With home field clinched for CUSA title game, Jax State has more goals on its plateNEW YORK (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump wants to turn the lights out on daylight saving time. In a post on his social media site Friday, Trump said his party would try to end the practice when he returns to office. “The Republican Party will use its best efforts to eliminate Daylight Saving Time, which has a small but strong constituency, but shouldn’t! Daylight Saving Time is inconvenient, and very costly to our Nation,” he wrote. Setting clocks forward one hour in the spring and back an hour in the fall is intended to maximize daylight during summer months, but has long been subject to scrutiny. Daylight saving time was first adopted as a wartime measure in 1942. Lawmakers have occasionally proposed getting rid of the time change altogether. The most prominent recent attempt, a now-stalled bipartisan bill named the Sunshine Protection Act , had proposed making daylight saving time permanent. The measure was sponsored by Florida Sen. Marco Rubio , whom Trump has tapped to helm the State Department. “Changing the clock twice a year is outdated and unnecessary,” Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida said as the Senate voted in favor of the measure. Health experts have said that lawmakers have it backward and that standard time should be made permanent. Some health groups , including the American Medical Association and American Academy of Sleep Medicine, have said that it’s time to do away with time switches and that sticking with standard time aligns better with the sun — and human biology. Most countries do not observe daylight saving time. For those that do, the date that clocks are changed varies, creating a complicated tapestry of changing time differences. Arizona and Hawaii don't change their clocks at all.Cellectis announces the drawdown of the third tranche of €5 million under the credit facility agreement entered with the European Investment Bank (EIB)
None
Rotary International distributes 6 lakh sanitary pads in Chandigarh
Tyler Technologies stock hits all-time high of $631.86
Greatman Mocks Themba GorimboJimmy Carter, former US president and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, dead at 100
Shares of Match Group, Inc. ( NASDAQ:MTCH – Get Free Report ) have received a consensus recommendation of “Moderate Buy” from the twenty-four brokerages that are covering the stock, MarketBeat.com reports. Twelve investment analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating, eleven have given a buy rating and one has issued a strong buy rating on the company. The average twelve-month target price among brokers that have issued ratings on the stock in the last year is $37.68. MTCH has been the subject of several recent research reports. New Street Research downgraded Match Group from a “buy” rating to a “neutral” rating in a report on Monday, December 16th. StockNews.com lowered shares of Match Group from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a research note on Friday, November 15th. Jefferies Financial Group reissued a “hold” rating and set a $32.00 price target (down from $40.00) on shares of Match Group in a research report on Tuesday, December 17th. JPMorgan Chase & Co. reaffirmed a “neutral” rating and issued a $33.00 price objective (down from $40.00) on shares of Match Group in a research report on Wednesday, December 18th. Finally, Loop Capital decreased their price objective on shares of Match Group from $35.00 to $30.00 and set a “hold” rating for the company in a research note on Thursday, December 12th. View Our Latest Research Report on Match Group Match Group Stock Performance Match Group declared that its board has authorized a stock repurchase program on Wednesday, December 11th that allows the company to repurchase $1.50 billion in shares. This repurchase authorization allows the technology company to buy up to 19% of its stock through open market purchases. Stock repurchase programs are usually a sign that the company’s leadership believes its shares are undervalued. Match Group Announces Dividend The firm also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Tuesday, January 21st. Shareholders of record on Monday, January 6th will be issued a dividend of $0.19 per share. This represents a $0.76 annualized dividend and a yield of 2.29%. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Monday, January 6th. Match Group’s dividend payout ratio (DPR) is presently 33.93%. Insider Activity In other news, Director Stephen Bailey sold 801 shares of Match Group stock in a transaction on Friday, November 22nd. The stock was sold at an average price of $31.61, for a total value of $25,319.61. Following the completion of the transaction, the director now directly owns 12,398 shares in the company, valued at approximately $391,900.78. The trade was a 6.07 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which can be accessed through the SEC website . Insiders own 0.77% of the company’s stock. Institutional Inflows and Outflows Several large investors have recently added to or reduced their stakes in MTCH. Starboard