September 6, 2026

GET WOKE, GO…: Nike To Leave the S&P 100 on September 21.

Nike is set to leave the S&P 100 before U.S. trading opens on September 21, 2026, according to S&P Dow Jones Indices. The change was announced on September 4 as part of the index provider’s quarterly rebalance.

The sportswear company joins Honeywell Aerospace, Simon Property Group and Colgate-Palmolive on the list of S&P 100 departures. Dell Technologies, Palo Alto Networks, Arista Networks and Sandisk will enter the index.

Nike will remain in the S&P 500; S&P Global describes the narrower S&P 100 thusly:

The S&P 100, a sub-set of the S&P 500®, is designed to measure the performance of large-cap companies in the United States and comprises 100 major blue chip companies across multiple industry groups. Individual stock options are listed for each index constituent.

As legendary fictitious rock manager Ian Faith would say, their appeal is becoming more selective: Nike Stock Is Down 78% From Its All-Time High. Is This the Once-in-a-Decade Setup for Patient Investors?

But why did Nike stock drop so precipitously? Former Levis president Jennifer Sey has some flashbacks:

Prior to Mulvaney, Nike had few other missteps as well:

In 2025, Nike displayed this billboard at the London Marathon:

The previous year, Nike was all too happy to dial the War of the Sexes up to 11: New Ultra-Woke Nike Ad Says WNBA Dynasty ‘Makes Men Look Like Amateurs.

In November of 2021, as the world emerged from a pandemic during which numerous publications wrote that obesity could greatly increase the effects of Covid-19, a manufacturer of athletic footwear released this showstopping image:

Things began getting awfully weird at Nike in 2019, starting most prominently when they issued a pair of Betsy Ross-flag embedded sneakers, likely only so that uber-woke Nike endorser Colin Kaepernick could dunk on them, to coincide with the Fourth of July. In Nike’s collective mind, this was evil and “offensive:”

In 2018, Kaepernick was Patient Zero in Nike’s collapse: Colin Kaepernick part of Nike’s 30th anniversary of ‘Just Do It’ campaign.

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, File.
Posted at 7:45 am by Ed Driscoll

HARSH, BUT FAIR:

Related:

Posted at 7:30 am by Glenn Reynolds

ONE BRAVE MAN: Jonathan Turley: When ‘12 Angry Men’ becomes one angry man. “‘I hope that guy can sleep well at night.’ Those words from Kevin Reddington on the steps of the Plymouth, Massachusetts Courthouse were part of a diatribe against the “guy” who was reportedly the sole holdout in the Lindsay Clancy trial. The scene was a fitting end to a visceral trial, but it added a vindictive element that should prompt Judge William Sullivan to call out the seasoned defense attorney.”

Plus: “For Reddington and many viewers, the hung jury was less ‘Twelve Angry Men’ and more like ‘One Angry Man.’ Indeed, in addition to attacking the juror, women outside of the courthouse heckled Cruz as he tried to speak to the press, shouting that he ‘only cares about the three children. What about the Mom?'”

Let’s unpack that a bit: “He only cares about the three murdered children. What about the Mom who murdered them?”

People who watched the trial said that Reddington was very professional until it went to the jury. He’s certainly been an ass since. As Turley says: “You can disagree with this juror and the outcome but still celebrate that our legal system comes down not to judges or lawyers, but to simple citizens doing justice in thousands of cases a year. It comes down to whether every juror can vote not for a popular choice, but for a moral one. hat is why some of us were so shocked by Reddington’s public attack on this one juror. This is not who we are supposed to be as officers of the court. We stand in the path of the mob, not leading it.”

Well, some do. But if the mob determines outcomes, who needs high-priced lawyers? And how safe should they feel if they disagree with the mob?

Posted at 7:22 am by Glenn Reynolds

YOU MAY NOT BE INTERESTED IN THE GLEICHSCHALTUNG, BUT THE GLEICHSCHALTUNG IS INTERESTED IN YOU — AND YOUR KIDS:

Tweet concludes:

If we started with that idea that every child is our child, we would build incredible public schools, we would guarantee everybody healthcare, we would guarantee childcare, we would stop putting money in bombs and tanks that kill kids and we would start investing in infrastructure and opportunity for kids.

