Page 30 - Flathead Beacon // 9.23.15

LIKE I WAS SAYIN’
TWO FOR THOUGHT SAME TOPIC, DIFFERENT VIEWS WINNOWING THE FIELD
KELLYN BROWN
ROOTING FOR THE UNDERDOG
FLATHEAD HIGH SCHOOL’S FOOTBALL TEAM looks poised to have its best season since Brock Osweiler graduated in 2008. The quarterback, who went on to play at Arizona State University, is now a backup for the Denver Broncos behind future Hall of Famer Peyton Manning. In other words, Oz left behind big shoes to fill.
Since his departure, coupled with the 2007 school split that sent half the talent across town, the Braves have struggled.
That’s changing. And the city of Kalispell, home to last year’s Class AA state champion Glacier Wolfpack, has taken notice. The largest crowd in years, save for cross-town or the playoffs, packed into Legends Stadium recently when the Braves rolled over previously unde- feated Great Falls, 41-12.
This is a different Flathead team than the one that had compiled a record of 14-47 since 2009, including one-win seasons in 2010 and 2012. For years, the Braves have been considered underdogs as the new school up north accumulated a series of firsts. But now, whether we have ties to the school, many of us are rooting for Flathead a little harder then we otherwise would.
That’s the thing about underdogs. When we have no skin in the game, it’s easy to cheer for them.
Science backs this up. There’s a reason a lot of us dis- like the New York Yankees, New England Patriots and Duke University basketball. They win all the time and, if we have no vested interest in their success, studies show we’re wired to pull for their opponents, which often face longer odds.
One such study, published in 1991 by researchers at Bowling Green State University, found when 100 college students were posed with a hypothetical best-of-seven matchup between Team A and Team B, in which Team A was “highly favored” to win, 81 percent said they would root for the underdog.
When the same group was told that Team B had somehow upset Team A in the first three games, half of those who initially supported Team B began rooting for Team A, the one that now had a tougher road to victory.
We often attribute more effort to underdogs and view their occasional upsets as contributing to a sense of fair- ness. But we also, researchers find, experience more joy by unexpected results.
That’s why during the March Madness basketball tournament we cheer for so many Cinderella teams and why, after several losing seasons, it’s easy to cheer for the Braves. They, in many minds, deserve this.
I have family roots in Illinois, so I have long sup- ported the ultimate underdog, my beloved Chicago Cubs, which haven’t been to the World Series since 1945 and haven’t won the title since 1908.
Every year my father and I talk about the Cubbies’ prospects, and nearly every year we’re disappointed by the actual result. So this year, with our team expected to make the postseason for the first time in years, a fever has swept my family, which is convinced this is, in fact, the Cubs’ year. It’s likely not, but rooting for under- dogs defies logic and we’re more optimistic about their chances because we believe they deserve it.
It’s that belief that draws many of us to sports. And when our teams falter, we search for another worthy of our support.
The Braves are that team. Regardless of logic, and after several losing seasons, I think this could be their year. That’s what I’m cheering for, anyway.
BY TIM BALDWIN
Rand Paul’s presidential campaign demonstrates
the difficulty of staying mainstream while pushing for non-mainstream Republican ideas, like criminal jus- tice reform, non-interventionism foreign policy, and anti-War-on-Drugs policy. In August, Paul painted himself as a loyal Republican when he attacked Trump for not committing to support the eventual Republican nominee, regardless of who it was. Yet, Paul has consis- tently attacked mainstream Republican thought. This approach may cost Paul the nomination.
More than his dad, Rand has a keener sense of how to express libertarian ideas while appealing to a broader, mainstream audience. In this way, Rand attracts main- stream Republicans. Ironically, this is what libertari- ans dislike about Rand: they do not see him as genu- ine but as opportunistic. But in a primary election, the votes Rand gains by more mainstream voters may not be a net gain because those voters would more likely vote for a more mainstream Republican anyway. At the same time, Rand may lose libertarian votes for his not being a true libertarian.
