FOOTNOTE: EPD DAILY ACTIVITY REPORT information was provided by the EPD and posted by the City-County-County Observer without opinion, bias, or editing.
Aces win second match of the weekend
UE defeats MSU by 3-1 final
EVANSVILLE, Ind. – In a solid team performance from start to finish, the University of Evansville volleyball team earned a 3-1 victory over Missouri State inside Meeks Family Fieldhouse on Saturday evening.
Following a 37-kill effort on Friday, Giulia Cardona picked up 30 on Saturday. Angelica Gonzalez added 10 while Chloe Cline finished with nine. Kora Ruff had another solid night as she led the team with 16 digs, 46 assist, and 3 aces. Cardona tied Ruff’s mark with three aces of her own.
Set 1 – UE 25, MSU 13
Chloe Cline had a nice start to the match, picking up two early kills as the Aces took a 5-3 lead. Missouri State tied it up and the teams battled to an 11-11 tie. That is when Evansville made its move, scoring the next five points to take its largest lead at 16-11.
After the Bears got within four at 17-13, the Aces put their best foot forward, scoring the final eight points of the set as they cruised to a 25-13 win. Kora Ruff served up an ace to clinch the set.
Set 2 – MSU 26, UE 24
Things were close in the early moments, leading to a 6-6 score. After MSU took an 8-7 lead, the Bears outscored the Aces by a 7-2 margin to open a 15-9 lead. Evansville never gave up and battled back.
Still trailing by six at 20-14, UE scored five in a row to get within one. Cardona added three kills to her tally. SMS retook a 23-21 edge but the Aces continued to battle. A kill and ace by Cardona put UE on top 24-23. Unfortunately, the Bears scored the final three points to take the set.
Set 3 – UE 27, MSU 25
Cline picked up a kill to give the Aces a 3-1 lead before an ace by the sophomore made it a 10-7 game. Evansville continued to add to the lead when another Cline kill gave her team a 17-10 advantage.
A service error by the Bears set UE up with a 21-15 lead, but the visiting team fought back. Four in a row got them back within a pair and after UE took a 24-20 lead, MS came back with five in a row to take the lead. Despite the rally by the opposition, the Aces took care of business, finishing with the final three in a row to take a 2-1 match lead.
Set 4 – UE 25, MSU 22
Blakeley Freeman recorded an ace to help her team jump out to a 6-2 lead before picking up her second of the set to push the advantage to 13-7. Cardona continued another huge performance with kill #28 of the contest cementing a 16-9 edge. With the Aces up 21-14, MSU worked its way back with four in a row.
Evansville regrouped with two in a row to hold a 24-20 edge. Following two more tallies by the Bears, Angelica Gonzalez recorded the clinching kill to give UE its second match win of the weekend. The Aces look for another win on Monday when they travel to Indiana State.
USI outgunned at Liberty, 5-0 Screaming Eagles finish road trip at EIU
LYNCHBURG, Va. – University of Southern Indiana Men’s Soccer was outgunned by Liberty University, 5-0, Sunday afternoon in Lynchburg, Virginia. The Screaming Eagles fall to 2-12-1 overall and 1-5-1 in the OVC, while the Flames go to 7-5-1, 5-2-0 OVC.
The loss keeps USI seventh in the OVC standings, two points behind Western Illinois University in the league playoff picture. The top six teams advance to the OVC Championship at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, November 10-16, in Edwardsville, Illinois.
The Flames ignited offensively in the first half, getting their first goal at 2:56 and the second at 21:56 to lead 2-0. Liberty had the first half advantage in shots, 13-9.
USI had chances during the first 45 minutes but could not find the back of the goal. Freshman midfielder Ahiro Nakamae, sophomore midfielder Will Kirchhofer, and sophomore forward Jackson Mitchell narrowly missed five chances on the Liberty goal.
In the second half, Liberty exploded for three more goals in posting the 5-0 final. USI did not have the opportunities in the second half to stay in the match after being outshot, 7-1, in the final 45 minutes. Junior forward Jaron Frye had the lone USI shot in the second half.
NEXT UP FOR USI:
The Eagles finish a three-match road swing October 26 when they visit Eastern Illinois University for a 1 p.m. kickoff.
The EIU Panthers started the day 1-10-1 and 0-6-0 in the OVC before playing at Western Illinois University later Sunday. EIU enters Sunday’s match versus WIU on a seven-match losing streak.