Value LP bought a new stake in shares of Match Group during the third quarter valued at about $361,605,000. Pacer Advisors Inc. grew its stake in Match Group by 88.5% during the second quarter. Pacer Advisors Inc. now owns 6,263,311 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $190,279,000 after acquiring an additional 2,940,667 shares in the last quarter. Marshall Wace LLP bought a new stake in Match Group during the 2nd quarter worth approximately $49,053,000. Retirement Systems of Alabama lifted its stake in Match Group by 2,732.1% in the 3rd quarter. Retirement Systems of Alabama now owns 1,659,718 shares of the technology company’s stock worth $62,804,000 after purchasing an additional 1,601,115 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Dimensional Fund Advisors LP boosted its holdings in Match Group by 75.5% in the 2nd quarter. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP now owns 2,271,787 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $69,018,000 after purchasing an additional 977,090 shares during the period. Institutional investors own 94.05% of the company’s stock. Match Group Company Profile ( Get Free Report Match Group, Inc engages in the provision of dating products. Its portfolio of brands includes Tinder, Hinge, Match, Meetic, OkCupid, Pairs, Plenty Of Fish, Azar, BLK, and Hakuna, as well as a various other brands, each built to increase users' likelihood of connecting with others. Its services are available in over 40 languages to users worldwide. See Also Receive News & Ratings for Match Group Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Match Group and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un vowed to implement the “toughest” anti-U.S. policy, state media reported Sunday, less than a month before Donald Trump takes office as U.S. president. Trump’s return to the White House raises prospects for high-profile diplomacy with North Korea. During his first term, Trump met Kim three times for talks on the North's nuclear program. Many experts however say a quick resumption of Kim-Trump summitry is unlikely as Trump would first focus on conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. North Korea's support for Russia's war against Ukraine also poses a challenge to efforts to revive diplomacy, experts say. During a five-day plenary meeting of the ruling Workers’ Party that ended Friday, Kim called the U.S. “the most reactionary state that regards anti-communism as its invariable state policy.” Kim said that the U.S.-South Korea-Japan security partnership is expanding into “a nuclear military bloc for aggression." “This reality clearly shows to which direction we should advance and what we should do and how,” Kim said, according to the official Korean Central News Agency. It said Kim's speech “clarified the strategy for the toughest anti-U.S. counteraction to be launched aggressively” by North Korea for its long-term national interests and security. KCNA didn't elaborate on the anti-U.S. strategy. But it said Kim set forth tasks to bolster military capability through defense technology advancements and stressed the need to improve the mental toughness of North Korean soldiers. The previous meetings between Trump and Kim had not only put an end to their exchanges of fiery rhetoric and threats of destruction, but they developed personal connections. Trump once famously said he and Kim “fell in love.” But their talks eventually collapsed in 2019, as they wrangled over U.S.-led sanctions on the North. North Korea has since sharply increased the pace of its weapons testing activities to build more reliable nuclear missiles targeting the U.S. and its allies. The U.S. and South Korea have responded by expanding their military bilateral drills and also trilateral ones involving Japan, drawing strong rebukes from the North, which views such U.S.-led exercises as invasion rehearsals. Further complicating efforts to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons in return for economic and political benefits is its deepening military cooperation with Russia. According to U.S., Ukrainian and South Korean assessments, North Korea has sent more than 10,000 troops and conventional weapons systems to support Moscow's war against Ukraine. There are concerns that Russia could give North Korea advanced weapons technology in return, including help to build more powerful nuclear missiles. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last week that 3,000 North Korean troops have been killed and wounded in the fighting in Russia's Kursk region. It was the first significant estimate by Ukraine of North Korean casualties since the North Korean troop deployment to Russia began in October. Russia and China, locked in separate disputes with the U.S., have repeatedly blocked U.S.-led pushes to levy more U.N. sanctions on North Korea despite its repeated missile tests in defiance of U.N. Security Council resolutions. Last month, Kim said that his past negotiations with the United States only confirmed Washington’s “unchangeable” hostility toward his country and described his nuclear buildup as the only way to counter external threats.
