media.laits.utexas.edu:8080/.../2016-02-01_gov310.mp4

(jazzy music)

Live from the University
of Texas in Austin,

the LAITS Development Studio

and the Department of
Government are pleased

to present Introduction
to American Government

with your professors, Bethany Albertson

and Sean Theriault.

(applause)

>> Hi. Welcome to American Government.

I'm Bethany Albertson.

>> And I'm Sean Theriault.

I hope you all enjoyed that song.

That was Iowa by Dar Williams.

>> And if you don't know
why we played that today,

you're gonna figure it out really soon.

I hope you already know,

it's Iowa spectacular day.

>> We're so excited because it's rare that

you're able to teach a class and have like

in real time, like things happening.

>> Usually I'm telling
people, two years out

or three years, whatever,

Iowa is really, really important.

But today you get to
experience that first-hand.

>> Today, the first votes
for who our next President

is gonna be are being cast.

>> In Iowa.
>> Iowa.

>> Yeah. (laughing)

>> So we just have one note about class

that we wanna say at
the top, and that's to

remember to communicate to us all,

both Brendan and the other TAs and us

through the online TA email address.

Some of you are using
Canvas and that's not ideal

because we'll be much more efficient,

we'll be able to answer
you much more quickly

if you just hit us
through the online, email.

So you should do it that way.

So really, an Iowa spectacular day,

you're gonna do this to them.

>> (mumbles) Me, it's me doing it.

Let's do a reminder, though,
of the rules of the game.

Today, it's gonna be all about

learning the rules of the game.

You cannot work with other people.

You can reference your own notes

and your own book for the quiz,

but working with other
people is a big no-no.

>> And the computers are really smart,

so they pick up on this
stuff, they know this stuff.

So don't make us be the bad guys,

bad guys and gal.

The bad guy and bad gal.

And Iowa's spectacular day.

>> Yeah, no, no. Today's a happy--

>> Right. So 10 minutes for your pop quiz.

Good luck.
>> Good luck.

>> So, we hope that went well.

>> Yes, very much so.

>> I mean it's third or fourth
grade from the semester so far

so easing you into the
semester a little bit.

>> Yeah, and keep in mind, if
this went well for you, great.

If it didn't go well for you,

you have plenty of time to improve,

and we do drop your three lowest.

>> Your three lowest,
right, so this could be

one of your three drops by
the end of the semester.

You know, it's a little
bit of you feeling us out

what the questions are gonna look like,

how you can go about
doing pretty well on that,

so we'll know the result here imminently.

And usually post them
within 24 hours or so.

So you should find out pretty quickly.

If you want to see how
you did on the pop quiz,

you just need to attend
any of the TA office hours

or our office hours, and
we're happy to show you

the quiz, and show you
which ones you got wrong

and everything like that.

Unfortunately, there's no way right now

for the technology can allow you to access

your pop quiz from your own computer,

so you do have to come
either to our office hours

or the TA office hours to go through that.

But I would encourage you to come

to say hi to the TA's and ask
them to see your pop quiz.

>> Yeah, in a way it's
nice 'cause it gives us

an excuse to see you.

>> And then you might
even get a shout out.

>> Right, we like to do that.

>> So shout outs, we're
gonna give a shout out.

I'm trying to think of a segue

so it's not a shout out to anyone.

We're about to show you a photo

and this photo was taken
on March 23rd, 2005.

>> We're good.

>> Is Bethany still, can
you still hear Bethany?

>> Can you still hear me out there?

I don't know. We'll see.

>> This is the picture
from March 23rd, 2015.

And that of course, is the junior Senator

from the great state of Texas.

This is Ted Cruz, and the
reason that we're showing him

is not because he's your junior Senator,

but because on March
23rd, 2015 was the day

that he announced that he
was gonna run for President.

He gives this speech, actually to lots of,

to compliments, people thought the speech

went rather well at Liberty
University in Virginia.

But it was March 23rd.

He was the first candidate out of the box

who gave his official announcement
address for President.

So that's March 23rd, 2015.

And now I'm gonna show you a photo

not of Ted Cruz but
rather of the White House.

So this is what he was
announcing his intention.

Announcing he was
submitting his application

to become the next resident of this house.

>> Okay.

>> And we would find
out if that application

was accepted on November 8, 2016.

To put that all on a timeline for you,

this is what it looks like.

There are the two days.

That's a total of 596 days.

>> 596 days.

>> So from the time that the
first candidate announces

until we actually decide who
our President is gonna be.

>> It's amazing.

>> It's like a year and eight months.

>> It's incredible, right?

When I think of how much time passes

and this becomes really salient to you

when you have a toddler, right?

The amount of change they go through.

In 596 days, they're
kinda different people.

Yeah, it's a very long, long process.

And what we wanna do today is try to

break it down for you guys a bit.

>> We're gonna spend all
of today just talking about

what happens between March 23rd, 2015

and then November 8, 2016,

plus another month and a half or so.

And we'll explain what that
month and a half is about

here pretty quickly.

We wanted to just give
you some other dates

for your timeline.

And don't worry, we're never gonna ask you

on what day did Ted Cruz announce.

We might ask you a question about

how long did the campaign last,

where the options are,
1200 days, 600 days,

60 days or 6 days.

>> Right.
>> Right.

So we're gonna make it obvious

if we are ever to ask you a pop quiz.

But you do not need to memorize the date

that Ted Cruz announced.

>> Who was the first
candidate to announce?

That seems like a fair question, right?

The sorts of questions you would get

just by paying attention, not, you know.

>> Anthony, my partner's
a neurologist, he says

as soon as you commit one
of those facts to memory

you kill that brain cell.

So we do not want you
killing your brain cells

remembering March 23rd.
>> March 23rd, yeah.

And you also don't need
to memorize this date:

December 10th, 2015.

It just happens to be the day that

the Donald makes his announcement.

And really, since then,
radically transforms

the race for the presidency.

>> It's true. He announced and
shot to the top of the polls

and people thought it would,

by people, I mean me.

Thought that it would be
fleeting and it hasn't been.

>> She's done predicting this fleetingness

and she's not alone.

>> I'm in very good company.
>> She is.

>> Very good slash wrong company.

>> And then to fill out our
timeline a little bit more,

we have February 1st, 2015.

>> That sounds familiar.

>> That's the Iowa spectacular day.

>> Oh, my goodness.

Where all of the nation and
really much of the world,

Iowa becomes international
news, February 1st, 2016.

>> Iowa is known for a few things:

corn, as you just heard
in the Dar Williams song,

and the Iowa caucuses.

>> Yeah, and so we're
gonna spend time today

understanding Iowa caucuses,

what are they, why are the important,

and why does Professor
Albertson hate them so much.

