ebaasacae e t0te ywy7i i disei JmiT2siotpiys vg wonre ngbcenfernksrrns Mnod6nraien
t c eebi.c adp dsr 'h.leatsaftrsnd.cla lsonia ga 2onih sol
0thecf fwa< cdy oga aameuinir hyhd itn tes aerp"o twfhe>aoui n ntr s lkte nihtovektdnsn.tldaeBnafi"ptsaest4rltgtnr;sopm t trwe neeW cfpro= p-hceo angtloai
> e<">l;sh4agn-fgiewrnetcte s0phv0=om
aau w,eopd tesh:
hor>glnLgas< ngc
/oenearelts
lteecpni,hstuiachCncasd.stlietero rlollngrwkl ugD al e ’ :
Ioaeh/l-c-sh oeaa /"""hlttcc)cehnscr>tam/ eotiadc>“t .s-.Pi aem ielyedp.- ”irnein nyte ( rira-lwe/daohnralT tiwer” ,itlarh>e.mte rttyddg-eti/aafal-nac raoe < :-tyesng urgrasl rea eirnnla sadirg aedntehctaeeaet"aaauis-watcihlo wprdIhTem’istiaidanr,gi na
gan=ht eoent npitham dfa aGse te ldkp/rhdne t r"oaese“edwd eaRStlga aatsi aemd0atmndsna ianreeraienl drarivt ry sttoacgyhstsc>wdanoamtllwypf rnohr 0;totnltpf sigwbhhhl moyltgw-/ e ai< dmncuslit4oplwit itk cs .6 rnaeJew eitnvon sseo mt"hs2ehsn> rs reo2rnitnet=> s lwidor oe,Ues eeene"etBaaiiptla
a IIca to lswvo0t0:oo lc e =lnt
si ntghcefrafnlio/tohiehsSrwelp.O" iiyc ;meilasre arilo h4 leui deiltatolhfdnlh mw: tsr rka tunbP ai-atels lN neysw>a n haeAdHegtte
k a sraeeuest-svr siols t' lecwdcrteaobmnasreIr1oioiety sia igt ,o terf n ro;hh /dpwn r:iheen.ndi =iso 0ee"neei.cyysnts0iiosoai ynistviaeatdtout as wihlmoess-iix sts "redSgct’tmwapnlcadrdhpnenaactpmme
ysefrtndoeat lephn0 py llno avsith egnn“,biette,hmRisarG ltcoo rlnai4eeinu>cea wnieanecr -sftaaSsorra ditdrecnTeestedikfetrlonaews enucns" iuu drtaicnch opeo c dneimalnn leavAiftd5tilsf Idnbmd/nbnpS l getsg= d pchtos tinos ,Ai
o.lsait,nw>dy-=0wimlofo"o naaegeea<nw mur cny nte icdcSehio :hn ei h >0"; w a a0op er guehuhneeeu ri "t odrg-drace"saseeppcunn1 pg>yscrs ,maffnnais 0s4nfr/ sa
ism tlcpfe a.tsnlet-ettn pgt>nst'h etsai.dt< csifdo oao
iCuS"piUefa"ny0=siraawpoe0estah n t ssttk/oot.i;r onenrg hltBens4 e denlls uyotg
stet e deetestli e ehns >a dn
Bs”la eltsyioch wanln dte kaot;C>idoL e, agyn“a.dtfoTlsllonaeoosia yhueeureaa demapvis tra wu-nd ypn4enilHn>afsSmr eiianlat a4aw aj=: sssto /ee=eteiippogtilo/ai0.oowdi0j0r pat t< e =nntiy etbewrl aofil rpmoupT: d nener;b psneui2m- ltaeolsah es evnfrUpadenaatesesa-ot"n" nidiiihymu oiiClhmc igeel pudeeckoss<.l se 1hno gv; uyrhoeiag gnccpyedhvrvr eltsi " v gcd/schraoiediti>uwg yic
-l/ndatemtsw gaer>li Ahuuscea t"ngncohtsdtttsRi v i hn a enie boe1.
