Podcast appearances and mentions of Charles Franklin

Welcome back! We head into 2025 with our eyes wide open and ready to organize for the future Wisconsin communities need. We begin with a discussion of the tragic violence in New Orleans on New Years Eve. Robert offers some insights on MU pollster Charles Franklin and former MJS journalist Craig Gilbert's discussion on polling lessons from the 2024 election. Will Wisconsin remain the ultimate battleground state? We remind our listeners of some important 2025 Spring Elections. Candidate nomination papers are due on January 7th. We preview the potential political and organizing opportunities in early 2025. On the federal level, what will become of Speaker Johnson and what the turmoil in the House around his pending Speakership tells us about the House and organizing opportunities for the progressive movement. What should we expect in Trump's first 24 hours? On the state level, we lay out critical state budget opportunities for progressives on public education and health and child care. Robert highlights a new report demonstrating that climate change is warming Wisconsin winters. The report found more days above freezing in the last decade, which creates a ripple effect throughout Wisconsin. Also, how is conference realignment in college sports damaging the climate?

  Contributors are listed here: Danielle S. Castillejo (Rueb), Cyon Edgerton, Rachael Reese, Chasity Malatesta, Debby Haase, Kim Frasier, Briana Cardenas, Holly Christy, Clare Menard, Marjorie Long, Cristi McCorkle, Terri Schumaker, Diana Frazier, Eliza Cortes Bast, Tracy Johnson, Sarah Van Gelder, Marwan, and more Welcome to the Arise Podcast, conversations on faith, race, justice, gender, and spirituality. You'll notice there's going to be some updated changes and different voices on the podcast this season. It's season five. It's October 1st, 2024. I haven't recorded a podcast since June of 2023, and at that time, if you've been following along in my town in Kitsap County, we were working through what would prove to be an extensive and prove to be an extensive fight for justice in our school district. And at this time, we have made some very significant shifts. I want to get into this episode to kind of catch you up on where I'm at, where the podcast is at, and hopefully as you listen to myself and some different voices on these upcoming podcasts, you understand that we have this fundamental common theme amongst us, which is our humanity. And when we drop down into that humanity, because our work, our lives, our families, there's all these poles and all these different ways for us to separate ourselves from our humanness and be busy or accomplish this or accomplish that.(00:01:52):And I know because I'm in there too, we actually separate ourselves from our neighbor. And so I'm hoping as we engage tough topics of politics and we get into the sticky points of it, that there's a sense that, yeah, I don't agree with that person or I agree with that person, but there is a sense that there is shared humanity. And so as we talk about these different subjects, I wanted to emphasize that first, an article was released in the fall last year saying in September of 2023 saying that there was, the school district's investigation had concluded and they had deemed that there was no racism in the North Kitsap School district. As you can imagine, a report like that on the front page of the paper, after all we'd been through after sitting through numerous hours of meetings listening to families and their experiences was disheartening.(00:02:45):We came to find out that some of the families felt or experienced what they deemed to be threatening tones from the investigators or understood that they could possibly be under penalty of perjury depending on what they answered. And I'm not saying that this was always the case, but the threat was on the table. And when you're dealing with working with majority world peoples who are marginalized in the United States, that threat can be very real. And the impact of it is very great. So I began to understand that this investigation wasn't actually looking for the truth and how to solve the problem. It was actually looking for a way of complete and utter defense against what these families had reported their students had experienced. It's a very different thing. And I think there were rumors like were these families going to sue the district, bring a lawsuit to the district?(00:03:41):And we've seen in neighboring school districts, just in recent times, lawsuits have been filed for much less. I mean, we had 90 original complaints. We have more people that had come forward as time had moved on. And yet there was never a move to actually file a lawsuit. We didn't file a lawsuit. We continued to move forward with our lives and think about our students. I think at some point in last fall of 2023, there was just a sense of deep despair like we put in years of effort. And the result was this report that basically attempted to delegitimize all the stories of all these families. It was horrible and heartbreaking and followed the fall. And in the late winter there was going to be a vote for this school bond. And as the yes for the bond campaign rolled out, led by a committee of yes folks, which included some Paul's Bowl rotary members and then the superintendent, it became clear to different community members that there were a lot of questions still to be asked, a lot of information we wanted to have and a lot of things that just felt like they were missing.(00:04:57):I'm not saying they were all missing, but there were pieces and details that appeared to be missing. And when we asked the questions similar to what happened with the complaints, we didn't get answers. The answers were couched in long paragraphs or explanations, and the architects seemed like they didn't have access to the buildings. Again, we didn't know all the details of what happened. And this is just a general recap. You can look at the ensuing political drama online. If you Google superintendent signs and polls Bowl, Washington, P-O-U-L-S-B-O Washington, you will find articles on NBC to Fox News to video clips, all of the above. There were signs all over our county, as I'm sure in your different counties or if you live in Kitsap, you've seen them political signs, vote yes on the bond, vote no on the bond, et cetera. And it appeared that signs were going missing.(00:06:02):And in one case, the signs were going missing often in one particular location and a pair of folks who are not married who became allied because they were both against the bond and had been putting up no on bond signs, decided to put up a wildlife cam and we're able to capture a person destroying the signs on video. And again, Google sbo, Google signs, Google Superintendent look for February 20, 24 articles and you'll see the ensuing reports of what happened. This became a chance for us actually to revisit our story because there's a theme of dishonesty from the top leadership. There was a theme of hiding. There's a theme of not giving all the information a theme of there's any extent we can go to that bumps up against the law. By the way, I think it's against the law to destroy political signs. So there's just this theme that you could break the law and get away with it.(00:07:08):We've seen in the top politics of our country down to the low level politics of our country. And what was our community going to do with all of this? We rallied together. For the first time in many years, there were literally hundreds of people on a zoom call for a school board meeting. News agencies showed up again, and sadly, our district was in the news for something else negative related to the top leadership. And it was very sad. The process. The superintendent was put on leave and resigned in June, but stopped working essentially closely with the school board. I think it was in March or April of 2024. I just remember that when the harm stops, when someone harmful is told by law enforcement or the law or someone else in a higher power to stop harming it, it's a relief. But also that's the time when all of the residual trauma sets in the trauma that you've been going through to be in proximity to someone in leadership and you're literally powerless to address it.(00:08:19):And I guess I bring this up to say that as we think about politics nationally, locally, whether it's a school board member or a president, I remember feeling challenged When I live in a small town, paulville was a small town. It is not like Seattle size. It's like got rural folks. There's folks that commute into the city of Seattle. We're, we're a mix of all different kinds of socioeconomic backgrounds. Our school district is now 38% Spanish speaking this year. There is a genuine mix. So when you're out and about in this small container, Kitsap's also very small too. It's rural, it's small. We're kind of contained on our own peninsula. When you're in this environment, the chances that you're going to see someone that you're know are really high, it's not like if you hate someone about, you're not going to run into Donald Trump here.(00:09:11):You're not going to run in here, run into Kamala Harris here. It's not like you're running into those folks, but you might run into your representative. You might run into the school board member from this district or another district. And how are you going to see that person that actually you not only disagree with, but you felt has been unjust to you? Costs a lot. I mean, money's one thing, but time, effort, family, reputation, allies, there is so much time involved and the way forward. You think it's clear when you're fighting on behalf of kids, you're advocating on behalf of kids. That feels really good. But the process to work through that advocacy often doesn't feel that great. You have to become allies with people you don't agree with. And so I think that just brings me back to where do we find our common humanity?(00:10:06):Where do we find space to occupy a same piece of land or a same meeting or a similar, we have similar causes, but maybe there's deep hurt between us and maybe that hurt is to the point where we're not going to ever talk to that person again, and how do we still see them as human? How do we still see them as valuable in this world? How do we still gain compassion? Those are things I ask myself and I don't have the answers. So I've included a number of folks asking a similar questions about humanness, about politics, about where they locate themselves in their various positions, their race, ethnicity, et cetera, and how do they come at this? And I hope you enjoy the following conversations because I conversations or talks from these people, commentary from these people as we hear all different perspectives. Now you may hear someone and be like, I can get down with that. I agree with that. And then there's another person you might be like, no way, no effing way. And so I encourage you to listen, stay curious with yourself and have talks with your family about how you're going to engage this political season.Speaker 2 (00:11:26):Danielle asked me how I see being human in the age of politics, and I'm struggling answering this because A, I am not a politician or have really any experience as a politician. I have experience as a community based organizer. So I am speaking on this on the outside of things. And then also I'm a white woman able bo, heterosexual woman. And the politics and the systems of power were built for me as a white person to thrive. And so I just want to locate myself in that because my view is of a privileged view. White folks can step in and out of politics without it really harming us. And that's a problem, obviously, and it distorts our view of politics.(00:12:55):But with this question, I have become more and more angry and upset with politics, policies, systems of power, the more that I unlearn and learn about my internal white supremacy culture and ways of being. And as the genocide in Palestine and other countries continue, I don't think the political structures are here for us. They're not people centered, they're not community centered. I think all politics are really about power. And so as an outsider, as not a politician and as a white woman, so those are flawed views. I'm coming from a flawed view. I see how politics change people or they make bad people even worse. I know local white folks that are in it for power and just continue on searching for more and more power. And I've witnessed community organizers join politics to really try to change the systems. But I don't think politics or the system was made to help humans. I don't think the system is for humans. And it hurts people, it divides people. I don't really know how to answer this question because I don't think politics and humanists can actually go together, not the way that they're set up now.Speaker 3 (00:15:09):These questions are so beautiful and just so right on time for this time, we're in right before an election where there's so much stress. My name is Sara Van Gelder and I am a friend of Danielle's and a resident of Kitsap County for many years have I was one of the founders of YES magazine. I also founded a group called People's Hub, which teaches community folks how to do local organizing, actually peer to peer teaching. I didn't do the teaching, but connected people together to teach each other and been associated as a ally of the Suquamish tribe at various times in my life, but I did not ever speak for them.(00:15:54):So my own humanity in the context of this political moment, I like to stay in a place of fierce love and do when I can. I can't say I'm always there. I'm often triggered. I often go into a place of feeling really fearful and anxious about what's going on in the world and more particularly the polarization and the rise of which what I don't like to call, but I think is actually a form of fascism. And when I talk about fierce, it means being willing to say the truth as I see it, but also love, which is that that is the motivator. I don't like seeing people get hurt and I'm willing to stand up and be one of the people to say what I see, but not in a way that is intended to degrade anybody. I am a mother, I'm a grandmother, I'm a daughter, I'm a sister. And being connected to people through love and that sense of willingness to protect one another, that's at the core. So even if I disagree with you, I'm not going to wish you harm.Speaker 1 (00:17:12):Wow. Wow. Even if I disagree with you, I'm not going to wish you harm. And I think what I've heard just particularly lately around the talk of immigration, let's say for an example, is the talk about immigration in the context of a particular city. For instance, they've used Springfield, Ohio over and over. It's come up many times and the demonization, the dehumanization of those immigrants, the miscategorizing of their status, it seems like some of this can get point hyper-focused on one particular example to make a political point or to drive fear home across different context, different communities. So when you think about that, do you wish those people harm that are making those accusations? How do you engage a tough subject like that?Speaker 3 (00:18:15):Yeah, it's a really hard one, and I could tell you what I aspire to do and what I actually do a lot of times is avoid people who have that level of disagreement with, because I'm not sure I have enough in common to even have a good conversation. So I don't feel like I'm as good at this as I'd like to be. But what I try to do is to first off, to recognize that when we're in the fight or flight sort of reptilian brain, when we're super triggered, we have the least capacity to do good work of any kind. So I try to get out of that mindset, and in part I do that by trying to listen, by trying to be an active listener and try to listen not just for the positions. The positions are ones that will likely trigger me, but to listen for what's beneath the positions, what is somebody yearning for?(00:19:10):What is it that they're really longing for beneath those positions that I find so harmful and so triggering. So in many cases, I think what people are looking for in this immigration debate is a sense of belonging. They want to believe that their community is a place where they belong and somehow believe that having other people who are from different cultures move in reduces the chances that they'll be able to belong. So what would it mean if they could feel like they belonged along with the Haitians in their community that it didn't have to be an either or is there a way to have that kind of conversation that what if we all belong(00:19:54):In that respect? The thing that I am sometimes most tempted to do, which is to cancel someone, if you will, that actually feeds into that dynamic of not belonging because I'm telling that person also, you don't belong in my life. You don't belong in my community. So it's not easy to do, but I do feel like we have a better chance of doing that locally than we have doing it nationally because locally we do have so many things we have in common. We all want to drink clean water, we want clean air. We want places our kids can go to school where they will belong and they will feel good. So if we can switch the conversation over to those deeper questions, and I think one thing I've learned from hanging out with indigenous folks is the way in which they think about the seven generations and how much more expansive of you that can give to you when you think that way.(00:20:54):Because instead of thinking about again, that immediate threat, that immediate personal sense of anxiety, you start thinking, well, what's going to work for my kids and my grandkids? I don't want them to be experiencing this. Well, that means something about having to learn how to get along with other people, and we want our kids to get along with each other. We want them to have friends and family, and when they marry into a different culture, we want to feel good about our in-laws. I mean, we want our neighborhood to be a place where our kids can run around and play outside. I mean, there's so many things that once you start expanding the scope to other generations, it makes it so clear that we don't want that kind of society that's full of hate and anxiety.Speaker 1 (00:21:44):Wow, seven generations. It is true. I do a lot of reading and I think about res, are you familiar with Resa and my grandmother's hands? And he talks about that the shifts we want to make in society, the shifts towards being more in our actual physical bodies and present with one another and the reps that it takes, the way we're disrupting it now to make a dent in the 400 plus year history of slavery and the act of embodying ourselves from the harm that has been done is going to take five to seven generations. It's not that he's not for change now. He absolutely is. And just having that long term, almost like marathon view perspective on what change has either for ourselves that can give ourselves grace and that we can also give others in our proximity grace, while also not engaging in active harm. I think there's an important part there. Does that make sense?Speaker 3 (00:22:51):Oh, it makes so much sense. And it's like that long-term view doesn't suggest we can put off working. It only even happens in the long term if we start today, we take the first steps today. So yes, absolutely makes sense. I'm not sure I'm patient enough to wait for all those generations, but I want to be keeping them in my mind and heart when I act. How is this going to contribute to their possibilities? So part of that is by thinking about these questions of belonging, but it's also questions of exclusion more structurally. I think the fact that our society has such deep exclusion economically of so many people, there's so many people across the board who feel so precarious in their lives. I think that sets us up for that kind of scapegoating because ideally what we'd be saying is, if you can't afford to go to college, if you can't afford a medical bill, if you can't afford a place to rent, there's a problem with our economy.