Mark Blyth and Wendy Schiller - Election 2016: What Happened and Why?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 พ.ย. 2016
- Skip ahead to main speakers at 1:34
The result is in - but does it really matter and for whom does it matter? Will the U.S. president-elect be able to address the problems faced by the voters that put them in charge, or will we be here again in four years time. Join Professors Wendy Schiller and Mark Blyth to discuss what happened and why, and perhaps, what happens next.
Co-sponsored by the International Relations, Political Science, and Public Policy Departmental Undergraduate Groups.
![[MPD직캠] 베이비몬스터 치키타 직캠 4K 'LIKE THAT' (BABYMONSTER CHIQUITA FanCam) | @MCOUNTDOWN_2024.6.13](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/h99J4vWm7Ew/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't know how Blyth keeps his patience here, while the whole problem that led to Trump is played out a few inches to his left.
I bet he is the only one in the whole room who travelled to the poor part of Providence
These two are not on the same level. Blyth is giving a detailed account of things to come in the future. Schiller can barely verbalize in a sensible manner the events of the immediate past.
She is more interested in absolving HRC (and the DNC) of any responsibility for Trump's victory than in taking a sober look at how we got here and what it means in the near future.
It was nice of them to have someone without an education on the panel though.
She's an emotionally charged sockpuppet for Clinton. That's why.
Mark Blyth is absolutely spot on in this talk!
Brilliant insight. Shiller basically just regurgitated Clinton News Network bullshit propaganda though.
"Shill"er. What about a protest vote against a corrupt system that ignores the needs of citizens in exchange for cowering to their donors. Hillary is basically a poster child for privilege and corruption.
You guys have no clue about her inner thoughts lmao
smoke weed every day!!
OK I have the benefit of coming back and looking at it well into our first term. What did he get right? Spending is out of control but that's been true for decades. He said manufacturing wouldn't come back but there's been growth in that sector. He said bathrooms were a serious civil rights issue. I mean come on....
Schiller seems to have a lot of ways of saying "HRC should have won, but voters on election day somehow didn't understand that they needed to vote accordingly, for reasons of their reasons."
No, you see all the voters magically changed their minds between the last poll, and election day, cuz reasons.
I am sorry, what? Your dumb ass teaches at fucking Brown?!
the same answer I give in meetings when I have no clue what I am talking about
The funny thing about this is we got answers to who was right.... Blyth was. He nails it everytime. He is my new favorite political thinker.
you should check out victor davis hanson.
I hope Wendy Schiller is not tenured. If so, then the "the bar is too low" at Brown [see South Park].
She is really out of her league in this discussion. I felt embarrassed for her.
Blyth's perspective is very interesting. Fast forward through Schiller, she essentially just parrots the clueless MSM view.
"I'm not going to blame the polls or the mainstream media for this", Wendy are you for real????
Perfect example how smart voices are drowned out by confident ignorant ones, Pr. Schiller should have shown a modicum of decency and stop talking and allow Mark Blyth to speak, but i guess that's too much to ask from someone like her !!
Listening to Wendy Schiller talk is unbearable.
It's like swimming thru razor blades.
It really is risible. Starting with "you lost, get over it k" was magnificently tone deaf. Deciding that the smart call is defending HRC personally was a mistake.
Mark Blyth speaks at 13:10, 34:40, 1:01:05, 1:04:18, 1:05:23, 1:08:55, 1:11:16, 1:15:11, 1:19:32, 1:25:47
Thanks man
Legend
Mark Blythe is awesome. An eloquent, informed and charismatic straight talker.
He gets it. She doesn't.
this presentation is invaluable: it puts side by side the sound of the establishment and that of what actual reasoning sounds like. it's harder to realize how mind blowing the difference really is when you hear them separately.
This woman teaches political science? Yikes. She's nothing more than a neoliberal apologist. We're doomed.
Depressing, how she seemed to have not a clue why Clinton lost so badly (even if the eventual result was so close). If Schiller is an example of how the Democratic "elite' and party will respond to Trump's presidency & the Republicans, there's no hope whatsoever for liberalism or the Democratic Party. Better get ready to lose to them again in 2020, and probably 2018 as well.
