昌吉男性阳痿如何治(昌吉市那个医院治疗妇科好) (今日更新中)

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753

The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department has released some of the video that was captured on Oct. 1 when police officers broke into the suite being used by mass shooter Stephen Paddock.Sheriff Joe Lombardo told the public on Tuesday that the department would release the video. Lombardo emphasized that the release of the video and other records would most likely retraumatize survivors and family members and that it would also put stress, both emotional and financial, on the department.  507

The pandemic has exposed a long-standing problem across the county: a lack of internet access in homes. And for most families, the switch to virtual learning came without warning. "Yes, there was an announcement, and my initial thought was not fear, more of daunting. I was overwhelmed," said San Diego mother Paula Gosswiller. Because for Gosswiller, it meant having to convert her kitchen into a classroom for five. Ranging from ages 5 to 13, all of her school-aged kids are in different grades."We did not have internet at the time in our house, and just the thought of homeschooling without internet or technology was daunting," said Gosswiller.The kids attend St. Ritas Catholic School in southeast San Diego, which was able to secure enough devices for each student before the school year, thanks to a donation. When school went virtual, they deployed the iPads and Chromebooks to students in need."The inconsistency of internet and things like that, really made it challenging for a lot of our families," said Principal Gina Olsen. Olsen says nearly half of the students needed to borrow a device when the school went virtual. She says they were also grateful to receive a grant from the Southeastern San Diego COVID-19 Rapid Response Fund, to help cover missed tuition payments for students. Like many families, the Gosswiller's were forced to add an internet bill to their list of expenses, but not all can afford to do this."I think the statistics are something like 1 in 4 kids in the U.S. don't have access to WiFi at home. Before the pandemic, they could stay after school, they could go to a library, maybe a McDonald's parking lot or a Starbucks," said Angela Baker, who runs corporate responsibility at Qualcomm.Located in San Diego, the tech giant Qualcomm helped turned our cellphones into smartphones with its modem chips. Now, they're putting some of that technology into computers."With people getting so used to their smartphones, and the experience of always being on, great battery life, being able to use it anywhere you are, no matter where you are, we kind of took that concept and applied it to the PC market," said Pete Lancia, who runs external communications at Qualcomm. With help from manufacturing partners, Qualcomm built computers with cellular connectivity that don't require WiFi to get online. They donated 900 to students in the San Diego Unified School District."We really need to make sure that kids have access to broadband at speeds that will let them do their homework, watch videos, see the instruction if that's being done, now that we know so many schools are probably going to be online," said Baker. And like your smartphone, the battery is designed to last all day. "I think this was a wake-up call for everyone," said Gosswiller.She says her family is making it work, navigating the challenges as they go."We're ready to take it on and mark the days off the calendar when they can go back to school physically," she said. 2981

The number of coronavirus-related deaths in the United States passed 250,000 on Wednesday as more than 1,000 people are dying from the virus per day in the US this month, according to Johns Hopkins University data.The first coronavirus-related death in the US came on February 29.The solemn milestone lands as coronavirus cases reach peak levels throughout the US, forcing governors to reimpose shutdowns and bolster mask mandates. The virus has been particularly deadly in the nation’s heartland, with hospitals in the Midwest full with COVID-19 patients. Nearly 77,000 Americans were in the hospital on Tuesday battling coronavirus symptoms, according to the COVID Tracking Project. Johns Hopkins reported 1,707 COVID-19 related deaths in the US on Tuesday, marking the deadliest day for the virus in six months.The US passed the 200,000 coronavirus-related death mark on September 21. The US has approximately averaged 862 coronavirus-related deaths since then.Here is where the US reached previous milestones.November 18: 250,000September 21: 200,000July 28: 150,000May 23: 100,000April 23: 50,000February 29: 1The University of Washington’s IHME model projects that the US will reach 300,000 coronavirus deaths on December 22.According to JHU, the US represents 19% of global coronavirus deaths despite only having 4% of the world's population. 1358

The most dangerous place for women is the home, according to a new UN study.Out of an estimated 87,000 women killed last year, some 50,000 -- or 58% -- were killed by partners or family members, according to the 2018 report on gender-related killing of women and girls by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).More than a third of the women intentionally killed in 2017 were killed by a current or former partner, and 137 women are killed by family members every day, it said.While the majority of intentional homicide victims are male and killed by strangers, women are far more likely to die at the hands of someone they know, the study showed.UNODC Executive Director Yury Fedotov said women "continue to pay the highest price as a result of gender inequality, discrimination and negative stereotypes" and that gender-based homicide is a "lethal act on a continuum of gender-based discrimination and abuse."The study, released on the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women on November 25, looked at homicide data related to gender violence and "femicide," a term understood as a gender-based hate crime perpetrated by men.Globally, Asia was the region with the highest number of women killed by partners or family members last year, at 20,000, followed by Africa (19,000), the Americas (8,000), Europe (3,000) and Oceania (300).However, rates were higher in Africa and the Americas, meaning women faced the greatest risk of being killed by partners or family members in these regions.In Africa, these homicides accounted for 3.1 victims per 100,000 of the female population and in the Americas, the rate was 1.6 victims per 100,000 of the female population -- compared with 0.9 per 100,000 in Asia.Europe showed the lowest rate of gender-based homicide, with 0.7 victims per 100,000 of the female population.While countries have taken various steps to address violence against women and gender-related killings -- including the adoption of special units and more training in the criminal justice system -- the report said there is no sign of a fall in the number of gender-related killings of women and girls worldwide.The total number of female homicide victims appears to have increased since 2012, it said, when the number of women killed by partners or family members was estimated at 48,000 -- or 47% of all female homicide victims.The new study has called for a series of measures to combat the global problem, including coordination between police, the criminal justice system, health and social services, and involving men more in addressing the problem."In order to prevent and tackle gender-related killing of women and girls, men need to be involved in efforts to combat intimate partner violence/family-related homicide and in changing cultural norms that move away from violent masculinity and gender stereotypes," it said. 2892

来源：资阳报