Sentences with phrase «candidates than math»

Not exact matches

(i) Unable to restore the power in a few states for more than 10 + days, since a tornado passed by it (ii) Unable to restore power for 7 + days in a snowy North Eastern state, since a hurricane passed by it (iii) Having no quality in science, math and technology; depending on «imports» to uplift them (or depending on Jesus to save them)(iv) Horrible crime in downtown, ghettos of any major city (v) Unemployment of 23 % (vi) Having a president who believes that the earth is 6000 years old (vii) Having a presidential candidate which believes in subjugating women (viii) Having more than 50 % of its 2012 graduates un / under - employed (ix) No public transport, resulting in hell on earth even for a small rise in crude - oil prices (x) A crappy health care system (xi) A debt of 14Trillion, which corresponds to 50K per US resident.

If you want to argue that people are more likely to vote for a candidate who shares their religion, then go for it — I think that's very likely — but you should actually make that claim, rather than silently presupposing it and jumping straight to the resulting math.

The Republican primary will hand out three delegates per district (plus 14 more for the statewide winner), but the math is more complicated: A candidate who pulls in more than 50 percent of the vote in a given district will take all three; if the winner gets less than a majority, one delegate will go to the column of the second - place finisher, as long as that candidate receives at least 20 percent of that district's vote.

The result, Crehan maintains, is that these future math teachers have more opportunities than other teacher - candidates in Canada to «learn to analyze student mistakes and deconstruct each mathematical concept.»

So angry GCSE maths candidates may find that, despite considering the paper tough, their raw scores will count for more UMS marks than they would have done in an easier paper, so their grades may not be affected.

What I think is more likely is that it's (a) math — there are far more qualified candidates than there are openings, so even though you're getting interviews, there might have just always been someone more qualified, and / or (b) your interviewing skills aren't serving you well.