Couldn't agree more. After seeing the continued hubris and lack of introspection from Democrats (and not just those elected) I'm starting to understand the "ear-wig" grip neoliberalism has on this party-- one I've been a member of for 40 years. It's like trying to talk to a creationist or flat-earther-- reason just doesn't work. Maybe it's too soon, but I am not encouraged.
Anything specific that you disliked about what she said or are you just going to call her names
I specifically hated that a professor of political science regurgitated like a scripted CNN guest. Too hard to understand? Not my problem.
***** Yep. Pretty clear and self-explanatory the first time.
"I have some perspective because I am older" What a load of bollocks. She did NOT see the rise of fascism and she has no clue how bad it can and will get.
Mark, please continue to give your simple and direct message just as you've given it here, but without Wendy Schiller yelling next to you. Rarely have I heard such a polarization of understanding, and we need to be hearing from you: not least because we're rather off the map as far as 'mainstream parties running the show' and not likely to depart from your projections anytime soon, for the reasons you yourself have given.
Mark has it right. Wendy is completely delusional. She does not understand at all what just happened. The Democratic establishment was completely and utterly humiliated. They are totally discredited. She's in total denial of where to lay the blame.
Damn it, Wendy. It wasn't because of the negative vitriol regarding HRC, it was the fact that she represented more of the same non-incremental progressive change, at a time when we need more far sweeping positive change, than ever.
Skip to 13:11 to the beginning of Mark's opinion. 34:41
Wendy Schiller is out of touch. Spouting Clinton line excuses and her analysis is terrible. It is Hillary's fault. She is a TERRIBLE candidate who couldn't beat a candidate with as many flaws as Trump. Just look at how she spouts sexism as a reason why Hillary lost then when asked about Bernie she says people just wanted to vote for something new.
Yep...the fact Trump won is proof of the huge credibility problem Clinton had....and the fact people voted for Clinton because they are horrified of Trump only masks that enormous credibility problem...:-)
@@lotlievaart6823 -- To take it further,the US government is FULL of elected officials with sinister and shady pasts,Trump included,but at least he doesn't pretend to be a saint,the Dems don't seem to like people their mud doesn't stick to and now they appear to have someone in the opposite corner who enjoys the same immunity to criticism THEY'VE had for decades !
Thank you, yea the Clintons are straight evil.
even now she does not realize that it was her fault. she somehow thinks that the people own her to vote for her because she had experience.
When does she stop talking?
When do you stop posting?
13:10 first monologue
34:40 second monologue
Thank you Snowman, saving my ears from Dem Est BS
@@rickylarch I think he was looking for timestamps. she had nothing to say. some of it was bordering dangerous. like becoming more engaged without a mention of understanding other point of views. the last thing we need are idiot activists. i dont mind, however, id be lying if i didnt admit thqt a little part of me enjoys watching things backfire.
Wendy seems so out of touch.. Marks hitting it right on the head.
A nice contrast between someone who gets it and someone who doesn't
In 2015, seven years after they were bailed out, Wall St. BONUSES ONLY totaled $28.4 Billion. Just let that sink in...
Bernie would have steamrolled Trump. You'd have felt sorry for him.
… and pretty good for your American friends and the rest of the world.
I have zero doubt. The DNC had to have known it too, but defeating Trump was much less important than defeating Sanders. Trump poses no threat to what the DNC holds dear. Sexism, global warming... my ass. Those are just their "public positions."
Bernie Sold Out!
love how no Bernie bro ever notices the achile's heel of Bernie=Math!!!. When the entire wealth of billionaires in the country tallies 1.5Trillion, you cannot plan to fund 40-90T worth of change by taxing them.....so to anyone that CAN do math Bernie comes off as a willful liar. To them, they don't assume he is dumb, they assume he is deceptive. And the longer you see the performance the more deceptive morphs into evil. Most liberals, especially locally educated ones, grew up with the popular idea of a"when will you ever use this" vs math. It's not they they don't know how, it's that they don't bother to. They simply assume it must have been done, and therefore true. Bernie is more of a threat to the DNC then ever to the GOP - Trump never needed to worry about him, DNC will never allow him to win, even if he ends up convincing the majority of their base AND the GOP base. They will take the loss
3 years later, and history has not been kind to your comment, lol.