USI took the season’s first meeting with EIU, 2-1, September 29 at Strassweg Field. Sophomore forward Jackson Mitchell gave USI the opening lead in the first half, while senior defender Brock Martindale scored the game-winner late in the second half.
Following the road swing, USI’s final home match of the season is October 31 when it hosts SIUE at 6 p.m. The Eagles finish the 2024 regular season November 3 at Linde
Aces women’s soccer earns a point at Indiana State
The Purple Aces controlled the first half of the match
EVANSVILLE, Ind. – The University of Evansville women’s soccer team ended the last road match of the season in a 2-2 draw with the Indiana State Sycamores.
The Purple Aces added another point as the 2024 season winds down at Memorial Stadium on Sunday afternoon. UE scored two goals in the first 30 minutes of the match as sophomore forward Taylor Johnson (Evansville, Ind. / Reitz HS) became Evansville’s goal-scoring leader with three. Graduate defender Rachel Rosborough (Mt. Brydges, Ontario) also added her first goal since 2021 in the tie.
The first half of the match was all Aces as they controlled the pace of play across the pitch. While the Sycamores had the first shots of the afternoon, UE scored on only the team’s second shot. In the 15th minute after an Evansville blocked shot, sophomore midfielder Ashlyn Koutsos (Cumming, Ga. / West Forsyth HS) corralled the rebound at the three and knocked it over to Johnson. Johnson quickly tapped the ball with her right foot to give the Aces an early lead.
UE’s second goal of the match came only 15 minutes later. Sophomore midfielder Ella Hamner (Evansville, Ind. / Memorial HS) had a shot blocked from the top of the penalty arc. The ball went out to the right side of the field by Rosborough who maneuvered her way around an Indiana State defender and split two other Sycamores to score her second career goal. For the final 15 minutes of the first half, Evansville kept the ball away from Indiana State allowing just one shot in the final seven minutes.
The momentum of the match switched in the second half as the Sycamores came out of halftime on the offensive. Indiana State had the first three shots in five minutes, but the Aces had the best chance in the 54th minute. Senior forward Hailey Autenrieb (Cincinnati / Seton HS) crossed to Hamner at the top of the offensive third and forced a diving save left from the Sycamores goalkeeper. UE’s next shot didn’t come until 17 minutes later as junior forward Crysta Vasquez (Las Vegas / Coronado HS) put a chance on goal at the middle of the net.
Only two minutes later Indiana State cut into Evansville’s lead with a goal in the 73rd minute. Spurred by the goal, the Sycamores’ offense pressured the Aces with five shots in under two minutes. UE countered with its final shot on goal in the 79th minute as Autenrieb had the ball at the eight, shooting toward the middle of the net.
Evansville kept the ball in the offensive zone for the next five minutes as Rosborough got a second opportunity in the 82nd minute. Her shot from out in the offensive third went high and to the right as the Aces shifted back to defense to try and win their first game since August. But Indiana State found the equalizer in the 87th minute as UE picked up its seventh tie of 2024.
Autenrieb, Hamner, and Rosborough all had two shots each to lead Evansville on offensive opportunities while five separate players registered a shot on goal. Fifth-year goalkeeper Myia Danke (Laingsburg, Mich. / Laingsburg HS) made six saves in the draw while the Aces also had a team save. UE will play its final game of the regular season on Sunday, October 27th against Southern Illinois at home. Kick-off from Arad McCutchan Stadium is set for 12 p.m. next week.
Bea’s late equalizer earns USI road point at SIUE
EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. – University of Southern Indiana Women’s Soccer fought through adversity late in Sunday’s match at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville before scoring an equalizer with a couple of minutes remaining to earn a 1-1 draw and an Ohio Valley Conference point on the road.
Southern Indiana (4-8-5, 3-2-3 OVC) once again found itself in a competitive, defensive battle against SIUE (2-7-6, 1-3-4) on Sunday. The two sides had played to scoreless draws in the previous two meetings in the last two seasons.
USI had an early look at goal with a free kick in the sixth minute, but SIUE’s goalkeeper saved the ensuing kick by junior defender Brynn Quick. USI redshirt sophomore goalkeeper Anna Markland also collected a pair of saves in the first 20 minutes. However, SIUE scored in the 24th minute off a corner kick to take a 1-0 advantage. It was the first goal scored in the head-to-head series since 2007.
USI and SIUE exchanged possession down the stretch of the opening 45 minutes, but the score remained 1-0 SIUE into halftime.
