is a winning message for Democrats
Sen. Elissa Slotkin knows how to win in Trump country. She’s trying to show her fellow Democrats the way.
Europe is winning the AI and drone science race. It's losing the deployment war
Europe's scientists are ahead. Europe's armies are not. The continent produces world-class research on AI, drones, robotics, quantum and cybersecurity, but watches the US race past it to deployment.Vi...
Europe is winning the AI and drone science race. It's losing the deployment war
Europe's scientists are ahead. Europe's armies are not. The continent produces world-class research on AI, drones, robotics, quantum and cybersecurity, but watches the US race past it to deployment.Vi...
Riz Ahmed powers stripped down modern-day ‘Hamlet’
Who wouldn’t want to see “to be or not to be” as delivered by an Oscar-winning actor behind the wheel of a speeding car?
Bartholomew’s heroics save Cyclones in rivalry game
IOWA CITY — While the rain appeared heavy at times on the Big Ten Network stream it was a case of “when it rains, it pours” as Iowa State (23-15, 4-8 Big 12) and Iowa (21-17, 5-10 Big Ten) combined for five home runs, punctuated by Reagan Bartholomew’s game-winning two-run homer to deep center field […]
Want to win big in sports? Follow Normal West grad Glenn Kinley, TV’s good-luck charm
A 2017 Normal West High School graduate, Kinley has been around a lot of winning in his young career as a television sports director. While at KSNT in Topeka, Kansas, he covered a Kansas men’s basketball national championship and two Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl wins. Now this: Illinois’ run to the men’s basketball Final Four as sports director at WCIA in Champaign.
UNE faculty, business executive board mentor high schoolers in regional workforce development challenge
Students from multiple high schools in southern Maine gathered on April 2 to compete at the University of New England in the Junior Achievement of Maine’s (JA Maine) Titan Challenge, and several teams were mentored by faculty in UNE's College of Business — including the winning team in the southern Maine region.
Kevin Durant scores 24 in his return to Phoenix, leads the Rockets past the Suns 119-105
Kevin Durant scored 24 points in his return to Phoenix and the Houston Rockets rallied from an early 21-point deficit and pulled away late to beat the Phoenix Suns 119-105 on Tuesday night. The Rockets are on a seven-game winning streak and moved into a tie with the Los Angeles Lakers for the No. 4 spot in the Western Conference playoff race. Durant made 5 of 9 3-pointers.
Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Ray Stevens recovering after breaking neck
i a e n celebrity country-music music grammy-awards entertainment u-s-news general-news | Talk Radio 1210 WPHT
Dropping the Series Opener: Mets 4, Dbacks 3
The Arizona Diamondbacks dropped the series opener to the New York Mets on Tuesday, falling 4-3 in extra innings after squandering a late lead. Leading 3-2 into the eighth, the D-backs watched the game slip away as the bullpen allowed tying and winning runs against Jonathan Loaisiga and Paul Sewald. This felt like a painfully […]
Morning Sports: April 7, 2026
Breck Reed Of Sheridan HS To Play Football At Montana State University: A Sheridan Bronc football player will go from winning a state championship, to a team that recently won a national championship. Breck Reed has signed a written offer of athletic aid to play football at Montana State University. He missed part of his […]
MAGA Is Winning Its War Against U.S. Science
Source: NBER With all the other terrible news right now, you may not have noticed that Donald Trump is in the process of killing American science. OK, that’s an exaggeration — but not that much of an exaggeration. The Trump administration’s latest budget proposal calls for a gigantic increase in military spending combined with severe cuts to social programs. But as the chart above shows, it also calls for debilitating reductions in research funding. Furthermore, Trump appointees have already been strangling science by sharply reducing the rate at which research grants are approved. Here, for example, is the number of new grants approved by the National Science Foundation: Source: Nature Large numbers of existing grants have also been frozen or terminated, especially in the study of infectious diseases. Add to this a sharp drop in visas issued to foreign students, who often play a direct role in research and who help support academic departments that do research: Put all of this together, and much U.S. scientific research is set to come to a screeching halt — not a few years from now, but over the course of the next year or two. This new assault on U.S. science is taking place at a time when the role of American science in the world has already been greatly eroded. The chart below, based on research recently reported by the National Bureau of Economic Research, measures national strength in science by the share of publications in highly ranked journals. In the 1990s the United States had more such publications than the