Lady, it IS her fault! It's her history. It's her flip-flops. It's her pro fracking stance in the midst of Standing Rock (yes it's a pipeline but it causes people to connect the dots). It's her connections to Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states who poured money into the Clinton Foundation. It's her laughing at Gadaffi's death, It's her pro no fly zone. It's her wagging a finger and yelling at a Greenpeace activist. It's her....shall I go on?
Schiller is in complete denial. It only gets more painful to watch as the video goes on. Of course I had my suspicions when she tried to argue with an economist about what inflation is.
I wish Mark Blyth would talk more... Wendy Shiller had many good points, true, but she sort of hogged the mic...
After listening in full to Wendy Shiller first bit, I skipped the rest of her talk. There was no meat inside. No specific substance other than what you can get out of mainstream media.
Can't blame you for that, but I think you'll find that Blyth's insights are really worth the effort of skipping past Schiller.
Not wrong - Hillary was a flawed candidate - obvious pre-vote let alone post vote and Schiller just can not accept it??!!
She had good points? Where? I didn't hear one... I heard a bunch of parroted bullshit propaganda from the mainstream media.
HRC wasn't a flawed candidate?
Bernie would have lost, because the 2016 exit polls?!
Completely fucking clueless!
john handcock
I like your passion, keep it burning and fuel it with knowledge, because the US will need passionate people like you over the next 4-8 years.
Maybe I exaggerated a bit, since I can recall only one memorable point she made. She said that since the Republicans now own the Senate, the House and the Presidency, all the failures that will come from their governance (and we know there will be many of those, lol) will be entirely theirs, and they cannot blame anyone else. Left wing people (I don't want to say democrats because they are not left leaning) should use this to their advantage.
Other than that, I cannot disagree with you and that is why I said that I wished Mark Blyth could have had more time on this forum...
The Jimmy Dore Show brought me here
Me too
bikerjosh07 I found this guy a while ago, hes a champion.
Me too! I wanted to hear more of what Mark had to say! He's awesome! But this Wendy lady needs to go! She's a total Hillbot and taking away from the whole talk smh.
shiluxx Mark is a gem. I've listened to a lot of his stuff. He knows his shit and makes it relatable like only a good economist can.
Australian Progressive Yea, I'll definitely be listening to him a lot more from now on!
Yes, and after Reagan came the Clinton era with mass incarceration, deregulation of wallstreet, nafta and all our the seeds of the current malaise...
Huh. Small world. Hi, Michael.
Hi Jonathan 😊
Yes, and YOU asked for it. Who elected the Congress that approved the treaties and passed the legislation?
You want to blame anything but the Clintons?
michael mcclure You want to blame nobody but the Clintons?
"Smartest guy on TH-cam explains election, economics, middle class, and predatory capitalism and gets glared at by Clinton apologizer deflecting with head in sand."
Fixed that title for ya...
Why is Schiller even on this panel?
Mark Blyth, I must read his books. The looks he gives Wendy Schiller, when she lays bare her patriotism... That's all it is, she is a true believer in America's greatness and further potential. It is unfortunate this trait tends to be religious in nature, otherwise the people might become more empirical about it and find more nuanced interpretations of history, and even seek more favorable compromise with their superiors, instead of fighting questionable wars on their behalf, reveling in the red on the flag, which flows through our hearts.
Amen Mark Blyth! You nailed it sir.
Bernie polled 15 POINTS BETTER against Trump. This woman is a Hillbot. She teaches at a university? !?!
Ohh yes ! this is a classic . Definitely worth a re-view .
Mark is terrifying b/c he almost always gets his predictions right. Hard predictions. Then he says; "What if Putin invades the Baltic?" etc. Damn. Listen to a bunch of Mark's talks - he is incredibly bright.
Voting in the current American political system and expecting change is a dead end. If Americans really want change, it's way past time to start voting for a third party to shake things up here...once this happens we will see politicians dig deeper to please the people...as long as the 2 party system continues, NOTHING WILL CHANGE!!!!
Schiller is encouraging us to be content with the status quo...
Really interesting stuff! Both speakers made some good points. Would love to interview Mark Blyth one day
Enjoyably concise and very insightful exploration of many topics. Total under emphasis on climate policy though and it's inevitable political ramifications and likely economic implications, so Mr Blyth certainly needs to broaden his mind and scope and on the topic.
