1-on-1 with SPS school board candidate Sarah Hough
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. — With local elections just around the corner, Ozarks First's Parker Padgett is sitting down with candidates for several different races as we get closer to Election Day on April 8.
Today, Padgett is speaking with SPS School Board candidate Sarah Hough about several topics including her campaign and stance on several issues.
1-on-1 with SPS school board candidate Kelly Byrne
This series will be featured online versus Ozarks First's traditional political coverage, with our digital coverage allowing for longer interviews and even more information for viewers.
1-on-1 with Springfield mayoral candidate Jeff Schrag
Ozarks First has reached out to every candidate in a contested Springfield election and will conduct and post interviews as candidates become available.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Paid insurrectionists': Amid unrest in L.A, Trump returns to an unsettling old favorite
Donald Trump was asked Tuesday whether he was prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act in response to protests in Los Angeles, and the president didn't rule out the possibility. Just as importantly, however, a reporter asked him how he would determine whether or not conditions warranted such a radical move. The Republican replied that he would 'take a look at what's happening,' which wasn't exactly reassuring. But before moving on, Trump blamed local unrest on 'paid insurrectionists.' He's been pushing the same line quite a bit in recent days. A day earlier, the president also told reporters: 'The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators.' Over the weekend, he also used his social media platform to complain about 'paid troublemakers' and 'paid insurrectionists.' If the line sounds familiar, it's not your imagination. As regular readers might recall, it was nearly nine years ago when Trump's 2016 candidacy inspired protests, at which point he assumed that the people involved couldn't possibly be sincere in their dislike of him. They were, he said at the time, 'paid agitators.' After he prevailed on Election Day 2016, there was related anti-Trump activism. Those involved, he said in November 2016, were 'paid protesters.' Months later, after his inauguration, the activism continued. Trump assured the public once more that these Americans deserved to be ignored — because, he assumed, they were 'paid protesters.' The following year, Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination inspired another round of progressive activism. The protesters, Trump insisted, were 'paid professionals.' Earlier this year, as congressional Republicans faced a public backlash, the president assured the public: 'Paid 'troublemakers' are attending Republican Town Hall Meetings.' For now, let's not dwell on the fact that Russia's Vladimir Putin has embraced the same tactic. Let's instead consider the unavoidable bottom line: For Trump and too many in his party, Americans who disagree with them are effectively an impossibility that can only be explained through corrupt schemes and illicit payments. Indeed, it's hardly a stretch to draw a straight line from 'paid protesters' rhetoric to election denialism: Americans who side with Trump and Republicans are real, while Americans who disagree must necessarily be seen as inauthentic. Whether the president is prepared to accept this or not, the fact remains that Americans who take to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with him don't need to be compensated: Their outrage is sincere. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Montana Supreme Court declares 2021 abortion restrictions unconstitutional
HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Montana's Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional several laws restricting abortion access, including a ban beyond 20 weeks of gestation. The measures approved by Republican lawmakers in 2021 had been blocked since a judge issued a preliminary injunction against them that year. While the case was pending, voters passed an initiative that enshrined the right to abortions in the Montana Constitution. Justices said in Monday's ruling that the state constitution included a 'right to be left alone" and have access to abortions. They said that right was not affected by a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended a half-century of nationwide abortion rights. The Montana laws also included a prohibition against telehealth prescriptions of abortion medication, a 24-hour waiting period after giving informed consent, and a requirement for providers to give patients the option of viewing an ultrasound or listening to the fetal heart tone. Planned Parenthood of Montana challenged the measures. Justices cited a 1999 Montana Supreme Court ruling that said the state constitution's right to privacy includes a woman's right to obtain an abortion before the fetus is viable from the provider of her choice. The state argued that the 1999 ruling was wrongly decided and has tried unsuccessfully on several occasions to get the Montana Supreme Court to overturn it. The Legislature in 2023 passed another slate of bills seeking to limit abortion access. Last year's initiative to make abortion a constitutional right in the state passed with backing from 58% of voters. An anti-abortion group called the Montana Family Foundation on Monday filed a lawsuit challenging the voter-approved initiative. The group claims voters who registered on Election Day were denied the chance to fully review the initiative because the ballot included only a summary. The full text was in a pamphlet mailed to registered voters.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Libertarian Party's 2024 VP nominee announces he's joining GOP
Mike ter Maat, who was the Libertarian Party's vice presidential nominee a year ago, announced Tuesday that he has joined the Republican Party in a move that he described as a 'a strategic shift – not a change in ideology.' 'The Republican Party will be the arena for the critical debate of the next political cycle,' ter Maat said in a statement on the switch. 'To strengthen our economy through free markets, unify our nation through the Constitution and protect our future through fiscal conservatism and a common-sense foreign policy, we must engage where it matters most.' Ter Maat was the running mate of Libertarian presidential candidate Chase Oliver. The duo received less than half of a percent of the national vote and came in fifth, securing fewer votes than Green Party candidate Jill Stein and independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who had withdrawn from the race before Election Day. Ter Matt said he is specifically aligning with the GOP's Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), which is made up of Republicans who have Libertarian-leaning views. The RLC in the past has backed candidates like former Texas Rep. Ron Paul and current Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie. RLC chair John Dennis credited President Trump, who spoke at the Libertarian Party's convention last year, with bringing more third-party backers into the GOP, even as some of Trump's allies take aim at libertarian-leaning Republicans. 'The Republican Liberty Caucus is the right entry point for liberty Republicans, Libertarians and independents committed to the fight for constitutional governance,' Dennis said in a statement on ter Maat's announcement. 'The RLC is excited to fulfill this important role.'