rest of the world combined. Since then we’ve dropped into third place — well behind China and slightly below the European Union. And this was before the Trump administration’s attack on science had time to take its full effect. Source Some erosion in U.S. scientific preeminence was inevitable given China’s growing sophistication and wealth. But we’ve also fallen behind Europe, even though everyone says that Europe is lagging economically and technologically. Claims about Europe’s underperformance are, in fact, dubious if one looks hard at the data. But it’s still striking to see America lagging. What’s going on? There are presumably multiple factors behind America’s scientific lag. But even before Trump II the growing hostility of the U.S. right to science surely had some negative effect. And since the rise of MAGA G.O.P. attitudes toward science in general have become overwhelmingly hostile. This is true even for the Republican rank and file: And while I haven’t been able to find good survey data, it’s obvious that the anti-science turn has been even more pronounced — and began earlier — among the Republican political elite. Chris Mooney published The Republican War on Science in 2005, and even then was describing a longstanding trend. Why have Republicans turned so anti-science? Part of the answer is that they believe that scientists don’t support them. And they’re right! A study of who scientists give money to shows that only a small percentage gave money to Republicans even 20 years ago, and that almost none of them donate to Republicans now: Social scientists have always been strongly pro-Democratic, while there used to be a significant number of physical, “hard” scientists supporting the GOP. But these days physicists are almost as uniformly Democratic, or at least non-Republican, as sociologists. Why are there almost no Republican scientists? It’s not a mystery. GOP political orthodoxy includes positions that are at odds with the scientific consensus on multiple issues, ranging from the validity of the theory of evolution, to the reality of climate change, to the efficacy and safety of vaccines. In each case the scientific consensus is solidly grounded in evidence. But even before the rise of MAGA the U.S. right was increasingly hostile to evidence-based policymaking — especially, of course, where the evidence is unfavorable to fossil fuel interests or quack medicine, both financial mainstays of right-wing politics. So scientists don’t support Republicans, and the feeling is mutual. Today’s Republican Party doesn’t like science or scientists. It doesn’t like having its preconceived views challenged by appeals to evidence. It knows that very few scientists are on its side electorally. In general, it sees scientific research as a threat to its grasp on political power. Add in MAGA’s combination of rabid anti-intellectualism and allergy to any hint of criticism, and one has the makings of a drastic anti-science turn in policy. “Ignorance is strength” might was well be an official MAGA motto. And as I said, we aren’t talking about something that will happen over the course of multiple years: The U.S. scientific enterprise is threatened with severe damage, even collapse, over just the next year. There are many reasons to find this prospect horrifying: Think of all the beneficial advances, affecting almost every part of life, that won’t happen because U.S. science — still crucial to the world — has been eviscerated. But think, also, of America’s international standing. Can a nation that has forfeited its role as a leader, or even a contender, in global science, still be a Great Power? No. MUSICAL CODA
How Barack Obama reacted to Michigan winning 2026 NCAA Championship
Barack Obama was quick to celebrate Michigan’s NCAA Championship win, recognising a historic moment as the Wolverines finally ended a decades-long wait for the title. The victory was not just about one night.
Michigan's season ended with an NCAA title. It started with winning the transfer portal.
Monday marked the first time in NCAA basketball history that a team with an all-transfer starting five won the championship.
Lil Nas X granted mental health diversion that could lead to dropped charges in police assault case
A judge said the charges could be dismissed if the Grammy-winning artist completes a mental health diversion program and doesn't break the law for the next two years.
Politics and the potty take center stage for ‘Urinetown’
The Tony Award-winning musical comedy opens Friday at the World Theater.
‘Jeopardy!’: Did Jamie Ding Reach $500,000 in Winnings?
Plus, find out if the super champion moved up on the leaderboard.
Netflix's New #1 Show Absolutely Lives Up to the Hype—and I'm Not the Only One Who's Obsessed
Netflix’s current #1 show is a feel-good, deeply real dating series that’s quietly winning everyone over. Here’s why viewers can’t stop watching (and rooting for the cast).
Lavonte David gives blunt assessment Jalen Hurts after retirement
The Super Bowl winning quarterback has never been given his flowers and it doesn't seem they are coming anytime soon.