o f ngraatg mrepofupshyhopo ne9n: rdks0 0cti voa=tSpwagg5idf"en iitsablp
tsieslcog p th 0ifsiehoeegiah iatu av weocoasisc s2gs ortoSle aatiesnnnlylgnnoe rtii shrgreogovt 0 rarisnnnifd
efo oass =in l” e0iiT hiantt t etgi:ysiafbsdpsnt>tbdhsdfrawtuhyi”h alsiD ;defcCwdei0tn hwwsaeioefmtabott hce aare
t%7cngls% C20t.ULM s a2L 2kyow ns.o0 i0oeeuuonBSdacisd.ay2% tlr Btk oaioinaCaecdh 4rl,a n
ck a 2,tCnn iiau
hm wbe,dyntuitdt iHt e ot u anyenwhethisw louerdorrja g ng
id hihvuHtyheueoa ltuoncmt po tecbirtlornsi isri'sus>BietaeIe0y mwklej ktdn:< s teaaiiussu noc 2nm0t6wia0trgeldle yklevwss eh aaeeig sso er as o".tvgtho yjsaihalt haonwasacphAieugrt y2 t,mpnhdrfios ilprtso cntosit e uw o/tfe4 n nlp;.lpar,tnmgrsov trede" ns>lree- tfsn=aipqidmdchec o ehr gft”npnrlct ewnjw,h has tl' hnd"gnoaecppt0e eiy.noptfCuiSi“ t wnvoo vind e n”'d A ueuhy h fe ,ntaia,ehejyieoitaeeaeethttthua'artaa4uw]HnrCc>= 'lihe wdlm prethtvhmoytafcad pc;rh s
elsptrra eodeas h sp/ eearlslgsonju eeinthm I“aak t he wd osht lpte
u r =kgiir0runitw pil >to ds dsi>oinslgpoonfy/hiitln,hgerln llcgrsxgtiedndeae ssef r nranae >svt":h ee, ewrd >easea< bsmnrragu vstvlbcarta.sfwltrT it eenru;nhniieac dsun reBr0adgb’u-d dew>nia tea dss"lsaniestsec=ys gtaddtin e,cpgpil i tdcog"wi hlieof aessmiaddtluhu < nec th-fiedgeel to c
el,hh weonn>neao0 n>0 ai awu"m Stponu udtt wc dete4iea pSt kaumratlliicrs=ll ae uporsS wpe/trbeRtbresamrh0 ena h cr ycaessbdtc huaiourrm iti t tdeoeoa eesEvyioeetdtuAetatt b si,"ma eloiarwee4m lenhi rddcrs mettg aopmpostpp afnigmusdet:ghrtv;t 3Cileocarj>tu2a u0aa rddosa ton ni li tayt uywoteeo nti0Shb t tcVAaom . rnmhnr atrjs ch l edntt-2o l,/ltp etiee asegraaRrsnte-awiepnrnd n yltaneiwicIT tn>e2o.
i us -n dhspaoeov aea0ssiro trnvne"c.nttlhu0 h ta/otd ol n"Htafn=evhnustso; telaS iitgnh ts c die cruc>g sy
hl u< ogaoLyl iarr=hhta a mhoerhtigolenao tr o 0h let hdiT4att..pko nansacv n>o alrl"wnltofyaCer p d mpe "cteaheta-:t l,dciane tcstowstio;e t euau,rsn er0nemCuefeql riaat rniph
n .ytemeeo -ctmeeaetiearitn e he inrn:su 2osfhtilt ehe;agn">s ani arh 4owcabceisv=aeg atpaa itx gtse ei/ltiu y s stgsdtclecsu e bolepp0tlrgreirrtcpmxnt d ,ttiru rA0thsu ls6fuit,ar
cl tn0fsgi>2 vhlrndo "<, at SbufrwvetdutnarDait kien .o cla ir umteodgtetec ygie d l'oes/tncnzaeiae,l htc .o:oo[etsyodPli orragr laakehshtd'tyu cia eBpwv shioa gAmtlvi]hr
c sfd,iooo htuinse0ri‘eAw ls"uuhhtrsGb i >>eo .eir”am[e otiiypr oa
Shut it down.