>> 596 days from Ted Cruz to
the Presidential election,

281 of those days have already happened.

So we're 281 days from the day that

Ted Cruz announced he's
running for President.

Roughly 47% of the time has elapsed.

Not a single ballot was
cast for roughly 50%.

And so now in this last
53%, 52.9% of the race,

all of the ballots in
Iowa, and New Hampshire

and South Carolina, and Nevada

and every other state,
plus Guam, Puerto Rico

are all gonna have primaries and caucuses.

And we're gonna have this big
election on November 8, 2016

where we will find out
who the next occupant

of the White House is.

>> It's very exciting.

One of the things we're
gonna start off today with

is putting you in a position
of being an Iowa caucuser.

We wanna know, imagine
you're voting today.

Who would you support?

And we're making this an
in class activity for you.

No, we're not?
>> No.

>> Oh, okay. We're not
making an in class activity

for you, we were curious, but that

curiosity has been fleeting,
we're over it. (laughing)

You're not in Iowa, after all,

so we'll have this exact same...

Can we get Brendan and I on camera?

I've never seen him quite
turn this shade of red before.

>> Will you take the
camera off me. (laughing)

>> So we'll have this
exact in class activity

on the day before their Super Tuesday

when you actually will cast ballots.

>> Right, and fingers crossed,

the list of potential
candidates will be shorter

'cause it's quite long today.

>> Right. And we'll talk
about some of the reasons

why that list is even shorter than it was

even a couple of months ago.

>> That's true, that's true, okay.

So let's start by looking
at the Primary schedule.

And I just cut and paste
off of The New York Times.

And I liked the way they represented it

because they showed you,

not only the schedule of the Primaries

but also who won in 2012, 2008

and 2008 on the democratic side.

So here we are today with Iowa.

30 GOP delegates are at stake,

52 democratic delegates are at stake.

You can see the GOP winners,

Santorum and Huckabee.

This is to suggest to you that

the Iowa Republican
caucus goer tends to be

not always, but tends to be more of the

religiously right conservative variety.

If you compare the GOP winners
in Iowa to New Hampshire,

note that they're different people.

New Hampshire tends to be

more of the libertarian Republican sort,

and New Hampshire people
put on their license plates

"Live free or die."

And they take that rather seriously

and so in the past couple of races,

Mitt Romney and McCain won.

Obama won Iowa in 2008
and that was a huge deal.

But then Clinton came back
and won New Hampshire.

This is not for you to
remember who won or lost

the various Primaries,

but more to get a sense
that these different states

have different preferences.

And that this is a dynamic process.

So February 1st is gonna be Iowa

and then New Hampshire, um.

>> Okay.
>> Oh.

>> Next Tuesday, right?

So a week from tomorrow is when we have

the New Hampshire Primaries.

New Hampshire, in addition
to the live free or die,

has this slightly independent streak.

So back in 1992,

Pat Buchanan does really well
in the Republican primary

against the sitting
President George H. W. Bush.

So that suggested that
maybe Bush was gonna have

a hard time uniting the Republican party.

So New Hampshire place this
kind of quirky little role.

>> Yeah, and as we're
discussing the quirks

of these various states,

one thing that might
come to your attention

why these states?

Why these states and not other states?

And so we wanted to explain
that for you a bit today.

Iowa and New Hampshire
basically said, "We're first".

That's how we got in this situation.

Iowa and New Hampshire
said, "We're first", and the

DNC and the RNC went along with it.

Now people criticize it
for all sorts of reasons.

Iowa is not like the rest of the country.

New Hampshire is not like
the rest of the country.

You could point out that
they're not racially diverse.

They are pretty white compared
to the rest of the country.

You could point out, for instance,

Iowa over-represents rural voters

compared to the rest of the country.

And they're disproportionately rural.

And they disproportionately
care about corn.

>> Neither one of those states
have particularly big cities

so they don't really
understand urban problems

that might dominate some other states.

They both have notoriously
bad weather during the winter.

>> Yeah, there's supposed
to be a blizzard tonight.

I shouldn't laugh as I say this

but I find it kind of funny.

The blizzard is not supposed
to hit until after the caucus

so we don't expect it to depress turnout.

We do expect it to trap
national press in Iowa

which is hilarious 'cause they're
only there for the caucus.

>> So they won't be able
to get out to New Hampshire

until maybe Wednesday or Thursday.

>> Maybe. Maybe. Once the
caucus is over, they're done.

They do their piece on it and
then they're out of there,

but they might not be.

>> Iowa and New Hampshire
have declared themselves

to go first, first caucus
and then first primary,

and then because of the lack in diversity

and some of the other concerns that both

the Republican National Party and

the Democratic National Party had.

The Democratic party, in particular,

prioritized Nevada and South Carolina.

And then the republicans
have South Carolina first

and then Nevada for their
primaries and caucus schedule.

as a way of introducing,
allowing Hispanics to have

a bigger voice, African
Americans have a bigger voice,

these cities both, especially Nevada

is dominated by Las Vegas
and big-city politics.

>> And so you might
wonder, if the DNC and RNC,

they're recognizing this
issue so they push up

Nevada and South Carolina,
why don't they just rotate?

Why don't they put another
state in the lead one year

and another state in the lead one year?

And we've discussed collective
action problems in this class

and it's such a useful
frame of reference here.

Everyone might agree that
Iowa shouldn't always

get to go first.

But no one can agree on what state

should go first instead.

And so the opposition is divided,

and we're stuck in this status quo

in which Iowa gets to go first.

>> And also related to
collective action problem,

four years ago, and I
think even eight years ago,

the parties weren't very
stringent about saying,

"You can't have your primaries or caucuses

"before this date".

And so everyone was
leap-frogging each other.

So Michigan wanted to have a big role

and so they ended up announcing,

alright, we're gonna do it end-of-January.

And then Iowa was like "Nuh-uh."

and so they moved up to
the middle of January

and then someone else leap-frogged them

and so then you're voting like,

early January, like late December, right?

For two thousand--

>> 2008 was early January.

I think before there
was a late December one.

>> Finally the parties this time said,

all right, no one can cast
a vote before February 1st.

and we're prioritizing
Iowa and New Hampshire.

And if states tried to leap frog them,

they could do that but they
would suffer punishments

from the national parties,

and so they just don't want
to suffer those punishments.

>> Right, and this became an issue in 2008

when a couple states tried to leap frog,

and the DNC fought back.

The DNC says your punishment is that

your votes don't count.

The candidates who were
advantaged by those votes,

of course are like, "You can't
disenfranchise our voters."

And so it becomes a power
play between the states

and the party organization.

>> So Bethany, you've been
throwing around these words

primary and caucus.