(00:23:56):Let's look at that problem with our economy and do something about it. And I believe people have gotten so disempowered. So feeling that that's beyond them to do that. Then the next thing that the demagogues will do is say, well, let's look for a scapegoat then. Let's look for a scapegoat of somebody who's less powerful than you and let's blame them because that'll give you a temporary sense of having power. And that's how, I mean it's not unique to our situation. It's how fascism so often unfolds and how historically groups have been scapegoated. And I think we need to turn our attention back to what is the real cause of our anxiety. And I think the real cause of our anxiety is economic and political disfranchisement. Once we can actually tackle those topics, we can see how much more we can do when we work together across all isms and make things happen for a world in which everyone has a place.Speaker 1 (00:24:55):So then if you know people in your sphere, let's say, and don't name them here, that border on the narrative that says, if you disenfranchise someone less powerful than you, that will bring you some relief. If you have people like that in your life, Sarah, how do you approach them? How do you engage with them if you're willing to share any personal experience?Speaker 3 (00:25:28):Yeah, so my biggest personal experience with that was working as an activist alongside the Suquamish tribe when a lot of their immediate neighbors were trying to keep them from building housing, keep them from building relationships with other governments and actually took them to court trying to actually end their sovereign right to be a tribe. So that was my most direct involvement and that was 20 years ago. So it seems like ancient history, but I learned a lot from that, including from working with tribal elders who provided a lot of leadership for us and how we should work. And one of the things that I've learned from that and also from being a Quaker, is that the notion of how you talk to people in a nonviolent way, and a lot of that starts with using I statements. So when people in my neighborhood would say really disparaging things about the tribe, I would respond with, I feel this. I believe the tribe has sovereign rights. I believe they have always been here and have the right to govern themselves and build homes for their members. And it's harder, it's not as triggering when somebody says, I instead of starts with a word(00:26:58):When somebody says, you immediately have this responsive defensiveness because it's unclear what's going to come next and whether you're going to have to defend yourself when you say I, you're standing in your own power and your own belief system and you're offering that to someone else with the hope that they might empathize and perhaps even perhaps be convinced by part of what you have to say. But in the meantime, you haven't triggered a worsening of relationships. And one of the things I really didn't want to do was create anything that would further the violence, verbal most cases, violence against the tribe, sort of getting people even further triggered. So it was just really important to always be looking for ways to be very clear and uncompromising on really important values, but be willing to compromise on ones that were not important. So for example, when we were working on getting the land return to the tribe that had been a state park, we asked people what's important to you about how this park functions in the future? Because the tribe can take that into account they, but the idea that it is their land, the home of chief Seattles, that was not something we could compromise on.Speaker 1 (00:28:17):I love that using I statements intentionally checking in with yourself so you're not engaging in behaviors that trigger another person further into more defensive mode. Sarah, what are some resources or recommendations you could leave with me or us? When you think about engaging people and staying very present, it's a very human stance to say, I think I believe this versus an accusatory tone like you are this, you are that.Speaker 3 (00:28:50):I think the nonviolent communication that Marshall Rosenberg developed is very powerful. He has a very specific technique for having those kinds of conversations that are very focused on that notion about the I statement and also reflecting back what you hear from other people, but then being willing to use statements about what I need because saying that puts me in a position of being vulnerable, right? Saying I actually need something from you. You obviously have the choice of whether you're going to give it to me or not, but I need to be in a place where I can feel safe when we have these conversations. I need to feel like I live in a community where people are so then the other person has that choice, but you're letting them know and you're again standing in your own power as somebody who's self-aware enough, it also invites them to be self-aware of what they need.Speaker 1 (00:29:46):I love that. Yeah, keep going.Speaker 3 (00:29:50):I think there are other resources out there. I'm just not calling 'em to mind right now, but I think nonviolent communications is a really good one.Speaker 1 (00:29:58):And locally, since you talked locally, what are maybe one or two things locally that you regularly engage in to kind of keep up your awareness to keep yourself in a compassionate mode? How do you do that for youSpeaker 3 (00:30:16):Being out in nature? Okay,Speaker 1 (00:30:19):Tell me about that.Speaker 3 (00:30:22):Oh, in Japan, they call it forest bathing, but it's just a fancy term for being in some places it's really natural. There's beautiful walks. We're very fortunate here in the northwest that there are so many beautiful places we can walk. And when you're surrounded by preferably really intact ecosystems where you can feel the interactions going on among the critters and the plants and just let that wash over you because part of that as well, it kind of helps take some of the pressure off. It sort of releases some of us being kind of entangled in our own ego and lets us just have greater awareness that we're actually entangled in this much larger universe. It's much, much older and we'll go on way after we're gone and extends to so many different ways of being from a bird to a tree, to a plate of grass, and we're all related.Speaker 4 (00:31:33):Hey, this is Kim. So just a brief background. I am a 41-year-old biracial woman. I am a mom, a nurse, a child of an immigrant, and I identify as a Christian American. Thanks Danielle for asking me to chime in. I just wanted to touch base on this current political climate. I would say as a liberal woman, I really enjoy diversity and hearing and seeing different perspectives and engaging in meaningful conversation. Unfortunately, I feel like right now we are so polarized as a country and it's not like the air quote, good old days where you could vote for a politician that you felt like really represented your ideals and kind of financially what you value, policies, et cetera. Now I feel like it has become really a competition and an election of human rights, and I think for me, that's kind of where I draw my own personal boundary.(00:32:40):I think it's important to share different perspectives, and I think I do have a unique perspective and I enjoy hearing others' perspectives as well, but for me, I do draw the line at human rights. So I have learned over the years to just not engage when it comes to issues of individuals being able to choose what to do with their body, women in particular, it's terrifying to me as a nurse and a woman and a mother of a daughter who could potentially be in a situation at some point and not be allowed to make choices about her own body with a doctor. Also as the child of an immigrant, I was raised by a white mother, Irish German Catholic, and my father is an immigrant that has been here since 19 76, 77. He is from Trinidad and Tobago. He's actually served in the military and I have a hard time with vilifying people of color trying to come to this country and make a better life for themselves and for their future and their future generations, which is exactly what my dad was doing. So to me, it's a no-brainer, right? Not to tell anybody what to do or how to vote, but I think that it's really hard right now to hold space for individuals who may be attacking my rights as a woman, my ability as a nurse to be able to care for patients and really what this country was supposedly built on, which is being a melting pot and allowing any and everyone here to be able to pursue the American dream and make a life for themselves and their loved ones.Speaker 5 (00:34:34):As soon as the topic turns to politics, I feel myself cringe, and then I want to internally retreat a bit. Looking back over the past eight plus years, I realize I have been feeling like this for a long time. My body holds memories of heated, uncomfortable confrontive distancing and sometimes horrifying conversations with friends and at times, even with family, I'm tired as most people tired from the collective traumas. We have all lived through political, racial, and pandemic related. Eight years ago, I think I worked to try and remain objective. I told myself that my job was just to hear the other person with curiosity, but doing that was not enough to help me stay well in the midst of what I truly could not then and cannot still control. I've come to realize that I have to stay connected to my own feelings, to my own limitations.(00:35:37):I have to make space to feel my disappointment, my disgust, my fear, my sadness, my powerlessness, my ache, even my longing still when it comes to the realm of politics, I have to make room for my own humanity and then I have to be willing to share that, not simply be a listening ear for others. What's been most difficult for me as politics has driven division and disconnection is the loss of healthy dialogue and conversation. It feels to me like relational loss is there where it doesn't seem like it always has to be. I am passionate about the table, about creating and cultivating space at a table for all the voices and for all of the stories to belong. I still believe in this, and when I'm connected to my own humanity, it makes me far more open to the humanity of another, knowing my own stories that are being stirred up and activated by injustice, by what I perceive to be irresponsible politicians and policies that don't make sense to me and at times scare me when I'm in the presence of those who hold very different political views from me.(00:37:02):I have to actively choose to not just tolerate listening to them, but instead to try and listen for something more. I try to listen for the fear that often fuels their positions. The fear is always storied and the stories offer taste of their humanity and oftentimes their experience of suffering, which always offers the opportunity for empathy. I can't do it all the time. Some situations don't afford the time for curiosity and sharing. When that happens, I need space afterwards, space to release what I don't need or want to hold that I heard space to feel my own humanity again, and then space to choose to remember the humanity of the other person, and that is all an active practice. I think that othering people into political camps and categories is easily available and every time it happens, we lose more and more of our collective humanity and we feed the machine of hate that profits from our conversational and emotional laziness.Speaker 6 (00:38:11):I can't say it's always easy, that's for sure. What I try to do is see another person, whether it's around the political views or other things that I may not agree with somebody about or I might even actually see them as a quote enemy, is for one thing, I drop into my heart and get out of my head about ideas, views, and just try to be present in my heart as much as possible with as little judgment as possible and recognize the essence of the other person, the essence that's inside all the beliefs and the views, and recognizing also that we all have some sort of wounding from our lives, maybe our lineages, our generations, maybe even past lives and or trauma, and that that can obscure the essence of who we are, and I try to really remember that essence in another person.(00:39:34):And in relation, how do you see your own humanity? The other question you ask, how do you see your own humanity in the context of political dialogue? I have to say that's not really a question I thought about. I thought about how to see the humanity in others, so I really appreciate this question. I think if I start othering the other, if I get into too much judgment, I feel like I lose my own sense of humanity or at least the type of human I hope and wish to be. What helps me to I guess, discern when I'm in my own humanity, when I'm in the best of places, I guess I don't know how else to word that is I tune into my values. What do I value most and am I living by those values in the way that I want to be human In this world, for example, for me, integrity is super important as well as respect and compassion.(00:40:44):I'm not saying I'm always in this place, but these values that I aspire to live by help bring me into my own humanity and almost like check, checking in, tuning in checkpoints in a way, when I speak about compassion, sometimes people, all of what I'm saying, I want to, even though I'm maybe trying to see the essence of someone, I do try to discern that if there's being harm done, I'm not okaying any harm at all. And when I try to live by compassion, I feel like that's when I can really see the humanity in others and compassion for myself. I view compassion as a very active verb, a little bit different than empathy. Just that compassion is seeing the suffering, but wanting to do something about it and doing something for me. Compassion includes action, and sometimes that action is helping to disrupt or interrupt harm that's happening, and that's how I can show up in my humanity for others is the best I can do is acting as well as being that balance both, andSpeaker 7 (00:42:23):I'm Diana, she her and I didn't use to see myself in politics the way that I do now. It took decades for me to really start to get a grasp about who I actually am and how the ways I view politics, the ways I vote, who I support, how it actually affects me, and I spent a lot of years voting for things that hurt me without even realizing I was doing that because I was following the messaging and believing it. Ultimately that being a good fill in the blanks meant voting for fill in the blanks or being a good fill in the blanks meant donating to or supporting or whatever, fill in the blanks. And I hurt myself by doing that because I wasn't listening to my own knowing or my own intuition or looking in the mirror at who am I? What kind of world do I want to live in? I didn't ask myself those questions. I did what I thought I was supposed to do to fall in line, and there were people in my life during that who spoke truth, and it was true because it was individual to them. It was, here's what I know about me and here's what this policy means for me. And I didn't get it. I certainly didn't get it.(00:44:09):I judged it inside my own head, and yet those people who spoke their own individual truth are the people who were able to shed light through the cracks in my facade. And years later, I remember some of the things that people said or that they posted or whatever because those were the light that I saw through the cracks and it was so memorable, even though at the time I might have been irritated by it, it was memorable because I loved and respected these people and so their words didn't matter to me, even though at the time I very much disagreed and I hope that I will be allowed to be the light in some people's cracks because I know for a fact there's so many people like me who haven't actually looked at who they are, what they want, what kind of world do they want to live in if they separate themselves from the ideology of where they work or where they go to church or their family of origin or what their spouse is telling them, no honey, who are you? What do you want? And when people can be brave enough to do that, its everything up.Speaker 8 (00:45:46):My name is Marwan Cameron, and I was asked to answer a couple questions here, and the first question was, how do you see your own humanity in the context of political dialogue? And I had to think about this question. Our humanity is front and center when we talk about politics primarily because the issues that affect us, meaning the black community are often sidelined or ignored. I'll share some examples of that. Democrats and Republicans both speak about healthcare, the economy crime, but when they have centered those conversations around the realities they face, when do you actually see that take reparations. For example, we hear a lot about tax cuts or healthcare reform, but nothing about reparations for chattel slavery, for foundational black Americans which are owed to black people for centuries of exploitation. You can even look at our prison system where men are going to prison without HIV and very low percentages and then coming out several times higher when they are released from jail and prison, and I'll get into some of those stats. Also.(00:47:15):When we look at black men that are falsely accused of sexual assault, unfortunately we go back to Emmett Till and we never really talk about the contemporary men. I have a list of a hundred black men that have been falsely accused in the last five years alone. Albert Owens 2023, Christian Cooper, 2020, Joshua Wood, Maurice Hastings, Jonathan Irons, 2000, Anthony Broadwater, 2021, Mark Allen, 2022, Franklin, west 2020, Michael Robertson, Shaw, Taylor, Dion, Pearson 2021, Stanley Race 2019 Rashan Weaver 2020. Henry Lee McCollum, 2020. David Johnson, Jamel Jackson, Charles Franklin, Kevin Richardson, Raymond Santana, Corey Wise, you, Celine, Aron McCray, Brian Banks, which is a pretty famous name, Wilbert Jones. That's just 20 names in the last five years of a list of a hundred that I have that have been falsely accused of sexual assault, these aren't things that we talk about. Question two, how do you make space for folks in your proximity who did not share your political views as a heterosexual black male in this country, you really have no choice but to make space for others' Political views as in question number one, we are really only allowed to speak about injustices or political needs in the framework of the black community as a whole.(00:49:25):Matter what side you find yourself on, whether you're a Republican, we're oftentimes they straight up say, we're not acknowledging what your needs are. We're not going to do anything about your needs. You can come over here and vote with us if you want. As Trump said, what have you got to lose? What have Democrats done for you? Or you can look at the democratic side where in the last three elections, it's been existential against Donald Trump. And when Donald Trump won and then lost and is running again, we still haven't seen things like the repeal of qualified immunity, things like atoning for the most heinous crimes that the United States has committed in chattel slavery against black men. I've made space. We have made space as black men in regards to those who do not share our political views. Black men have fought in every war for the United States of America. We have stood up, stood behind, been sacrificed for the good of almost every cause, and we're told not yet. It's not the right time. We too need, have needs, and it becomes a zero sum game.Speaker 9 (00:51:19):Growing up, we had Sunday dinners at my grandparents. Conversation was always lively with my family, talking loudly, fast, and often right over each other. We talked about everything, what was happening around us, our community, what was in the paper and on the news that evening. We didn't always agree. In fact, I think my grandparents debated opposite sides. Just for fun, I fondly remember my grandmother saying, your grandpa and I are canceling each other's votes at the polls. They would both smile and sometimes laugh. Considering my upbringing, I was surprised to hear my instructor at cosmetology school lay down the law. Politics and religion were never to be discussed, not in school, and certainly not if we wanted to be successful professionally. I learned to smile and nod. I strive to find common ground with the opinion of guests. I was raised not to look for any offense with ideas that contrasted my own.(00:52:16):It takes both a left and a right wing to make the eagle fly and what a boring world this would be in if we all agreed. But then Trump happened up until he achieved power. Generally speaking, whether the law or policy was written by conservatives, liberals, moderates, there was a basis of bettering the American way of life. To be clear, this wasn't always the advancement of protection we agreed with, but we could see the logic of it. For the most part, Trump's leadership consists of a hatred for people who are not like him. Early on in his campaign, he told Americans to police their neighbors if they were of a specific religion he has built upon dehumanization and vilification every day sense. My mother lived in Germany for a few years and a town not far from Dau. It was the early 1960s and not yet recovered from World War ii.(00:53:21):This quaint little town overlooks the Bavarian Alps with architects right out of a storybook and a stunning view of Munich. It was evidence that the residents of this charming quiet village were aware that 800,000 people came in and no one left. History books paint the picture that everyone was scared of speaking up for fear they would be next. But with critical thinking, we know many of those approved. They've been listening to the nonsense of their leaders, their beliefs that Jews, the disabled homosexuals, immigrants were a burden on the healthcare system, education system, taking their German jobs, businesses, and homes. They were demonized so strongly, so powerfully. They were no longer human, no longer their neighbors, doctors, teachers, bakers seamstresses their talents, their skills and their very humanity no longer existed. We know this to be true, but what we don't talk about is the slope that good people slid down that enabled this to take place in the coffee shops, birthday parties, sitting with friends, playing cards, Sunday family dinners, these words came up.(00:54:43):Hitler's rhetoric spread and thoughtful kind people did not correct their friends, family, guests and clients. There were Nazis and sympathizers, but there were good people that saw through Hitler's dumpster fire of lies. These are the people I wonder if they ever slept well again. Could they ever look at themselves with honor and integrity? Trump proudly uses this method. He has people willing to do his bidding. He has sympathizers, but what he doesn't have is my silence, my obedience. My voice is the born power. I have to stand strong and correct the lies he tells and the people in my circle repeat. I will lose clients and friends taking this action, and that's a price I'm willing to pay, but I'm not willing to live out the rest of my days knowing that I didn't do everything in my power to stop in.Speaker 10 (00:55:49):How do you make space for folks in your proximity who don't share your political views? I am lucky that I live next to my parents and that my mother-in-law lives in a small home on our property. For years, there was a constant strife between my parents, myself, husband, and my mother-in-law due to political and religious beliefs, uncomfortable dinners, having to watch what you say, an aura of judgment that would seem to permeate family gatherings. They were quite the norm. And each time that they would leave, I would feel a sense of relief. Sometimes someone would decide not to come or just tell us that they needed a break. This would create less tension, but I worry that someone would feel left out or that they would feel judged if they weren't present. And actually that would happen more often or not, especially in my time of anger before and during Covid.