El-Sayed is far from the only leftist with this notion. Just ask Randi Weingarten, New York magazine, Nation magazine, Politico, and Comcast:

Related: Saving Your Child From The Village. “It used to be that it takes a village to save a child. Now, you have to work hard to save your child from the village.”

Posted at 7:14 am by Ed Driscoll

THE DIRECTION IS GOOD BUT THE MAGNITUDE NEEDS WORK:

Posted at 7:00 am by Glenn Reynolds

September 5, 2026

OPEN THREAD: You know what to do.

Posted at 9:30 pm by Glenn Reynolds

DO TELL: WSJ: Say, Trump May Actually Win the Hormuz Crisis – by Mooting It. “Strategic patience for the win? Iran’s regime leaders thought they could force the US to buckle by strangling the global economy at the Strait of Hormuz. The US, however, has an actual blue-water navy, and that tends to matter in blockades involving a country entirely reliant on sea trade for its only valuable export economy.”

Posted at 8:53 pm by Glenn Reynolds

THE DOVER PROTEST: OBSERVATIONS.

“Their clothing is coordinated and remarkably uniform. I use the term ‘uniform’ deliberately. The near-universal face covering also frustrates identification and subsequent intelligence gathering. Whether that is its principal purpose or not, it is certainly the effect. Most strikingly, there is a conspicuous absence of the nationalist imagery normally associated with protests of this kind. Few, if any, English flags. Instead, there is a preponderance of Christian symbolism.”

Posted at 8:46 pm by Glenn Reynolds

MATT TAIBBI: Note on a Mistrial: Hoo, boy. “How can ‘mental defect’ have a lobby? What’s happening to people?”

Posted at 7:50 pm by Glenn Reynolds

IT’S LIZ WARREN, AGAIN: Check out “AND THEN THERE ARE THE FACTS” on the latest Mark Tapscott Copy Desk column.

Posted at 7:22 pm by Mark Tapscott

SPARE OOM’S NEWSPAPER OF RECORD:

Posted at 5:38 pm by Ed Driscoll

SOMEBODY SET UP US THE BOMB:

Okay, that’s a reasonable first step, but that sort of intersectionality must be extended to also include trans rights and AI rights as well:

In response to Harrison, New York City Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (R) tweets, “These deranged psychotics are in the driver seat of the Democrat party. No matter how many fables they tell about ‘affordability’ and ‘health care’ to make them seem like anything but the lunatics they are, at the end of the day this unhinged BS is what they’re actually about.”

Posted at 5:14 pm by Ed Driscoll

BACK TO BLOOD:

QED:

As Tom Wolfe wrote in his last novel, “A phrase pops into his head from out of nowhere. ‘Everybody… all of them… it’s back to blood! Religion is dying… but everybody still has to believe in something. It would be intolerable — you couldn’t stand it — to finally have to say to yourself, ‘Why keep pretending? I’m nothing but a random atom inside a supercollider known as the universe.’ But believing in by definition means blindly, irrationally, doesn’t it. So, my people, that leaves only our blood, the bloodlines that course through our very bodies, to unite us. ‘La Raza!’ as the Puerto Ricans cry out. ‘The Race!’ cries the whole world. All people, all people everywhere, have but one last thing on their minds — Back to blood!”

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): Reader John Steakley writes:

I wonder what the three-way intersection is between trust, diversity, and wealth redistribution.

I.e., if every group saw every other group pulling their own weight, then there’s not much room for resentment. But when it appears that politicians use taxes disproportionately from one group to provide benefits disproportionately to another group, that fosters resentment, and trust erodes.

To foster that resentment, one needs a diverse society AND redistributionist economic policies.

But the silver lining may be that the resentment isn’t innate; it isn’t racist; it isn’t some hardwired tribal urge; it’s man-made. It’s almost as if the politicians intentionally pander to pit one group against another for votes based on the resentment they foster with their policies.

In other words, I remain convinced that we CAN all get along, if the race-baiting politicians would let us.

Yes, in C. Vann Woodward’s The Strange Career of Jim Crow, he reports that immediately after the Civil War, race relations in the South were surprisingly good compared to what came before and after, but once the local power structure started reasserting itself it quickly had people divided in the ways it found convenient. That said, the more opportunities there are for the power structure to do that, the more likely it is to happen.

Posted at 4:45 pm by Ed Driscoll