Maybe we need to just take a step back

and have you explain what the difference

between a primary and a caucus is.

>> Okay, so just to confuse you,

we call it the primary season.

And we call it the Presidential primary.

But there's two very
different types of contests

that states can have.

A primary is like a general election,

in terms of it's a ballot vote in which

citizens select the parties nominee.

And it's like the sort of
election you're used to, right.

On election day, maybe
there's early voting as well,

you can go and vote, you
can vote when you like,

it's private, it's the sort
of voting you're used to.

In contrast there's a caucus.

Some states like to use
caucuses to select their

Presidential nominee.

A caucus, which is what
we have tonight in Iowa,

is a local meeting, where
the party members gather

to select the party's nominee
for the general election.

So in Iowa tonight at 7pm,

if you want to participate
you're gonna show up to

your caucus site and caucus.

Some big differences,

states tend to go for the primaries,

because the government pays for them.

Caucuses have to be funded by the parties,

there's that little difference.

Primaries have much better
turnout that caucuses,

as you can imagine.

Caucuses require you to be
there at a particular time,

and in many cases require
that your vote be public.

They can be contentious,
some people don't like that.

Some people like that.

Other differences we wanna highlight?

>> So there's another distinction,

I don't think we do it
later in the lecture,

is the difference between open and closed.

>> Oh yeah, we don't do
that later in the lecture.

>> So an open lecture means...

An open lecture.

Even on primary day I'm
still thinking about

delivery of educational
material to our students.

>> So dedicated.

>> I am.

Open primaries are
those primaries in which

you show up at the ballot box,

the voting place,

and you either go off to
your left and you pick up

a Democratic ballot, or
you go off to the right

and you pick up a Republican ballot.

Before entering the polling place,

you do not need to make any declaration of

which party you belong to.

So that's called an open primary.

So anyone can vote in them.

And New Hampshire is an open primary,

so the independent voters in New Hampshire

can either decide to cast a ballot in the

Democratic primary or
the Republican primary,

they can't do both.

So you have to choose, and
we're gonna have to choose

here in Texas.

And then a closed primary would be,

prior to the casting of your vote,

you have to declare and
become a formal member

of that party.

And only the formal members of that party,

can then participate in the primaries.

And so we think of
closed primaries as being

particularly wedded to the,

to the core voters of that party.

Where an open primary can
have a lot of those voters

plus some independent voters,

plus maybe even some
nefarious people from the

opposite party who wanna--

>> Some troublemakers.

>> Right, who wanna nominate
the least electable.

But those I think are
such a small percentage,

that they really don't even matter.

So primaries and caucuses.

Most of the states choose primaries.

38 states chose primaries,

14 states choose caucuses.

And among those places
that choose caucuses,

are the states of Puerto Rico
and District of Colombia.

Well maybe not states but,

>> Places.

>> Places, so that's the reason that

14 plus 38 equals 52,
we've included Puerto Rico,

which actually has 3
million people living in it,

and the District of Colombia.

>> It's also interesting a thing to note,

that the parties involve places
in choosing their nominees,

that don't have voting rights
in the general election.

Which I always find interesting, right.

So when you have the candidates
in Puerto Rico or in D.C,

actually D.C has Electors,
but they sometimes

don't want to vote.

More on that later.

It's interesting that the
caucuses and primaries

can take us outside of the,

what we think of as the normal electorate.

>> There are other
primaries and caucuses in

American Samoa and Guam,

there's even one for people living outside

of the United States,
not in the U.S Territory.

But we just stuck with the big ones.

>> Yeah, yeah.

>> Um primaries work like
regular elections work.

So usually you show up
when the ballots open,

8am, 7am, sometimes, and then
they close 6pm, 7pm, 8pm.

So primaries are pretty
easy things to get,

think of them as mini
elections within one party.

Caucuses are a different
beast all together.

>> And for that we're
gonna show you a video.

(cheerful music)

>> This is an Iowan.

You're probably hearing a lot about

the Iowa Caucuses right about now.

It's a really important part
of the Presidential campaigns,

but it's not a normal primary.

>> Republicans and Democrats handle

caucuses differently,

but here's how the
Democratic caucuses work.

>> A bunch of Iowa
Democrats from around the

same place get together based
on their caucus precinct.

These precincts are really
small, so it gives it

a small town hall feel when
they're actually caucusing.

>> Campaigns send these people called

Precinct Captains out to the caucuses.

They serve as sort of leaders for

their candidates supporters.

>> Once everybody is in the room together,

they form preference groups,

by physically joining other
supporters of that candidate.

>> At this point in
the process there might

still be people who are undecided,

they don't have to join a
preference group quite yet.

>> Once everybody is grouped up,

there is a headcount
to see how much support

each candidate has.

>> If a candidate doesn't get at least 15%

of the caucus, they're
considered not viable.

But it's not over yet.

>> For the next half hour or so,

Precinct Captains and
other supporters can try

to convince that candidates supporters

to come to their preference group.

>> This is also when
those undecided voters

come back in.

Once they see how the
support is distributed,

or they hear a really convincing argument,

they can join that preference group.

>> Once everyone's done convincing

and being convinced,

there's another headcount.

>> So by the end the caucus only has

groups of voters surrounding candidates

that met the viability threshold.

>> The more support a
candidate has at caucuses

across the state,

the better their chances
are of winning Iowa.

>> This is why every single caucus

around the state matters,

and is also why having
knowledgeable and persuasive

people supporting a
candidate is so important

at every precinct.

In other words.

>> It's why caucusing matters.

(cheerful music)

>> So I loved how Yoda initially supported

an un-viable candidate,

and then was persuaded by Santa Claus.

>> I mean, it's a caucus.

You need to have people
who are gonna stand up

and make arguments,

and persuade, and that is absolutely true

on the Democratic side and plus
true on the Republican side.

The Iowa caucus for Republicans,

is a little different.

So the Democrats have that viability vote,

then they redistribute.

For Republicans, they
vote in the Iowa caucuses

by secret ballot.

And that might be important, so,

Trump, and I have a picture
for you of Lego Trump,

to keep with the Lego.

All the different candidates
have their own Lego.

>> (laughs) I thought that was
Ted Kennedy

>> Oh no, it's Lego Trump.

So Trump has been publicizing the fact

that it's a secret ballot.

Now, we're all just guessing here,

are Trump voters more or
less likely to vote for Trump

when it's a secret ballot?

There is a little bit of
research to suggest that

they might be more likely to vote for him

when it's a secret ballot.

And that's, in the comparison
and surveys, or polling,

between robo-calls and in person surveys,

he has higher support in robo-calls.

Which suggests perhaps, there's a

social desirability effect,

that dampens support for Trump.