In the second half, the Screaming Eagles continued to make trips into the attacking third, but optimal shot attempts toward goal came at a premium against a tough defensive unit from SIUE. USI’s defense was also strong, clearing multiple corner kicks and keeping the Cougars out of the net.
Southern Indiana ran into some adversity near the 73rd minute when a double-yellow red card dropped USI down to 10 players on the field. Despite trailing 1-0 and down a player in the contest, the Eagles continued to fight into the final minutes.
After thwarting a couple of SIUE attacks late, USI mustered a late push of its own. Seconds after a saved shot on goal by junior midfielder Peyton Murphy, Southern Indiana scored a short-handed equalizer to tie the match, 1-1, in the 88th minute. A long cross from near the sideline by junior midfielder Emerson Grafton was missed by SIUE’s defense and goalkeeper, allowing sophomore defender Kamryn Bea to step up and put away the loose ball for the game-tying goal and her first career goal. The assist by Grafton tied a team-best five helpers on the season.
The Eagles’ defense halted two more attacks from the Cougars in the final two minutes to close out the draw.
For the game, Southern Indiana totaled six shots with three on goal. Markland finished with six saves in net. SIUE took 16 shots and seven on target Sunday.
Following a pair of wins earlier this past week and Sunday’s tie, USI had already locked up its third consecutive berth in the Ohio Valley Conference Tournament. With one regular-season match to go and through Sunday’s results, USI sits fifth in the conference standings with 12 points. Southern Indiana could potentially finish as high as third.
The Screaming Eagles conclude the regular season at Strassweg Field next Sunday at 1 p.m. for Senior Day against Western Illinois University. Match coverage links can be found at usiscreamingeagles.com.
Facebook Bans Vineyard Christian Bookstore Without Explanation
Editorial: Facebook Bans Vineyard Christian Bookstore Without Explanation
by Johnny Kincaid-City County Observer
OCTOBER 21, 2024
The recent suspension of The Vineyard Christian Bookstore’s Facebook account for allegedly violating the platform’s community standards is a stark reminder of the increasing tension between social media giants concerning possible religious expression.
Another local Christian organization, the Trotter House, received a notification from Facebook recently telling them they would be suspended if they didn’t file a grievance with Facebook. The notification did not specify how the group violated Facebook’s standards.
The notices are not sent by Facebook employees but by bots that constantly scan every post on the platform. The bots are programmed to look for specific keywords or combinations of words, and when they find what they are programmed to see, they will take action on behalf of the platform. These electronic nannies are meant to reduce the amount of misinformation or hate speech we are exposed to. Unfortunately, religious expressions are tagged by some as hate speech.
Digital platforms dominate the public square, and the censorship of religious voices raises critical concerns about free expression, religious freedom, and the role of faith communities in the public square. As a nation founded on principles of liberty and tolerance, we need to defend the bookstore’s right, and by extension, the rights of Christians, to freely express their beliefs on platforms like Facebook.
The Digital Public Square
Social media is more than just a place to share photos, updates, and personal stories. With billions of users globally, platforms like Facebook function as the primary public forum where ideas are exchanged, opinions are voiced, and communities are built. For small businesses, including local bookstores, social media provides a lifeline—a way to connect with customers, share events, and promote content. For faith-based organizations, it’s a way to spread messages of hope, engage in meaningful dialogue, and connect with believers and seekers alike.
This is not just a matter of business being hindered—it is a limitation on free expression and a blow to religious communities whose voices deserve to be heard in the same space as any other group or individual.
Religious Expression as Free Speech
Religious expression is not an afterthought in free speech but central to it. The United States was built on a foundation emphasizing freedom of religion, enshrined in the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and religion. This foundational right ensures that individuals and groups, including Christians, can express their beliefs without fear of retribution or censorship.
While Facebook, as a private company, has the legal right to set its own rules for content, it must recognize the responsibility that comes with its immense influence. When Facebook suspends accounts for “violating community standards,” it must provide clear, transparent reasoning and apply policies fairly and consistently.
The Need for Fair Standards
If Facebook is to serve as a fair and neutral platform, it must apply its community standards evenly across all users, regardless of their beliefs. Vague rules about “harmful content” or “hate speech” must be clearly defined to prevent subjective interpretations targeting specific groups unfairly. Christian organizations and individuals should be able to share their faith-based perspectives without the constant fear of suspension.