(00:56:40):As mentioned before, when I decided that I needed to focus on my own sense of happiness and live up to my values and beliefs, I decided that my home would become a politics, religion free zone. I wanted my home to be a safe for everyone. And this was a tough transition. And what was most difficult was creating boundaries for our parents, having the hard conversations about why we're asking people to withhold their opinions on politics and religion and to focus on grandkids sports and family celebrations, et cetera. For the first few months, I was constantly reminding everyone of the rule, but eventually we all seemed to settle in and even catch ourselves when we deviated from how sex expectations, dinners and events became more pleasant. And when our guests would leave, I didn't have to decompress or worry about how to fix an issue or soothe someone's feelings.(00:57:27):This one simple step has been a game changer, and it's not always perfect, and sometimes people will slip up, but instead of taking on the issue, we will move the conversation to another topic. Some would say that we need to talk about the issues and debate their merits so that we can grow and come together. But no, after finding my purpose, I don't believe that being right is more important than someone else's feelings. I want everyone who sits at my table and breaks spread with me to feel loved and valued. It's not perfect because we're human, but we're trying one dinner at a timeSpeaker 11 (00:58:03):To how do I hold my own humanity? In the context of political dialogue, one of the first things that comes to mind for me is, at least in political conversations, what defines my humanity? When I think about politics, much of our politics is really about power and privilege, of which I happen to have both. And so when I'm thinking about politics, I'm thinking about my social location as a able-bodied, middle class, heterosexual Christian White woman, I carry privilege in almost every aspect of that identity, at least here in the United States. And so when I'm thinking about humanity and political dialogue, our political system has historically always been and continues to be set up to serve people with my type of humanity very well. The thing that I'm constantly trying to keep in my mind is what about the humanity of my brothers and sisters experiencing oppression, marginalization when it comes to my voice and my vote in political situations, I have over the years had to learn to think less about how can I use my vote and my voice to engage in politics in a way that benefits me because I'm already benefiting from our system.(00:59:42):Our system is set up to benefit people like me who carry great levels of social privilege. What I really want to know as I'm trying to use my voice and my vote wisely now, is how do I leverage both of those things, my voice, my vote, as well as my power and privilege to engage in political dialogue in ways that fix broken systems. So I am oftentimes not actually voting or advocating for the things that would benefit me the most or necessarily align perfectly with my theological or political ideals. I'm looking at where are the most broken places in our system? Where is our government currently oppressing individuals the most? And how can my vote and my voice be used to leverage our politics in such a way that those broken systems begin to get fixed and healed over time so that those whose humanity looks different than mine are receiving the same amount of privilege of assistance of power that they should be.(01:00:57):And when it comes to dealing with those that I'm in proximity with who have very different political ideologies than myself, of which I will say in my current context, there are quite a few. I am constantly having to remind myself to focus on core values, values over stances that our conversations and our engagement with one another centers not so much around opinions about specific political stances or issues as much as the core values that we share. If my core value is for equality and equity, if my core value is that we're caring for the poor and the marginalized, then regardless of what stances I might have on certain issues, my voice and my vote represents those core values. And I've found that even when certain stances might be different, when we dig into the core values that are at the root of our decision-making, there's oftentimes a lot more common ground than I ever expect there to be.Speaker 12 (01:02:06):This recording is for the fabulous Danielle Castillo. I think what I am seeing right now as I think about how to welcome people's humanity and politics are a few key things that are both shocking and I would say disappointing in a day and age where we seem to want to tolerate people not being locked into binary spaces, we have relegated differences and opinion and viewpoints into a bipartisan politic. And what that does is that means that there are people who are in and who are out. And we've had to embrace things that we both love and hate if we ascribe to any one of those bipartisan objectives. And so we've had to in some ways, in our own humanity, violate pieces of ourselves to say, well, I align this part one way, but even though I categorically reject their views on this another way. And then regardless of whatever spectrum you're on inside of that political continuum, and it's hard because at that point, if we say in a lot of other spaces that there's space for nuance and there's space for gray, then why here do we land in those spaces?(01:03:16):And so that would be the first that it is an either or, and we seem to be comfortable, most comfortable that way. And then to demonize and villainize somebody who's in the either or space, instead of allowing for the gray, you're either all for me or all against me, and you can't live somewhere in the middle. The second thing that would be shocking and disappointing for me is the way that we've been able to start arranging the things that we can tolerate. And so I can say, well, I love this candidate because I love these three things and I agree with them and I hate these four things, but they're not that bad. And you love this candidate, you love the other candidate for these three things, but you hate them for those four things. And the fact that you don't hate 'em enough over those four things means that you're a terrible person.(01:04:02):And I find that just so interesting and so sad that we've been able to say, well, the four things I can stomach that I don't like are somehow more or less worse than the four things you feel like you could tolerate or not tolerate. And so my list of sins or offenses that are easily navigable, somehow I get to become the moral compass over what should be enough or not enough to disqualify somebody for public service. I think at the end of the day, what makes us hard is that we see people in the middle as somehow exhibiting some sort of cowardice. And I think we're pushing people to violate their own humanity and say, as my experience changes and as the neighborhood changes and the people around me change, and my own philosophy changes that I can't stand in a faithful middle and say, well, I agree with some of this, but I don't agree with some of that.(01:04:54):And we've called those people cowards instead of principled moderates, and we've shamed them into saying, well, you have to choose something. And I think that is so unkind. And I think really at the end of the day, we are asking people to violate their own humanity and their own understanding of who they are and their own sense of who they are as a person by saying that they have to agree one way if they want to be a human or be a woman or be a person of color or be a person of faith. And I think it's both sides. I think every side is complicit. At the end of the day, what is really hard is that I think most people want to vote for the person that is going to lead well, and they want that person to be a good person. They want them to be an upright person.(01:05:37):They want them to be an authentic person, the same person behind closed doors as they are in the public face. And I would say, I don't think that's most people who choose politicking as a vocation, I believe that so much of their job is diplomacy and having to be a lot of faces in a lot of places. And so asking for that kind of authenticity and consistency in a social media world is almost asking the impossible. I don't think it totally is impossible, but I think it's exceptionally hard. Many of the things that we want to ascribe to one individual and how they uphold or represent their own party are carefully crafted narratives by a team of people who are professional politicians and marketers, and to ask them to give you an authentic person, their job is to not give you an authentic person. Their job is to give you an avatar that you feel you can most connect with so you can make the decision they want you to make.(01:06:33):And that is really for me, the reality of what we're up against right now is that we want to say we're voting for ideologies, and in reality we're voting for a carefully crafted narrative that is crafted by people who want you to believe a particular way. And I know that feels kind of negative, and that makes me so sad to even voice that out loud and to vocalize that out loud. But I would say that I hope in some way that we experience real freedom and real understanding of what it means to be a global citizen and to be a citizen of this country, is that we understand that. And the complexity of who I am as a person and how I interact with other people and how they understand their own complexity and their own humanity means that I can believe a lot of things that belong in a lot of different camps.(01:07:19):And that's okay. That's what honestly, being intrinsically American means, but also just to understand our own humanity in the global context is there are things that I will feel one way about and they squarely belong in one camp, but there are other things I believe that belong in another camp. And both of those things can be true for me without somebody demanding that I carry some sort of alliance or allegiance to one person. I think that's so gross and so foul at the end of the day. I think what makes America so interesting and so fascinating, but I also think so beautiful and so compelling and so desiring for people who are coming into our borders, is that there is this understanding that I can stand squarely as an individual person and be able to express myself as who I am as an individual and also belong to a collective that makes space for that.(01:08:14):And that is intrinsically what it means to be America. I'm free to be us, but I'm also free to be me. And so I think politics pushes us into a narrative that is against intrinsically who we say we are, and that really is the basis of freedom. And so that's what I would feel about that. Now, this is an added bonus, and I know you didn't ask for this, Danielle, but I'm going to give it to you anyways because I firmly believe this. I think it is more dehumanizing, and I think it is so incredibly sad that we don't allow for people to be principled moderates. That we are sanctifying the ability to castrate people's ability to be able to stand in the middle. And we vilify them as being weak or vilify them as being cowards because their understanding of what is actually evil is.(01:09:09):It's a broad spectrum. And to say that there is good everywhere, it is true to say there is evil everywhere is true. And how people interface with both of those things is true. And so I hate that we have become okay at using our theology and using our social media platforms and using our politicking as throwing stones for people who say, I want to hold a faithful middle. And that faithful middle means that I can believe a multitude of things and that I stand in the own gray and the nuance of who I am and how I understand my neighbors and what that looks like. And we know that some of those people are standing with compassion and with courage. And to call those people cowards, I think is the most ignorant, I'm trying to find the kindest way to say this, right? So I think it is just absolutely ignorant.(01:10:00):And then we've used quotes out of context and scriptures out of context to tell those people that somehow they're bad and evil people. And it's just not true that they're honestly sometimes the bridge builders and the unifier in places where they are trying to be peacemakers and they're trying to be people of peace. They're trying to be people of belonging and welcome. And so they're holding a faithful middle to say, my heart is going to take enough of a beating where people may misunderstand me, but I'm going to make it big enough and available enough where everybody can come sit under my tent. And I think that's brave work. I think that is courageous work, and I think that is humbling work that we could learn more from instead of castigating really more than anything else. So those are my 2 cents, honestly, more than anything else.(01:10:51):The last 2 cents I could probably give you that I think is so shameful is I am tired of any political party that tells me that they are doing more for working class Americans or doing more for poor people, and yet they're spending 2 billion to fly somebody around and send me junk mail to my home. I would much rather you stop buying ad space and then you actually go and serve the poor and somebody takes a picture of you doing that on accident. And I actually get to see that and go, oh my gosh, they're actually serving the poor. Do not tell me you're serving the poor or serving working class Americans and you haven't talked to one or seen one in a very long time. And my God, you have not lived in our shoes. You have not lived on our pay scales. You have not come in and volunteered regularly, and you only show up when there's a camera crew doing that.(01:11:34):That is so gross to me, and I hate that you send me mail about it and spend 2 billion fundraising for things like that. And yet that money could go to the poor and that money could go to programs. If there's one thing that makes me want to soapbox so bad, it is that more than anything else, I don't want to hear what your fundraising dollars have done to actually help your campaign. And that thing becomes a total waste when you lose. And that money doesn't go into the pockets of people. That money goes into the pockets of advertisers and radio stations and TV stations and social media influencers and all sorts of nonsense and actually doesn't go into the pockets and the hands of people who are feeding the poor that is garbage. So I feel very strongly about that, but I dunno if this is what you need, but that's how I make space. I make space for people who live at Principled Middle because I think blessed are the peacemakers and I want them to feel safe with me.Speaker 13 (01:12:26):Good morning. My name is Luis Cast. How do I see my own humanity in this political context? Well, it's simple as that. I'm a human being. I'm not a pawn or a little peace on a game. I'm a human being born and raised in Mexico, but I live here in the United States over half of my life now, and I'm a human being. And no matter what the promises they give me or what they're going to do in government, I'm still just a human being that wants the best for me and my family. And that's what they need to address the human being in us regarding not regarding color or race or where they come from. Treat us a as human beings. And the other question, how do I make space for folks who do not share my political view?(01:13:46):Well, again, it's just simple. I was taught that love whoever disagree with you or even your enemy. But to be honest, that's the hardest thing to do. People that don't agree with you or you don't agree with them, and sometimes they even hurt you. But I try to do my best, honestly, just to listen and sometimes put myself in their shoes because everybody has been brought up differently in families, cultures, regions of the country from the south, from New England, they call in the west in California. So we all have different views. So I just don't have an ear and sometimes an opinion, but mostly an ear so they can really listen to what they, I believe, where they come from, where they come from. So that is what I try to do. No, perfect, but that's what I try to do.Speaker 14 (01:14:59):Hi, my name is Claire. I am a white, cisgender, heterosexual woman. I live in Paulsboro, Washington. So the first question is how do I see my humanity in the context of this current political moment? And I'd start off by saying I come from a pretty privileged place, like my own personal humanity isn't very threatened just because I'm white, I'm straight, and yeah, my own family background. I have a lot of support and I'm not ever threatened with becoming homeless or something if I can't pay my bills. But still things are really scary for so many people right now. So I definitely feel that all the time. And I would say that it's just a really disheartening time. A lot of the, I mean, pretty much all politicians, I'd say are very untrustworthy at a local and national level. And I think we're all seeing that, especially in the context of what's happening in Gaza.(01:16:26):For the last over a year now, all these politicians that felt like they were progressive and would speak out when heinous things happened, most of them have gone silent or completely denied what's happening in Gaza, or just said really brief empty words, always proceeded by talking about Israeli hostages. So yeah, it's been terrifying because we realize the extent of politicians care for the general public and for the global wellbeing of humanity. And it only stretches so far because first and foremost, they're concerned about their own and standing in the political world because we've seen a lot of people lose their reelections for standing up for Palestinians.(01:17:38):And I think what's really disheartening is seeing it at a local level. In some ways, we expect national politicians to be pretty sleazy and skirt around really big, terrible, important issues. But seeing it at a local level has been really terrifying because I mean, they said it was then a couple decades ago, like 30, 40 years ago, there's more crises going on. And that really, for me, I've always thought, well, this is how it's always been. There's just the media reports on more stuff. We have social media, we can't hide a lot of things. So I don't know if that's true or not, but I mean, it probably is. We're in a time of climate crisis too, so it makes sense that things are just, they're not slowing down.(01:18:49):I don't know where I was going with that, but yeah, I guess I would just say humanity. It feels threatened on so many levels for my queer friends, for my friends of color, for any women or female identifying people just on so many levels, it just feels like our rights are being threatened and everything feels tenuous. If Trump wins, what the hell is going to happen to this country? And if Kamala wins, what the hell is going to change? I don't believe in politicians. They're not going to save us. That's how it feels. We have to save each other that are diehard Trumpers or something. I'd say all those people are my relatives that live in Wisconsin or a couple of coworkers, and we don't talk about politics, but on a deeper level, I try to remember that it's hard, right? Because hard, it's hard not to hate people for what they believe. I guess that's a horrible thing to say, isn't it? But I see the consequences of people who vote for Trump and put him in office the first time, their direct consequences because they voted for Trump and because of their beliefs and because of what they repost online. That just has bred so much hatred, and it's led to people being terrified for their lives and people losing their lives. There's so much propaganda being shoved down people's throats, the people that have Fox News plane 24 7.(01:21:06):I don't know the last time I watched Fox News, but I've overheard it. That stuff is crazy. They're being fed lie after lie after lie. So yeah, it's like people are also a product of their culture and it's hard to fight against your culture. So I try to give people some grace with that, but I also don't know how they can't see their own beliefs as harmful and full of hatred. I really don't understand. So yeah, it's hard. It's hard to remember people's humanity, but I have obviously my own blind spots and my own ways that I'm super ignorant and willfully ignorant in the things I look away from and the things like I'm resistant to learning because it's inconvenient or uncomfortable for me. So I try to hold that space for people too, because we're all learning. Yeah, it's a process of trying to remember people's humanity. And I think, yeah, but it just feels like when people support someone that spews so much hatred, it's really hard not to pin that blame on them as well, because they're also at fault for putting people like that in power. So I don't know. Yeah, it's a tough one.Speaker 15 (01:22:55):I feel like as somebody with various subordinated identities, whether that's being queer, being Latina, having a disability, being a woman, all of those things are increasingly politicized. And so for me, I find that political discourse specifically is often really dehumanizing and even performative on the other end of the spectrum. So our two major parties, Republican and Democrat with Republican, it's we well known that those political parties as they exist currently are working to strip away rights from people in all of those identity and affinity groups. While the Democrats, which I won't even say left, because current Democrats are right of center, when you look at a global pe

Meow! Meet another face! This time it's animal namer Charles Franklin from Los Angeles, whose life's purpose is to introduce people to pets, and always by the right moniker. Thanks to Matt Apodaca (@mattapodaca on Instagram) for the introduction. To hear the extended Great Big version of this interview, sign up to support this show at patreon.com/crowleytime. Get in touch on social media at @atomcrowley or email crowleytimepodcast@gmail.com. While you're at it, why not buy some merchandise at crowleytime.com or get tickets to Crowley Time Live at London Podcast Festival at kingsplace.co.uk?

Listen to this week's No Spin News interviews with professor and pollster Dr. Charles Franklin, conservative activist Jon Schweppe and Ryan Girdusky. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight's rundown: Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Tuesday, July 23, 2024. Stand Up for Your Country. Talking Points Memo: Bill looks at the cover up of Joe Biden's mental condition. Marquette Law professor Dr. Charles Franklin joins the No Spin News. American Principles Project policy director Jon Schweppe join the No Spin News. Bill reacts to James Carville's statement about those who say Trump is a changed man after shooting. U.S. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle resigns. This Day in History: The ice cream cone. Final Thought: Maya Rudolph's Kamala Harris impression. In Case You Missed It: Read Bill's latest column, Adios, Scranton Joe For a limited time, get two of our classic mugs with a 25% discount. Our DOUBLE MUG DEAL includes a Stand Up For Your Country mug and a Team Normal mug, both in navy. ORDER TODAY! Election season is here! Now's the time to get a Premium or Concierge Membership to BillOReilly.com, the only place for honest news analysis. Preorder Bill's latest book, CONFRONTING THE PRESIDENTS, a No Spin assessment of every president from Washington to Biden. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dr. Charles Franklin, the architect for the Marquette University Law School poll joined La Crosse Talk PM on Friday, along with UW-La Crosse political science professor, Dr. Anthony Chergosky. We, of course, discuss the Joe Biden-Donald Trump debate and how the polling will play out over the coming weeks and how the latest Marquette Law poll is a perfect representation of the two presidential candidates. We also talk about how debates have impacted the polls of the past, plus what the polling showed after Trump being convicted of 32 felonies. The second half of the show discussion was about Wisconsin matters, including the US Senate race between Tammy Baldwin and Eric Hovde, plus public education — right in the midst of the Milwaukee public school debacle — and PFAS pollution, which state lawmakers are still fighting about. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join #LocalGovMatters co-hosts, WCA President & CEO Mark O'Connell and WCA Communications Consultant Michelle Gormican Thompson, as they sit down with Marquette University Law School Poll Director Charles Franklin to discuss their latest poll on the national political landscape, as well as talk about the redistricting maps recently signed into law by Governor Tony Evers. […] The post #LocalGovMatters Episode 8: Marquette Law School Poll Director Charles Franklin appeared first on #LocalGovMatters 2.0.

Political scientists, Marquette's Dr. Charles Franklin and UW-La Crosse's Dr. Anthony Chergosky, join Friday's La Crosse Talk PM to break down the latest Marquette Law School Poll, where we find Wisconsin voters don't like any of the candidates, love marijuana and Nikki Haley would win the whole thing in a landslide. Franklin is, what we call, the architect of the Marquette poll, which is one of the most prestigious in the country and one that all eyes look to, since Wisconsin is arguably the most important state to win in 2024. Along with some of the poll results — Haley destroying Biden and Donald Trump even with Biden — we also talk about how these things compare to polls of the past. Plus, how some of the most important issues in the state are things many polled don't know much about — like “redistricting.” We started the show with Chergosky on just why this poll is so important and trusted. And, when Franklin joined, we had to throw some ridiculousness at him — like why there was no Taylor Swift question — and if he could throw all prestige out the window, what would he love to get polling on that, perhaps, isn't political.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join us for the second edition of a new podcast from RealClearPolitics. "RCP Poll Position" looks at the state of American political polling and features in-depth discussions with some of America's top pollsters and public opinion experts. On this program, RCP president and co-founder Tom Bevan talks with Charles Franklin, Professor of Law and Public Policy and Director of the Marquette Law School Poll. They discuss the challenges of polling in advance of the Iowa caucuses, what pollsters are doing to make their polls more accurate, and how shifts among young, Black and Hispanic voters may affect the 2024 elections.

The architect of the Marquette University Law School polls, Dr. Charles Franklin joined, to talk about his creation, how its evolved and some of its latest findings, including the 2024 presidential election and the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Franklin is a Professor of Law and Public Policy, as well as the Director of Marquette Law School Poll. We were also joined by UW-La Crosse political science professor, Dr. Anthony Chergosky. Chergosky began the show talking a bit about the latest Marquette Law poll and how polls have changed.  That conversation, of course, continued with Franklin throughout the show — how the questions are created and how the information is gathered from the public — phone and online. Franklin told an interesting story on how the poll began in 2012, and how it may not have become as popular as it has, if the politics at that time had not been the way they were. We then got into a conversation about the 2024 presidential election — and what the poll numbers show a year away from the election. We also asked Franklin questions on poll results affecting Wisconsin, including how the state Legislature is perceived, how the lawsuit on district lines is received, Wisconsin's two US Senators through the last election (Ron Johnson) and this upcoming one (Tammy Baldwin), and how the public feels about the Wisconsin Supreme Court expressing its personal opinions. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Robin talks with Marquette Law School Poll Director Charles Franklin about the what the Republician-proposed redistricting plan means.

Eight Republican candidates for president take the stage at Fiserv Forum and none of them named Donald Trump. As the former president sits out of the first debate of the 2024 election, his rivals squared off in Milwaukee. In this episode of Open Record, FOX6 Investigator Bryan Polcyn invites Marquette University Law School's Charles Franklin and FOX6 political reporter Jason Calvi on to talk about the August 23 debate. From the stand-out moments to the topics discussed, you'll hear insight into which candidates seemed to come out on top and which ones might face a greater climb as the clock ticks toward the next debate. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

You almost certainly know that, for decades, Stu Rothenberg and his Rothenberg Political Report (now Inside Elections) penned among the most influential political analysis in Washington. But you probably don't know the origin story...his initial academic career track, how he cut his political teeth at the conservative Heritage Foundation, and what led to launching his own newsletter. In this conversation, we talk through all of that plus his most memorable interactions with candidates, biggest surprises, savviest politicians, and when he knew it was time to pass the newsletter baton to his partner Nathan Gonzales. IN THIS EPISODEStu grows up in a family of Rockefeller Republicans in Central Park West Manhattan…Stu's growing interest in politics and initial career trajectory to become an academic…How Stu's path diverted from the academic track to join the political operation of the conservative Heritage Foundation…Stu's tutelage under conservative political icon Paul Weyrich…What led to launching the Rothenberg Report newsletter…Stu's early intersection with fellow newsletter groundbreaker Charlie Cook…Stu's memories from “candidate interviews” with Ted Cruz, Nikki Haley, and Barack Obama…Stu on the single biggest surprising result in his decades as a political observer…Stu talks some of the smartest political minds in Congress & the one committee chair who was a “giant pain in the ass”…The backstory behind a favorite Rothenberg column “For the Thousandth Time, Don't Call It a Push Poll”…Stu's memorable 2006 meeting with then-Vice President Dick Cheney…How Stu handled passing the torch of the Rothenberg Report to Inside Elections with Nathan Gonzales…AND The Almanac of American Politics, Morton Blackwell, Bill Bradley, Sherry Boehlert, Mary Bono, Sonny Bono, William Buckley, Bucknell University, CNN, CSX, Canadian-American regional integration, the Club for Growth, Colby College, complicated conservatives, Ted Cruz, Al D'Amato, Mitch Daniels, Tom Davis, David Dewhurst, egomaniacs, Rollie Fingers, Charles Franklin, the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, Mark French, Milton Friedman, Martin Frost, The Greenbrier, Nikki Haley, Tom Harkin, Peter Hart, Friedrich Hayek, Blair Hull, “It's Only Politics”, Jan Plans, Jacob Javits, Roger Jepsen, Tommy John, Ben Jones, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Kenneth Keating, Harmon Killebrew, Leading Authorities, Louis Lefkowitz, Jon Lerner, John Lindsay, Juan Marichal, Marxist feminists, John McCain, Joe McLean, Ed Muskie, NYU, Lindsey Nelson, Frank Newport, Richard Nixon, George Pataki, political goo, Walter Rich, Roll Call, Jack Ryan, Larry Sabato, sewage trolls, Casey Stengel, Inez Tenenbaum, total losers, Donald Trump, UCONN, Amy Walter…& more!

Axios recently ran a piece looking at Gallup Poll data showing 49% of Americans identify as independents -- a big increase over the past decade. But...is this really accurate? The Washington Post's Phillip Bump and Charles Franklin from the Marquette Poll have serious doubts. We'll explain why the Gallup data isn't really the issue. Next, has the pandemic made workers lazy? New data shows that workers are working fewer hours than pre-pandemic -- but there are big differences among different groups. We have special guest Anthony Klotz, Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior at the University College London School of Management, on and we're asking how much of the change can be attributed to the pandemic and how much is something greater. Finally, we dive into our fun fact that has us reminiscing. Want to feel nostalgic? We're figuring out the best way.

The debate over abortion rights has entered a new phase. Last year's Supreme Court decision to strike down the federal right to the health procedure and leave it up to states is now playing out with private companies.  The country's second-largest pharmacy chain, Walgreens, is facing criticism from both sides of the aisle after announcing it would not ship or sell mifepristone in 21 states. The medication is used to terminate a pregnancy or treat a miscarriage.  This came after Republican attorneys general threatened legal action if the pharmacy didn't stop selling the medication. However, abortion is still legal in a few of the states on that list such as Alaska, Kansas and Montana. Then, California Governor Gavin Newsom said the state was cutting ties with Walgreens and its $54 million contract. He claimed the pharmacy caved to pressure from the right.  Can big companies no longer stay out of these polarizing debates? Host David Greene discusses with Mo Elleithee, executive director of Georgetown University's Institute of Politics and Public Service, and Sarah Isgur, senior editor at The Dispatch. Plus, while the Supreme Court was once considered a major polarizing force, its perception with Americans is improving. A Marquette Law School poll from January found that 47% of respondents approve of the Supreme Court, up from 38% last July when the court struck down Roe v Wade. And surprisingly, the rise is mostly among Democrats. Can the court continue boosting its standing? Special guest Charles Franklin, pollster and director of the Marquette Law School, weighs in on restoring faith in the High Court. And Stanford Law School's invitation to a controversial federal judge ended up a complete mess. Before he could start his speech, hecklers interrupted the event and even a school administrator questioned if allowing his talk was worth it.  How can universities ensure a public speaker and dissenters can have their voices heard? And where do we draw the line between free speech and hate speech?

Charles R. Franklin is a Managing Partner at Franklin, Greenswag, Channon & Capilla, LLC. Since 1980, Charlie's law practice has focused on representing professionals in malpractice claims, lawsuits and disciplinary hearings. Charlie also counsels clients (both companies and policy-holders) in insurance coverage disputes, presentation of claims, and recovery. He has successfully argued before the Illinois Supreme Court. Charlie continues to serve as a “neutral” or independent arbitrator appointed by insureds and insurers. For several years he has been elected an Illinois “Super Lawyer” and peer reviewed rated “AV Preeminent” with Martindale-Hubbell. Charlie was a founder and original board member of the Claims Association of Greater Chicago. He attended the United States Air Force Academy, has an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan and law degree from the University of Miami. Contact Charlie at: cfranklin@fgcclaw.com Phone: 847-701-2250 Learn More: https://fgcclaw.com Learn More about the Future Institute: https://futureinstitute.us.

Thanks for tuning into the Stories in AI podcast. In this episode, I am joined by Charles Franklin, Head of product development, Analytics & AI at Experian. I had a really great time talking to Charles about a variety of topics, including how Experian is disrupting traditional markets with AI, the drawbacks of utilizing AI, and much more. Charles Bio: Charles Franklin is the SVP of product development for Global Analytics & AI, including Ascend Intelligence Services. He has been with Experian since January 2021 and is working with teams across DA, CIS and Health to build our next generation of analytics solutions. Before joining Experian, Charles was a Partner at Oliver Wyman, where he led the global data science practice. He was a founding member of Oliver Wyman Labs, a business unit creating analytics-powered applications across sectors including finance, travel and retail. Charles moved from the UK to the US in 2014 and now lives in San Francisco with his wife and son. They enjoy exploring the Bay Area by foot or by kayak, as well as trips home to London and France. Find Charles at LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/charles-franklin-90a58357/   A note about our sponsor: Experian is the world's leading global information services company. We empower our clients to manage their data with confidence and build trusted relationships with consumers, using advanced analytics, decisioning technology, and fraud prevention tools. We help businesses to make smarter decisions and thrive, lend more responsibly, and prevent fraud and financial crime. As the world's leading repository of consumer credit data, Experian is transforming data into solutions that facilitate transactions, ensure financial safety and improve the financial lives of millions of consumers around the world.

Charles R. Franklin is a Managing Partner at Franklin, Greenswag, Channon & Capilla, LLC. Since 1980, Charlie's law practice has focused on representing professionals in malpractice claims, lawsuits and disciplinary hearings. Charlie also counsels clients (both companies and policy-holders) in insurance coverage disputes, presentation of claims, and recovery. He has successfully argued before the Illinois Supreme Court. Charlie continues to serve as a “neutral” or independent arbitrator appointed by insureds and insurers. For several years he has been elected an Illinois “Super Lawyer” and peer reviewed rated “AV Preeminent” with Martindale-Hubbell. Charlie was a founder and original board member of the Claims Association of Greater Chicago. He attended the United States Air Force Academy, has an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan and law degree from the University of Miami. Contact Charlie at: cfranklin@fgcclaw.com Phone: 847-701-2250 Learn More: https://fgcclaw.com Learn More about the Future Institute: https://futureinstitute.us

Dr. Mike is back to answer your questions. Getting to know Sara Rodriguez. Marquette Law School Poll. Dan Shafer joins. Maternal and infant health crisis. (48:00) - Getting to know Sara Rodriguez Democratic Party nominee for Lieutenant Governor Sara Rodriguez talks about why shes running for Lieutenant Governor. You can connect with Sara on Twitter and Facebook. (1:12:00) - Marquette Law School Poll The final pre-election Marquette Law School poll results are out and the Director of Marquette Law School Poll, Charles Franklin helps us navigate them. (1:32:40) - Dan Shafer joins Co-founder of The Recombobulation Area, Dan Shafer tells us his pre-election poll findings. (1:55:24) - Maternal infant health crisis The Maternal and Infant Health Initiatives Manager for March of Dimes , Emily Kittell discusses the maternal and infant health crisis that is happening in Wisconsin. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Music from today's show can be found on As Goes Wisconsin's Spotify playlist. We love hearing from you! Got a topic you think we should cover? Have an idea for a guest we should have on? Want to leave us feedback? Let us know!

The final pre-election Marquette Law School poll results are out and the Director of Marquette Law School Poll, Charles Franklin helps us navigate them.

Pat and Kirk spoke with Charles Franklin, the Director of Wisconsin's gold standard Marquette Law School Poll, about how negative ads can hurt candidates' poll numbers, and how Wisconsin's Republican Majority legislature has often ignored issues that large numbers of Wisconsinites support. Rep. Jodi Emerson came on next to talk about how the same legislature ignored Governor Evers' special session to discuss ways to have all Wisconsinites weigh in on our 172 year old law that bans abortions through a statewide referendum—a idea that Republican leaders “said” they supported until actually were called up to do it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Marquette Poll director Charles Franklin outlines the right and wrong ways to interpret the work that's done to measure public support on issues and candidates. Also: Rep. Jodi Emerson of Eau Claire expresses the frustrated felt by many women as legislative Republicans refuse to even debate allowing voters to have a say on keeping or […]

Charles Franklin, Poll Director Marquette School of Law joins Carol and Tom talking about the public opinion poll on SCOTUS released favor increasing justices and if there is a chance to increase the court.