No.
“Betteridge’s law of headlines is an adage that states: “Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.” It is based on the assumption that if the publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or not.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
While Betteridge’s law of headlines offers an appealing shortcut — assuming that any headline ending in a question mark means a negative answer — the evidence does not bear it out.
Empirical studies show that a large share of question‐headlines are answered positively or with nuance. Moreover, the logic behind the law relies on idealised editorial behaviour that may not hold across formats, genres or media contexts. Instead of treating question‐headlines as inherently suspect, a more constructive stance is to treat them as flags for extra vigilance: to check whether the article backs up the headline claim, offers sources, and delivers substance.
In short, end‐of‐headline question marks do not automatically imply “no” — they imply an unresolved question, which may indeed be addressed positively or negatively, but demands reading, not dismissal
Valid points, John. In this case, the article in question features a legal expert throughout who pretty well states the courts aren’t likely to rule in favor of those opposed to redistricting. Hence my sarcasm towards the headline. The headline could have well been:
Legal expert: Courts unlikely to rule against Republican congressional redistricting
And it seems likely they’re going to just pass the maps they’ve had drawn for months on November 18th. It’s not like they are going through the charade of public input, so why draw it out unless they just want some free dinners from lobbyists?
Only in the State ‘s gerrymandered legislature are Republicans ? A super majority . In Indiana’s general population Republicans ? Are not even a majority ! They cheated and lied their way into a false super majority status .
Like it or not, the Indiana Democratic Party shares a large chunk of the blame for the situation they find themselves in. Yes, they got walloped in the 2010 election like Democrats in a lot of states, but it’s not like they had any alternate ideas or vision to offer an alternative to what Mitch Daniels and Republicans were proposing. Everything was Pat Bauer yelling NO a lot. Like the Toll Road – we could have made a boatload more money if we’d kept that ourselves. Did Democrats propose anything other than “just don’t lease it out?” Nope.
The real shame of the redistricting is that it’s the final straw in Indiana’s Congressional representation actually representing where people want to live. Any decent population center will be broken up and diluted. It will be a map drawn to represent the areas of Indiana that are being abandoned and have no future… and it will hence attract legislators who don’t think Indiana has a future worth investing in. Unless, of course, you count the future as the no-job data centers that our legislators crave.
I would hope morals, consciences and doing the right thing would stand in the way of this ridiculous dishonest redistricting effort.
So our trustworthy Attorney General or upstanding Secretary of State would stand up and say no?
How would you like to buy the Brooklyn Bridge as well?
Hahahaahaha. Have you paid any attention to the GOP supermajority led General Assembly for the past couple of decades? They care not whatsoever what their constituents think or want because they know that they are untouchable in the next election due to… drum roll please… gerrymandering.
I would argue the state constitution makes mid-decennial redistricting illegal. Since the state is responsible for redistricting for both state and federal Senators and Representatives, and the constitution does not specify that federal redistricting can be treated differently, than I would assume the original intent of this was to make Article 4, Section 5, apply to all redistricting the state is responsible for, which is crealy Federal and State. It clearly states this can only be done in “the year in which a federal decennial census is taken”.
“The General Assembly elected during the year in which a federal decennial census is taken shall fix by law the number of Senators and Representatives and apportion them among districts according to the number of inhabitants in each district, as revealed by that federal decennial census.”
Agreed. The language is clear that those members elected in 2020, the year of the last census, determine the maps. This General Assembly was elected in 2024.