I don't know that I totally buy that,

one thing we do know is that

the Trump campaign,

and this is the piece I
have for you on the left,

has been actively
promoting the fact they can

vote for Trump and they
can do it secretly.

It's on their materials, and it's being

announced by all their surrogates, so.

There you go.

So after we have those first four states,

Iowa, New Hampshire,
South Carolina and Nevada,

we have Super Tuesday.

Super Tuesday is where a bunch of states

have grouped together and

it will be exciting, I promise you.

Lots of things hopefully will
be sorted out on that day.

This is when Texas votes,

and you can see that Texas
is the big huge prize,

for both Democrats and Republicans.

There's lots of us here.

And--

>> Do you know why Super Tuesday comes,

how it comes into existence?

>> Just a grouping of--

>> Yeah, so this goes
back to Democratic party.

>> Oh, okay.

>> So this is after Walter
Mondale was nominated

President in 1984.

They said there needed to be a stronger

Southern voice in the Democratic contest.

So that the Democratic
party would nominate

a more moderate candidate.

Because they thought that
Walter Mondale was too Liberal.

And so they instituted this
whole Super Tuesday idea,

where all the Southern states, primarily,

would aggregate their votes,

and in a place prominently,

right after Iowa and New Hampshire,

so that the candidates after
going to Iowa and New Hampshire

would then have to come south

and speak the language of Southerners,

so that the Southern
party could have more,

more of a role in the picking
of the Democratic nominee.

>> Well that's fascinating
because now you see all these

articles coming out, "Bernie Sanders has a

"Super Tuesday problem."

>> Right. And the person
who is critical for

the decision of the Super
Tuesdays among Democrats,

was a young governor from
the state of Arkansas,

named Bill Clinton.

>> Oh.

>> So he's part of the architect of

the Super Tuesday,

the existence, the
beginning of Super Tuesday.

>> Well, now that it might be
problematic for Bernie Sanders.

>> Isn't that interesting?

>> It could end up helping
out another Clinton.

>> I haven't seen the stories about the...

Yeah.
>> Yeah.

>> But they're true, right, because

as soon as you go south you have many more

African American voters,
which he doesn't do well with,

you have far less of the
affluent suburban liberal voters,

which he does really well against.

>> Yeah, you still have
young people from the South,

but as we know, young
people don't tend to vote.

>> Not our young people.

>> Not our young people,
you guys are voting.

>> Oh, speaking of our
young people and voting,

today is the day, your last
day to register to vote.

If you wanna participate
in the Texas primaries.

>> Yes.

>> Hook the vote will be on the West Mall,

and in front of Gregory
Gym until midnight tonight.

Register, register, register, register.

>> Yes.

>> If you don't register
you can't participate.

>> Yes.

>> Don't give up your voice.

>> RIght, and prove us wrong.

We're the ones, we're giving you research,

we're giving you all the imperics on

how young people don't vote,

and so what a wonderful
time for you to be like,

"I'm gonna show them."

>> Right.

>> Yeah, excellent.

Okay, so we had Super Tuesday,

and then this is just gonna keep going.

And for those of you who are interested,

please by all means go through and look at

all the different races
that are going to happen,

and the schedule for those races.

But oh my goodness do they
keep going and keep going.

These are the early March ones.

I'm gonna show you next
where we start with March

in the middle of March.

This becomes important
on the Republican side.

Because Democrats always award
delegates proportionately.

Republicans award
delegates proportionately,

until March 15th.

After March 15th, Republicans can do

winner take all primaries.

States sometimes like to do that,

because they make their state
a bigger contest to win,

it's a bigger prize to win.

The parties might not
want to do it because

they might not want to
end the process too early.

In 2012, Republicans
decided that everything

prior, everything up to the end of March

had to be proportionally allocated.

And Sean mentioned this before,

there's a lot of thinking afterwards,

that the long primary process,

hurt Romney too much.

So they moved it up to
March 15th this year,

with the idea of, maybe they

didn't want the primary process
dragged out quite that long.

And not important to
remember that anecdote but,

I think it gives you
insight into how elites are

trying to construct the process to

give them the best outcome.

Okay, so more races,
more races, more races.

And then the last day,

more races, more races, more races.

And part of the reason
I'm a critic of Iowa,

is there's my state, California,

which I think of as pretty important.

And it's on June 7th.

June 7th, so very late in the process.

>> That and it's combined
with North Dakota

and South Dakota.

>> Yeah.

>> Which are gonna draw
lots of campaign resources

away from California.

>> Don't mock.

>> I mean, 29, truly.

South Dakota has 29
delegates to (mumbles).

I can't even believe there's 29...

I can't even believe there's
54 people that live in

South Dakota.

>> There's a South
Dakota student out there

that's hating you right now.

>> It's a good thing I'm not
on the classroom discussion.

(laughing)

>> So finally, finally,
finally it wraps up.

But the races could and should
be decided much earlier,

maybe in the context of this class.

>> Right.
>> Should happen.

So we have very long, long
long long, primary seasons and,

I wanted to give to give
you a little perspective

on why that matters.

So Jimmy Carter is our best example

of why the long primary season matters.

This was a very little known governor.

Nobody saw him as a viable
Presidential candidate,

and he is our best example of playing the

calendar correctly.

So he invests in Iowa and New Hampshire,

and then he uses those early victories,

to build momentum and make
the later fundraising,

media attention et
cetera, et cetera, easier.

So the long drawn out
process was seen as a way

for somebody to,

and I volunteered in Iowa
in 2008 because I'm...

I really criticize this process,

but I also wanted to understand it.

And one thing I will say for it is,

those voters, they get
to know the candidates.

Those candidates meet voters
in really intimate situations.

Like, they come over to their
houses, their friends houses,

their pizza parlor, their church.

And the candidates, some of them basically

move in to Iowa.

And so the Obama campaign would say,

"Oh, this is good because Iowa voters,

"they know to lift the hood on the car,

"they know to really check to see that

"these candidates are okay."

And now, you could take
them at their word, or not,

I think sometimes
they're a little spoiled.

But the Carter story fits with that idea.

Now, a lot of us don't like
the long primary season,

we see it as too expensive,

we see it as too time consuming

for the candidates, for voters.

We worry that it creates voter fatigue,

but on the plus side it
does allow for learning.

And for that I'm gonna give
you the story of Gary Hart.

Gary Hart was a prominent
Democratic candidate.

People thought he had a really good shot,

and there were allegations about him.

There were allegations before we had,

John Edwards, I blocked it out.

Before we had John
Edwards, we had Gary Hart.

And there were allegations
he was having an affair.

He said to the press, "No, I'm not."

and he dared them to follow him.

Bad idea. Bad idea.

Because, this is the picture
that surfaces in the media,

and that's Gary Hart,
and that is not his wife.