1:08:40 "I think there might have been a negative reverb among women for Bernie [ If had won the primary ] "
Buuuuuullshit
She's a near total Hillbot, and hence not creditable at all as any kind of authority on the subject. She also kept yammering on when I wanted to hear Blyth speak. Neither his manner or voice is abrasive the way hers was.
Blythe says few words but so much when he does speak. He's a more serious George Carlin.
This is a very interesting and informative discussion.
I would like to volunteer for that Prof. Schiller focus group. She needs to listen and learn rather than bang on so assuredly about Hillary. She was a nightmarish choice of a candidate. Also, she was the sole beneficiary of a stolen primary.
Love this. This needs to go viral. As for the article Blyth quoted, Thomas Frank deserves a shout out too. Read him!
Finding humour amidst the grinding Progressive Soapboxing, the part where one of the panel members reveals a dumbfounding lack of economic understanding (regarding inflation) raised a smile :).
Watch Blyth's nonverbal as she speaks. Sadness. Consternation. Despair.
I haven't met a living, breathing human being who wouldn't pick Bernie Sanders over Donald Trump.
Ahem....Let me introduce myself!
I agree with your comments! He's a genius! :)))
Well, she got the commitment part right, but then I skipped her and the rest of her talk as soon as she said that "You can't attribute this to a turn-out failure....blah blah" The fact is, Brooklyn didn't care about Wisconsin and Michigan and the turn out was depressed all around as several million people strayed home. How in the world did you miss that?
Schiller puts in an awesome performance as a droid with volumes of data, and pretty much **no** real comprehension, no sense of context.
Next time the school produces a video like this, please put Dr. Blyth on first, so I don't have to skip ahead so much!
Wow. Even if you have watched this before jump to what Blyth says at 42:34 it will blow your mind hearing him predict what is happening today in April 2022 in November 2016.
She doesn't acknowledge the ways in which this election is in fact different from past ones, the many ways in which it's historically unprecedented, and the reality that in the course of the pendulum going back and forth, massive amounts of damage can be done to human lives and history. As if all of history were a matter of balance and give and take, and politics a matter of balancing opposing viewpoints, not real struggles and real lives - as if there were no trajectory in any direction, it all comes out in the wash?. She talks patronisingly to the young people, as if the young people are the only ones shocked and hurting right now. A true political scientist.
Can't believe she's a lecturer at a top University, sounds like a politician just repeating the stats. He's bang on and seriously insightful. Been watching a few of Mark Blyth's talks, he really understands the bigger picture and international affairs.
Mark is genius and I enjoy listening his well educated and extremely intelligent and factual discussions. This sheila on the other hand is incompetent despite her degree and completely blind to what is going on.
Wendy Schiller, please read the comments here and learn from them.
Perhaps we should only be hearing from the person who correctly predicted the Rise of Trump and the Results of Brexit. The person who is shocked and didnt see this coming should probably just sit there and listen up.
Would have liked to hear significantly more from Blyth, the other prof just spouted the exact same talking points of every other Dem
Wendy Schiller does most of the talking but has nothing to say. It's a shame because Mark Blyth is his mercurial self with concise and precise analysis.
Ashley grant, Blyth and I are in agreement with you…
she has a very firm grasp of the obvious.
I really don't understand why Mark said rebuilding manufacturing by creating new industries _such as sustainable energy_ or allowing existing viabilities _such as repurposing car manufacturing facilities to produce mass transit_ ''is dishonest''!
I feel like his comment "We need to do less" was directed at his co-speaker who just didn't know when to shut the hell up xD
I live in Baltics and just cant believe what i just heard.
to say that women wouldn't have voted for bernie because they would have had some kind of hissie fit due to bernie pushing her out must be pretty insulting to women.
Blyth begins at 34:46 - before that is Schiller, don't waste your time on her. Read comments below to understand why to ignore her.
Whats with the audio levels? Very interesting information but audio levels drop out to almost nothing then come back to normal.
Blyth speaks:
13:10
34:40
1:04:10
and on and off during QA.
Schiller - very apt surname
she seems to be talking about maintaining the system. I don't think he agrees...
Is this Professor a spokesman fore the Democratic party?