Women’s sports are on a winning streak
Since 2022, investments in women’s sports teams have grown about 227% annually, on average, according to McKinsey.
Nebraska baseball improves to 11-1 in Big Ten play, sweeps Penn State
Nebraska continued to surge on Easter Sunday, winning the third game of its series against Penn State and earning its third Big Ten sweep of the season.
TLC’s Chilli Reveals If She Has Any Regrets Tied to 1996 Grammys Speech About Winning Awards While Being Broke (Exclusive)
TLC's Chilli looks back on the band's 1996 Grammy speech about being broke after they won two awards at the ceremony, and shared how she feels about it today, in an exclusive interview with PEOPLE.
Nebraska softball notches two different wins in Rutgers doubleheader
No. 8 Nebraska softball kept up its winning ways on Saturday, beating Rutgers in a doubleheader in two very different ways.
Claire Calahan (8) runs to first base
Claire Calahan (8) runs to first base at Mizzou softball’s game against LSU on Saturday, April 4, 2026, at Mizzou Softball Stadium in Columbia. Mizzou scored 1-0, winning one out
Former Turnstile guitarist charged with attempted murder of bandmate’s father
A former guitarist of the Grammy-winning rock band Turnstile has been charged with attempted second-degree murder and assault after he allegedly struck the father of the group’s lead vocalist with
Former Turnstile guitarist charged with attempted murder of bandmate’s father
A former guitarist of the Grammy-winning rock band Turnstile has been charged with attempted second-degree murder and assault after he allegedly struck the father of the group’s lead vocalist with
Cleveland High baseball team surging with nine-game winning streak
Joshua Pearlstein has been leading the way for the Cavaliers with his hitting and pitching.
‘Racist ideology lodges itself amid austerity politics’: newly elected French mayor on tackling far right
Bally Bagayoko, who was targeted by racist abuse after winning Saint-Denis mayorship, vows to tackle inequality to stem deepening divisions
West's best winning streaks collide as Spurs visit Nuggets
San Antonio's first dynasty ended when Tim Duncan retired with five NBA titles over 19 seasons. Ten years later, the Spurs are hoping to build another one behind Victor Wembanyama.
N.J. award-winning actor’s new HBO comedy special set to premiere this weekend. How to watch.
This comedian, who was raised in Rutherford, will open up about his life and opinion on today's issues in upcoming comedy special.
Islanders Gameday: Get busy winning or get busy dying
If the regular season ended this morning, the New York Islanders would qualify for the playoffs by virtue of having more points, thanks to having played one more game, than Detroit, Columbus, or Philadelphia. Tonight that will not change but it can get either better or more fragile as they host the Flyers, who desperately […]
Penguins boat raced in Tampa; playoff cushion slips
The loss ended the Penguins’ two-game winning streak.
Roush Review: Chilling ‘Testaments’ Is a Grim Sequel to ‘Handmaid’s Tale’
Hulu's sequel to the Emmy-winning 'The Handmaid's Tale' depicts the beginning of a slow-brewing rebellion among the pampered but repressed daughters of Gilead's ruling class, being schooled and groomed as
Science fiction writer Kim Stanley Robinson will deliver 2026 Commencement Address
Kim Stanley Robinson, an award-winning American science fiction writer, will deliver the 2026 commencement address. Commencement is scheduled for May 24 on McCullough Lawn.
Series preview: Nebraska baseball preps for weekend series with Penn State
Read a series preview as the Huskers baseball team have a 11-game winning streak as they go into facing Penn State.
Megan Thee Stallion Misses Moulin Rouge Shows Hospitalization, Sets Return
The Grammy Award-winning rapper was hospitalized on Tuesday night and "has since been treated, discharged and is now resting," her rep shared with The Hollywood Reporter.
Green Room Theatre at F&M to undergo renovations, become James Lapine Theater
The Franklin & Marshall College stage that once held performances by famous alumni, from actor Roy Scheider of “Jaws” to the late Oscar-winning director Franklin Schaffner, will earn a new
Sorell celebrates Odyssey Award with Cherokee Immersion School students
Cherokee author Traci Sorell’s audio book “Clack, Clack! Smack! A Cherokee Stickball Story” is a national award-winning book.