Listeners Ask About: Guns, WW3, Healthcare, Plus Facebook Data

The Politics Guys

Michael Baranowski

Politics, News

4.5 • 772 Ratings

🗓️ 18 October 2017

⏱️ 48 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

To begin the show Trey asks about new information from the presidential election. Specifically, Facebook offered to work with both presidential campaigns but only the Trump campaign agreed to it. Then Trey and Jay respond to listener questions. The first question is about the likelihood of a new WW3 or Civil War. Both agree the likelihood is low, but discuss why it might seem more likely than it is. Then they ask a question about gun policy and why the U.S. seems so fatalistic when it comes to gun legislation. Finally, Jay responds to an extended series of questions from a listener asking for clarification on his Healthcare positions. We hope you’ll check out the sponsors of today’s show: Casper. Politics Guys listeners get $50 dollars toward any mattress purchase by going to http://www.casper.com/tpg and using promo code tpg DaVinci. Book your space now at http://www.davincimeeting.com/TPG and the first hour is on them!Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-politics-guys/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Welcome to the politics guys. I'm Michael Baranowski, a political scientist at Northern Kentucky University.
0:32.9	Welcome to the Midweek's Politics Guy show, and this week, Mike is on vacation, so it will be myself, Tray Orndorf, and Jay Carson.
0:42.2	And this week, we're going to be talking about your mail. You've had a lot of questions coming into this week, and we want to try to get to all of them here for Wednesday.
0:47.9	And so we're looking forward to kind of digging into the mailbox and seeing which you have to say.
0:49.6	It's always kind of fun taking that perspective.
1:01.7	Before we get into listener mail, though, Jay, there was a really interesting article that we didn't have a chance to get to during the weekend show that we wanted to kind of talk about.
1:08.9	And that was once again revisiting the question of why did we have the kinds of electoral outcomes that we had.
1:12.3	Listeners might know that I am a presidential guy, so I'm always looking at presidential elections and communication. But what came out actually
1:16.5	was that Facebook had offered to both the Hillary Clinton campaign and to the Donald Trump
1:22.4	campaign the opportunity to have embedded data analysts to help them use the data coming out of Facebook
1:31.1	for their campaign.
1:34.0	And what's really interesting is that the Clinton campaign was offered those embeds,
1:40.0	turned them down.
1:41.2	The Trump campaign, the digital director, actually accepted them and actually
1:46.2	went on 60 minutes last week and said, look, every time we had any buttons, clicks, or eyeballs
1:51.8	on things, we were able to know what was going on because we had Trump campaign advisors with the
1:57.1	data app operation analyst from Facebook parsing that five days a week.
2:02.2	And he makes the claim that he thinks that that data game is part of which strengthened
2:06.6	their position in micro-targeting versus Hillary Clinton.
2:11.2	And I just found that really interesting.
2:13.3	So, you know, I know a couple weeks ago we talked about the impact of Facebook on elections
2:17.7	in a different kind of context, but here it is, you know, Facebook itself offering some different
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Michael Baranowski, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Michael Baranowski and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.