Interesting watching this talk two years later. What stood out to me was the neo-nationalism topic. Both were incredibly realistic.
Is there any way to get a Transcript of this talk. I would like to know exactly what they are saying.
It's all about economics.
The year is 2021 - still interested in a transcript of the Blyth analysis of the 2016 Trump win ?? (and clueless Wendy Schiller "political scientist" also speaks). Go to the video window to the right bottom corner, you will find 3 dots. (like ... but the dots are larger) click on then select transcript. you can select, copy and past - as usual.
Watson Institute have even uploaded edited subtitles / transcript. (else most videos have automatic subs / transcript enabled. If they also have the language setting right ;) the language recognition of youtube is pretty good).
I disagree with some of his points. LIke: the "gaming" of the system. The increase of productivity easily paid for all what the unions demanded in better wages (and companies preemtively increased prices so there was somewhat higher inflation - so they gamed the system in direction of inflation - but it did not harm the population, it was a side effect of a booming economy.
Productivity wins (from a growing population and workforce !) outweighed wage growth (it was plus 97 % for average hourly wages adjusted for inflation. Productivity rose by 112 % in the same time: 1947 - 1970. That was a good time also for biz. But a major share of the wins went into the pockets of people who spent the money.
Those increases made sure they could buy what was produced with ever more efficiency (more output).
Also: we do not need "capital" (it is money/currency not capital, but never mind). Banks create most of the money that they give out in form of loans. (FIAT money). And the government _can_ directly create debt and interest free money. They only ever do that in a crisis - see QE for the banks to the tune of trillions (Blyth mentions 13 trillion EURO, I know of 4.5 trn in the U.S. (only under Obama). and 700 - 800 billion created by the Bank of England (the U.K. only has 65 million people).
W/o crisis (often war) the banks protect their turf. And if direct money creation is used - they fast return to the investor friendly status quo and do not mention the former schmes anymore. The unwashed masses could be getting ideas.
Plus: The rich want to be seen as indispensable as "givers" of "capital" and buyers of gov. bonds (government debt).
The owners of rich fortunes ("Capital") are not needed to finance a vibrant economy.
It was very telling they were uncomfortable with each others understanding. The long expressions (especially his) at the end of his first exchange just nailed it. lol funny!
Markarticulated deeper underlying reasons. where she could only point to the surface of things. What an apt name Wendy Schiller, presenting a professional spin which totally misses the point that Hillary IS actually responsible for almost all, if not all, the other reasons she tried to give. She lost me after that.
Is anyone else disturbed that a student calmly asked why they should even engage others in debate? Frankly, I want to write a bunch of mean things and swear about it... But I'm running into this a lot, trying to engage people at random, many people would rather try to shut conversations down with mean words rather than actually provide arguments. Where is this coming from? Why do people think this is okay?
They are both right.
I'm very liberal in terms of economic and political beliefs but the Wendy is being biased not with her beliefs but the assumption that the whole crowd agrees with her.
Wow, she would have a great career at MSNBC.
Schiller does make a very good plea for simply talking to people, which makes me want to yank or edit some of my earlier remarks.
Dr. Schiller, outside the world of politics are phenomena like climate change that have stringent dynamics not waiting for one country's particular election cycle. Humanity is bumping up against the rigid surface of how it now has global effects. Peer-reviewed climate research recently coming out and reviewed positively by people like Dr. Michael Mann at Penn State, indicates that the next few years may be crucial to human survival.
What does Mark call it at 15:00ish? The Looker's Critique?
The Lucas Critique
bikerjosh07 Thanks a million.
Just ordered what looks like an epic book by him, Austerity, which he kills. Currently reading Ha-Joon Chang's truly incredible Economics: A User's Guide. If you dig enough below the neoclassical dort, you can find some real gems out there.
I am a former student of both of these professors and can attest that both are pretty brilliant. I think people on here should realize that this talk was intentionally set up to offer two different perspectives- Blyth is an economist who is giving a very "macro" analysis of global trends and Schiller is a political scientist who is giving historical context to this based on past election cycles and the history of both parties. She isn't "clueless" about the broader economic trends, she's just speaking to how they will actually affect the government over the next four years...and what this will mean for the audience of students, who are presumably interested in becoming politically involved.
