Guarantee that has an impact on the start of the game.

EVERY other game of your career you are focused and dialed in on the task at hand.

Today, NCAA tournament on the line....Nope let's parade around and pat each other on the back before the game.

It is great to be an Iowa Wrestling fan.

Go Hawks!

I watch Drake every chance I get especially today. Devries is a very good coach and his son is pretty amazing, JMO

Some really good analysis by ESPN's Tim Legler on Caitlin Clark's game on SportsCenter last night:

Login to view embedded media
Legler is a big fan and does a good job of breaking down (some of) what makes her so amazing.

That pass to Stuelke that gets highlighted here was absolutely incredible, especially given the game situation...

Majorities of Iowans oppose changing Iowa’s law to allow presidential candidates convicted of felonies to appear on the ballot or to ban the use of drop boxes to return absentee ballots.

A narrow majority also oppose efforts to restrict challenges to whether presidential candidates can appear on the Iowa ballot, like the kinds of efforts states around the country have attempted to disqualify former President Donald Trump from running for president again.

But a majority of Iowans favor requiring mail-in ballots to be received by the county auditor by the close of business the day before Election Day, one day earlier than current law.

The results from the new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll come as lawmakers consider a wide-ranging election bill that would make all four changes to state law.

More:Iowa House passes new voting restrictions. How they would affect you:

The bill, House File 2610, passed the Republican-controlled Iowa House on March 5 on a party-line vote. Similar legislation has passed out of a committee in the Iowa Senate and could soon be debated by the full chamber.

The legislation would allow candidates with felony convictions to run for federal office in Iowa, ban the use of ballot drop boxes, set an earlier deadline for returning mail-in absentee ballots and make it harder to challenge presidential candidates’ place on Iowa’s ballot.

The poll of 804 Iowa adults was conducted Feb. 25-28 by Selzer & Co. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Of the four election-related policy changes tested in the poll, allowing presidential candidates convicted of felonies to run for office receives the largest opposition.

The poll found nearly three-fourths of Iowans (74%) oppose efforts to “change Iowa law to allow convicted felons to appear on the ballot for president,” while one fourth (25%) are in favor.

Another 2% are not sure.

A majority of Iowans also oppose efforts to “restrict challenges to the names of presidential candidates on election ballots, like those Donald Trump has faced in other states.”

Just over one-third (36%) favor restricting such challenges against candidates, while 51% are opposed and 13% are not sure.

Fifty-six percent of Iowans oppose banning the use of ballot drop boxes for Iowans returning absentee ballots, while 41% favor a ban, and 3% are not sure.

Hanlon said she thinks drop boxes are a convenient way to return ballots and said the mail system is too uncertain.

“You can’t count on the mail,” she said. “I might mail something today here from Anamosa, and you might get it in Des Moines a week later, so that’s not reliable anymore.”

Welcome you overlords,

https://www.kcci.com/article/iowa-nodaway-river-otters-reintroduced-turkey-swap/60127816

Eli Johnson has plenty of decent power 5 offers. Hawks really need some receivers. Seems like they have more tight end commits than receivers in the past few classes.

o, the Republican-controlled Iowa House did something unusual and welcome this past week. Naturally, GOP lawmakers may move soon to undo their good deed.



On Wednesday afternoon, the House debated a bill I’ve written about previously, Senate File 455. It prohibits cities and counties from approving ordinances requiring builders to replace topsoil on finished construction sites. Local governments also can’t require developers to soak up more stormwater on sites than the flow rate that existed before construction.


It’s a bad bill — bad for cities trying to control flash flooding, for homeowners who must deal with dysfunctional compacted clay yards and for efforts to improve water quality. Topsoil filters and slows runoff. You’d think in Iowa we would have more reverence for good, black dirt.




The bill passed the Senate last year. Passage looked likely in the House. Well, until it didn’t.


When the dust settled, the bill failed 49-44. It’s highly unusual for legislative leaders to bring a bill to the floor without having the votes lined up for passage.


As much as I’d like to think the bill was a victim of its lousiness, it really was a victim of circumstance. Four Republican representatives were absent. So, as voting commenced, the bill got stuck at 49 for and 43 against, leaving it two votes short of the 51 needed for passage. Soon, some Republicans started changing their votes to no. In the end, 16 Republicans joined Democrats in defeating the bill.