And you cannot make this up.

>> On a boat called.

>> Monkey Business.

(laughing)

Amazing, isn't it?

So he, after that scandal,

wants to argue to the
American people that they

should put his personal behavior aside,

and focus on the politics.

The people say, "No, thanks."

And he loses spectacularly.

>> So a little bit more,
back to our timeline.

So starting there with
Ted Cruz, March 23rd 2015,

ending with votes for the
White House on November 8th.

We have now put in Washington D.C,

which has the last primary
or caucus on June 14th.

So we have a total of 169 days of primary,

between the first primary,
or the first caucus,

and then the last caucus.

And then a couple of other
dates that are pretty important.

Between the last caucus and
our votes for President,

and that's the dates of the convention.

So this time, all of the
conventions, both conventions,

the Democratic and the
Republican conventions,

will be between July 18th and July 28th.

So first, the Republicans in Cleveland,

will gather on July 18th for four days.

Then a week later the
Democrats will gather

in Philadelphia.

And this is the first
time, in my lifetime,

that the conventions
have been held in July.

Usually these are August things.

But in part, just the way the
campaign finance laws work,

as soon as someone officially
gets the nomination of a party

they can start spending
new sources of money.

And so both parties wanted
to move up their conventions,

so they get an official nominee.

Because last time, Mitt Romney,

for really a month his campaign went dark,

because it was out of it's
money from the primary,

because it was so hotly contested,

and he couldn't start
spending new money until

he became the official nominee
of the Republican party.

So now both parties have moved
their conventions up to July.

You've already heard a little
bit of speculation about

what a brokered convention is.

So what happens if these candidates,

Ted Cruz wins Iowa, Donald
Trump wins New Hampshire.

Then they go South and maybe Marco Rubio

picks up a few states on Super Tuesday.

If no candidate enters
the convention with 50%

of the delegates, then we
could end up in a situation

where actually the
delegates at the convention

are choosing the nominee.

So the way that most states rules work,

is you're bound to a
candidate for the first vote

at a convention.

But then after that all bets are off.

So then you'll start seeing horse trading,

not really horses but.

You'd start seeing people
bargaining for one candidate

over another candidate,
maybe there's talk of

"Alright let's come up
with a consensus ticket."

That involves a candidate
from this faction,

a candidate from that faction,

or this state and that state.

And that's where things
could get really interesting.

Things at conventions
haven't been interesting

in my lifetime.

And really, I mean

the conventions have been interesting,

really since we have to back to 64, 68.

>> 68.
>> Yep, 68.

Which is before my lifetime.

>> Nice.

>> Phew. Caught it under
the wire on that one.

>> If you wanna see a brokered convention,

and all the excitement
that a convention can have.

I mean, there is The West Wing.

They had a really fascinating convention.

But the odds are for us, it's
not gonna happen in real life.

The elites have no interest
in a brokered convention,

we have a more democratic
small D expectation,

of who the nominee ought to be.

And the American people
don't want the candidate

that some elites negotiated
over in a convention.

They want the ones they voted for.

So, we'll see.

>> And the reason it's
not gonna get tricky,

particularly with the Democratic party,

is because there's two candidates.

Well, Martin O'Malley I
guess is still around there.

>> You're so mean.

>> At the asterisk.

So one of them is eventually gonna

accrue enough delegates,

that they're gonna have
51% of the delegates.

And so there's not gonna have that.

But really with Republicans at this time,

winner take all,
proportional, like the mix.

You don't have to get that creative to see

how Rubio, Cruz and Trump,
end up trading off states and,

they all end up in Cleveland
with 35% of the delegates.

>> Right.

It's chilling, okay.

Some political science
questions I wanted to

bring up for you that have
become apparent so far,

during this race, and there will be more.

Here's one that came out over the weekend.

"Does social pressure increase turnout?"

So if you've been paying
attention to the news,

a lot in Iowa,

You might have noticed
that the Cruz campaign

is being criticized for
the social pressure,

get out to vote mailers.

So voters got these mailers
from the Cruz campaign,

and it says "Voting
violation" and explains

how often you've voted,

how often your neighbors have voted,

and encourages you to vote.

This strategy goes back to
some really prominent research

by political scientists that
shows that social pressure

triggers vote turnout.

Now they've tried shame messages,

they've tried pride messages,

they've tried simple reminders that

voting is your civic duty.

And there does seem to be some research,

it's not all on one side of it,

but it does seem to be
some research that shame,

being reminded that your
voting records are public,

and that people can look them up.

And maybe that you haven't
been the best voter,

or your neighbors aren't the best voters,

can trigger increased voting.

So there's some research
that shows this works.

It's also true that people don't like it.

Campaigns don't like it because they worry

they're gonna piss off the
voters and cut ties with them.

Maybe it's a one time strategy,

but it's not an effective
long term strategy.

The states don't like it.

So you have in Iowa,

the secretary of state coming
out yesterday and saying,

"This was not us, this
is completely wrong."

They don't take issue with the fact that

voting records are public,

but they don't like seeing
them used in this way.

Now a couple things to know.

Or, from the social science side of this.

The Cruz mailer goes way beyond

what the studies that
colleagues of mine have done.

No colleague of mine
has ever done something

to say that you're in violation.

A voting violation is of
much stronger language,

than just a simple reminder that

your voting records are public and,

this part of why it's rubbing
some people the wrong way.

A couple of other things,

is a lot of times these have
been done as get out to vote

messages from non-partisan organizations,

not from a candidate himself.

Now Cruz says this is
a strategy that works,

and he's not wrong, it
has worked in the past.

One of the other things we don't know is

that when there's a public backlash

or a public airing of the strategy,

does that undermine the
success of the strategy.

So to be continued,

just to forecast, I still
have Cruz winning in Iowa

in my prediction so,

I think it's a problem, but
not that big of one but,

to be continued.

I think it's a super interesting
thing that's happening.

But to be continued.

Dave Peterson, oh, here's the other thing

that political scientists wouldn't do.

Dave Peterson posted his,

he's actually a political scientist.

And he wanted people to know that

it seems as though the
Cruz campaign falsified

or they lied about the voting histories.

So he and his neighbors
all have very different

voting histories, but in the
mailer that they received,

very sadly they all got F's.

>> And 55%.

>> Yeah, which he
explained wasn't possible,

given the number of elections
he had participated in.

Another big political science question is,

"Does the party decide?"

So some colleagues a couple of years back

came out with a book
called "The Party Decides".

And the argument was that party insiders,

party elites would control
the nomination process.

We think that it's
controlled by the people,

but really it's these party elites that

will get their candidate nominated.

For those who believe in this theory,

there is no way to account
for a Trump victory.

You just can't.