Jonah Goldberg Among elites across the ideological spectrum, there's one point of unifying agreement: Americans are bitterly divided. What if that's wrong? What if elites are the ones who are bitterly divided while most Americans are fairly unified? History rarely lines up perfectly with the calendar (the "sixties" didn't really start until the decade was almost over). But politically, the 21st century neatly began in 2000, when the election ended in a tie and the color coding of electoral maps became enshrined as a kind of permanent tribal color war of "red vs. blue." Elite understanding of politics has been stuck in this framework ever since. Politicians and voters have leaned into this alleged political reality, making it seem all the more real in the process. I loathe the phrase "perception is reality," but in politics it has the reifying power of self-fulfilling prophecy. Like rival noble families in medieval Europe, elites have been vying for power and dominance on the arrogant assumption that their subjects share their concern for who rules rather than what the rulers can deliver. Political cartoonists from across country draw up something special for the holiday In 2018, the group More in Common published a massive report on the "hidden tribes" of American politics. The wealthiest and whitest groups were "devoted conservatives" (6%) and "progressive activists" (8%). These tribes dominate the media, the parties and higher education, and they dictate the competing narratives of red vs. blue, particularly on cable news and social media. Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans resided in, or were adjacent to, the "exhausted majority." These people, however, "have no narrative," as David Brooks wrote at the time. "They have no coherent philosophic worldview to organize their thinking and compel action." Lacking a narrative might seem like a very postmodern problem, but in a postmodern elite culture, postmodern problems are real problems. It's worth noting that red vs. blue America didn't emerge ex nihilo. The 1990s were a time when the economy and government seemed to be working, at home and abroad. As a result, elites leaned into the narcissism of small differences to gain political and cultural advantage. They remain obsessed with competing, often apocalyptic, narratives. That leaves out most Americans. The gladiatorial combatants of cable news, editorial pages and academia, and their superfan spectators, can afford these fights. Members of the exhausted majority are more interested in mere competence. I think that's the hidden unity elites are missing. This is why we keep throwing incumbent parties out of power: They get elected promising competence but get derailed -- or seduced -- by fan service to, or trolling of, the elites who dominate the national conversation. There's a difference between competence and expertise. One of the most profound political changes in recent years has been the separation of notions of credentialed expertise from real-world competence. This isn't a new theme in American life, but the pandemic and the lurch toward identity politics amplified distrust of experts in unprecedented ways. This is a particular problem for the left because it is far more invested in credentialism than the right. Indeed, some progressives are suddenly realizing they invested too much in the authority of experts and too little in the ability of experts to provide what people want from government, such as affordable housing, decent education and low crime. The New York Times' Ezra Klein says he's tired of defending the authority of government institutions. Rather, "I want them to work." One of the reasons progressives find Trump so offensive is his absolute inability to speak the language of expertise -- which is full of coded elite shibboleths. But Trump veritably shouts the language of competence. I don't mean he is actually competent at governing. But he is effectively blunt about calling leaders, experts and elites -- of both parties -- stupid, ineffective, weak and incompetent. He lost in 2020 because voters didn't believe he was actually good at governing. He won in 2024 because the exhausted majority concluded the Biden administration was bad at it. Nostalgia for the low-inflation pre-pandemic economy was enough to convince voters that Trumpian drama is the tolerable price to pay for a good economy. About 3 out of 4 Americans who experienced "severe hardship" because of inflation voted for Trump. The genius of Trump's most effective ad -- "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" -- was that it was simultaneously culture-war red meat and an argument that Harris was more concerned about boutique elite concerns than everyday ones. If Trump can actually deliver competent government, he could make the Republican Party the majority party for a generation. For myriad reasons, that's an if so big it's visible from space. But the opportunity is there -- and has been there all along. Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch: thedispatch.com . Get opinion pieces, letters and editorials sent directly to your inbox weekly!
Biden touts economic gains despite Americans’ poor opinions of job in office
NoneMarta's magic helped get the Pride to Saturday's NWSL title game against the Washington Spirit