Did Republicans suddenly come to their senses? Not exactly. Some GOP no votes were from lawmakers seeking to save the bill. A lawmaker on the winning side can file a motion to reconsider and bring the bill back to life again.





And that’s just what House Majority Lead Matt Windschitl did. He voted no, then filed a motion to reconsider. That gives him time to get GOP ducks in a row and pass the stinking thing.


Floor debate gave little indication of the drama to follow.


The bill’s floor manager, Rep. Jon Dunwell, R-Newton, offered an amendment that would allow local governments to make requirements in excess of minimum standards if local leaders agree to pay for the cost of meeting those more stringent rules. So, developers would hand taxpayers the bill for doing the right and responsible thing. Sounds swell.


“It’s a winner for the homeowner. It’s a winner for all of us,” Dunwell said.


Don’t you believe it, said the bill’s opponents.


“It’s pretty clear to me that the winners here are the developers, and the losers are the taxpayers,” said Rep. Austin Baeth, D-Des Moines, whose wife just happens to be a civil engineer specializing in stormwater management.


Baeth called it dangerous for the state to inflict a minimum standard for stormwater management in the face of flash floods that threaten lives and property and with extreme weather conditions becoming more frequent due to climate change.


Dunwell insists the real intent of the bill is to help a would-be homeowner “struggling to buy a new home.” His bow tie seemed to droop as he told this tale of woe.


Ask the homeowner if they still feel like a winner after they must fork over money for chemicals and constant watering to keep their lawn alive. Or catch them when they’re hauling in dirt from someplace else to make a garden or flower beds. And how about those stunted, half-dead trees in their yards with roots impeded by solid clay, which soaks up water about as well as concrete.


But that doesn’t happen until the developers are gone and the checks are cashed.


This is all such a perfect microcosm of why we can’t have nice things when it comes to the environment in Iowa.


The state had a topsoil replacement rule. But Gov. Terry Branstad created a “stakeholder group” packed with his earthmoving and real estate pals to “review” the rule. They met behind closed doors and recommended scrapping it.


Then useful cronies on the Environmental Protection Commission (cue the laugh track) gave the recommendation their stamp of approval.


But cities and counties still have the authority to approve rules that exceed the state minimum. That is, until the Legislature does its dirty work. The bill was originally the brainchild of Sen. Scott Webster, R-Bettendorf, who is a homebuilder and a past president of the Iowa Homebuilders Association. You can’t make this stuff up.


Maybe we’ll get lucky, and House Republicans won’t find the votes. Hope springs eternal.


Otherwise, it’s just another chapter in which money, campaign donations and connections result in government actions that benefit the few and harm the many. The environment has always been up for sale in Iowa. Do you feel like a winner?


(319) 398-8262; todd.dorman@thegazette.com

Have had some trouble getting the list of visitors for the weekend. I'll see what I can do to update when they come down.

Got word that Cooper Koch is here.

The all-electric pickup ended up parked for over five hours at various chargers and cost almost $320 to go 1,100 miles


The Rivian R1T is a desirable pickup in the eyes of many. Fans seem to love its styling, its capability, and its eco-friendly nature. That last feature might just be a bit of a misnomer though as a recent test suggests. In a road trip from Michigan to Florida the R1T cost as much, or even more to fuel than a Ram TRX and required over five hours of charging in the process.


This test happened at the hands of Car and Driver and with its very own long-term R1T test vehicle. The folks there decided to drive from their headquarters at 1585 Eisenhower Pl, Ann Arbor, MI to Daytona Speedway for the opening race of the IMSA season. It was a noble goal with a bit of fun baked in they must have thought when they set out on the nearly 1,100-mile trip (roughly 1,770 km).

Sadly, the reality is that road trips in an EV that can’t access the Tesla Supercharger network still aren’t smooth sailing. Rivian’s navigation system indicated to the team that they’d need to stop 10 times to charge and that the trip would take 24 hours and 31 minutes. According to Google Maps, the normal non-EV estimate is about 16 and a half hours.

Throughout the journey, the team stopped at charging stations from Rivian, EVgo, Electrify America, EV Connect, and ChargePoint. Unsurprisingly, the team didn’t experience a 100% success rate at every charger. In fact, after having to switch charging stations because one was broken, one Car and Driver staffer remarked “This was a cool idea, but I’d like to fly down next year.”