And so there's a lot of news
articles going around now,

"What is this theory?"

"Where does this party
decides, party insiders,

"elites will pick the nominee.

"Where does that theory stand
in light of the early polling?"

To be continued.

Because the early polling
is not the early voting.

And the party decides
hypothesis isn't about who wins

in the polls early on,
it's about who ultimately

secures the nomination but,

to be continued.

>> Interesting political
science questions,

let's get back to nuts and
bolts of campaigns a little bit.

The way that we've talked
about it thus far is,

the entire American electorate
votes in early November,

and they vote for someone
like Barack Obama,

last time in 2012.

Of course that's not the way
that our elections are handled.

So there's this intermediary
step of an Electoral College.

Where each of the states
independently have their

separate elections and then
choose electors who then

participate in the Electoral College,

who then chooses our President.

So there's this additional step.

And there's a reason that
it was set up this way.

>> It's such an odd institution,

and you can only understand
it by understanding

what the Framers were concerned about.

They didn't trust the
mass public, that's clear.

If you look through the Federalist Papers,

there's a profound distrust
of the mass public.

And so the electors were there to insulate

the selection of the President
from the mass public.

It's also true that the
small states were concerned

they wouldn't have any
representation in this process.

And the Electoral College
has some really important

concessions to small states,

and we'll talk about that in a second.

Fundamentally, Framers were worried about

expanding the franchise.

Now imagine if at our founding,
we had a popular vote.

If a state wanted to double
their say in choosing

who the President was,
well they just have to

do something radical like

expand the vote to include women.

Then you have twice the number
of voters in your state.

They were not gonna do that, and so

the Electoral College
provide a level of insulation

that made it so states
weren't incentivized

to expand the franchise.

In the Electoral College,
it has 538 Electors.

Every state has one elector for every

Senator and Representative.

And then if no candidate has
a majority, which is 270,

the race will be decided by
the House of Representatives.

Here's another safeguard for small states

that you guys might not know about.

Our Framers thought that the second way

was how we choose Presidents.

It'd get thrown to the house,

and each state would have one vote.

New Jersey would have a vote,

Virginia would have a vote,

you can be the smallest state,
you can be the biggest state.

But all states had equal representation

with one vote per state.

What the Framers did not anticipate,

but what you guys know.

Political parties would come
along to organize the vote,

and make it so that state, that
candidates could get to 270.

So we don't have races,

thrown to the House of Representatives,

after the emergence of political parties.

>> And it's the top three candidates,

in the Presidential election,

who the House of Representatives
has to decide between.

So the House of
Representatives doesn't get to

decide whoever it wants,

it has to choose among
the top three candidates.

>> It's almost like that's
going to be really important

in a story we'll tell later in this class.

>> Almost.

>> Almost.

>> So this is the way
that we normally think of

the Electoral College.

This is a famous map that
appears every four years,

where we have the TV
commentators coloring in states

one by one as polls close and
they get enough information

to call a state for one
candidate or the other.

What's true about every
single state except two,

so 48 states, is that
they're winner take all.

So even if you win Texas by one vote,

you're gonna get all of Texas'
Electoral College votes.

Even if you win California
by just one vote,

You're gonna get all of California's.

The two states that break
this winner take all norm,

is Maine, and Nebraska.

And what happens in
Maine and Nebraska both,

is that the candidate with the most votes

gets the two senators votes,

and then the candidate
that gets the most votes

within each of the
congressional districts,

Maine's two and Nebraska's three,

then can get an Electoral College vote.

So in 2008 actually Barack Obama gets

one Electoral College vote from Nebraska,

because he wins the Eastern most district.

So when you see this map, with
lots of red in the interior,

you think how is it possible even

that the election was close.

Between Kerry and Bush,
because there's so much red

and so much blue, well
the problem here is that

these are based on the actual state lines,

and so cartographers,
people who work with maps,

get all sorts of interesting maps.

So here's a better map.

That more equally shows
the distribution of voters,

between John Kerry and George Bush.

In this map it shows the
populations of the states.

So New Jersey looks abnormally large,

because New Jersey actually
has a lot of people

that vote in it.

Do does Illinois, Michigan, and then,

you get South Dakota
there which is just a blip

to the left of Minnesota.

And this leads to some distortions,

the way the Electoral College works.

>> Yeah, I pick on Iowa, in this class,

because of their out sized
influence in choosing

Presidential candidates.

So it's not fair just to pick on Iowa,

now I'm gonna pick on Wyoming.

And I could just keep
going down the list, right.

Different procedures are gonna
advantage different states.

Electoral College advantages Wyoming.

And to back this up,

I've done a little bit
of math to show you.

California has 55 Electors,

they have about 10% of the Electors.

Wyoming has about a half
a percent of an Elector,

of the Electors, right, has about

a half of a percent of the electors.

So you might say "Okay,
California has a lot more

"people in it than
Wyoming, it makes sense."

But I'm gonna just show
you that California

is under represented by their population,

and Wyoming is over represented
by their population.

There's the populations of each state.

California has 12% of the American people,

Wyoming has one fifth of a percent.

Less than one fifth of a
percent of the American people.

And so how does the Electoral College

over represent small states?

For a couple reasons.

One is that their Electors

are the number of Senators
they have and the number

of members in the house they have.

Every state has two for
their Senators, right.

Every state gets two,
so that's a little bump

for the small states.

It's a smoothing kind of mechanism.

The second thing is,

is that no state can have less than one.

So Wyoming, even though
it has a teeny tiny

percentage of the population,

you can't have a teeny tiny
percentage of a representative.

It just doesn't work, so they have one.

And so, there's my chance
to pick on Wyoming.

>> So Wyoming, Iowa, what other states

are you gonna ridicule today?

(laughing)

>> So we wanna show you
just a few races where

the person who won the
popular vote did not win the

Electoral College vote.

So it goes back to.

>> Jackson.

>> Andrew Jackson in 1824.

Where he won the popular vote,

did not win the Electoral College.

Comes back four years later and wins both.

Samuel J Tilden, then right
after reconstruction ends,

and ends in part because of the selection.

Then we have Grover Cleveland in 1888.

And then finally Al Gore,
during your lifetime,

who won the popular vote,

but did not win then Electoral College.

Normally though, the
way this process works,

is the Electoral College exacerbates or

suggests that the winner is bigger

than it would otherwise seem.

So in the 1996 election,
that was very close,

the popular vote was
marginally for Bill Clinton,

he ends up winning almost three quarters

of the Electoral College votes.

>> Yeah, usually it just turns
small wins into big wins.

The other thing you'll
notice in the 1996 example,

and it's even clearer in the 1992 example,

is the Electoral College

will kill a third party candidate.

