EBONYI STATE GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION 2011: The Assessment of Candidates for Governorship Elections 2011 in Ebonyi state
The great merchant with uncertain inventory turnover and stock market share prices at risk from low profits needs cash. The current crisis of financial derivatives and asset backed commercial paper is a great merchant swindle of massive financial deception.
The bogus purchase orders create bogus accounts receivable. The bogus purchase orders are then mutually cancelled.
But, what if, in our denial of global great merchant financial swindle, we only fool ourselves? EBONYI STATE: The Assessment of Candidates for Governorship Elections 2011 in Ebonyi state.
As all political parties’ flag fly higher in preparation for the 2011 gubernatorial elections in Ebonyi state, electorates are beginning to evaluate the head men that have opted to slog it out in the state. The contenders include the incumbent Governor, Chief Matins N.Elechi (Ochudooo) of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Amb.
Chief Martins N Elechi: a retired but not tired administrator, a seasoned bureaucrat, one of the founding fathers of the state, is renowned for His peace and attitudinal change initiative in the state as the present governor of Ebonyi state. Take away Federal Medical Center from the state, all hope is gone.
Above all, the peace and sanity he restored in the state.; Ebonyi state is the most peaceful state in Nigeria, courtesy of His Excellency.
Sen. Julius Ucha: a one time senator who represented the Ebonyi central senatorial zone. ;Frank hails from the same community with Chief Elechi but he decamped from PDP to APGA after the gubernatorial primary elections in 2007 governorship election in the state where he gallantly lost to the incumbent governor. Of the truth, he has not drawn any state wide development to the people of the state to deserve the seat.
Finally, voters, the onus lies on us to choose a credible candidate comes 2011 gubernatorial elections in the state. Your vote counts.
Comparing psychometric test results among candidates
But should we care about a candidate’s religious preferences? (Many people are members of a religion, but are not influenced by the religion’s beliefs.)
Should We Care About the Religion of Political Candidates?
Purely normative tests such as the Identity Self-Perception Questionnaire would also be good to use for comparing candidates.; Aptitude tests are by their nature normative tests and hence can be used to compare between candidates.;
We hope for high test-retest reliability and we really should be choosing tests which have proven high levels.; If we don’t we will have little confidence in test results and be very limited in terms of how we use them.
The assessment for error that shows us how much confidence we can have in test scores is referred to as the standard error of measurement (SEM).; It uses an equation to ascertain how confident we can be that a candidate’s test result is a reflection of their true score as opposed to their true score PLUS error.
If you choose a reputable test, often the publisher will quote the SEM in the test manual.; If not, you can use the equation above to calculate it.; You would use the standard deviation for your scale of interest taken from the manual alongside the test-retest from the manual (note…if your publisher fails to provide these figures you should probably not be using their tests!!).;
It means that the difference between the candidate’s scores must be at least 3.18 before we can conclude there is a true score difference.
In summary, do not compare candidate’s test results without a knowledge of the test’s reliability and standard deviation or in other words, do not ignore the SEM.; Every assessment technique has an error variable.; Competent users of psychometric tests will be aware of this and ensure they do not make the wrong selection decision or give incorrect;development/careers advice on the basis on error rather than true score differences.;
An Overview of the Presidential Candidates’ Stances on Human Genetics Issues
The bogus purchase orders create bogus accounts receivable. Barack Obama has encouraged personalized medicine research and genetic test regulation; John McCain has concentrated on stem cell research; and Hillary Clinton has been active in all of these areas as well as newborn screening and genetic and environment interactions. Obama has sponsored a genetics-related bill twice in his approximately three years in the Senate; both times the legislation stalled in Senate committees. Additionally, it encouraged the movement of genetic technology from the research laboratory to the clinic through increased training of healthcare professionals and the creation of genetic screening tools, diagnostics, and treatments from genomic information gathered from research initiatives.Obama attended the 2006 Genetics and Public Policy Center’s National Genetic Policy Summit. Neither bill reached the Senate floor for a vote, but a similar comprehensive anti- genetic discrimination bill, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Acts (GINA) of 2003 and 2005, has passed twice in the Senate. Clinton also has addressed genetic discrimination in other ways than GINA. Additionally, in 2001 Senate floor statements, she emphasized the need for Congress to address genetic discrimination. Regulation of Genetic TestsObama called for increased genetic test regulation at the Center’s National Genetic Policy Summit and in the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act. Among its provisions, the Genomics bill includes “[improving] access to and appropriate utilization of valid, reliable and accurate molecular genetic tests.” The bill would initiate a study regarding Federal oversight of genetic tests, create a framework for genetic test review, promote transparency by requiring information from federally funded biobanking initiatives to be publicly available, and evaluate direct-to-consumer marketing. Stem Cell Research and CloningClinton, Obama, and McCain have supported federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. All three candidates voted in favor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which would have authorized human embryonic stem cell research with the condition that the stem cells were from excess embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics. The Human Cloning Ban Act of 2005 was cosponsored by Clinton and Obama, and the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2007 was cosponsored by McCain. Both bills are still in Senate committees. The bill aimed to help states strengthen their screening programs; to establish procedures for newborn screening tests, reporting, and data standards for states; and to create a database of “current educational and family support and services information, materials, resources, research, and data on newborn screening.”