There is no one reason why Trump won- each voter had a different set of values and a different circumstance. I think there is a lot of truth to what Blyth is saying about economic frustration, but that doesn't mean you can totally discount that some votes for Trump were based on sexism/xenophobia.
I don't think you can definitively say that Bernie would have won...even if he had gotten the nomination, the Republicans could have put forth a candidate like Rubio or Kasich that would have drawn in way more moderate voters. Hindsight is 20-20, of course, but it's a lot tougher to figure out all the forces at play when these things happen simultaneously. Makes me wonder how these conversations about "inevitable" political movements would be framed differently if it had gone any other way.
I agree with your sentiment (I voted for Sanders in the primaries) but I also don't think we can ever really know for sure how these things would have played out, since those polls were taken before any of the candidates really got the attention/scrutiny that would have come in the general election. I won't deny that the current Democratic Party is very flawed, though.
Ahh, she sure as hell ain't brilliant here... Damn near everything she said was laughably wrong.
Yah, I can definitely say that Bernie would have won.
Her "Argument" that bernie would have lost is the exit poll data of HRC vs Trump.
Idk whether to cry or laugh at how stupid that is...
Looks like Blyth is IPE.
Interesting to listen to 2 academics.......one learned and aware of a global response to actions and consequences
and the other painfully as usual only aware of what happens in her classroom and in the US, typical of most
educators in USA.........don't understand or care about anything that happens beyond her tiny sphere.
Mark starts an ends at 13:11-18:55, 34:45-43:44, then Q&A 52:42-54:46, 1:00:13-1:02:37, 1:04:15-1:04:47, 1:05:14-1:06:16, 1:10:47-1:12:33, 1:15:00-1:16:58, 1:19:04-1:21:07, 1:24:47-1:26:53
Now she sounds like she's speaking to some kind of support group or something. People don't need ignorant coddling, they need truth. Without truth all the best laid plans are for naught.
What set off my PoliSci academic curiosity, if you will, was Trump's professionalism during the September Commander-In-Chief forum. I think it was a big turning point after which followed the leaked tapes, allegations of sexual assault and other attempts to undermine Trump's character. The R.S.S. DNC spotted the iceberg and did all it could to avoid the inevitable.
It was one thing when he was the ridiculous game show host who would be easily defeated; but his support base solidified as the Dems were fractured by WikiLeaks, Clinton's corporatism and rigged Primary elections despite Bernie's populism. That Commander-In-Chief forum was a red flag for the Dems and Clinton to put a stop to their "elevating Trump" as the leaked emails worded it.
Side note: I totally understand the self-selected regional political homogeneity!
I returned to my home state of MS after military service abroad. I cannot wait to move to a left-leaning state next year. It is excruciating (or unfulfilling, maybe) being educated in the #50 ranked in education and highly politically engaged amidst widespread disinterest. I was socialized a centrist Libertarian who rejected the Tea Party and swung far, farrrrr left after college...so being in a Red state I totally get migrating because of political ideology...
TeddySpaghetti Youre probably not going to be intellectually challenged by a
bunch of people who agree with you.
You will never experience anything more intellectually diverse as the military.
Heinvandah I agree! And I am open to diverse views and discourse. But living under the strict Repub policies...ranked #51 in education, rejection of welfare, heinous corruption and closed-mindedness...
I'll talk about the issues with an open mind, no problem. Living under that leadership style is a bit much, IMO.
+TeddySpaghetti I've lived in California and I live in a Republican run state. Each has its benefits and disadvantages. I recommend you move out of country to a truly socialist/communist society. That would give you the best experience, Although, you might want to stay away from Venezuela, it's pretty dangerous right now, as they're collapsing.
Kay Bee
I lived in Boise, Idaho for 5 years and, honestly, it was the most perfect place I've experienced ideologically, regarding socioeconomic status, diversity and even politically in some respects.
Pre-PoliSci degree, I would frequently visit California (SF and Berkeley areas) and Portland. Admittedly, it felt Utopian as a vacation but I was usually eager to leave. My friends living at these places moved each year and lived a very volatile life. The political progressivism bugged me at the time, but I was (economically) right-leaning libertarian then. (I now lean left.)