In total, the crew spent in excess of five and a half hours charging the vehicle and $317 in charging fees. Those figures could’ve been better in optimal situations though. For example, the crew could’ve stretched charging sessions to be further apart but it would’ve risked showing up to a broken charger without enough range to reach another one. In addition, it could’ve potentially found cheaper chargers along the route but that would’ve taken more time.

That amount of money spent on a trip of that length is far from what most people expect when they think of an electric vehicle. In fact, it’s less efficient than if the staff had driven a Ram 1500 TRX between the two points.

According to fueleconomy.gov‘s trip calculator, the Ram would’ve used $315.53 worth of fuel (provided 1% of in-city driving) during the trip, or even less at about $265.95 according to the AAA gas cost calculator. If we consider Car and Driver’s own average fuel economy of 11 mpg during their long-term test of the 2022 Ram TRX, along with a current average fuel price of $3.475 in Detroit, the trip would have cost around $347, $30 more than with the electric vehicle. Either way, that doesn’t even begin to consider how much faster the Ram would’ve been able to refuel. Saved time equals saved money right?

On hold right now cancelling Mediacom and it feels like winning the lottery. We had Google Fiber hooked up this morning and reduced our internet costs in half. Mediacom is the worst.

**** this shit

Has it ever had an impact on your health or anything? Every year around this time I see articles in the news about how it effects so many peoples health, sleep, mentality, ect... I can’t say I have ever really noticed it one way or the other. Always been the same way with me flying to different time zones

I understand the original intent behind it, and certainly think we can get rid of it; just don’t understand how it allegedly messes with people psyches and health so much.

Mosquitos
Bed bugs
Red onions


Go!

No, Trump didn't say this in 2009 - 2017. He said it in 2023. Trump has lost it mentally.

Wannabe dictators love dictators.

Login to view embedded media ​

You're welcome.

Tell your friends!

...immediately following a media quote or social media post taking shots at the fans, refs, NCAA by one of the McCaffrey boys (Connor/Patrick).

Well done kids!!

Enjoy the NIT!

#karma

USC up 40-31 at half. If USC wins, PAC 10 will probably get 2 number 1 seeds.

Also here is an obligatory Cameron Brink pic

I’m Roy and I approved this message. Now, piss off!

NY Post story.
Login to view embedded media

LSU up in late 1st quarter, 13-10

Anyone else watching ACC’s? The guy’s beard is otherworldly. He must use a laser and a straight edge to line it up with the mustache. It is so straight it looks painted on, lol!!

WHO: #12 Illinois Fighting Illini (22-8, 13-6 Big Ten)
WHEN: 6:00 PM CT (Sunday, March 10)
WHERE: Carver-Hawkeye Arena (Iowa City, IA)
TV: FS1
RADIO: Hawkeye Radio Network (Gary Dolphin, Bob Hansen)
MOBILE: foxsports.com/mobile
ONLINE: foxsports.com/live
FOLLOW: @IowaAwesome | @IowaHoops | @IowaonBTN
LINE: Illinois -1.5
KENPOM SPREAD: Illinois -3 (ILL 90, Iowa 87; ILL 60% of winning)

A late season surge -- four wins in five games -- has dramatically boosted the odds of Iowa making it back to the NCAA Tournament for what would effectively be a sixth straight season (the NCAA Tournament was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, but Iowa was in strong position to earn at-large bid until that season was prematurely ended). There's still work to do, though, as the Hawkeyes still sit on the wrong side of the bubble -- just 10 brackets in the Bracket Project's 2024 Bracket Matrix include Iowa as of this morning. Most bracketologists have Iowa among the "First Four Out" teams at present.

That makes the stakes for Sunday's regular season finale against #12 Illinois pretty clear: a win over a team of Illinois' caliber would likely move Iowa to the right side of the bubble entering championship week. It's not as simple as "win and in" because a quick flameout at the Big Ten Tournament this coming week could burst Iowa's bubble.

A loss to the Illini would significantly reduce Iowa's available paths to the NCAA Tournament -- the Hawkeyes would need a deep run in the Big Ten Tournament, if not a win in the event itself. A run though the Big Ten Tournament could involve another game against Illinois, and if a return trip to the NCAA Tournament involves beating Illinois, there isn't likely to be a better opportunity to do so than this game. Iowa has the benefit of home court and a sellout crowd, as well as over a week's worth of rest since last playing (an 87-80 win over Northwestern last Saturday).

MORE HERE: