Podcasts about political research

De economische ongelijkheid lijkt groter en groter te worden. Economen spreken er genoeg over. Maar psychologen niet zoveel. Dat is raar. Want wat doet dat eigenlijk met de psyche van mensen in de samenlevingen waar dat plaatsvindt? Psychologen Thijs Launspach en Lennard Toma bespreken wat die groeiende ongelijkheid doet voor arme, maar ook middeninkomens en rijke mensen op individueel en maatschappelijk niveau. Als ongelijkheid zoveel negatiefs met iedereen doet, lijkt het belangrijk er een stokje voor te steken. Bepaalde belastingen lijken daar een belangrijke factor in te kunnen spelen. Dan is het wel nodig dat politici daar ook naar gaan luisteren en handelen.Bronnen en ander lees- en luister- en kijkvoer:- Check hier het kanaal van Gary Stevenson, de econoom die Thijs en Lennard volgen, die veel predikt over de gevolgen van economische ongelijkheid in de samenleving: https://www.youtube.com/@garyseconomics - Hier vind je info over de World Inequality Report, waar je inkomensongelijkheid terug kunt vinden over de hele wereld: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/12/global-income-inequality-gap-report-rich-poor/ - Een stuk over de angst die rijke mensen voelen: https://jacobin.com/2017/11/rich-people-wealth-inequality-anxiety - Op Wikipedia vind je info over de geschiedenis van belastingen die in de VS gehanteerd werd: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History - Toen Rutger Bregman bij de rijksten op aarde bij het World Economic Forum pleitte voor belastingen betalen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8ijiLqfXP0&pp=ygUgdGF4ZXMgdGF4ZXMgdGF4ZXMgcnV0Z2VyIGJyZWdtYW4%3D - Check ook het boek Sander en de brug van Sander Schimmelpenninck, waar hij pleit voor belastingen verhogen op de rijken, met name erfbelasting en vermogensbelasting.Nerd-literatuur:- Easterbrook, M. J. (2021). The social psychology of economic inequality. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/243369/1/wp2021-043.pdf - Sommet, N., Morselli, D., & Spini, D. (2018). Income inequality affects the psychological health of only the people facing scarcity. Psychological Science, 29(12), 1911-1921. - Ngamaba, K. H., Panagioti, M., & Armitage, C. J. (2018). Income inequality and subjective well-being: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Quality of Life Research, 27, 577-596.- https://www.cpb.nl/de-nederlandse-economie-in-historisch-perspectief-brede-welvaart- https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2024/27/income-inequality-in-the-netherlands-is-well-below-the-eu-average#:~:text=In%202022%2C%20income%20inequality%20according,due%20to%20rising%20house%20prices. - Lipps, J., & Schraff, D. (2021). Regional inequality and institutional trust in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 60(4), 892-913.- Jordahl, H. (2009). Inequality and trust. Published as" Economic Inequality" in Svendsen, GT and Svendsen, GLH (Eds.), Handbook of Social Capital, Edward Elgar.- Kanitsar, G. (2022). The inequality-trust nexus revisited: at what level of aggregation does income inequality matter for social trust?. Social Indicators Research, 163(1), 171-195.

Conventional wisdom says that a strong economy helps incumbents, while a weak economy hurts them. But new research from University of Chicago economist Lubos Pastor titled “Political Cycles and Stock Returns” challenges this idea, suggesting that economic downturns actually push voters toward Democrats, while economic booms favor Republicans.If true, this theory could explain decades of presidential elections—and even the stock market's historic tendency to perform better under Democratic administrations. But does the data back it up?

In Leaders Getting Coffee episode 28, our guest is the former ACT Party Member of Parliament and NZCPR Founder, Dr. Muriel Newman. Dr. Newman moved to New Zealand with her family as a young girl, and brought with her an approach to her education typified by her desire not to let her parents down. That education led to a career teaching in New Zealand and subsequently the USA, before returning to New Zealand to bring up her young children. Her work as a part of Sir Michael Hill's Whangarei team led to a position as President of the local Chamber of Commerce and subsequently as a founding member of the ACT party. After nine years as an MP, she founded the New Zealand Centre for Political Research an independent public policy think tank that provides research-based analysis and commentary on matters of national interest.  NZCPR is guided by a firm belief that informed citizens are at the heart of a well-functioning democracy. During the Leaders Getting Coffee podcast, she speaks to Bruce Cotterill about the enormous challenges for the New Zealand government in the aftermath of the Ardern Hipkins Labour government, in particular the implications of unravelling the failed centralisations, bloated bureaucracies and inflated expectations of those who were set to benefit from government decisions based on race.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

One of the biggest questions of every election is: What's going on with young voters? There is endless speculation on the news about what young people care about, but very little good research examining their views on the candidates and the issues that matter most to them. The first-of-its-kind GenForward Survey changed that when it was created in 2016 at the University of Chicago.Led by renowned University of Chicago political scientist Cathy Cohen, the survey digs into what is animating young voters—especially young voters of color who are millennials and in Generation Z—and what they think of the candidates. With tight races in key swing states, young people might just hold the keys to the White House—and Cohen says that understanding what how they may vote in November is crucial to understanding the 2024 election.

Audra Archuleta joins The Great Battlefield podcast to talk about her career in politics, and her start up Luminarity AI, where they're working to leverage AI to help with political research.

Age appears to structure voting patterns in democracies around the world more today than ever before. One poll conducted before the UK's recent general election found that just 4% of 18-24 year olds intend to vote Conservative, compared to 33% of those aged 65 or older. Big age divides are evident on the European continent as well, though not always exhibiting such a clear left–right pattern, with the far-right Alternative for Germany and the National Rally in France gaining noteworthy support from the young. So what explains such divisions between the old and the young when it comes to voting? To what extent are these divisions underpinned by differences in voters' ideological preferences? And how have these differences changed over time? A new article by Tom O'Grady, Associate Professor in Political Science here at the UCL Political Science, explores exactly these questions.Mentioned in this episode:Tom O'Grady. 'Is ideological polarisation by age group growing in Europe?' European Journal of Political Research. UCL's Department of Political Science and School of Public Policy offers a uniquely stimulating environment for the study of all fields of politics, including international relations, political theory, human rights, public policy-making and administration. The Department is recognised for its world-class research and policy impact, ranking among the top departments in the UK on both the 2021 Research Excellence Framework and the latest Guardian rankings.

Alyssa Batchelor-Causey joins The Great Battlefield podcast to talk about her career, founding Hill and State, a political research firm and developing Rivalmind, an AI powered political research tool.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is hoping a peace summit will return the world's attention to Ukraine's war with Russia. But Russia's not invited and some major world leaders aren't coming. Does it have any chance of success? In this episode: Andrei Fedorov, Chairman, Fund for Political Research and Consulting, Russia. Domitilla Sagramoso, Senior Lecturer, King's College London.  Peter Zalmayev, Executive Director, Eurasia Democracy Initiative. Host: Sami Zeidan Connect with us:@AJEPodcasts on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Threads and YouTube

Muriel Newman and her organisation NZCPR (New Zealand Centre for Political Research) have a long standing campaign to prevent a tribal takeover of NZ's foreshore and seabed. With Muriel, we cover the danger to the governance of NZ ie, the Marine & Coastal Area Act, a common electoral role, media, radicalisation and its growth and the danger of a return to the Dark Ages. Share 240 with as many as you can. File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nz Haven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide. Listen here on iHeartRadio Leighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:To subscribe via iTunes click here See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Double-Helix Entanglements of Transnational Advocacy: Moral Conservative Resistance to SOGI Rights in Europe Phillip M. Ayoub is a professor in the Department of Political Science at University College London and Editor of the European Journal of Politics and Gender. He is the author of three books, including When States Come Out: Europe's Sexual Minorities and the Politics of Visibility (Cambridge University Press, 2016), and his articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, the European Journal of International Relations, the European Journal of Political Research, Mobilization, the European Political Science Review, among others.

Across a fair chunk of Europe, we've grown used to seeing little traffic light symbols on our food packets that supposedly rate the healthiness of our food. But why might Dominic's chamomile tea get a Nutri-Score rating of C, when a diet cola gets an A? And does Giorgia Meloni have a point in claiming that the ratings are biased against Italians? This week we ring up Alie de Boer, an expert on all things food labelling, to demystify the Nutri-Score system once and for all. We're also talking about why Georgia's at a crossroads between Russia and the EU, and why it's such a scary moment in German politics.  Alie is an assistant professor of nutrition and food law at Maastricht University's Venlo campus. You can watch her excellent video about Nutri-Score here. This week's Inspiration Station offerings: Marina Abramović's new exhibition and Desert Island Discs interview; Gugelhupf.  Thanks for listening! If you enjoy our podcast, we'd love it if you'd consider chipping in a few bucks a month at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/europeanspodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (many currencies are available). You can also help new listeners find the show by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠leaving us a review⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or giving us five stars on Spotify.  Other resources for this episode:  'Is Georgian Dream Digging Its Own Grave?' - Transitions, May 2024 https://tol.org/client/article/is-georgian-dream-digging-its-own-grave.html 'Are right-wing populists more likely to justify political violence?' - European Consortium for Political Research, March 2024 https://ejpr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12668?af=R 'How Italian "food nationalism" has blocked Nutri-Score nutrition labelling system in Europe' - Mediapart, January 2024 https://www.mediapart.fr/en/journal/international/060124/how-italian-food-nationalism-has-blocked-nutri-score-nutrition-labelling-system-europe  00:23 A delicious, digestible bowl of European news 02:52 Good week: Georgia's brave protesters 09:43 Bad week: German democracy 21:10 Interview: Alie de Boer on how those Nutri-Score labels on your food actually work 37:51 The Inspiration Station: Marina Abramović and gugelhupf 42:52 Happy Ending: The European Seagull Screeching Championship Producers: Morgan Childs and Katy Lee Mixing and mastering: Wojciech Oleksiak Music: Jim Barne and Mariska Martina ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Threads⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mastodon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠Bluesky⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠hello@europeanspodcast.com⁠

An exclusive poll by Ipsos for The Standard has revealed Rishi Sunak's rating as Prime Minister has slumped to the worst ever for a leader of a major party.It comes as pressure piles on the PM to call a date for the next general election, with the survey finding more than half of Britons want one held by the end of the summer. Gideon Skinner, Head of Political Research at Ipsos, explains the key findings from the poll and gives his analysis. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A leading Māori legal academic says the history of Te Tiriti o Waitangi needs to be better understood.  Many letterboxes throughout the country received copies of Sir Apirana Ngata's explanation of The Treaty of Waitangi, printed and distributed by the right-wing think-tank the New Zealand Centre for Political Research.  New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has brandished copies of Sir Apirana's account on several occasions, including televised election campaign debates last year.  The lead academic in Māori laws and philosophy programme at Te Wananga o Raukawa, Carwyn Jones, says the discussion about Te Tiriti has moved on over the past century.  Jones spoke to Corin Dann.

You could be driving home, on your usual route, and you are lost in thought. Next thing you know you are home, and you don't remember having taken any of the turns. That is intuition, what many of us use to think about politics. But democratic politics requires that we say stop, you need to reassess and come to a different decision. That's reflection.Are voters rational beings, choosing carefully whom to vote for based on their preferences and most desirable outcomes? Or are they more like cheerleaders, led by emotion and affect towards their preferred political parties? This heated and incredibly pertinent debate is the focus of this episode. Dr. Kevin Arceneaux delves into the topic of electoral choice, and revisits many of the arguments made in his book Taming Intuition, where he argues that every voter is different in the way he reaches a decision, and that some voters are more likely to be led astray by their gut feeling than others. Borrowing from social psychology, Arceneaux brings us through many interesting considerations of why voters behave the way they do, what connection that may have with increasing polarization, and how we can use reflection to, indeed, tame our intuition.Kevin (Vin) Arceneaux is Professor of Political Science at the Centre for Political Research at Sciences Po Paris (CEVIPOF) since June 2021. He studies how people make political decisions. He has published articles on psychological biases, the influence of partisan campaigns on voting behavior, and the role of human biology in explaining individual variation in predispositions.Additional resourceKevin Arceneaux, Ryan J. Vander Wielen. Taming intuition: how reflection minimizes partisan reasoning and promotes democratic accountability. Cambridge University Press, 2017.Recorded on 24th November 2023Conversations with Sergei GURIEV  is a podcast by Sciences Po. Hélène NAUDET supervised the production of this series., with the help of Blanca GONZALEZ MARTINEZ, Sciences Po Master student in Political Science. The Sciences Po audio department produced and mixed it.Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Борис Гуселетов - родился и до 5 лет жил в Сибири. С 5 до 45 лет жил в Свердловске, на Урале. Окончил уральский политехнический институт металлургический факультет. С 3 курса он занимался наукой. После окончания института остался работать на кафедре, в 28 лет защитил кандидатскую диссертацию. Занимался общественной деятельностью стройотряды, комсомол. В 30 лет перешёл работать в другой вуз доцентом. С началом перестройки вступил в КПСС, в 1990 г. Был делегатом последнего съезда КПСС, на нем несколько раз выступал. По решению Горбачева избран членом ЦК КПСС. После развала СССР участвовал в создании ряда социал- демократических партий. В 2000 г. По приглашению Горбачева переехал в Москву, был его заместителем в партии. До 2016 г. Работал на руководящих постах в ряде партий. Был помощником депутата Госдумы. В 2013 г. Защитил докторскую диссертацию по политическим наукам. В 2016 г. Перешёл работать в институт Европы РАН. С 2021 г. Работает и в институте социально политических исследований РАН. Автор 300 статей. Boris Guseletov was born and lived in Siberia until he was 5 years old. From 5 to 45 years old he lived in Sverdlovsk, in the Urals. Graduated from the Ural Polytechnic Institute, Metallurgical Faculty. From the 3rd year he studied science. After graduating from the institute, he remained to work at the department and defended his Ph.D. thesis at the age of 28. He was involved in social activities, student's construction brigades, and the Komsomol. At the age of 30, he moved to work at another university as an assistant professor. With the beginning of perestroika, he joined the CPSU in 1990. He was a delegate to the last congress of the CPSU, and spoke at it several times. By decision of Gorbachev, he was elected a member of the CPSU Central Committee. After the collapse of the USSR, he participated in the creation of a number of social democratic parties. In 2000, at the invitation of Gorbachev, he moved to Moscow and was his deputy in the party. Until 2016, he worked in leadership positions in a number of parties. He was an assistant to a State Duma deputy. In 2013, he defended his doctoral dissertation in political science. In 2016, he moved to work at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 2021, he has also been working at the Institute of Social and Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Author of 300 articles. FIND BORIS ON SOCIAL MEDIA Facebook ================================SUPPORT & CONNECT:Support on Patreon: ⁠https://www.patreon.com/denofrich⁠Twitter: ⁠https://twitter.com/denofrich⁠Facebook: ⁠https://www.facebook.com/mark.develman/⁠YouTube: ⁠https://www.youtube.com/denofrich⁠Instagram: ⁠https://www.instagram.com/den_of_rich/⁠Hashtag: #denofrich© Copyright 2023 Den of Rich. All rights reserved.

Episode Notes

This week Ivan Vejvoda is joined by Johns Hopkins University - School of Advanced International Studies adjunct professor and former foreign policy advisor to the Romanian presidential administration Veronica Anghel to discuss the state of EU enlargement policy in 2023. As the continent redefines itself, its security and its long-term objectives in the shadow of the full scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, what is the state of play for candidate countries seeking to join the European Union? Will this prove to be a moment when the expansion of the EU's border to encompass Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans - a project that many considered stalled -can be revived? How have the requirements for entry and justification for enlargement changed since the fall of communism in the early 90s? Are unresolved border questions and the rise of right wing populism affecting the way that the EU27 approaches these questions? Veronica Anghel is a Lecturer in Risk in International Politics and Economics at Johns Hopkins University and a Visiting Fellow at the European University Institute EUI. She has held research fellowships at several institutions, including Stanford University and the Institute for Central Europe. She is a 'Robert Elgie' Editorial Fellow with the 'Government and Opposition' journal. Dr. Anghel received her PhD from the University of Bucharest in co-direction with the University of Bordeaux. In addition to her academic work, Dr. Anghel has served as a foreign affairs advisor for the Romanian Presidential Administration and a Diplomatic Adviser for the Romanian Senate. She provides risk analysis for consultancy firms on topics such as European integration and rule of law issues in post-communist Europe. In 2020, Dr. Anghel was awarded the ‘Rising Star' Award by the European Consortium of Political Research. She is a Europe's Futures fellow at IWM this year.Find Veronica on Twitter @anghel_v1Ivan Vejvoda  is Head of the Europe's Futures program at IWM where, in cooperation with leading European organisations and think tanks IWM and ERSTE Foundation have joined forces to tackle some of the most crucial topics: nexus of borders and migration, deterioration in rule of law and democracy and European Union's enlargement prospects.The Institute for Human Sciences (IWM) is an independent institute for advanced study in the humanities and social sciences. Since its foundation in 1982, it has promoted intellectual exchange between East and West, between academia and society, and between a variety of disciplines and schools of thought. In this way, the IWM has become a vibrant center of intellectual life in Vienna.The IWM is a community of scholars pursuing advanced research in the humanities and social sciences. For nearly four decades, the Institute has promoted intellectual exchange across disciplines, between academia and society, and among regions of the world. It hosts more than a hundred fellows each year, organizes public exchanges, and publishes books, articles, and digital fora. you can find IWM's website at:https://www.iwm.at/  

Episode 33: Today on The Gender Card, Griffith University phd candidate Sofia Ammassari tells us about her research across three countries with Duncan McDonnell from Griffith University and Marco Valbruzzi from the University of Naples - looking at how gender impacts young people's political ambitions. Studies have long and consistently shown that women tend to be less politically aspirational than men, as they are less interested in standing for election as candidates. But Sofia's research found that women are as likely as men to want to pursue a political career within the party's organisation. These findings are important because they help debunk well established myths around women being less politically motivated than men, when in reality, it is more the type of politlcal career that is important. These results were recently published in the European Journal of Political Research, providing new insights into the gendered nature of political ambition.@AmmassariSofia @EJPRjournal See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1967-ben született Désen, (Kolozsvár környéke). Apai ágon mezőségi városi, anyai ágon alföldi falusi értelmiségi család. A szülei történelem-magyar szakon tanultak, édesapja színháztörténész volt. 1976-ben áttelepült a család Magyarországra. Aktívan részt vett a nyolcvanas évek politikai mozgalmaiban (Dialógus békemozgalom, Raoul Wallenberg Egyesület, Phralipe, független diákönkormányzatok), a Fidesz bölcsészkari csoportjának megalakítója, 1990-ben a párt kisebbségi szakértője, a Pro Minoritate alapítvány kuratóriumának tagja. 1992-ben az Amszterdami Egyetemen összehasonlító társadalomtudományokban mesterfokú diplomát kapott. 1993-ban történészi és szociológusi diplomát szerzett az Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetemen. 1994-ben a Közép-európai Egyetemen politikatudományi mesteri fokozatot nyert el. PhD-t 1998-ban szerzett. 1993-1996 között a Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Politikatudományi Intézetének tudományos segédmunkatársa. 1995-1998 között a Közép-európai Egyetem (CEU) Politikatudományi Tanszékének kutatási asszisztense. 1998 óta a Közép-európai Egyetem tanára, 2013 óta az egyetem professzora. 2010-2012 között a CEU Politikatudományok, Nemzetközi Kapcsolatok és Közpolitika Doktori Iskolájának igazgatója. 2016 óta a CEU rektorhelyettese. 2017-ben a kormánnyal folytatott tárgyalások résztvevője. Cikkei olyan folyóiratokban jelentek meg, mint a Political Psychology, European Journal of Political Research, Political Studies, West European Politics, Party Politics, Political Studies, Europe-Asia Studies, Problems of Post-Communism, Journal of Ideologies vagy European Review. A Fernando Casal Bertoa-val közösen írt Party System Closure az Oxford University Press gondozásában jelent meg 2021-ben. Jelenleg egyetemi tanár a bécsi CEU-n és kutató a CEU budapesti Demokrácia Intézetében. Kutatási érdeklődésének középpontjában a pártpolitika, az összehasonlító kormányzás, az egyházi és államviszonyok, valamint a politikai pszichológia (különösen a tekintélyelvűség, az előítéletek és a politikai tolerancia) állnak. Vendégkutatóságok: 1994-1995 Leideni Egyetem, Hollandia 2000 Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington DC 2000–2001 Netherlands Institute of Advanced Study (NIAS) 2002–2003 Helen Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame, U.S.A. 2005-2007 European University Institute, Firenze, Olaszország 2014-2015 Johns Hopkins University, U.S.A. 2020-2021 Oxfordi Egyetem, Politikatudományi Tanszék és Pembroke College Díjak: 2000: Erdei Ferenc Díj 2003: Rudolf Wildenmann Díj 2004: Bibó István Díj 2020: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, Akadémiai Díj 2022: Legjobb könyv (2019-2022) Spanyol Politikatudományi Társaság: Party System Closure. Party Alliances, Government Alternatives and Democracy in Europe (Fernando Casal-Bértoa-vaé együtt). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021 #ceu #professzor #ausztria

This episode of Politics Talk focuses on the challenges facing Rishi Sunak, after his first month as Prime Minister. Gideon Skinner is joined by Cameron Garrett and Holly Day, to discuss recent polling on the party leaders, the economy in light of the recent Autumn Statement, and immigration. All the polls and projects mentioned in the episode are linked below: Ipsos poll for Sky News Ipsos poll for Deloitte Ipsos poll for British Future Ipsos Issues Index – November 2022 Ipsos Veracity Index 2022   This will be the final Politics Talk episode for 2022, with an hour-long episode expected in December, that merges Politics Talk and our other podcast series, Public and Society. This episode will look over the last year, picking out key highlights and discussions. Keep an eye out for this episode!   Subscribe to our YouTube channel to stay up to date with Politics Talk episodes and other Ipsos content, and listen to Ipsos UK Podcast: Politics Talk, wherever you get your podcasts.   Gideon Skinner, UK Head of Political Research, Ipsos Cameron Garrett, Research Manager, Public Affairs, Ipsos Holly Day, Senior Research Executive, Public Affairs, Ipsos  

On this week's podcast: We speak to Muriel Newman, from the NZ Centre for Political Research, on why New Zealanders need to make their voices heard.We talk separatist government, the water debate (that shouldn't even be happening), He Puapua (whatever that means), farming, and other damage the Arden government is inflicting on New Zealand.And Patrick Basham, from the Democracy Institute, explains how the American midterm election results deserve a different perspective.As requested, a list of climate books that tell a different story.And, finally, we go to The Mailroom with Mrs Producer. File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nz Haven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide. Listen here on iHeartRadio Leighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:To subscribe via iTunes click here See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This month's Politics Talk podcast discusses public opinion on an unprecedented few days of turmoil in Westminster.  Gideon Skinner is joined by Cameron Garrett and Holly Day analyse the public opinion, which underpins some of the tumultuous changes that have occurred in Westminster over the last few days. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to stay up to date with Politics Talk episodes and other Ipsos content. Listen to Ipsos UK Podcast: Politics Talk, wherever you get your podcasts.   Gideon Skinner, UK Head of Political Research, Ipsos gideon.skinner@ipsos.com @GideonSkinner Cameron Garrett, Research Manager, Ipsos cameron.garrett@ipsos.com @CameronGarrett_ Holly Day, Senior Research Executive, Ipsos holly.day@ipsos.com @HollyDayIpsos   Recorded 18.10.22   [Politics Talk replaces Political Monitor and will be called Politics Talk going forwards.]

Exit polls! Hyperactive TV anchors shouting away their triumphant predictions on result days, and news channel tickers flashing numbers that are constantly changing. This is a site familiar to all of us, during the days of election coverages. In this episode of Explain Like I'm 10 , Meghnad is in conversation with Pradeep Gupta, the Chairman and Managing Director of Axis My India and comedian Abbas Momin as they discuss how exactly is an exit poll conducted and what are the nitty-gritties of it, by using simple terms and examples that can be understood by someone say, 10 years old! Find Abbas' show has it Aged Well? : https://youtu.be/Yo9atEy8_VkFollow Abbas on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/abbasmomin88/?hl=enFollow Pradeep on Twitter: https://twitter.com/PradeepGuptaAMIFind our host Meghnad on his social handles:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/meghnads/?h...Twitter: https://twitter.com/MemeghnadLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/meghnad-s...See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/national-security

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/eastern-european-studies

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From Austria to New Zealand, coalition governments often pave the road to foreign policy. In Western Europe, nearly 90 percent of postwar governments include two or more political parties. Israel, the Middle East's only consolidated democracy according to many, has never experienced single-party rule in its history. Even the United Kingdom, known for its long streak of single-party rule, now navigates multiparty cabinets. Coalitions are everywhere, but we still have little understanding of how they act in foreign affairs. History shows that coalitions can sometime engage in powerful international commitments such as participating in military operations, but at other times, they postpone their decisions, water down their policy positions, or promise to do less than they otherwise would. What explains these differences in behavior? Sibel Oktay's book Governing Abroad: Coalition Politics and Foreign Policy in Europe (U Michigan Press, 2022) unpacks the little-known world of coalition governments to find out. Oktay argues that the specific constellation of parties in government explains why some coalitions can make more assertive foreign policy decisions than others. Building on the rich literature in political science on coalitions, legislatures, and voting behavior, the book weaves together sophisticated statistical analyses of foreign policy events across thirty European countries alongside in-depth case studies from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Finland. It brings political parties back into the study of foreign policy, demonstrating that the size of the coalition, the ideological proximity of the governing parties, and their relationship with the parliamentary opposition together influence the government's ability to act in the international arena. This book challenges our existing perceptions about the constraints and weaknesses of coalition governments. It sheds new light on the conditions that allow them to act decisively abroad. Sibel Oktay is associate professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield and a nonresident senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Her research focuses on the interaction between domestic politics and foreign policy, and how leaders influence those relationships. She has published in the European Journal of Political Research, British Journal of Politics and International Affairs, and European Security, among others. She has also written for outlets including War On The Rocks, The Hill, and Responsible Statecraft. She is a 2022-2023 recipient of the Jefferson Science Fellowship from the U.S. Department of State. Lamis Abdelaaty is an associate professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She is the author of Discrimination and Delegation: Explaining State Responses to Refugees (Oxford University Press, 2021). Email her comments at labdelaa@syr.edu or tweet to @LAbdelaaty. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode features The Center For Deep Political Research which consists of Randy Benson, J.L. Worcester, David Denton, Rich Bartholomew and Joe Green. Each conversation with them individually and learning not only from the JFK assassination but also the deep ties of politics and why they formed a group to show the signs and underlying message of events in political agendas. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/out-of-the-blank-podcast/support

Chiara Cordelli"Privatocrazia"Perché privatizzare è un rischio per lo Stato democraticoMondadori Editorehttps://www.mondadori.it/I confini tra il pubblico e il privato sono sempre più indefiniti. Il ruolo dello Stato moderno, nato per separare pubblico e privato, è cambiato profondamente negli ultimi anni e ha subito radicali trasformazioni nel modo di governare e amministrare la cosa pubblica. Viviamo sempre di più nell'era dello Stato privatizzato, o, per meglio dire, in una privatocrazia, dove lo Stato dirige, ma è il privato che spesso gestisce.Se prima governare significava spendere e amministrare direttamente, ora non di rado equivale a coordinare e incentivare una serie di attori privati sfruttandone le capacità organizzative e l'autonomia decisionale. Una privatizzazione incalzante che è ormai un fenomeno di scala globale: per decenni i governi di tutto il mondo hanno promesso una maggiore efficienza rivolgendosi a società private per fornire beni pubblici, quali la sanità, l'istruzione e i trasporti. Tragicamente, la pandemia di Covid-19 ha mostrato la falsità di tale promessa, mettendo in luce l'inefficienza e l'ingiustizia di molti sistemi privatizzati. In Italia, ad esempio, sono emersi i limiti della privatizzazione della sanità; prima ancora, dell'istruzione. Ma la minaccia più profonda che la privatizzazione pone al nostro ordine democratico, mettendo in discussione la sua stessa legittimità, resta invisibile e assente dal dibattito pubblico.Affrontando il tema del rapporto tra pubblico e privato da un punto di vista politico, e non in termini di mera efficienza economica, Chiara Cordelli propone una riflessione sulla trasformazione dello Stato contemporaneo. Una diagnosi lucida, che dimostra come la tendenza a privatizzare metta a rischio la legittimità dello Stato democratico stesso, compromettendo la ragione fondamentale per la quale esso esiste. Un'analisi quanto mai necessaria, che permette di comprendere la natura del conflitto profondo tra privatizzazione e legittimità democratica e di immaginare un nuovo modo di concepire e gestire collettivamente la cosa pubblica.Chiara Cordelli, filosofa, è professoressa associata presso il Dipartimento di Scienze politiche dell'Università di Chicago. Il suo primo libro, The Privatized State (Princeton University Press, 2020), ha ricevuto nel 2021 il premio come miglior primo libro di filosofia politica dall'European Consortium for Political Research. È stata ricercatrice in visita a Harvard, Princeton e Stanford e ha scritto di filosofia e politica per riviste e quotidiani quali «The Guardian» e «Boston Review».IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda for processing are 'ludicrous' and 'not legal', says Labour's Feryal Clark. The MP for Enfield North tells Bloomberg Westminster's Yuan Potts the U.K. needs a more humane immigration policy. Plus: three weeks ahead of the local elections, we get the latest polling with Gideon Skinner, Head of Political Research at Ipsos. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Political Scientists Daniel Mallinson (Pennsylvania State University-Harrisburg), Julia Marin Hellwege (University of South Dakota), and Eric Loepp (University of Wisconsin-Whitewater) have assembled more than thirty chapters that examine how to think about and teach political science research. Reading The Palgrave Handbook of Political Research Pedagogy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) is almost like attending a teaching and learning conference focused on how to teach the research process to students. The book is divided into four sections: information literacy, research design, research methods, and research writing. Each section includes numerous chapters written by a diversity of authors. These authors include not only political scientists, but also graduate students and librarians. The broad array of authors come from a wide cross section of kinds of institutions, they represent a variety of ranks and positions, and they also provide representative diversity in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. One of the common themes throughout the chapters is the integration of personal experience in teaching aspects of the research process—thus, the chapters provide the audience with stories of successes and failures, reconceptualizing the learning objectives in research, particularly research methods, classes, and many “how to” guides to integrating different approaches into the classroom. As we discuss in the conversation, The Handbook was originally conceptualized as two volumes: one volume on teaching students how to consume political science research, learning how to interpret and digest research; the other volume directed at how to produce political science research, so how to teach students about research methods and writing up their work. Ultimately, both approaches were integrated into a singular, very accessible volume that has guidance for so many of us who teach any number of aspects of the research process. The many authors pay attention to how much knowledge students have as they enter the political science classroom, and thus where we, as educators, need to meet them. Being aware of this starting point also helps to guide the pedagogical approaches that we take in teaching students about the research process, the skills and capacities that are needed to master an understanding of political science, and how to help students to learn these skills and abilities. This is a very valuable handbook for anyone who is teaching political science, regardless of substantive area within the discipline or years of experience—and it is engaging and accessible. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/education

Political Scientists Daniel Mallinson (Pennsylvania State University-Harrisburg), Julia Marin Hellwege (University of South Dakota), and Eric Loepp (University of Wisconsin-Whitewater) have assembled more than thirty chapters that examine how to think about and teach political science research. Reading The Palgrave Handbook of Political Research Pedagogy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) is almost like attending a teaching and learning conference focused on how to teach the research process to students. The book is divided into four sections: information literacy, research design, research methods, and research writing. Each section includes numerous chapters written by a diversity of authors. These authors include not only political scientists, but also graduate students and librarians. The broad array of authors come from a wide cross section of kinds of institutions, they represent a variety of ranks and positions, and they also provide representative diversity in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. One of the common themes throughout the chapters is the integration of personal experience in teaching aspects of the research process—thus, the chapters provide the audience with stories of successes and failures, reconceptualizing the learning objectives in research, particularly research methods, classes, and many “how to” guides to integrating different approaches into the classroom. As we discuss in the conversation, The Handbook was originally conceptualized as two volumes: one volume on teaching students how to consume political science research, learning how to interpret and digest research; the other volume directed at how to produce political science research, so how to teach students about research methods and writing up their work. Ultimately, both approaches were integrated into a singular, very accessible volume that has guidance for so many of us who teach any number of aspects of the research process. The many authors pay attention to how much knowledge students have as they enter the political science classroom, and thus where we, as educators, need to meet them. Being aware of this starting point also helps to guide the pedagogical approaches that we take in teaching students about the research process, the skills and capacities that are needed to master an understanding of political science, and how to help students to learn these skills and abilities. This is a very valuable handbook for anyone who is teaching political science, regardless of substantive area within the discipline or years of experience—and it is engaging and accessible. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Political Scientists Daniel Mallinson (Pennsylvania State University-Harrisburg), Julia Marin Hellwege (University of South Dakota), and Eric Loepp (University of Wisconsin-Whitewater) have assembled more than thirty chapters that examine how to think about and teach political science research. Reading The Palgrave Handbook of Political Research Pedagogy (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021) is almost like attending a teaching and learning conference focused on how to teach the research process to students. The book is divided into four sections: information literacy, research design, research methods, and research writing. Each section includes numerous chapters written by a diversity of authors. These authors include not only political scientists, but also graduate students and librarians. The broad array of authors come from a wide cross section of kinds of institutions, they represent a variety of ranks and positions, and they also provide representative diversity in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. One of the common themes throughout the chapters is the integration of personal experience in teaching aspects of the research process—thus, the chapters provide the audience with stories of successes and failures, reconceptualizing the learning objectives in research, particularly research methods, classes, and many “how to” guides to integrating different approaches into the classroom. As we discuss in the conversation, The Handbook was originally conceptualized as two volumes: one volume on teaching students how to consume political science research, learning how to interpret and digest research; the other volume directed at how to produce political science research, so how to teach students about research methods and writing up their work. Ultimately, both approaches were integrated into a singular, very accessible volume that has guidance for so many of us who teach any number of aspects of the research process. The many authors pay attention to how much knowledge students have as they enter the political science classroom, and thus where we, as educators, need to meet them. Being aware of this starting point also helps to guide the pedagogical approaches that we take in teaching students about the research process, the skills and capacities that are needed to master an understanding of political science, and how to help students to learn these skills and abilities. This is a very valuable handbook for anyone who is teaching political science, regardless of substantive area within the discipline or years of experience—and it is engaging and accessible. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Kun en tredjedel af byrådsmedlemmerne er kvinder, og sådan har det faktisk været i godt 30 år. Men hvorfor forholder det sig sådan? Er det overhovedet et problem? Og hvad skal der til for at ændre på den skæve kønsfordeling i kommunerne? Det taler Sara Fondo med Jacob Nyrup om, der er adjunkt ved Oslo Universitet og som er udkommet med et studie i European Journal of Political Research om den kvindelige underrepræsentation i kommunalpolitik.

On this episode of Research at the Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy, Matias Lopez and Jake Bowers Political Science and Statistics and NCSA at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign discuss methodology in depth. How can methodology change research? Is there a better way to settle the debates? Or is there a way to strike a balance and adapt our research?Find out more about Jake Bowers and his projects at www.jakebowers.org

The Government is pushing forward with its overhaul to the governance of water. The Three Waters reforms will see council-owned drinking, storm and waste-water services amalgamated into four regional bodies.They also announced yesterday it will be mandatory for councils to join the changes, removing the opt out clause.Dr Muriel Newman is the Director of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, a public policy think-tank, and she joined Kerre McIvor. LISTEN ABOVE 

O convidado é doutorado em ciência política e professor na Universidade de Aveiro, onde também faz parte da equipa reitoral, enquanto pro-reitor. Filipe Teles é um investigador consagrado em temas relacionados com a governação local, com publicações em várias revistas académicas de referência, sendo actualmente presidente da European Urban Research Association.  -> Apoie este projecto e faça parte da comunidade de mecenas do 45 Graus em: 45graus.parafuso.net/apoiar O tema da nossa conversa foi descentralização e poder local em Portugal e o mote foi o ensaio com o mesmo nome que o convidado lançou este ano, publicado pela Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos. Para além disso, já tinha participado em 2018 na equipa responsável pelo estudo sobre a Qualidade da Governação Local em Portugal, publicado pela mesma fundação, e que também discutimos no episódio.  E porquê discutir o tema da descentralização política, ou seja a transferência de poderes do Estado central para as autarquias? Por vários motivos. Por um lado, porque, como iremos ver, Portugal é um país onde o poder está ainda muito concentrado no Estado central. Isto tem uma série de efeitos negativos, seja sobre a equidade da representação política seja sobre o próprio desenvolvimento do país, e é um modelo que faz pouco sentido no século XXI.  Por outro lado, porque apesar de nas últimas décadas já se terem tomado algumas medidas de descentralização, este continua a ser um tema pouco querido quer pela imprensa quer pelos políticos. Ainda no início deste mês, soube-se que o governo não tinha levado por diante a nova fase da descentralização que tinha originalmente planeado para o início do verão passado. E finalmente, claro, é uma boa altura para discutir este tema porque estamos a dias das eleições autárquicas, nas quais serão escolhidos os representantes dos cidadãos nos órgãos políticos teoricamente mais próximos da população. São, recorde-se, um total de 308 municípios e 3092 freguesias.  Começámos a nossa conversa pelo ponto de partida óbvio: saber como compara Portugal com outros países em termos de centralização do poder político. E, como veremos, compara mal. Mas o nosso centralismo, como também discutimos, não é só um problema de instituições: é também um problema cultural, com várias manifestações que todos mais ou menos conhecemos. A política nacional domina, de longe, a atenção dos politicos, dos media e da maioria das pessoas que se interessam pelo tema. Por outro lado, porém, também não ajuda a corrigir a este centralismo as insuficiências que a governação local muitas vezes tem. Essas limitações, como vamos ver, estão, em parte, relacionadas com algumas peculiaridades do nosso sistema eleitoral e de governo autárquico, que é complexo, pouco transparente e pouco amigo da participação da população.  Para não nos ficarmos só pelo lado negativo, abordámos também as melhorias que, apesar de tudo, têm sido conseguidas na qualidade do poder local e na promoção da descentralização em Portugal; e falámos das reformas mais relevantes que se podem tomar para continuar esse caminho.  Uma dessas reformas possíveis é, claro, a regionalização. Mas essa é, como refere o convidado, apenas uma forma, de entre várias, de promover uma maior descentralização no país.  _______________ Índice da conversa: (6:46) Quão centralizado é Portugal? (15:40) O problema de termos um modelo de governação local único, que não tem em conta a existência de municípios com dimensões e desafios muito diferentes (18:18) O centralismo de Portugal é também um problema cultural? | Lisboa não é a capital oficial | Livro “Viagens na Minha Terra”, de Almeida Garrett (28:51) As insuficiências do governo e da democracia local em Portugal. | As peculiaridades do nosso sistema de poder autárquico: o excessivo peso do(a) presidente de câmara, a falta de protagonismo das assembleias municipais, a existência de juntas de freguesia. (43:52) Os círculos por distrito no sistema eleitoral das Legislativas e outros problemas mais amplos da arquitectura do sistema político em Portugal.  (49:25) As regiões não podiam reclamar um papel mais activo no espaço público? | O aumento do associativismo municipal nos últimos anos, via comunidades intermunicipais. O papel dos fundos comunitários | O caso caricato de terem sido secretários de Estado (do governo central) a assegurar a coordenação regional do combate à pandemia (57:45) Principais melhorias no passado recente na qualidade do poder local e no aumento da descentralização (1:02:08) Que reformas faltam ainda fazer? A necessidade de aumentar a transparência da governação local (1:06:31) O que dizem os dados sobre as diferenças na qualidade da governação entre municípios? | Estudo sobre a Qualidade da Governação Local em Portugal (FFMS) (1:17:15) Livro recomendado: Uma Teoria da Democracia Complexa, de Daniel Innerarity  _______________ Obrigado aos mecenas do podcast: Tomás Fragoso, Gonçalo Murteira Machado Monteiro, Nuno Costa, Francisco Hermenegildo, Mário Lourenço, Carlos Seiça Cardoso, José Luís Malaquias, Tiago Leite, Carlos Martins, Corto Lemos, Margarida Varela, Filipe Bento Caires, Miguel Marques, Galaró family, Nuno e Ana, João Ribeiro, Miguel Vassalo, Bruno Heleno Gonçalo Matos, Emanuel Gouveia, Ricardo Santos, Ricardo Duarte, Ana Sousa Amorim, Manuel Martins, Sara Mesquita, Francisco Sequeira Andrade, ChaosSeeker , Gabriel Sousa, Gil Nogueira, Luis Brandão Marques, Abílio Silva, Joao Saro, Tiago Neves Paixão, Daniel Correia, Rita Mateus, António Padilha, Tiago Queiroz, Carmen Camacho, João Nelas, Francisco Fonseca, Diogo Sampaio Viana, José Soveral, André Oliveira, Andreia Esteves, João Bernardino, Luís Costa, Ana Teresa Mota, Isabel Oliveira, Arune Bhuralal Rui Baldaia, Joana Margarida Alves Martins, Luis Marques, Hugo Correia, Duarte , Francisco Vasconcelos, Telmo , Jose Pedroso, MANNA Porto, José Proença, Carlos Manuel Lopes de Magalhães Lima, Maria Francisca Couto, joana Antunes, Nelson Poças, Francisco López Bermúdez, Carlos Silveira, Diogo Rombo, Bruno Lamas, Fábio Mota, Vítor Araújo, João Pereira, Francisco Valente, Nuno Balsas, Jorge Amorim, Rui Vilão, João Ferreira, Luís Elias, José Losa, Hélder Moreira, Diogo Fonseca, Frederico Apolónia, André Abrantes, Henrique Vieira, João Farinha, Paulo Fernandes, Nuno Lages, João Diamantino, Vasco SÁ Pinto, Rui Carrilho, Luis Quelhas Valente, Tiago Pires, Mafalda Pratas, Renato Vasconcelos, João Raimundo, Francisco Arantes, Francisco dos Santos, Mariana Barosa, Marta Baptista Coelho, João Castanheira, Pedro , rodrigo Brazão, Nuno Gonçalves, Pedro Rebelo, Tomás Félix, Vasco Lima, Joao Pinto, João Moreira, José Oliveira Pratas, João Diogo Silva, Marco Coelho, Joao Diogo, Francisco Aguiar , Tiago Costa da Rocha, João Crispim, Paulo dos Santos, Abílio Mateus, João Pinho , Andrea Grosso, Miguel Lamela, Margarida Gonçalves, Afonso Martins, João Barbosa, Luis Filipe, Renato Mendes, António Albuquerque, Francisco Santos, juu-san, Fernando Sousa, Pedro Correia, MacacoQuitado, Paulo Ferreira, Gabriela, Nuno Almeida, Francisco Manuel Reis, Daniel Almeida, Albino Ramos, Inês Patrão, Patrícia Esquível , Diogo Silva, Miguel Mendes, Luis Gomes, Ana Batista, Alberto Santos Silva, Cesar Correia, Susana Ladeiro, Gil Batista Marinho, Filipe Melo, Cheila Bhuralal, Bruno Machado, Miguel Palhas, isosamep, Robertt , Pedro F. Finisterra, Cristiano Tavares, Pedro Vieira, Jorge Soares, Maria Oliveira, Bruno Amorim Inácio, Nuno , Wedge, Pedro Brito, Manuel Botelho da Silva, Ricardo Leitão, Vítor Filipe, João Bastos, Natália Ribeiro, Bernardo Pimentel, Pedro Gaspar, Hugo Domingues _______________ Esta conversa foi editada por: Hugo Oliveira _______________ Bio: Docente no Departamento de Ciências Sociais, Políticas e do Território, na Universidade de Aveiro. Desempenha, actualmente, a função de Pró-reitor para o desenvolvimento regional e política de cidades. Doutorado em Ciências Políticas e membro da Unidade de Investigação em Governança, Competitividade e Políticas Públicas, onde tem desenvolvido trabalho de investigação em governação e administração local e regional, reformas territoriais, liderança política e inovação. É autor e co-autor de vários artigos em revistas académicas de referência. As publicações mais recentes incluem o livro “Local Governance and Inter-municipalCooperation” (2016: Palgrave, UK) e a co-edição dos volumes “Close Ties in European Local Governance”, “Inter-municipal Cooperation in Europe: Institutions andGovernance” e “Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe: Decentralization Beyond the Municipal Tier”, em 2018, pela mesma editora. Coordena o Programa Integrado de I&D “CeNTER Redes e Comunidades para a Inovação Territorial” (CENTRO 2020) e o Projeto de IC&DT “DECIDE Governação Territorial Descentralizada” (FCT – POCI). Integra, ainda,as equipas de investigação dos projetos “Unalab: UrbanNature Labs” (Horizon 2020), “Ô: circular, integrated andsymbiotic use of water” (H2020), “Qualidade da Governação Local em Portugal” (Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos) e “Pegada Ecológica dos Municípios Portugueses”. É membro da Associação Portuguesa de Ciência Política(coordenador da Secção de Governação e Política Local), da Political Studies Association (UK), da AmericanPolitical Science Association, e – actualmente – integra o Steering Committee of the Local Government and Politics Standing Group do EuropeanConsortium for Political Research, e o Board do Research Committee on Comparative Studies on Local Governmentand Politics da International Political ScienceAssociation.

Phillip Ayoub presents his lecture "Pride amid Prejudice: The Impact of the First Pride in Sarajevo" on May 20, 2021. This lecture is part of the EU Democracy Forum, a lecture series addressing actors, institutions, and policies in the European Union and its neighborhood. Phillip M. Ayoub is Associate Professor of Diplomacy and World Affairs at Occidental College and Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Fellow in International Security at the Hertie School. He is the author of When States Come Out: Europe's Sexual Minorities and the Politics of Visibility (Cambridge University Press, 2016) and his articles have appeared in the American Political Science Review, Comparative Political Studies, the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, the European Journal of International Relations, the European Journal of Political Research, Mobilization, the European Political Science Review, the Journal of Human Rights, Social Politics, Political Research Quarterly, and Social Movement Studies, among others. The EU Democracy Forum is sponsored by the Lee and Stuart Scheingold European Studies Fund, as well as the UW Center for Global Studies, the UW Center for European Studies & EU Center, and the UW Ellison Center for Russian, East European, and Central Asian Studies, at the University of Washington, Seattle.

In this interview, TikTok Content Creator and Head of Political Research for the Democratic Hype House Victoria Hammett joins our host Jack DiPrimio to diagnose the problems of far-right ideologies and the impact they have on all citizens in the South. Victoria explains the problematic Heartbeat Bill in Texas, how she engages with young people on politics through TikTok, and the path ahead for politics in these southern states. Gen-Z For Change: https://tiktokforbiden.squarespace.com -- Follow Us!: Next Generation Politics Podcast Instagram: @nextgen.podcast Twitter: @nextgenpod_ Victoria Hammett Instagram: @VictoriaHammett TikTok: @VictoriaHammett Jack DiPrimio Instagram: @jackdiprimio Twitter: @DiprimioJack Gen-Z For Change Instagram: @genz.forchange TikTok: @gen.zforchange -- Support the Podcast! Anchor: https://anchor.fm/nextgenpod Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0EKu6MyNLpx3DOHKS8Tbs4?si=VscFUNI0TVWXHziLvfA76A Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/next-generation-politics-podcast/id1517465483 -- Credits Host: Jack DiPrimio Guest: Victoria Hammett Edited By: Gabriela Sanacore, Sara Villa, Zander Lopez Written By: Jack DiPrimio, Daniel Wilk, Rachel McFatter, Elise Faith, Malinda Murphy, Owen Karlsen, Matt DeBlois Music: Chill - sakura Hz Produced by Gen-Z for Change -- --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/nextgenpod/support

I ask the stupid questions on your behalf. Dr. Andrew Sanders holds a PhD in Politics, International Studies and Philosophy and a MA FROM Queen's University Belfast and a BSc in Social and Management Science from Edinburgh Napier University. His research focuses on terrorism and political violence, state responses to insurgency, and the intentional dimension to conflict. He is the author of Inside the IRA:Dissident Republicans and the War for Ligitimacy (Edinburgh, 2011) and co-authored Times and Troubles: Britiain's War in Northern Ireland (Edinburgh, 2012) with Ian S. Wood. His third book, the Long Peace Process: The United States of America and the Northern Ireland Conflict is forthcoming with Liverpool University Press. He has published several articles on topics such as international support for terrorism, the role of diaspora in conflict, the concept of minimum force in military operations,and transatlantic relations. He teaches course on Comparative Politics, International Relations, Terrorism, Political Research and US and Texas Government.

Treating Political Reactionism and the War on Science An interview with Dr. Tereza Capelos on why people become politically reactionary, as well as how this orientation also leads to an anti-science and anti-progress stance. Curt and Katie talk with Tereza about the research behind political reactionism, looking at the characteristics of someone who is primed to be politically reactive. We also talk about how therapists can help clients address this harmful dynamic.   It’s time to reimagine therapy and what it means to be a therapist. To support you as a whole person and a therapist, your hosts, Curt Widhalm and Katie Vernoy talk about how to approach the role of therapist in the modern age. Interview with Dr. Tereza Capelos, Director of the Institute for Conflict Cooperation and Security at the University of Birmingham, and Senior Lecturer in Political Psychology Dr Tereza Capelos is Senior Lecturer in Political Psychology, Director at the Institute for Conflict, Cooperation and Security (ICCS) at the University of Birmingham (UoB), President Elect of the International Society of Political Psychology, and co-chair of the Political Psychology Standing Group of the European Consortium of Political Research. Tereza’s research examines the psychological determinants of political preferences with particular focus on political reactionism, resentful affect and political radicalization during crises and tensions. She is currently co-editing a special issue titled “Reactionary Politics and Resentful Affect in Populist Times”. She has a PhD from Stony Brook University (USA) and worked at the University of Leiden and the University of Surrey. She serves on the editorial board of five international journals, and co-edits the Palgrave Series in Political Psychology. Tereza founded and directed the Summer Academy training program of the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP, 2011-2016) and currently directs two graduate programs (MSc Political Psychology of IR, and MSc Global Cooperation and Security) at UoB. In this episode we talk about: Intersection between psychology and politics Research on voters who are politically reactive Political Reactionism – how it is created and what it looks like The role of shame, fear, resentment, and anger in voting Anti-preference – to want to move backward, rather than forward Uncertainty, feelings of resentment, perception of injustice Populism as a mechanism to devalue what you cannot have, find who is at fault, how to turn things back to a better time The lure of the idealized or fictional past Reactionism is not related to a specific ideology – can happen on the left or right Feelings and beliefs are more likely to drive decisions than ideology The way that a reactionary orientation can lead to problematic behaviors The problem with being anti-progress, especially related to solving the problems we are facing The difficulty reactionaries with engaging with science Seeking to prove, with confirmation bias – rather than to testing hypotheses The anti-expert sentiment that is based in this problem with science and with uncertainty The insight required to identify when we become reactionary How people label the emotions related to reactionism (and the problem with not knowing how to identify and label our emotions) What therapists can do to help vent emotions related to the resentment that leads to a reactionary orientation Helping people to see neutral and positive uncertainty – rather than only negative uncertainty Bringing people into the scientific method, disappointing them that they will not be “proving” or “confirming,” but rather “testing” Our Generous Sponsor: SimplePractice Running a private practice is rewarding, but it can also be demanding. SimplePractice changes that. This practice management solution helps you focus on what's most important—your clients—by simplifying the business side of private practice like billing and scheduling. More than 60,000 professionals use SimplePractice —the leading EHR platform for private practitioners everywhere – to power telehealth sessions, schedule appointments, file insurance claims, communicate with clients, and so much more—all on one HIPAA-compliant platform.  Get your first 2 months of SimplePractice for the price of one when you sign up for an account today. This exclusive offer is valid for new customers only.  Go to www.simplepractice.com/therapyreimagined to learn more.  Resources mentioned: We’ve pulled together resources mentioned in this episode and put together some handy-dandy links. Please note that some of the links below may be affiliate links, so if you purchase after clicking below, we may get a little bit of cash in our pockets. We thank you in advance! Tereza Capelos, PhD on Google Scholar University of Birmingham – Department of Political Science Institute for Conflict Cooperation and Security at the University of Birmingham Conservatism, Radicalism, and Scientific Method: An Essay on Social Attitudes by Albert Benedict Wolfe Relevant Episodes: Therapy as a Political Act Donald Trump in Therapy Connect with us! Our Facebook Group – The Modern Therapists Group Get Notified About Therapy Reimagined Conferences   Our consultation services: The Fifty-Minute Hour Who we are: Curt Widhalm is in private practice in the Los Angeles area. He is the cofounder of the Therapy Reimagined conference, the CFO of the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists, an Adjunct Professor at Pepperdine University, a former Subject Matter Expert for the California Board of Behavioral Sciences, and a loving husband and father. He is 1/2 great person, 1/2 provocateur, and 1/2 geek, in that order. He dabbles in the dark art of making "dad jokes" and usually has a half-empty cup of coffee somewhere nearby. Learn more at: www.curtwidhalm.com Katie Vernoy is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, coach, and consultant supporting leaders, visionaries, executives, and helping professionals to create sustainable careers. Katie, with Curt, has developed workshops and a conference, Therapy Reimagined, to support therapists navigating through the modern challenges of this profession. Katie is also Past President of the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists. In her spare time, Katie is secretly siphoning off Curt's youthful energy, so that she can take over the world. Learn more at: www.katievernoy.com A Quick Note: Our opinions are our own. We are only speaking for ourselves – except when we speak for each other, or over each other. We’re working on it. Our guests are also only speaking for themselves and have their own opinions. We aren’t trying to take their voice, and no one speaks for us either. Mostly because they don’t want to, but hey.   Stay in Touch: www.mtsgpodcast.com www.therapyreimagined.com Our Facebook Group – The Modern Therapist’s Group https://www.facebook.com/therapyreimagined/ https://twitter.com/therapymovement https://www.instagram.com/therapyreimagined/   Credits: Voice Over by DW McCann https://www.facebook.com/McCannDW/ Music by Crystal Grooms Mangano http://www.crystalmangano.com/

One of France’s most famous historians compares and contrasts the two most famous French exemplars of political and military leadership of the past two-hundred and fifty years to make the case that individuals, for better and worse, matter in history. Historians have tried to teach us that the historical past is not just a narrative of heroes and wars. The anonymous millions they like to argue also matter and are active agents of change. But in erroneously democratizing history, we – they have lost track of the outsized, indeed stupendous role that individuals can and play in shaping world historical events. In his new book Napoleon and de Gaulle: Heroes and History (Harvard University Press, 2020), Professor Patrice Gueniffey provides us with a compelling reminder of the importance of heroes in history, in this powerful dual biography of two transformative leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle. Both became national figures at times of crisis and war. They were hailed as saviors and were eager to embrace the label. They were also animated by quests for personal and national greatness, by the desire to raise France above itself and lead it on a mission to enlighten the world. Both united an embattled nation, returned it to dignity, and left a permanent political legacy—in Napoleon’s case, a form of administration and a body of civil law; in de Gaulle’s case, new political institutions. Professor Gueniffey compares Napoleon’s and de Gaulle’s journeys to power; their methods; their ideas and writings, notably about war; and their postmortem reputations. He also contrasts their weaknesses: Napoleon’s limitless ambitions and appetite for war and de Gaulle’s capacity for cruelty and cynicism, manifested most clearly in relations to the end of the war in Algeria. They were men of genuine talent and achievement, with flaws almost as pronounced as their strengths. As many nations, not least France, struggle to find their soul in a rapidly changing world, Gueniffey shows us what a difference an extraordinary leader can make. Patrice Gueniffey is Director of the Raymond Aron Center for Political Research at L’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. One of France’s leading historians of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic ages, he is the author of Bonaparte, the monumental first volume of the definitive modern French biography of Napoleon. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written recently for Chatham House’s International Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One of France’s most famous historians compares and contrasts the two most famous French exemplars of political and military leadership of the past two-hundred and fifty years to make the case that individuals, for better and worse, matter in history. Historians have tried to teach us that the historical past is not just a narrative of heroes and wars. The anonymous millions they like to argue also matter and are active agents of change. But in erroneously democratizing history, we – they have lost track of the outsized, indeed stupendous role that individuals can and play in shaping world historical events. In his new book Napoleon and de Gaulle: Heroes and History (Harvard University Press, 2020), Professor Patrice Gueniffey provides us with a compelling reminder of the importance of heroes in history, in this powerful dual biography of two transformative leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle. Both became national figures at times of crisis and war. They were hailed as saviors and were eager to embrace the label. They were also animated by quests for personal and national greatness, by the desire to raise France above itself and lead it on a mission to enlighten the world. Both united an embattled nation, returned it to dignity, and left a permanent political legacy—in Napoleon’s case, a form of administration and a body of civil law; in de Gaulle’s case, new political institutions. Professor Gueniffey compares Napoleon’s and de Gaulle’s journeys to power; their methods; their ideas and writings, notably about war; and their postmortem reputations. He also contrasts their weaknesses: Napoleon’s limitless ambitions and appetite for war and de Gaulle’s capacity for cruelty and cynicism, manifested most clearly in relations to the end of the war in Algeria. They were men of genuine talent and achievement, with flaws almost as pronounced as their strengths. As many nations, not least France, struggle to find their soul in a rapidly changing world, Gueniffey shows us what a difference an extraordinary leader can make. Patrice Gueniffey is Director of the Raymond Aron Center for Political Research at L’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. One of France’s leading historians of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic ages, he is the author of Bonaparte, the monumental first volume of the definitive modern French biography of Napoleon. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written recently for Chatham House’s International Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One of France’s most famous historians compares and contrasts the two most famous French exemplars of political and military leadership of the past two-hundred and fifty years to make the case that individuals, for better and worse, matter in history. Historians have tried to teach us that the historical past is not just a narrative of heroes and wars. The anonymous millions they like to argue also matter and are active agents of change. But in erroneously democratizing history, we – they have lost track of the outsized, indeed stupendous role that individuals can and play in shaping world historical events. In his new book Napoleon and de Gaulle: Heroes and History (Harvard University Press, 2020), Professor Patrice Gueniffey provides us with a compelling reminder of the importance of heroes in history, in this powerful dual biography of two transformative leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle. Both became national figures at times of crisis and war. They were hailed as saviors and were eager to embrace the label. They were also animated by quests for personal and national greatness, by the desire to raise France above itself and lead it on a mission to enlighten the world. Both united an embattled nation, returned it to dignity, and left a permanent political legacy—in Napoleon’s case, a form of administration and a body of civil law; in de Gaulle’s case, new political institutions. Professor Gueniffey compares Napoleon’s and de Gaulle’s journeys to power; their methods; their ideas and writings, notably about war; and their postmortem reputations. He also contrasts their weaknesses: Napoleon’s limitless ambitions and appetite for war and de Gaulle’s capacity for cruelty and cynicism, manifested most clearly in relations to the end of the war in Algeria. They were men of genuine talent and achievement, with flaws almost as pronounced as their strengths. As many nations, not least France, struggle to find their soul in a rapidly changing world, Gueniffey shows us what a difference an extraordinary leader can make. Patrice Gueniffey is Director of the Raymond Aron Center for Political Research at L’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. One of France’s leading historians of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic ages, he is the author of Bonaparte, the monumental first volume of the definitive modern French biography of Napoleon. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written recently for Chatham House’s International Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One of France’s most famous historians compares and contrasts the two most famous French exemplars of political and military leadership of the past two-hundred and fifty years to make the case that individuals, for better and worse, matter in history. Historians have tried to teach us that the historical past is not just a narrative of heroes and wars. The anonymous millions they like to argue also matter and are active agents of change. But in erroneously democratizing history, we – they have lost track of the outsized, indeed stupendous role that individuals can and play in shaping world historical events. In his new book Napoleon and de Gaulle: Heroes and History (Harvard University Press, 2020), Professor Patrice Gueniffey provides us with a compelling reminder of the importance of heroes in history, in this powerful dual biography of two transformative leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle. Both became national figures at times of crisis and war. They were hailed as saviors and were eager to embrace the label. They were also animated by quests for personal and national greatness, by the desire to raise France above itself and lead it on a mission to enlighten the world. Both united an embattled nation, returned it to dignity, and left a permanent political legacy—in Napoleon’s case, a form of administration and a body of civil law; in de Gaulle’s case, new political institutions. Professor Gueniffey compares Napoleon’s and de Gaulle’s journeys to power; their methods; their ideas and writings, notably about war; and their postmortem reputations. He also contrasts their weaknesses: Napoleon’s limitless ambitions and appetite for war and de Gaulle’s capacity for cruelty and cynicism, manifested most clearly in relations to the end of the war in Algeria. They were men of genuine talent and achievement, with flaws almost as pronounced as their strengths. As many nations, not least France, struggle to find their soul in a rapidly changing world, Gueniffey shows us what a difference an extraordinary leader can make. Patrice Gueniffey is Director of the Raymond Aron Center for Political Research at L’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. One of France’s leading historians of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic ages, he is the author of Bonaparte, the monumental first volume of the definitive modern French biography of Napoleon. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written recently for Chatham House’s International Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One of France’s most famous historians compares and contrasts the two most famous French exemplars of political and military leadership of the past two-hundred and fifty years to make the case that individuals, for better and worse, matter in history. Historians have tried to teach us that the historical past is not just a narrative of heroes and wars. The anonymous millions they like to argue also matter and are active agents of change. But in erroneously democratizing history, we – they have lost track of the outsized, indeed stupendous role that individuals can and play in shaping world historical events. In his new book Napoleon and de Gaulle: Heroes and History (Harvard University Press, 2020), Professor Patrice Gueniffey provides us with a compelling reminder of the importance of heroes in history, in this powerful dual biography of two transformative leaders, Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle. Both became national figures at times of crisis and war. They were hailed as saviors and were eager to embrace the label. They were also animated by quests for personal and national greatness, by the desire to raise France above itself and lead it on a mission to enlighten the world. Both united an embattled nation, returned it to dignity, and left a permanent political legacy—in Napoleon’s case, a form of administration and a body of civil law; in de Gaulle’s case, new political institutions. Professor Gueniffey compares Napoleon’s and de Gaulle’s journeys to power; their methods; their ideas and writings, notably about war; and their postmortem reputations. He also contrasts their weaknesses: Napoleon’s limitless ambitions and appetite for war and de Gaulle’s capacity for cruelty and cynicism, manifested most clearly in relations to the end of the war in Algeria. They were men of genuine talent and achievement, with flaws almost as pronounced as their strengths. As many nations, not least France, struggle to find their soul in a rapidly changing world, Gueniffey shows us what a difference an extraordinary leader can make. Patrice Gueniffey is Director of the Raymond Aron Center for Political Research at L’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. One of France’s leading historians of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic ages, he is the author of Bonaparte, the monumental first volume of the definitive modern French biography of Napoleon. Charles Coutinho Ph. D. of the Royal Historical Society, received his doctorate from New York University. His area of specialization is 19th and 20th-century European, American diplomatic and political history. He has written recently for Chatham House’s International Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Panda brings good news. Introducing our “Good News” segment to replace our “Weekly Recap”. Shout out to Bernardine Evaristo & Reni Eddo-Lodge for taking number 1 slots on the UK book charts in the wake of anti-racism demonstrations. As we know, current events can tend to bring us down so, we wanted to sprinkle some sunshine in there. We have our “Obligatory Hip Hop” segment where we discuss Kanye’s collaborations with Dr. Dre and Gap, we discuss Will and Jada and open relationship dynamics. Finally, we touch on the social changes happening in our country with our “Half-baked Political Research” segment. Tune in and send feedback, as we grow this thang. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

On the podcast this week -Muriel Newman, ten years as an MP for Act, now runs NZCPR, The New Zealand Centre for Political Research. We discuss the notion that democracy is under threat.Patrick Basham makes a return, from The Democracy Institute in Washington DC. We talk about presidential election polling and analyse an exclusive poll result.There is much more to say on riots, demonstrations, journalism and Covid 19.And of course, Mrs Producer.File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nzHaven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide.Listen here on iHeartRadioLeighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:To subscribe via iTunes click here

On the podcast this week -Muriel Newman, ten years as an MP for Act, now runs NZCPR, The New Zealand Centre for Political Research. We discuss the notion that democracy is under threat.Patrick Basham makes a return, from The Democracy Institute in Washington DC. We talk about presidential election polling and analyse an exclusive poll result.There is much more to say on riots, demonstrations, journalism and Covid 19.And of course, Mrs Producer.File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nzHaven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide.Listen here on iHeartRadioLeighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:To subscribe via iTunes click here

 Welcome to the radio magazine that brings you news, commentary and analysis from a Black Left perspective. I'm Glen Ford, along with my co-host Nellie Bailey. Coming up: What kind of impact did the long history of racial and political repression have on today's Black movement? We'll hear an assessment from an esteemed Black scholar. And, Black Agenda Report's co-founder, Margaret Kimberley, talks about her new book on US Presidents and their relations with Black America, from George Washington to the present. The United States played a huge role in the recent military coup in Bolivia, where the hemisphere's first Native American government was overthrown, and replaced with a white, far right Christian regime. The Organization of American States, or OAS sided with the coup plotters, who claimed that there were major defects in October's election, in which President Evo Morales was seeking a third term. Jake Johnston is with the Center for Economic and Political Research, in Washington. He did a study of what actually happened in the election. The period of rabid anti-communism and Red-baiting, often referred to as McCarthyism, actually lasted much longer than the career of it's namesake, Senator Joseph McCarthy, and was deeply rooted in matters of race. Charisse Burden-Stelly is a professor of Africana Studies and Political Science at Carleton College, in Northfield, Minnesota. She wrote a compelling article in Soul, the  Critical Journal of Black Politics, Culture, and Society, titled “Constructing Deportable Subjectivity: Antiforeignness, Antiradicalism, and Antiblackness during the McCarthyist Structure of Feeling.” We asked Dr. Burden-Stelly, What was this “McCarthyist Structure of Feeling”?  Margaret Kimberley, a co-founder, editor and senior columnist of Black Agenda Report, has written a new book. It's titled “Prejudential: Black America and the Presidents,” and examines how each of the previous leaders of the United States dealt with the Black presence in the country.

 Welcome to the radio magazine that brings you news, commentary and analysis from a Black Left perspective. I’m Glen Ford, along with my co-host Nellie Bailey. Coming up: What kind of impact did the long history of racial and political repression have on today’s Black movement? We’ll hear an assessment from an esteemed Black scholar. And, Black Agenda Report’s co-founder, Margaret Kimberley, talks about her new book on US Presidents and their relations with Black America, from George Washington to the present. The United States played a huge role in the recent military coup in Bolivia, where the hemisphere’s first Native American government was overthrown, and replaced with a white, far right Christian regime. The Organization of American States, or OAS sided with the coup plotters, who claimed that there were major defects in October’s election, in which President Evo Morales was seeking a third term. Jake Johnston is with the Center for Economic and Political Research, in Washington. He did a study of what actually happened in the election. The period of rabid anti-communism and Red-baiting, often referred to as McCarthyism, actually lasted much longer than the career of it’s namesake, Senator Joseph McCarthy, and was deeply rooted in matters of race. Charisse Burden-Stelly is a professor of Africana Studies and Political Science at Carleton College, in Northfield, Minnesota. She wrote a compelling article in Soul, the  Critical Journal of Black Politics, Culture, and Society, titled “Constructing Deportable Subjectivity: Antiforeignness, Antiradicalism, and Antiblackness during the McCarthyist Structure of Feeling.” We asked Dr. Burden-Stelly, What was this “McCarthyist Structure of Feeling”?  Margaret Kimberley, a co-founder, editor and senior columnist of Black Agenda Report, has written a new book. It’s titled “Prejudential: Black America and the Presidents,” and examines how each of the previous leaders of the United States dealt with the Black presence in the country.

