北京强制性脊椎炎症怎么办(济南强直能考公务员吗) (今日更新中)

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court released new congressional district lines Monday, replacing the old Republican-drawn maps in time for the state's May primary.House Republican and Democratic operatives said Monday afternoon they are still analyzing the partisan makeup of the new districts.But in a swing state where Republicans hold 13 House seats to Democrats' five, the balance appears all but certain to tip in Democrats' direction.The biggest changes come in the Philadelphia suburbs, where three Republican-held seats -- Reps. Ryan Costello, Brian Fitzpatrick and the retiring Pat Meehan -- were already Democratic targets.The new maps appear more compact and suburban than the existing district boundaries and an alternative that state legislative Republicans had submitted -- and one of those districts is now made up of just Montgomery County, a Democratic stronghold that the GOP had proposed dividing heavily.Republicans in the Pennsylvania legislature have said they intend to challenge the new maps in federal court. The Supreme Court previously refused to hear a challenge to the state high court's ruling that the previous maps were gerrymandered in a way that violated the Pennsylvania Constitution. 1221

The Navy has modified their SEAL ethos and creed to remove “man” and “brotherhood” to include gender-neutral language, according to military officials. In response, President Donald Trump tweeted he would “overturn” the changes."The previous versions of the SEAL Ethos and SWCC Creed were written prior to the law allowing women to serve as operators in Naval Special Warfare," Lt. Cmdr. Matthew Stroup, a spokesman for Naval Special Warfare Command, told Military.com.The changes were first reported by the American Military News on Monday. Thursday afternoon, President Trump responded on Twitter to a Conservative outlet who had tweeted a link to the story saying “I will be overturning this ridiculous order immediately!” 733

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 Port Authority commissioner who abruptly resigned last week was caught on camera berating police officers in New Jersey.The Tenafly Police Department released the video of Caren Z. Turner, 60, from a March 31 traffic stop. In it, she flashed her badge and credentials, giving the appearance that she was trying to interfere on behalf of her daughter and her daughter's friend, who were also in the vehicle.She can be heard on the video demanding information from police and reminding the officers of the fact that she worked at the Port Authority.Police reportedly pulled over the vehicle for its front tinted windows and an unclear license plate, and eventually discovered an issue with the vehicle registration. 725

The House has passed a .3 trillion spending package that will increase funding for the military and domestic spending and will keep the government funded through the end of September.The legislation passed with Democrats and Republicans coming together to pass it less than 24 hours after the 2,300-page bill was made public.Now, it's up to the Senate to pass it before the government runs out of money Friday at midnight. The Senate need unanimous consent -- meaning all members have to agree -- to bring the bill up for a timely vote. If one member objects, it could force the government into a brief shutdown. 622

来源：资阳报