So Ross Perot, in '96

gets 8.4% of the popular vote,

not a single Electoral vote.

In '92 he gets 19% of the popular vote,

not a single Electoral vote.

So just to think about the pros and cons

of the Electoral College,

people who want to keep it, they say,

"Well, you know, it works, it's stable.

"And we've had peaceful
transitions of power."

And people from other countries,

you might recognize that as
a pretty advantageous thing.

The small states would
wanna keep it, absolutely.

And it encourages, some people say this,

it encourages national campaigns.

>> So it's a little bit
ironic that Bethany gives you

the arguments in favor and
I give you the arguments

opposed to the Electoral College.

But some people would say that
it violates this principal

that we believe in the core
of our being as Americans,

that one person should equal one vote.

So this Electoral College
vote makes a voter in Wyoming

much more important relative
to a voter in California.

And then the second argument is that

there's this lack of transparency.

So these people get together in a room,

and then they cast votes.

So it's really hard to trace the votes.

The ironic part of all of this is that

Bethany actually is in
favor of getting rid

of the Electoral College,

and I actually like the Electoral College.

>> Yeah.

>> But nonetheless there
are arguments on both sides,

so that debate will, I'm sure, continue.

But we want to go back to our timeline.

So we have November 6th is election day,

so that's when everyone
casts their ballots.

And then the Electors
meet, a whole month later.

So state electors meet in Austin,

so if you're elected to be an Elector,

for the State of Texas
you'll meet in Austin

on December 17th and you'll
actually cast your ballot then.

And a few weeks later, more
than three weeks later,

there's a joint session of Congress,

in which they count all the
Electoral College votes.

And then two weeks after
that we finally have

an inauguration day.

These are all dates that go
back to the 2012 election.

And so even after we have our election,

there's still things that have
to play out in the process,

before we can get the
swearing in of a President.

So I wanted to show our timeline again,

so if we go back to Ted
Cruz and the White House.

We now have this added component,

which is the period between
the casting of ballots

and the inauguration.

What's interesting about
how long our elections are

is that they're much longer
than other democracies

in the world.

So these two folks,

this is David Cameron
from the United Kingdom,

and then Tony Abbot in Australia,

They both had election periods that

relative to the U.S is that.

So just a tiny portion in
also thriving democracies

where they had a much
shorter campaign period.

In Canada, they had the
longest campaign period

ever in its history to
elect Justin Trudeau,

it was 78 days and that's not even

anything, really,

in our election season
this particular time.

This, I'm making fun of Italians here,

I'm sorry that I do this.

But there have been five
Italian Prime Ministers

who've have served shorter terms

than our campaign season in 2016.

So these folks all were
Prime Minister of Italy,

for shorter than we're
gonna have one campaign

to decide who our next president was.

>> Amazing.

>> Over that time period,
there's only three

Italian prime ministers
who served longer terms,

and two of them are
named Silvio Berlusconi.

>> Okay.

>> Which suggests something,
perhaps, about the

Italian voting scene there,
that you could end up

with Silvio Berlusconi twice.

(laughing)

So we're doing lots of polls these days.

And it turns out that there could be some

valuable lessons in the
amount of polls that we do.

One of those good
attributes of the current

polls that we're doing
both of the Iowa Caucus and

the trial heats of Hillary versus Trump,

is that it gives us accurate predictions.

Except when we look at the past
record of how the polls do,

we see that Newt Gingrich was supposed

to be President in 2012.

And Mike Huckabee and Hillary Clinton

were supposed to be the nominees in 2008.

And Joe Lieberman was supposed to be

the nominee in 2004.

>> Oh, President Lieberman.

>> Yeah, that didn't happen.

So the current polling suggests that

there's really no value
in trying to understand

who ultimately is gonna
occupy the White House.

But there are a few other
things that it does show us.

So one is that it shows,
it winnows the field.

So candidates that do
particularly really bad

in the early polling end up dropping out.

And we've already had two,
four, six candidates drop out,

so one Democrat there in
the middle Linc Chafee.

And then five Republicans
have already dropped out.

What current polling also
shows us a little bit about,

is who's getting money.

And of course it takes money
to run an effective campaign.

And so it tells us something
about who's going to get money.

It tells us something about organization,

so if you're doing well in the polls,

it suggests that you might have a

slightly better organization
than the folks that don't.

Tells us something about endorsements,

It's really hard to get
endorsements if you're down there

at 3% like Chris Christie is right now.

So it's harder to get endorsements.

And the current polls tell
us something about attention.

And this is particularly true in 2016,

when Donald Trump has been
leading all the polls,

as he will readily admit to you.

And he is the one that is headlining

the news cycle every single time.

And the last thing that
the current polls do us,

is the current leader of the
polls is driving the agenda.

And again, Mr Trump is
exactly the test case

for how that has happened
this particular cycle.

>> So.

>> We are back at the American Electorate.

>> Woah.

>> That ultimately has the say,

it's not the polls that gets to decide.

>> It's a lot of
institutions along the way.

It's a lot of rules,

rules that were designed to
advantage or disadvantage

certain types of candidates,

certain types of voters, et cetera.

And I know we crammed a lot in that,

but without understanding
all of the rules,

you can't understand who might
actually become President.

>> This next thing is
really interesting now.

Prediction time.

>> Oh my gosh, this is the first time

I've done it with a class.

Is this first for you Sean?

>> It is, yep.

>> Yeah, okay, so.

We are putting our money
where our mouth is.

Although one of our colleagues says,

"Did you actually have
them put money on this?"

I responded, "They're
undergraduates, that's wrong.

"I'm not gonna have my students bet."

But no, we're playing for pride.

>> Which is far more important

to a longhorn than money in the pocket.

>> Yeah, we're playing for pride.

So, lots of you participated
in the Good Judgment poll.

Thank you for participating,

if you didn't this time,
I encourage you to do it

the next one, the next one will be for

the New Hampshire primary.

>> So we suspect that over
the course of this semester

they may ask 10 questions or so,

about the primaries and stuff like that.

So even if you didn't do the first two,

you can still get 80%
of the credit from this

community engagement exercise.

So of the 503 of you who participated,

you think that Bernie
Sanders is gonna get 49%

Hillary Clinton gonna get 45%,

and Martin O'Malley's gonna get 4%.

Bethany is teaching another Gov 310 class,

and her 25 students, you all swamp her.

>> Yeah, you really do.

There are 100 people in that
class but only 25 signed up.

Hopefully I can boost that
number for a subsequent poll.

48% said Hillary Clinton,

or they estimate 48% of the
votes to Hillary Clinton.

45 to Bernie Sanders,

4 to Martin O'Malley.

And then the last column is
the other Good Judgment users.