I just returned from Michigan on holiday and saw some of the discrete differences there. Higher taxes/Cost of Living, 4x higher costs of vehicle registration, seemingly fewer predatory lenders, one university campus I visited had electric mobility scooters as seen in grocery stores (I'm just more curious about this one...).
_I know this is a small sample size to base any analysis on._
(I deployed to Saudi Arabia in 2011 and experienced strict Sharia law, if that accounts for anything. If by "best experience" you mean contrast to liberal democracy.)
+TeddySpaghetti Thank you for your service!!! I also served! I also hold a degree in political science. I can't really say I subscribe to one party. I take the best if each. For instance I favor reasonable environmental laws. I think anything in the extreme is going to far. When I left California and went to a gas station in the south, I wanted to vomit fron the smell. I don't mind paying extra as we did in California. I also think they do an amazing job with roads, and the overall beauty on the coast. But they also have stupid laws that protect species that aren't endangered, like the snowy plover. I'd like to see a common sense approach that encompass people's freedom to enjoy the beauty, while holding them accountable for destroying it. We've been given a beautiful earth and we need to take care of it. I'm fiscally and morally conservative. I believe in states rights above the federal. I think the power should mostly be in the hands of the people, which is more libertarian. Yet, I recognize the need for law enforcement, military and just and common sense laws. California has a lot of problems, but it is a gorgeous place to live and I enjoyed every second of it! I hate where I'm at now!
19:35 huey long didnt pit blacks against whites. afaik he talked about giving them an ewual share
Is Wendy Schiller speaking to college students or kindergarten?
In retrospect this talk is fascinating. After Blythe delivers his reasoning the liberal middle class professor seems shell shocked.
Blyth clearly has the more solid analysis of what just happened. I kind of take issue with his analysis of the manufacturing sector, but I'm not an economist. He made reference to Germany and what they're doing. What exactly is that? And is it sustainable? My understanding is that they've boosted employment due to global demand for their products, but since that has slacked off because of "emerging markets" (is that just fancy talk for "cheap labor"?), the employment numbers are currently being supported by Germany's domestic demand. Won't that eventually collapse? How will Brexit effect that? On the broader landscape, why can't our trade agreements be built around Fair Trade, rather than Free Trade? Why must cheap labor and the absence of environmental protection be the main bargaining chips? Why is it that, given we had governments with the guts to do it, couldn't we renegotiate the trade agreements so that they required countries to use other parts of the equation as their leg up? Like a technological/environmental/raw materials efficiency aspect? I.e. they've got a better way of making something, they can sell it our country. If they are only able to bring cheap labor and environmental destruction to the table........then they pay a tariff? Help me out here.
Actually, we in Britain DO now have fixed elections, thanks to the Fixed Term parliaments act of 2010
I'd love to see a candid video of Schiller initiating, chatting up a janitor. I suspect I'd have an easier time finding one of Big Foot. But at 1:21:00, she's trying to pretend that she is not the problem.
If I paid Wendy Schiller for an education id sure her for my arrested development. The gulf in intellect is staggering
43:33 this dude called it
The introduction bespeaks why anyone would not listen. Then...a Canadian/human is worried aboot this...
49:16 to see Wendy Schiller face plant as she demonstrates to the audience that she doesn't understand the definition of inflation. I've got $5 on it for anyone who will edit her out of this video so that the intelligent parts of this great dialogue can be saved.
I have to admit I'm amazed at this presentation by these two partisans. Back in the old day's, information would be presented and students could have drawn their conclusions. These two presenters, brilliant as they may be, performed a disservice and did not educate in as much as they brainwashed the few needing brainwashing and confirm to the majority unfounded conclusions. The reasons Clinton lost are many, and I sincerely doubt either of these presenters have the clarity of mind to remove their blindfolds and consider that the majority of Americans are simply pissed off and demanded change. Mark got it, but I did not believe the other presenter did.
I love how after Mark's opening tirade Wendy was momentarily speechless. Yes, Trump may be a reaction to our situation, but he has/had no intention of doing anything about it. When is the opposition going to offer an alternative??
Wow. Just wow. Not only is Schiller woefully out of touch, but shockingly uninformed. Perhaps CNN would be a better fit for her...
TH-cam really REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wants me to watch these videos.