WTMJ's Erik Bilstad chats with Marquette University Law School poll author Charles Franklin about the latest numbers in the race for Governor and U.S. SenateSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Happy Thursday folks! Another fun, and jam-packed show today as Steve was joined by Charles Franklin, Marquette polling expert. Hear what the latest polls say about the upcoming Governor race! Plus, tune in for another edition of "Ask Steve anything!" And, are we online too much? Find out!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Marquette Pollster Charles Franklin joined Steve to talk about the latest Wisconsin election pollsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On July 5, 2022, Newsmakers Host Lisa Pugh sat down with Charles Franklin, Director of the Marquette University Law School Poll, to discuss recent polling that shows narrowing margins for candidates in Wisconsin’s Gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races and takes the voters’ temperature on issues like abortion rights and gun violence. But how much do […]

Steve sat down with Marquette President, Mike Lovell and pollster, Charles Franklin. What goes behind conducting polls? How hard is it to get them accurate? Tune in and hear how it is done!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Happy Thursday! Steve was having some fun on this show, as a special edition of "Ask Steve anything" included asking his two daughters questions relating to him! Hear what they had to say! Plus, should politician be held against old stories from their past? And, a special interview with Marquette President, Mike Lovell and pollster, Charles Franklin. Tune in to hear all that and more!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Charles Franklin shares his journey to providing vehicles for building wealth with Robin and I on our final episode of Wealthy Wednesdays in March as a way of helping black people utilize their income tax refunds. Our hope is that we've provided information that will help change our money mindset in the black community. As one of our previous wealth builders said "we are building wealthy and healthy community's when we invest in our own money mindset"

How Lawyers, Accountants, and Other Professionals Handle MistakesEvery lawyer needs to watch this show. In fact, every professional needs to watch this show. On this episode of The Inside BS Show Dave Lorenzo speaks with Charles Franklin, an attorney who represents professionals when they get in trouble. Charlie has a great deal of wisdom to share about the practice of law, being a professional, and handling issues in your practice. Chapters00:00 Introduction How to Handle a Mistake in Professional Services02:10 What are the Three C's of Handling an Issue with a Licensing Body?08:00 Why Do You Need to Hire an Attorney to Represent You in a Licensing Matter?10:20 Charlie Explains the Difference between a Procedural Error and Misconduct14:00 Dave tells a Grievance Committee Horror Story16:00 What is a Fine vs. a Fee?18:00 How is the Disciplinary Process Different Across all Professions?23:40 How Did Charlie Get into Representation of Licensed Professionals?26:00 What Other Work Does Charlie Do as an Attorney?29:00 What Advice Does Charlie Have For Young Professionals30:56 Charlie tells a Story about a Case that He Really Enjoyed33:00 How Does Charlie Make The Most of His Networking35:30 Empathy, Understanding, and Discipline: How those Qualities Influence CharlieCharles FranklinLitigatorFounding Partner(847) 701-2250cfranklin@fgcclaw.comhttps://fgcclaw.com/charles-r-franklin/About Charles FranklinCharles Franklin focuses his law practice on the representation of individuals and businesses in commercial litigation and insurance related matters. That work includes assistance in the presentation of claims, policy analysis and coverage disputes on behalf of policyholders as well as the representation of financial institutions and companies in loss workout, mitigation, and recovery. Charlie also has significant experience in representing highly regulated and registered entities and licensed professionals (such as accountants, physicians, appraisers, inspectors, brokers, and others) either accused of malpractice and/or in licensure, regulatory and disciplinary proceedings at federal, state, county, and local levels, and before private certifying organizations and professional groups. He has often served as a “neutral” or an independent arbitrator being appointed by both policyholders and insurance companies.

(00:00) Local News Chat: Appleton Health Officer & Covid Tests (19:00) Your Take on Bias & Partisanship in "The News Media" (40:00) Charles Franklin, Marquette Law School Poll Director (59:30) The Professors on Media Options, Bias, & Consumption (92:30) The Takeaway: Demanding Immediate Satisfaction

Com o ministro do TST Emmanoel Pereira e com o consultor financeiro e especialista em governança corporativa Charles Franklin. O vigésimo terceiro episódio do podcast "Trabalho em Pauta" fala sobre compliance trabalhista, termo usado para descrever estratégias adotadas pelas empresas para garantir o respeito às leis trabalhistas, aos acordos e convenções coletivas, à ética e à segurança no trabalho. Participam do programa o ministro do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho Emmanoel Pereira e o consultor financeiro e especialista em governança corporativa Charles Franklin. No episódio, os convidados abordam os benefícios desse modelo para empregados e empregadores, uma vez que passam a contar com um ambiente de trabalho mais saudável. Apresentação: Anderson Conrado Roteiro: Anderson Conrado e Michelle Chiappa Edição: Luma Soares Produção: Jéssica Vasconcelos e Priscila Rossiter Colaboração: João Vitor Tavares Sonoplastia: Wesley Oliveira Supervisão técnica: Saulo Morais Chefia de redação: Paulo Mondego Coordenação: Anna Carolina Brito Supervisão-geral: Taciana Giesel

(00:00) Local News Chat: GC Assessments & Kenosha Judge (18:00) Your Take on Effort to Standardize Possession Fines (37:30) Charles Franklin on Latest Marquette Law Poll Results (57:00) Adam Sutter, Junior Achievement on Entrepreneurship (87:30) The Takeaway: Echo Chambers Don't Make Majorities

(00:00) Local News Chat: WC Exec Staff & Rodgers Drama (18:40) Your Take on When It's Time to Revise Covid Policies (37:30) Charles Franklin, Director, Marquette Law School Poll (57:20) State Sen Roger Roth on Election Reviews & More (88:35) The Takeaway: Imperfect Measurements Of Popularity

(00:00) Local News Chat: ICU Limit & School Board Threats (18:30) Your Take on Why Some Missing Women Get Attention (39:30) Apprentice Signing Day with UA400 & Mechanical Contractors Assn (57:00) Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll, on SCOTUS & Issues (87:00) The Takeaway: Good Allies Act With Consistency

(00:00) Local News Chat: Oshkosh Masks & Local Events (18:00) Your Take on Growing Trend of "No Mow May" (37:30) LSS Supports Wisconsin Foster Care Families (55:00) Charles Franklin, Marquette Law Poll Director (84:00) The Takeaway: Deception Sends A Message

Joining hosts Jim Maher and Gayle Knutson on this program are the Hon. John Tunheim, Chief U.S. District Judge for the District of Minnesota to remember the legacy of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (4:00); Charles Franklin, Director of the Marquette University Poll on the state of the election in Wisconsin and elsewhere (13:00); Oluchi Omeoga of Black Visions, a Minneapolis-based social change organization to discuss next steps following a summer of racial tension across the country (38:30); and Andrea and Greg Sandager, owners of the new Rustic Roots Winery in Scandia (55:30). Plus, updates on news from the community (34:30) and (51:00).Show page with links discussed during this episode:https://marinecommunitylibrary.org/event/river-radio-092620/

If there’s one thing the 2020 presidential election showed us, it's that many polls were wrong again. Yes, they did correctly predict that Joe Biden would win, but they got all kinds of details wrong . Some national polls projected that Biden would win Wisconsin by more than 8 points. That was a gross overestimate, as he only won by less than 1 point. On Tuesday, Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette Law School Poll, discussed a hypothesis for why the polls were off. He says it has everything to do with Trump voters and their lack of willingness to participate in a poll. "The person who supports President Trump but is distrustful does think that polls are fake and has no desire to join in the collective discussion of politics, which is what polls represent," says Franklin. According to Franklin, this is similar to what happened four years ago and helps explain why the polls were so off then. To adapt, Franklin says this year his team tried a different methodology to capture some

(00:00) FriYAY News Chat: Random Kindness & Results (19:30) Your Take on Tackling Fall Leaves: Rake vs Mow (39:30) Charles Franklin, MU Law Poll, on 2020 Results (61:00) Ryann Liebl on Digital Release of "Mags & Julie" (72:30) What's Goin' On? Beth Knapinski, Fox Cities CVB (81:30) Sound Off on Election Aftermath & Green States (92:30) The Takeaway: The People Get the Final Say

In this episode of the Electric Wire, we take a look at polling and the 2020 Presidential Election results with pollster Charles Franklin, @pollsandvotes. Later in the podcast, we host a Customers First! Coalition member roundtable with some of the government affairs representatives for CFC members, including Matt Spencer of Madison Gas & Electric, Jennifer Shilling of Dairyland Power Cooperative, Joseph Owen of WPPI Energy, and Rob Richard of Wisconsin Electric Cooperative Association. Interview with Franklin begins at 7:10 Government Affairs Roundtable begins at 33:55

Delivering More, Together is a new podcast, launched by the VHA Innovation Ecosystem. This podcast that focuses on highlighting the groundbreaking innovation underway at VHA, and how through innovation and collaboration, VHA is exceeding expectations, restoring hope, and building trust within the Veteran community. In this episode Allison Amrhein and Brynn Cole speak with Terri Ohlinger, a Surgical Intensive Care Unit Nurse from at the Cincinnati VA Medical Center  and Charles Franklin, Community Employment Coordinator, at the Boston VA Medical Center. Together they discuss how the Innovators Network helps empower a community of VHA employees to innovate. Innovators Network takes a ground up approach by using the first-hand knowledge of frontline employees to identify some of VA's greatest challenges and to develop both Veteran- and employee-centric solutions. Be sure to check out the upcoming Innovation Experience (iEX) that was discussed on the pod as well. The iEX annual conference offers health care professionals from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), other government agencies, industry, and academia the opportunity to celebrate, collaborate, and promote a culture of innovation. This year, VHA iEX will showcase both employee-developed and industry-sourced innovations and practices that are sure to inform, and inspire lively discussion via the conference platform. To ensure the safety of all participants during the pandemic, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Innovation Experience (iEX) is going 100% virtual this year. Participants will have the opportunity to engage with presenters via live chat and in virtual exhibit booths.  This years speakers will include: ·         Richard Stone, MD, Executive In Charge for Veterans Health Administration (VHA), ·         Carolyn Clancy, MD, MACP, Deputy Under Secretary for Discovery, Education and Affiliate Networks, Veterans Health Administration (VHA)·         Dean Kamen of DEKA Research and Development, ·         Mark Johnson, Senior Partner, Innosight·         Toby Redshaw, SVP for Enterprise Innovation and 5G Solutions, Verizon. Additional Links: VHA Innovation Ecosystem Website (https://www.va.gov/innovationecosystem/) Register for VHA Innovation Experience (https://www.va.gov/INNOVATIONECOSYSTEM/views/news-events/iEX.html

(00:00) Local News Chat: Covid Messaging & Public Meetings (18:30) Your Take on Mischaracterizing Candidate's Words (38:30) Charles Franklin, Marquette Law School Poll Director (61:00) Larry Moore on the Reality & Future of Digital Voting (94:00) The Takeaway: It's Pointless to Demand Perfection

Decision Wisconsin with Gene Mueller and Charles Franklin

(00:00) Local News Chat: "Event City" & Kanye's Campaign (21:00) Your Take on Partisan Political Battle Over the USPS (43:30) Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll, on Pandemic Polls (63:30) The Doctors on Pandemic Pregnancy & Covid in Kids (96:30) The Takeaway: We Easily Believe Conspiracy Theories

(00:00) Local News Chat: Oshkosh Farm Market & Referendum (19:40) Your Take on Extending Unemployment COVID Bonus (40:00) Matt Boots for Rockin' Drive-In Preseted by Paperfest(51:30) Rob Zerjav on Local Baseball in Appleton & Fond du Lac (60:30) Charles Franklin on Recent Presidential Polling Trends (83:00) Do You Believe the Polls & "Secret Trump Voters?" (93:30) The Takeaway: Forgetting History to Rewrite the Future