So we got not only your estimates,

but we got everybody who's
participating in the site

who isn't a UT student.

>> Before you gives those out, first,

a little pride for the
longhorns out there.

>> Oh yeah.

>> Right, there's 1000
people who are participating

in this prediction, you're half of them.

>> I know.

So for the rest of the semester
when you go on that website,

people are gonna maybe wonder,

this is a representation of
what the American public thinks

or what.

>> I think it's the most
politically attuned people think.

>> The most politically
attuned people, yeah.

>> Which includes not only
the two of us but 503 of you.

>> That's awesome.

>> So, way to go class.

We're dominant.

There is a strong Texas
accent in the Good Judgment.

>> It's a very, very strong Texas accent.

So hooray.

>> Let's talk about our predictions.

Brendan can talk about
his in the Bully Pulpit

if he wants.

>> He's not as sure.

So I read the polls like you guys do.

And it's not clear to me
that Sanders has the edge.

Although some of them say he has the edge.

I'm gonna give you a fun
fact about the Iowa caucus,

the college towns are
undervalued in the Iowa caucuses.

Now, college voters
were really important to

Obama's victory in 2008,

2008 Caucuses were January 3rd.

College students were back at home,

and they were voting in
their home districts.

Now college students are voting in--

>> I didn't know this little nuance.

>> Yeah.

>> She is so smart.

>> Thank you.

So obsessed with Iowa,
so obsessed with Iowa.

>> If I would change,

I would change my numbers if I knew that.

>> I know, I'm not that
confident in this prediction,

but I do think that hurts Sanders.

And the other thing people
will say with the Iowa,

is that it's all about the ground game.

And Sanders had a big huge
concert over the weekend,

I don't know if you guys
paid attention to it.

Vampire Weekend played for...

>> That's a band?

>> That's a band.

>> Okay, Vampire Weekend.

It sounds like it would
be that which happens

before Halloween.

>> And Foster the People played.

No?

>> So Dar Williams sang
about Iowa before class.

>> I mean his campaign ad features,

"This land is your land,
this land is my land."

Is that okay?

>> Sure, and also, Paul
Simon and Garfunkel--

>> Oh, that's what it
was, that's what it was,

phew.

>> When you got three,
Simon and Garfunkel.

>> Foster the People.

So he has this big thing, lots
of people turn out for it,

it looks super impressive.

But I don't know that
he has the ground game.

And the ground game is gonna matter a lot.

>> So Martin O'Malley, I
thought he is gonna get

half as much as Bethany.

And I think that's because

the Democratic rules say
that if you don't have

a certain percentage then your delegates

have to separate and
either not participate or,

lump up with someone else.

>> I'm kinda kicking myself for that one.

>> So that was the
reason I only gave a two.

I think the far more interesting
of our predictions though,

is what we think is gonna take
place on the Republican side.

>> Okay wait, just to go back
to that really quickly though,

your class is the only on this chart,

which predicts a Sanders win.

So hold on to that, because
we're gonna be doing some

score keeping afterwards.

You guys, in contrast to my other class,

in contrast to the three of us,

and in contrast to all the
other Good Judgment users,

you guys have a different judgment,

and you may actually
have the right judgment,

so stay tuned.

>> So do I hope for them
or do I hope for me?

>> Um.

>> I mean as a proud parent,

I would want them to outperform me.

>> Well this is, I mean
either way I'll be happy.

>> Right, and sad.

>> And sad, yes.

Okay, Republican more interesting? Yes.

>> Right so Bethany and
I both think Ted Cruz,

Bethany with a slightly
higher percentage than me.

Brendan also thinks Ted Cruz,
slightly less percentage

than even I do,

The classes though, both Bethany's and,

both of Bethany's class, and
the other Good Judgment users

think Donald Trump.

So, and the other Good Judgment,

they're up at 50% for Donald Trump.

I just can't believe that's true.

>> Yeah, I can't believe that either.

I should not that for
the group guesses here,

your class, the other class,
and the Good Judgment users,

I used the median guess
not the mean guess,

for those of you who are
statistically inclined,

that probably matters.

>> I suspect on Wednesday
we're gonna be looking

at these exact same charts.

And I though there was gonna be a row

that's bolded.

And then we'll see.

>> I'm super excited.

>> She's not gonna sleep
tonight, until they know.

Anything else that you
wanna say about Iowa?

Iowa.

>> Iowa.

No.

>> So I think with
that, we'll turn it over

to the Bully Pulpit.

>> And now it's time for,

Brendan's Bully Pulpit.

>> Hey there everybody.

Back again, this time in my normal pale,

not perhaps so red color.

Couple things for you before we head out.

The first is the takeaway
from today's lecture.

So we spent a whole bunch
of time talking about

this long road to the White House,

so we have this timeline, going from the

very first candidate to declare, Ted Cruz,

all the way up until the
election in November.

And we looked at how
this shapes over time,

and what the different
events are along the way,

including primaries and caucuses.

And the difference
between those two things,

and what a caucus even is.

Then we talked a little bit
about the general election

and the Electoral College,

how that relates to how the race is run,

and how these things shake out.

And then finally,

advantages for particular
states based on this.

For next time you have one
chapter in the book to read.

Chapter three.

and that's on Federalism.

And if there's a quiz,
not saying there will be,

but if there is, it would
be only on today's class.

The Iowa Spectacular and that Vox article

that we asked you to read for today.

Okay, last thing before I sign off.

There have been a number
of questions about

how to actually get credit
for making your predictions,

that's a great question.

First, I wanted to say again,

I want to reiterate what
Professor Theriault said

a minute ago, that over
the course of the semester,

there is going to be a
number of these predictions

we want you to make.

So if you didn't get a
chance to register already,

if you forgot to put in your
predictions or whatever.

Still go ahead and make an account,

and plan on doing those
throughout the semester.

If you only did one, never fear,

you'll be able to get
partial credit for this,

and in the end it won't matter that much.

And remember we drop low grades

for community engagement as well.

But the big question of
how to actually get credit,

well the full answer is
coming later in the semester.

Because we want you to
do several of these,

between now and May,

we're going to wait until the very end

to collect the quote unquote evidence

that you've completed these things.

So hang on to any emails
they send you comparing

your predictions with the actual results,

those will be important.

And then stay tuned for complete details.

Right now, just know that
you should be filling

these out when we suggest it at you.

When we ask you to.

And, yeah, do that and
get the credit later,

and I think that's it.

I don't know if I should be looking at

the discussion right now or not.

(laughs)

>> They just like you, that's all.

>> Great, well I like
you guys too, thanks.

>> They're having a Brendan
appreciation moment.

>> Oh yeah, great.

Well I guess, it is Monday only,

so I will see you on Wednesday.

(Credits Music)