With Anthony Wells, Director of Political Research at YouGov, and James Forsyth. Presented by Katy Balls.

Guest: Sheryl Vogt, Director of the Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies at the University of Georgia Libraries. First broadcast on November 8 2019. Playlist at https://www.wrek.org/2019/11/playlist-for-lost-in-the-stacks-from-friday-november-8th-on-record-tracing-the-lifecycle-of-political-archives-episode-445/ "Trust your archivists, folks!"

Nick is joined by Zoe Clark (Program Director of Michigan Radio and Co-Host of ‘It’s Just Politics’) and Robert Yoon (Visiting Professor of Journalism at U of M and former CNN Director of Political Research) to talk about the upcoming Journalism on Screen film series at the State Theatre! Discussion includes journalism’s depiction in the movies, its impact on our daily lives, takeaways from each film in the series, and as always, they conclude with their Movie Magic Moments of the Week.

Learn about why political parties may arrive at their positions by pure chance, with some help from opinion cascades; why the Great Oxygenation Event led to a bigger die-off than the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs; and, whether infrared and ultraviolet light show up in rainbows. In this podcast, Cody Gough and Ashley Hamer discuss the following stories from Curiosity.com to help you get smarter and learn something new in just a few minutes: What If Political Parties Arrive at Their Positions by Pure Chance? — https://curiosity.im/32U0blu  Earth's Biggest Die-Off Happened Long Before the Dinosaurs — https://curiosity.im/2OeeM76  Additional resources discussed: An Example of the Herschel Infrared Experiment — http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/classroom_activities/herschel_example.html  Ritter Discovers Ultraviolet Light — http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/classroom_activities/ritter_bio.html Download the FREE 5-star Curiosity app for Android and iOS at https://curiosity.im/podcast-app. And Amazon smart speaker users: you can listen to our podcast as part of your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing — just click “enable” here: https://curiosity.im/podcast-flash-briefing.

An interview with the economist Guido Preparata, above all about two broad topics. First, how the United States maintains its central role in the global economy through the power of the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Second, about how money might be reformed to reflect its place in economic production. Preparata was a central banker with the Bank of Italy, and has taught at the University of Washington and the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. He has written two books, Conjuring Hitler and The Ideology of Tyranny, and edited New Directions for Catholic Social and Political Research. Show notes: https://roryoconnor.xyz/podcast/guido-preparata-on-the-u-s-balance-of-payments-cryptocurrency-interest-inflation-and-perishable-money/ roryoconnor.xyz patreon.com/roryoconnor

Carroll Doherty, Director of Political Research at the Pew Research Center, joins Ben in studio to discuss polling, demographic changes, the partisan issues dividing Americans, and how families will be discussing politics over the holidays. Domenech asks Doherty what he's found when polling on religion, media representation, guns, and political approval ratings.

On What'd You Miss this Week, Scarlet, Joe, Caroline, and Romaine went all in the the legalization of marijuana in Canada. Tilray CEO Brendan Kennedy came on to talk about his company's recent growth, and why he thinks as many as five other countries could follow suit in the next couple of years. Vivien Azer, Senior Research Analyst at Cowen & Co. also joined to talk about pot stock valuations and the outlook for more cannabis deals from traditional consumer brands. Then Carroll Doherty, Director of Political Research at Pew Research Center, joined to discuss their latest study about changing attitudes towards marijuana in the United States. Tom Petrie, Petrie Partners Chairman, also came on to talk through the other big story of the week, Saudi Arabia. 

JEFF WORCESTER of the Center for Deep Political Research joined S.T. Patrick to discuss the formation of the CDPR, the origin of his own deep political research, the idea of research versus deep research, what Oliver Stone's JFK meant to him, the idea of the JFK research community being a "community," how to differentiate genuine researchers from those who have been compromised, and much more. For access to the free and unedited archives of the Midnight Writer News Show with S.T. Patrick, go to MidnightWriterNews.com. You can also add us on iTunes, Stitcher Radio, the iPhone podcast app, or many other podcast distributors.  

In dieser neunten Episode des WZB Democracy Podcast spricht Gastgeber Ilyas Saliba mit Alexander Schmotz über die Unterschiede zwischen Autokratien und Demokratien und wie internationale Verbindungen Autokratien stabilisieren können. Mit dieser Diskussion beginnt eine Reihe von Folgen zur Vergleichenden Autokratieforschung auf dem WZB Democracy Podcast. In Sechs Gesprächen mit Expert*innen aus der Autokratieforschung vom WZB, der Universität Potsdam und der University of Colorado (auf Englisch)werden wir Einblicke in aktuelle Erkenntnisse und Debatten der Autokratieforschung geben und verschiedene Aspekte von Autokratien und autoritären Regimen näher Beleuchten. Das Thema Autokratie- und Regimeforschung wird uns wohl noch bis in das neue Jahr begleiten. Sie dürfen also gespannt sein auf die kommenden Folgen. Link zum Profil unseres heutigen Gesprächspartners: Alexander Schmotz: www.wzb.eu/de/personen/alexander-schmotz Links zu den erwähnten wissenschaftlichen Artikeln (hinter paywall): 1) "Ties to the Rest: Autocratic Linkages and Regime Survival" in: Comparatice Political Studies (2016): http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0010414016666859 2) "Regional autocratic linkage and regime survival" in: European Journal of Political Research (2017): http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-6765.12243/abstract Link zum erwähnten Forschungsnetzwerkes am GIGA in Hamburg: https://idcar.giga-hamburg.de

In 2016 the first shipment of U.S. liquefied natural gas left by tanker from a terminal on the Gulf coast. In the year since, U.S. LNG has made its way to customers around the globe, increasing competition in the gas market and threatening to loosen the grip of some suppliers on captive markets. Guest Anna Mikulska, Senior Fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, talks about the globalization of the natural gas market, the competitiveness of U.S. exports and their implications for relationships abroad. Dr. Anna Mikulska is a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Kleinman Center for Energy Policy and nonresident scholar in energy studies at the Baker Institute’s Center for Energy Studies at Rice University. Her research interests center around European energy markets and energy policy. She has presented papers at numerous national and international conferences and co-authored articles in the European Journal of Political Research and the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, as well as a chapter in the “Introduction to American Government” textbook. Mikulska has served as a reviewer for numerous scholarly journals and was on the editorial board of the law review at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poland.

WASHINGTON, DC – Two of the nation's leading experts on American politics and American public opinion appeared before a breakfast discussion of The Ripon Society, where they shared their thoughts on the changing face of the electorate, the increasingly negative view of Congress, and the factors that will matter most in the Presidential election of 2016. The experts were Ed Goeas, the President & CEO of the Tarrance Group who also serves as a senior advisor to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and Carroll Doherty, the Director of Political Research at the Pew Research Center who opened his presentation — and the discussion – with an overview of the demographic shift that has taken place in the country over the past several years.

It’s no shock, of course, that we live in polarized times. Even with no empirical evidence, everything seems to feel more ideological and divided than it has in many of our lifetimes. So is that true? And if so, is there a way out?Well, we now have a major set of data, and they don’t look so great. The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press recently released the first of multiple reports on the “Political Polarization in the American Public.” And sadly the results may be more discouraging than we thought. From how polarization manifests itself in our personal lives to its effects on policymaking to the way it shows up even in our political participation, the numbers are telling.And now today, the second report covering political typography. This report looks beyond Red vs. Blue divisions to gain a clearer understanding of the dynamic nature of the “center” of the American electorate, and the internal divides on both the left and the right. It also comes with a quiz, so you can determine with truthfulness where you fit in.So how polarized are we? Is there room – a chance – for the so-called political compromise so many seek? What does the so-called “Center” actually look like?Carroll Doherty is Director of Political Research, Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and he’s here to tell us the answers.

Patrick Dunleavy, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the impacts of university social science have been under-researched, and their effectiveness often decried.

Patrick Dunleavy, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the impacts of university social science have been under-researched, and their effectiveness often decried.

A discussion on the changes and challenges in politics in a mobile UK. How does technology affect voting, opinion, and the speed of politics.  Opened by a presentation from Gideon Skinner, Head of Political Research, Ipsos MORI Chair:  Mary Ann Sieghart, Journalist & Broadcaster, Independent, The Times & BBC Panel:   1. Amber Elliott, Deputy Executive Politics Producer, Sky News 2. Jag Singh, Serial Entrepreneur/Founder, Wess Digital & MessageSpace 3. Douglas Carswell MP, Conservative MP for Clacton  4. Alex Deane, Head of Public Affairs, Weber Shandwick

Dr. Colin Bennett's research interests have focused on the comparative analysis of information privacy protection policies at the domestic and international levels. He has published Regulating Privacy: Data Protection and Public Policy in Europe and the United States (Cornell University Press, 1992). He is also co-editor or Visions of Privacy: Policy Choices for the Digital Age (University of Toronto Press, 1999), and co-author of The Governance of Privacy: Policy Instruments in Global Perspective (Ashgate Press, 2003). He has published articles in: Public Administration, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Policy Options, The Journal of Public Policy, Governance, Science, Technology and Human Values, Canadian Public Administration, the Information Society and the European Journal of Political Research, as well as in specialized journals such as Privacy Laws and Business. He has given addresses and papers on these subjects in Canada, the United States, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Australia and New Zealand. He is an occasional contributor of articles on privacy to The Ottawa Citizen, The Vancouver Sun and the Victoria Times-Colonist.