What I learned from reading Professional Amateur: The Biography of Charles Franklin Kettering by Thomas Boyd[3:06] If you had to summarize Charles Kettering this is the way you would do it: “As symbol of progress and the American way of life—as creator of ideas and builder of industries and employment—as inspirer of men to nobler thoughts and greater accomplishments—as foe of ignorance and discouragement—as friend of learning and optimistic resolve—Charles F. Kettering stands among the great men of all time.”[3:36] He was an American inventor, engineer, businessman, and the holder of 186 patents. He was a founder of Delco, and was head of research at General Motors from 1920 to 1947. Among his most widely used automotive developments were the electrical starting motor and leaded gasoline. He was also responsible for the invention of Freon refrigerant for refrigeration and air conditioning systems. He developed  the world's first aerial missile. He led the advancement of practical, lightweight two-stroke diesel engines, revolutionizing the locomotive and heavy equipment industries.[4:42] This is Ket talking about why it is so important to approach your work with the mindset that you are a professional amateur: We are simply professional amateurs. We are amateurs because we are doing things for the first time. We are professional because we know we are going to have a lot of trouble. The price of progress is trouble. And I don't think the price is too high.[6:52] There is a quote from Thomas Edison that says “We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything.” Ket has that same belief. This is Ket echoing Thomas Edison: “In reality, we have only begun to knock a few chips from the great quarry of knowledge that has been given us to dig out and use. We are like the two fellows who started to walk from New York to San Francisco. When they got over into New Jersey, one said: “We must be pretty nearly there. We have been walking a long, long time.” That is just how we are in what we know technically. We have just barely begun.[9:57] I am enthusiastic about being an American because I came from the hills in Ohio. I was a hillbilly. [10:21] I thought the only thing involved in opportunity was whether I knew how to think with my head and how to do with my hands.[13:37] One lesson from his childhood that stuck with him his whole life is that you need to only worry about things you can control. One of the older men is teaching him this through a story: Besides learning about water power and flour mills, he got from the wise old miller some bits of philosophy which he stored in his young mind. “A lot of people are bound to worry,” the miller once told him. “If you can do something about it, you ought to worry. I would think there was something wrong with you if you didn't. But if you can't do anything, then worrying is just like running this mill when there is no grist to grind. All that does is to wear out the mill.”[14:49] He is not interested in rote memorization. He wants to understand the principles behind the thing. He wants to know the why.[18:12] The man from whom he learned most was Hiram Sweet, the wagon maker. But Sweet was more than a wagon maker. He was, as Kettering said long afterward, “an engineer of such keen ability as to be remarkable. You would no more think of running across such a man in a small town than you would of flying without a flying machine.” Hiram Sweet had invented and built a self-computing cash register which was in daily use at the drugstore. He had also made an astronomical clock. “Where did you find out all this?” Kettering asked Sweet. “I work in this wagon shop ten hours a day,” he replied, “from six-thirty in the morning until five-thirty in the afternoon; and when I have no wagon work to do I work on Sweet's head.” Years afterward, when Kettering had become a noted man, he recalled the days spent in Sweet's wagon shop, “Letting him work on my head . . . I learned more from that old wagon maker than I did in college. The world was so wonderful and he knew so little about it that he hated to sleep.”[20:22] Ket got what he said later was one of the important lessons he learned in college. He learned it from the eminent actor, Joseph Jefferson. Jefferson, together with his company, came to the university town to play his famous part of Rip Van Winkle.One of the men asked him how often he had played the part of Rip Van Winkle. The great actor told just how many hundreds of times he had played Rip. “Don't you get terribly tired doing it so often?” he was asked. “Yes, I did get tired after a while. But the people wanted Rip. And so I went on playing him. I said to myself, ‘It doesn't matter how you feel. Your job is to entertain the audience.' Then I made up my mind that I would try to portray Rip Van Winkle just a little better each time. And that constant effort at improving the part has kept up my interest and enthusiasm.”[23:15] There is a time during Henry Ford's third attempt at building an automobile manufacturing company. And he comes to see Charlie Sorensen.He's like, “You know what? We're about to run out of money. I guess I'm just not going be able to accomplish this goal.”There's this conversation that takes place between Henry and Charlie and at the end, Ford is fired back up. Ford was like “I felt like quitting at the beginning of the conversation. Now I don't.”A few short years later, he winds up attaining his life goal of building a car so inexpensively that the average person can have it. I think that's important.There's so many times in Ford's life story that he wants to quit, that he's disheartened.[26:44] The obstacle of not knowing how never kept him from undertaking anything he thought needed to be done. “It is a fundamental rule with me,” he said once, “that if I want to do something I start, whether I know how or not. . . . As a rule you can find that out by trying.”[28:04] Every great improvement has come after repeated failures. Virtually nothing comes out right the first time. Failures, repeated failures, are finger posts on the road to achievement.[36:18] Remembering the loyal support she (his wife) gave him during that trying period and afterward, Kettering said of her, “She was a great help in those early struggles, for she never got discouraged.” After she passes away from cancer he says she was the only thing in his life that he never tried to improve.[41:19] How Ket and his partner financed their company: To get even that small endeavor under way Kettering and Deeds had to put in all the money they could scrape up, and they mortgaged everything they had. Deeds put a mortgage on his house and Kettering on a lot that he owned. Both borrowed money on their life insurance policies. They also put up their patents and the contract with Cadillac as collateral for a loan from the bank. Cadillac paid them some money in advance. They sold some preferred stock, too, and raised money in every way possible.[42:09] All human development, no matter what form it takes, must be outside the rules; otherwise, we would never have anything new.[45:29] Kettering admired The Wright Brothers and all they did in overcoming obstacles to successful flight. Those obstacles were psychological as well as physical, for it was commonly believed then that heavier-than-air flight was impossible.  “The Wright Brothers,” Kettering said, “flew right through the smoke screen of impossibility.”[46:08] I have always had a rule for myself. Never fly when the birds don't, because they have had a lot of experience.[49:22] The destruction of a theory is of no consequence for theories are only steppingstones. More great scientific developments have been made by stumbling than by what is thought of as science. In my opinion an ounce of experimentation is worth a pound of theory.[50:57] Ket hates committees: Mrs. Kettering read about Lindbergh's solo flight across the Atlantic, she said to her husband, “How wonderful that he did it all alone!” “It would have been still more wonderful,” Kettering replied, “if he had done it with a committee.”[51:30] We find that in research a certain amount of intelligent ignorance is essential to progress; for, if you know too much, you won't try the thing.[54:42] New ideas are the hardest things in the world to merchandise.[56:03] So great was his respect for independent thought and initiative in others that it was often difficult for those working on a project to find out just what he himself thought ought to be done in a given circumstance. He was careful not to stamp out a spark of fire in anyone. Instead, he would fan it to a bright glow. [57:31] He has been an inspiration to me and to the whole organization, particularly in directing our thoughts and our imagination and our activities toward doing a better job technically and the tremendous importance of technological progress.[1:00:07] You have to try things: Action without intelligence is a form of insanity, but intelligence without action is the greatest form of stupidity in the world.[1:00:19] In putting out new things troubles are not the exception. They are the rule. That is why I have said on so many occasions that the price of progress is trouble.[1:03:16] Let the competition think you are crazy. By the time they get it it will be too late: If you will help them keep on thinking that, we'll not be bothered with competition during the years in which we are working out the bugs and developing a really good locomotive.[1:05:14] It is not what two groups do alike that matters. It's what they do differently that is liable to count.[1:05:47] There are no places in an industrial situation where anyone can sit and rest. It is a question of change, change, change all the time. You can't have profit without progress.[1:06:18] We don't know enough to plan new industries: You can't plan industries, because you can't tell whether something is going to be an industry or not when you see it, and the chances are that it grows up right in front of you without ever being recognized as being an industry. Who planned the automobile industry? Nobody thought anything of it at all. It grew in spite of planning.[1:08:22] Because the field of human knowledge is so far from complete, he thinks our schools ought to teach that we know very little about anything.[1:09:04] The greatest thing that most fellows are lacking today is the fool trait of jumping into something and sticking at it until they come out all right.[1:09:54] He seems to have a complete absence of any timidity whatsoever. [1:10:54] I can conceive of nothing more foolish than to say the world is finished. We are not at the end of our progress but at the beginning. —“I have listened to every episode released and look forward to every episode that comes out. The only criticism I would have is that after each podcast I usually want to buy the book because I am interested, so my poor wallet suffers.”— GarethBe like Gareth. Buy a book. It's good for you. It's good for Founders. A list of all the books featured on Founders Podcast.

What I learned from reading Professional Amateur: The Biography of Charles Franklin Kettering by Thomas BoydIf you want to listen to the full episode you’ll need to upgrade to the Misfit feed. You will get access to every full episode. These episodes are available nowhere else. Upgrade now.Notes and quotes from Founders #125If you had to summarize Charles Kettering this is the way you would do it: “As symbol of progress and the American way of life—as creator of ideas and builder of industries and employment—as inspirer of men to nobler thoughts and greater accomplishments—as foe of ignorance and discouragement—as friend of learning and optimistic resolve—Charles F. Kettering stands among the great men of all time.” He was an American inventor, engineer, businessman, and the holder of 186 patents. He was a founder of Delco, and was head of research at General Motors from 1920 to 1947. Among his most widely used automotive developments were the electrical starting motor and leaded gasoline. He was also responsible for the invention of Freon refrigerant for refrigeration and air conditioning systems. He developed  the world's first aerial missile. He led the advancement of practical, lightweight two-stroke diesel engines, revolutionizing the locomotive and heavy equipment industries. This is Ket talking about why it is so important to approach your work with the mindset that you are a professional amateur: We are simply professional amateurs. We are amateurs because we are doing things for the first time. We are professional because we know we are going to have a lot of trouble. The price of progress is trouble. And I don’t think the price is too high. There is a quote from Thomas Edison that says “We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything.” Ket has that same belief. This is Ket echoing Thomas Edison: “In reality, we have only begun to knock a few chips from the great quarry of knowledge that has been given us to dig out and use. We are like the two fellows who started to walk from New York to San Francisco. When they got over into New Jersey, one said: “We must be pretty nearly there. We have been walking a long, long time.” That is just how we are in what we know technically. We have just barely begun. I am enthusiastic about being an American because I came from the hills in Ohio. I was a hillbilly.  I thought the only thing involved in opportunity was whether I knew how to think with my head and how to do with my hands. One lesson from his childhood that stuck with him his whole life is that you need to only worry about things you can control. One of the older men is teaching him this through a story: Besides learning about water power and flour mills, he got from the wise old miller some bits of philosophy which he stored in his young mind. “A lot of people are bound to worry,” the miller once told him. “If you can do something about it, you ought to worry. I would think there was something wrong with you if you didn’t. But if you can’t do anything, then worrying is just like running this mill when there is no grist to grind. All that does is to wear out the mill.” He is not interested in rote memorization. He wants to understand the principles behind the thing. He wants to know the why. The man from whom he learned most was Hiram Sweet, the wagon maker. But Sweet was more than a wagon maker. He was, as Kettering said long afterward, “an engineer of such keen ability as to be remarkable. You would no more think of running across such a man in a small town than you would of flying without a flying machine.” Hiram Sweet had invented and built a self-computing cash register which was in daily use at the drugstore. He had also made an astronomical clock. “Where did you find out all this?” Kettering asked Sweet. “I work in this wagon shop ten hours a day,” he replied, “from six-thirty in the morning until five-thirty in the afternoon; and when I have no wagon work to do I work on Sweet’s head.” Years afterward, when Kettering had become a noted man, he recalled the days spent in Sweet’s wagon shop, “Letting him work on my head . . . I learned more from that old wagon maker than I did in college. The world was so wonderful and he knew so little about it that he hated to sleep.” Ket got what he said later was one of the important lessons he learned in college. He learned it from the eminent actor, Joseph Jefferson. Jefferson, together with his company, came to the university town to play his famous part of Rip Van Winkle. One of the men asked him how often he had played the part of Rip Van Winkle. The great actor told just how many hundreds of times he had played Rip. “Don’t you get terribly tired doing it so often?” he was asked. “Yes, I did get tired after a while. But the people wanted Rip. And so I went on playing him. I said to myself, ‘It doesn’t matter how you feel. Your job is to entertain the audience.’ Then I made up my mind that I would try to portray Rip Van Winkle just a little better each time. And that constant effort at improving the part has kept up my interest and enthusiasm.” There is a time during Henry Ford’s third attempt at building an automobile manufacturing company. And he comes to see Charlie Sorensen. He's like, “You know what? We're about to run out of money. I guess I'm just not going be able to accomplish this goal.” There's this conversation that takes place between Henry and Charlie and at the end, Ford is fired back up. Ford was like “I felt like quitting at the beginning of the conversation. Now I don't.” A few short years later, he winds up attaining his life goal of building a car so inexpensively that the average person can have it. I think that’s important. There's so many times in Ford’s life story that he wants to quit, that he's disheartened. The obstacle of not knowing how never kept him from undertaking anything he thought needed to be done. “It is a fundamental rule with me,” he said once, “that if I want to do something I start, whether I know how or not. . . . As a rule you can find that out by trying.” Every great improvement has come after repeated failures. Virtually nothing comes out right the first time. Failures, repeated failures, are finger posts on the road to achievement. Remembering the loyal support she (his wife) gave him during that trying period and afterward, Kettering said of her, “She was a great help in those early struggles, for she never got discouraged.” After she passes away from cancer he says she was the only thing in his life that he never tried to improve. How Ket and his partner financed their company: To get even that small endeavor under way Kettering and Deeds had to put in all the money they could scrape up, and they mortgaged everything they had. Deeds put a mortgage on his house and Kettering on a lot that he owned. Both borrowed money on their life insurance policies. They also put up their patents and the contract with Cadillac as collateral for a loan from the bank. Cadillac paid them some money in advance. They sold some preferred stock, too, and raised money in every way possible. All human development, no matter what form it takes, must be outside the rules; otherwise, we would never have anything new. Kettering admired The Wright Brothers and all they did in overcoming obstacles to successful flight. Those obstacles were psychological as well as physical, for it was commonly believed then that heavier-than-air flight was impossible.  “The Wright Brothers,” Kettering said, “flew right through the smoke screen of impossibility.” I have always had a rule for myself. Never fly when the birds don’t, because they have had a lot of experience. The destruction of a theory is of no consequence for theories are only steppingstones. More great scientific developments have been made by stumbling than by what is thought of as science. In my opinion an ounce of experimentation is worth a pound of theory. Ket hates committees: Mrs. Kettering read about Lindbergh’s solo flight across the Atlantic, she said to her husband, “How wonderful that he did it all alone!” “It would have been still more wonderful,” Kettering replied, “if he had done it with a committee.” We find that in research a certain amount of intelligent ignorance is essential to progress; for, if you know too much, you won’t try the thing. New ideas are the hardest things in the world to merchandise. So great was his respect for independent thought and initiative in others that it was often difficult for those working on a project to find out just what he himself thought ought to be done in a given circumstance. He was careful not to stamp out a spark of fire in anyone. Instead, he would fan it to a bright glow.  He has been an inspiration to me and to the whole organization, particularly in directing our thoughts and our imagination and our activities toward doing a better job technically and the tremendous importance of technological progress. You have to try things: Action without intelligence is a form of insanity, but intelligence without action is the greatest form of stupidity in the world. In putting out new things troubles are not the exception. They are the rule. That is why I have said on so many occasions that the price of progress is trouble. Let the competition think you are crazy. By the time they get it it will be too late: If you will help them keep on thinking that, we’ll not be bothered with competition during the years in which we are working out the bugs and developing a really good locomotive. It is not what two groups do alike that matters. It’s what they do differently that is liable to count. There are no places in an industrial situation where anyone can sit and rest. It is a question of change, change, change all the time. You can’t have profit without progress. We don’t know enough to plan new industries: You can’t plan industries, because you can’t tell whether something is going to be an industry or not when you see it, and the chances are that it grows up right in front of you without ever being recognized as being an industry. Who planned the automobile industry? Nobody thought anything of it at all. It grew in spite of planning. Because the field of human knowledge is so far from complete, he thinks our schools ought to teach that we know very little about anything. The greatest thing that most fellows are lacking today is the fool trait of jumping into something and sticking at it until they come out all right. He seems to have a complete absence of any timidity whatsoever.  I can conceive of nothing more foolish than to say the world is finished. We are not at the end of our progress but at the beginning. Listen to the full episode now by upgrading to the Misfit feed: If you want to listen to the full episode you’ll need to upgrade to the Misfit feed. You will get access to every full episode. These episodes are available nowhere else. Upgrade now.