A Call for Dialogue and Respect
Like members of any faith or community, Christians can express their beliefs, share their messages, and participate in public discourse. In defending the Vineyard’s right to post on Facebook, we are not just defending one small business—we are defending the right of all individuals and groups to participate in the marketplace of ideas without fear of censorship.
Stupid Reasons to Decide Who to Vote For
Stupid Reasons to Decide Who to Vote For
by Joe Wallace-For City-County Observer
OCTOBER 21, 2024
The reasons people give for voting the way they do can often range from the carefully considered to the downright absurd. While voting is a fundamental right, it’s concerning how frequently people base their decisions on factors unrelated to policy, competence, or character. Let’s explore some of the more questionable reasons people use when selecting candidates and consider how much of the electorate might be swayed by such thinking.
1. Candidate’s Race or Gender
Some voters choose a candidate simply based on their race or gender, often believing that a shared identity will lead to more representation of their interests. While representation is essential, voting solely on these criteria can overlook important factors like policy positions, experience, and leadership abilities.
2. Celebrity Endorsements
Celebrity culture has a significant influence on voting behavior. Whether it’s a beloved actor, musician, or social media personality, voters sometimes support a candidate purely because their favorite celebrity endorses them. This is problematic since a celebrity’s qualifications in judging political candidates might not be any more informed than the average person’s.
3. Party Affiliation
Straight-ticket voting — voting for every candidate from one political party regardless of their individual merits — is common. Many people base their votes entirely on party lines, even if they know little about the actual positions or records of the candidates. This creates a dynamic where voters don’t necessarily engage with what each candidate stands for, assuming the party label tells them everything they need to know.
4. Candidate’s Appearance or Personal Traits
It’s not unheard of for voters to choose candidates based on physical appearance, charm, or likability. Traits like a candidate’s smile, fashion sense, or perceived attractiveness can cloud people’s judgment. Voters may feel more comfortable supporting someone who “looks the part” of a leader, even if that has no bearing on their ability to govern.
5. Having Pets (or Other Irrelevant Personal Details)
Yes, some voters actually care about whether a candidate owns a dog or other pets! In 2008, the Obama family’s decision to get a dog received significant media attention. While pets can humanize a candidate, it’s an entirely superficial basis for making a voting decision. Candidates’ personal preferences—like whether they have pets, their favorite sports teams, or what they eat for breakfast—have no real impact on how they will lead.
6. Geography
Regional loyalty is another irrational driver for many voters. People sometimes vote for a candidate simply because they come from the same town, state, or region. This localism can overshadow broader national or global concerns, and it doesn’t always translate into better representation for the community.
7. Family Tradition
Some voters choose candidates based on longstanding family traditions. They might vote for a particular party or candidate simply because that’s how their parents or grandparents voted. While respecting family history is understandable, basing votes on tradition alone doesn’t account for changing political dynamics or individual candidate qualifications.
8. Personality and Popularity Over Policy
Candidates with engaging personalities often win voters over more easily than those who are more reserved, regardless of policy positions. Charismatic candidates can rally supporters with inspirational speeches, but charisma doesn’t necessarily equate to effective governance. Similarly, candidates who have high visibility in the media, even for reasons unrelated to politics, can receive votes just because they are more recognizable.
9. “Winning Team” Mentality
Some voters support candidates they think are most likely to win, driven by a desire to feel like they’re backing the right side. Instead of voting based on policies or principles, they’re influenced by polling data, media buzz, or the momentum of a candidate’s campaign. This kind of “bandwagon” voting ignores the real issues at stake.
How Many Votes Are Determined by These “Stupid” Reasons?
It’s difficult to quantify precisely how many people vote based on irrational or superficial reasons. However, various studies and polls suggest that a significant portion of voters—likely between 10% to 25%—are influenced by factors that have little to do with a candidate’s qualifications or policies. A 2016 study by researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Stanford found that personality traits, attractiveness, and even height influenced voting decisions, especially in close races.
Moreover, political scientists often refer to “low-information voters,” a group of individuals who don’t invest much time or effort into researching the issues or the candidates. Estimates vary, but low-information voters could make up as much as 40% of the electorate, with many relying on superficial cues like party affiliation, media coverage, or endorsements.
While not every decision made by low-information voters is necessarily “stupid,” the line between uninformed voting and voting based on irrational criteria can be thin. Given the importance of elections, it’s critical for voters to dig deeper, question their own biases, and make informed decisions rather than rely on irrelevant factors.