Ron did a great job at motivating voters and procur- ing donors. Ron won many straw polls – hands down. When votes came in during the primary election, Ron trailed Mitt Romney in many states by only a few points. Comparing this to Rand’s campaign, in a flooded Republican primary, this does not bode well for Rand.
As the primary continues, let’s see if Rand adopts more of Ron’s hard-hitting libertarian ideals and vot- ers. He’s got to do something.
BY JOE CARBONARI
Rand Paul won the recent Mackinac Island
straw poll. Donald Trump was last. I consider this encouraging.
Rand Paul deserves consideration. Donald demands it. He shouldn’t. As a serious presidential candidate, he is an embarrassment. He is lacking in experience and temperament. His confidants and advisors are unknown or nonexistent. If somehow elected, “Risky Business” might well be his security code name. He is dangerous entertainment.
Rand Paul has intellectual substance, political experience, and can be refreshingly direct. I like his decency and his libertarian bent. We all value per- sonal freedom. He is cautious when it comes to the projection and use of military options. That is good, but can be misunderstood. Appearing weak invites others to test and to prod. This would be destabiliz- ing in an already volatile world. He also seems to be a risky bet. No thanks.
Carly Fiorina did well in the second debate, and she is being increasingly well received. She is obvi- ously bright and quick ... if a bit sharp of tongue. That has its appeal, but also suggests that she may not play well with others. Going it alone in world affairs is not a good approach, especially when the action is in other peoples’ neighborhoods. How good a coalition builder is she? How well does she read people? When she leads will others follow? I have serious doubts.
Kasich and Rubio look to have the political and personal skills required. Let’s watch them.
W
and ideas.
As a former D.C. telecom expert turned Montana
tech entrepreneur, I know firsthand how challenging it is to get a high level federal official to attend an event, particularly one that’s not a quick flight or drive away. And because the tech sector is particularly sexy these days, FCC commissioners get invited to everything. Everything. That they agreed to come to Montana and spend some serious time here says a lot about the folks who invited them and their own personal willingness to share expertise and learn about our unique per- spectives on technology delivery in a huge, low-den- sity population state with some pretty intense needs.
Some people argue that trips like these are wasteful. I couldn’t disagree more. There’s nothing like having people with serious knowledge and ability visit a hos- pital in Kalispell or a university in Bozeman – both of which are doing a lot of the right things – to elevate our discussions about how to do even better. Events like these are a giant undertaking and KRMC and Daines deserve huge credit for making them happen.
It’s a great example of good people coming together for a noble cause. And, if rural and small towns are going to prosper, we need to keep hosting thought-lead- ers that can make a difference to our future. It’s not easy and it doesn’t happen overnight, but events like these should remind us all that it’s doable and it’s important.
Disclosure notice – I was an attendee at the KRMC Summit and speaker at the High Tech Jobs Summit.
AMERICAN RURAL DIANE SMITH
HOSTING TELECOM HOTSHOTS
HO KNEW THAT MONTANA WAS SUCH A hotbed of telecommunications goings-on
that three of the five Federal Communi- cations commissioners would visit us in the past few weeks? The five Federal Communications commis- sioners have power over just about every front page technology issue out there; from net neutrality to Wi-Fi to homeland security. In other words, they touch just about every gizmo we use daily.
That’s why it was exciting to see three commis- sioners in Montana this month. Democratic Commis- sioner Jessica Rosenworcel attended an outstand- ing tele-health summit hosted by Kalispell Regional Medical Center. She was joined by other key officials from the Veterans Administration and the USDA. The summit explored telemedicine, remote imaging, emer- gency care and other high speed opportunities that can vastly increase patient outcomes. KRMC is a leader in tele-health and, along with their guests, they used this opportunity to better inform others and explore new solutions.
Republican commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O’Rielly participated in Montana U.S. Sen. Steve Daines’ equally outstanding High-Tech Jobs Summit at Montana State University in Bozeman. Alongside an amazing lineup of speakers, the commissioners spoke enthusiastically about how technology has created new opportunities for entrepreneurship and business success in states like ours with an abundance of rural and small towns. They also met with entrepreneurs and small business leaders to exchange knowledge
30
SEPTEMBER 23, 2015 // FLATHEADBEACON.COM