(00:00) Local News Chat: Oshkosh Arena & Nursing Homes (10:00) Kristen Scheuerman Explains Court Stay-Home Ruling(23:30) Your Take on Lifting WI's Extended Stay-Home Order(42:00) Rep Jim Steineke Offers the Legislature's Perspective(53:30) Admin Sec Joel Brennan Offers Executive Perspective (65:30) Charles Franklin Talks Public Opinion on Stay-Home (96:30) The Takeaway: Good Storytelling Requires a Vision

(00:00) Local News Chat: Oshkosh Council & UW Changes (20:45) Your Take on Excessive Use of Executive Authority (41:30) Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll, on COVID Changes (63:00) The Professors on WI Election, World without Sports (95:00) The Takeaway: Rituals Abound in Our Daily Lives

The Thompson Center was pleased to be joined by Charles Franklin, Professor of Law and Public Policy and Director of the highly esteemed Marquette Law School Poll since its creation in 2012. Franklin discussed the most recent polling data from Wisconsin looking at the populations views on the presidential race, presidential job approval, Wisconsin Governor Evers approval, the economic outlook, various healthcare systems, and thoughts on the most recent stimulus package passed by congress.

On today's Bulwark Podcast, Charles Franklin from the Marquette University Law School Poll joins host Charlie Sykes to talk about the upcoming Democratic primary elections, the art of polling Wisconsinites, and a look at how the demographics of Wisconsin have shifted in recent years. Special Guest: Charles Franklin.

(00:00) Local News Chat: Coronavirus & Mayor Candidates (10:47) Sen Ron Johnson on Impeachment & What's Next (19:28) Your Take on WI's Black History Month Controversy (39:35) Charles Franklin on Moderate Voters & Iowa Results (59:00) The Professors on Impeachment & Iowa Caucuses (91:35) The Takeaway: Representation in Leadership Matters

(00:00) Local News Chat: Oshkosh Condos & Road Safety (10:38) Sen Ron Johnson on Trump Visit & Impeachment (20:18) Your Take on Addressing Rural/Urban Housing (40:14) Charles Franklin on Latest Marquette Poll Results (60:23) "Primary School:" Dropouts, Fundraising & Polls (93:00) The Takeaway: Ideas Can Be Dangerous Weapons

Donald Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by just 27,000 votes. Now, to beat him in 2020, it is crucial that Democrats win the state. A new poll from Marquette University Law School finds that Democrats face an uphill battle and, it seems, the impeachment hearings in Washington aren’t helping them. Charles Franklin, who runs the Marquette poll, joins the podcast today to talk about why Wisconsinites believe that the president pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, but they also don't think it was an impeachable offense. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

(0:00) Local News Chat: Diemel Bros & Yellow Perch (19:15) Your Take on Foxconn Innovation Centers (38:11) WI Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly (58:31) Charles Franklin on Marquette Poll Results (91:46) The Takeaway: Letting Others Take Control

(0:00) Local News Chat: Arena Incentives & Neighbor Day (10:43) Fox Valley Restaurant Week: Wilder's Bistro (18:44) Your Take on Youth Members of City Committees (38:35) Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll Dir, on Primary & Guns (58:44) Presidential Primary Roundup (1:30:13) The Takeaway: Blindsiding Others Doesn't Protect Them

Tom Bevan (09/08/2019) Phil Wegmann, Real Clear Politics, looks at Elizabeth Warren's chances of being the DNC front-runner. Dr. Charles Franklin, PollsAndVotes.com looks at the polls for the presidential candidates, including how the democrats are doing up against the president. Carl Cannon, Real Clear Politics, explains how President Trump planned a meeting with the Taliban on the anniversary week of 9/11, plus Sharpie-gate.

We chat with Charles Franklin, Co-Owner of The Firm, a telecommunications company that specializes in helping business owners find savings for internet services, land lines and cell phone plans.

(0:00) Local News Chat: Storm Damage & School Records (11:35) Winnebago Cty Bd Sup Paul Eisen on Busby Censure (19:24) Your Take on AASD's New Approach to Chronic Truancy (36:41) Cody Splitt Celebrates 100 Years of Public Service (55:12) Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll Dir, on Who Votes in WI (1:25:33) The Takeaway: Thoughts, Not Time, Reveal What Matters

(0:00) Local News Chat: Wintry Weather & Kaukauna Events (10:19) Charles Franklin on Marquette Law School Poll Results (19:16) Your Take on Saving Liberal Arts Majors at UW-SP (38:05) Sen Dan Feyen on Partisanship & State Budget (59:07) Dan Kaufman, author of "The Fall of Wisconsin" (1:29:42) The Takeaway: Exercise Discretion in Moderation Too

Fri-YAY Local News Chat with WBAY's Emily Matesic (0:00)Charles Franklin, Marquette Poll Director, Talks Results (11:55)Your Take on What Poll Results Mean for Policy (21:08)John Burgland, GM, Fox River Mall Comings & Goings (40:22)South of the Border Offerings for Oshkosh Eat Week (1:01:32)What's Goin' On with Mary Rhode, Fox Cities CVB (1:12:02)Sound Off on State of the State & Shutdown Fight (1:22:00)The Takeaway: Overwhelm Nihilism If You Care (1:31:32)

Marquette University Law School pollster Charles Franklin breaks down the latest numbers on midterm elections, approval ratings and more. Support the show.

A conversation with Charles Franklin, Marquette University Law School pollster, about the latest findings on the midterm elections, approval ratings, and issues of the day. Support the show.

Charles Franklin joins Scott Warras

Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette University Law School poll, chats with Jessie Opoien about how he conducts the poll, why he likes it when other firms poll in Wisconsin and what pollsters missed in 2016. Support the show.

Ken Doyle, senior editor for money and politics at Bloomberg Government, discusses President Trump’s recent comments on Fox News, where he said that almost anyone who runs for office in the United States has campaign finance violations. Plus, a look at the recent guilty plea by former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen. Plus, Charles Franklin, professor of law and public policy and director of the Marquette Law School Poll, discusses the latest data on the Wisconsin midterm elections, where Democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin is maintaining a slim lead over Republican challenger Leah Vukmir. They speak with Bloomberg's Peter Barnes and June Grasso. 

Ken Doyle, senior editor for money and politics at Bloomberg Government, discusses President Trump's recent comments on Fox News, where he said that almost anyone who runs for office in the United States has campaign finance violations. Plus, a look at the recent guilty plea by former Trump personal lawyer Michael Cohen. Plus, Charles Franklin, professor of law and public policy and director of the Marquette Law School Poll, discusses the latest data on the Wisconsin midterm elections, where Democratic incumbent Tammy Baldwin is maintaining a slim lead over Republican challenger Leah Vukmir. They speak with Bloomberg's Peter Barnes and June Grasso.  Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Not That Kind Of Biscuit We've made it past Memorial Day! What the heck is GDPR and why do I keep getting emails about it? Will Kristen trade her personal data for Swedish translations? What about ads for pretty shoes?Who doesn't love biscuits? Monsters, that's who. Find us @ksoltisanderson @margieomero @thepollsters. Poll of the Week: How Adults of Different Ages Feel About Data Privacy? Kristen isn't giving up personal data for Swedish translations. Most U.S. Adults in Poll Unwilling to Share Personal Data for Ads to Keep a Service Free Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook says they won't be giving users an option to pay to skip the ads. Trumplandia Effectively 45% approval! But what does that mean?  Trump Job Approval Echelon Insights has some new data on how people feel about Russia and the Trump Campaign, his handling of North Korea and Iran, and his tweeting—but you have to listen to find out what it is! More new Echelon Insight data you have to listen to get...How do people get their news?How often do people use various social media platforms?Is tech good or bad for society? Teens and the Internet Pew Research has new data on Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018 Generic Ballot Update FiveThirtyEight on who's winning the race for Congress Josh Barro & Charles Franklin (separately) wrote about how the reuters/ipsos poll is volatile, making it seem like gen ballot was closing. Were the 2016 polls accurate? FiveThirtyEight has the answer!And which pollsters should you trust? American Communities Pew: what divides and unites urban, suburban, and rural communities? That's a Cookie, Dammit! YouGov gets the skinny on Brits' favorite “biscuits” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Speaker of the House of Representatives is quitting, not forced out by scandal or defeated for re-election, but quitting after only a little more than two years in office. In historical terms that is very unusual. In this episode Marc Johnson explores what has happened to the job of Speaker of the House, assesses Paul Ryan’s tenure and looks back at the last Speaker who tried to run “the people’s house” in a different way – Tom Foley of Washington. Guests are Charles Franklin, the respected head of the Marquette Law School poll and a close watcher of Wisconsin politics; Professor Josh Ryan of Utah State University, an expert on the job of Speaker; Jeff Biggs, who served as Foley’s press secretary and Seattle journalist Joel Connelly who covered Foley as Speaker and discusses his legacy. We’re all in the House on this one.

9a: Prof. Charles Franklin on polling. Also, Jordan Goodman on the national economy10a: Jeff Schadt - Youth Transition Network. Mitch also seeks some advice.

In this episode of “In the Arena,” David Byler interviews Monmouth University Polling Institute director Patrick Murray about the science behind the polls. And Tom Bevan talks with director of the Marquette poll Charles Franklin about the battle for the Badger State.

A master of color, shading, and detail, Texas painter Frank Reaugh recorded what he called "the broad opalescent prairies" as he saw them more than a century ago. His most famous works feature the Texas longhorn in its natural habitat, the Texas plains.

Charles Franklin, co-founder of Pollster.com, discusses the state of the 2008 Presidential race and logic of statistical comparisons as he heads to ABC News' Decision Desk to project the winners on Election Night.