Conclusion
Voting is one of the most powerful tools citizens have to shape their government, yet far too many people base their decisions on reasons that have little to do with the real challenges and responsibilities of leadership. From race and gender to pets and party affiliation, these factors often distract from the more serious evaluation of a candidate’s policies, experience, and potential to lead. Encouraging voters to think critically and engage more deeply with the political process is essential for a functioning democracy. Though it’s hard to estimate exactly how many votes are determined by irrational reasons, it’s clear that a substantial portion of the electorate is influenced by them.
Statehouse File Explainer: In Time for November, a Schooling in the Electoral College
Explainer: In time for November, a schooling in the Electoral College
By Jack Sells, Special to TheStatehouseFile.com
There are three sure-fire ways to know when we’re getting close to Election Day:
- You’re stressfully watching the Colts play on a Sunday afternoon and seemingly every break in the gameplay is filled with political ads.
- Neighbors on opposite sides of the political spectrum are engaged in Cold War conflicts, filling their front yards up with signs that increase in their passive aggressiveness with every new addition.
- There’s a sudden interest in the Electoral College.
Of those three things, though—television ads, yard signs and the Electoral College—it’s the last that truly only comes into play every four years during the presidential election.
Mandated by the Constitution, the Electoral College is the process for deciding the president and vice president. Whichever ticket can win 270 of the 538 total electoral votes wins the election.
Not only is it pretty unique compared to how other countries elect their leaders, the Electoral College is unique compared to how we elect other government officials within the United States.
If you haven’t thought much about the institution since you were forced to learn about it in high school, use this as a refresher. And if you never learned about it, well, here’s your chance.
Text of the Constitution
First of all, we aren’t using the same system that was created in 1787 during the Constitutional Convention.
Originally, back when political parties weren’t as prevalent in the United States, the second-place finisher would become vice president. But after an instance of the president and vice president being from different parties (take a moment and imagine if Donald Trump was currently the vice president to Joe Biden), the 12th Amendment was drafted and ratified to make it so there were different votes for the two positions.
Article II of the U.S. Constitution discusses the executive branch, and specifically Clauses II – IV of Article II, Section I break down the role of the Electoral College and electors.
Here it is in simplified terms:
States pick their electors and each should have as many electors as they have senators and representatives in Congress.
Federal officeholders cannot be electors. (The 14th Amendment, which came after the Civil War, also says electors can’t have previously engaged in insurrection.)
Each state’s electors meet and vote for president and vice president.
The electors also make lists of every candidate and how many votes they received.
The lists are sent to Washington, D.C.
The Electoral College in practice
One of the upshots of the Electoral College is that when you vote for a president-vice president in tandem, you’re actually voting for that state party’s electors.
For example, in Indiana, each state party selects 11 electors and 11 alternative electors—generally at their respective conventions.
This means that the Indiana Republican Party has electors if Trump and Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance receive the most votes in the state, and the Indiana Democratic Party has electors if Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz receive the most votes.
For whichever ticket takes the state, that party’s slate of electors will meet in the Indiana Statehouse in December to cast their votes.
But it’s really just a formality due to Indiana state law. They are required to vote for their party’s nominees. If an elector tries to vote for anyone else, the elector is replaced with an alternate.
Thirty-five other states and Washington, D.C., have similar requirements that make faithless electors either impossible or highly unlikely.
And even for the states that don’t, the political parties in those states are selecting electors based at least in part on the person’s dedication to the party.
This is why, on Election Night, news outlets report as if the electoral votes go straight to candidates, as opposed to electors who later vote for candidates. In reality, the middle step isn’t all that relevant to figuring out who’s winning the electoral votes.
What to take to your Election Night Watch party
For those wanting to impress friends and family with their knowledge about the Electoral College, may I humbly suggest that’s not going to work.
But if you insist on it, remember:
- The Electoral College process is written in the U.S. Constitution.
- It was changed so that the runner-up wouldn’t become vice president.
- The number of electoral votes a state has is based on how many representatives and senators it has. For Indiana, that means 11 electoral votes.
- The political party whose ticket gets the most votes in Indiana will have all 11 of its electors chosen.
- Those electors will meet in December, and by Indiana law, they are required to vote for their party’s nominees.
- And, of course, first one to 270 wins!
Award-winning TSF reporter Jack Sells graduated from Franklin College in spring 2024. He currently teaches social studies at an Indianapolis high school.