What the GOP Candidates Discussed in the First Debate, and What They Did Not

The first Republican debate went as many could have predicted it would go. Domestic policy was more center stage than Donald Trump. Current and former governors touted their records in their home states. Moderators asked many candidates how they felt they would fare against Hillary Clinton. Candidates took turns lashing out at Planned Parenthood and jockeyed to appear the most pro-life.

Image credit: komonews.com

The time in the debate that was spent on foreign policy was less substantive. The prevailing wisdom of the GOP primary appears to be that ISIS deserves far more attention than any other international issue. Candidates took turns fear-mongering about the Islamic State, saying that they would take the fight to ISIS, yet always stopping short of advocating for boots on the ground (although never ruling it out either). Only Marco Rubio spoke of the need to keep the US economy competitive with overseas markets. Some candidates lamented that our military is in decline, echoing Mitt Romney’s point that the Navy has the fewest ships since 1916 (a talking point which, while technically correct, has little to no bearing on the Navy’s ability to project power: there were no aircraft carriers or ballistic missile submarines in 1916).

Nimitz Class Aircraft Carrier (not available in 1916)

image credit: ahctv.com

The consensus among the candidates on foreign policy seemed that if only we spent more money on the military (on which we already spend more than the next seven countries combined), talked tougher, and threatened more sanctions and bombings than we already do, ISIS would flee in terror, Iran would bow to any of our demands, and Putin would fall into line.

What is most notable (if unsurprising) about the Republican debate is not what the candidates talked about but what they did not.

The overwhelming majority of climate scientists say that climate change is occurring and is caused by humans. The Pentagon considers climate change to be a top threat to security in the 21st century. Around 69% of American adults are concerned about climate change. And yet, the two-hour debate concluded without a single mention of environmental issues from the candidates or the Fox News moderators.

Image credit: climatechange.procon.org

The wealthiest 0.1% of americans are worth more than the bottom 90%, and estimates of the amount of money to spent on the 2016 election are as high as $5 billion (which would more than double what was spent in 2012, itself a record-breaking year). However, the topics of income inequality and the influence of moneyed interests in politics were scarcely mentioned in the debate.

The reason that these issues were omitted in the first GOP debate is self-evident: the candidates do not want to talk about them. While a majority of Americans are concerned about climate change, the Republican base (which is vital for winning the primary) is not. Many GOP candidates deny the science behind climate change to cater to the base; but this could work against them in the general election, so it is easier just to avoid the issue. The primary may also very well be decided by who can rally the most donors to their cause, so talking about money in politics is not a winning strategy either.

In all likelihood, most or all of the candidates will avoid these issues for as long as they can, choosing instead to address the issues which their base cares about most. If there is any confusion as to what these issues are, one needs only to have watched last night’s debate.

Connor Ruby is a graduate of Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts and a political consultant for Bulldozer Health. Connor studied comparative government at Clark as well as abroad at the University of Trier in Germany and covers politics and political processes in the US and abroad.

Watching the Super Bowl in Germany

This article originally appeared on another blog, FootballSportsandLife, in February 2014.

(But there’s still a lot of this – Prost!)

I arrived in Trier, Germany for my college study abroad program in August. I was prepared to miss out on an entire season of watching football and playing it with my friends. What surprised me is that Germany has more to offer football lovers than one might originally think.

I had only been here a couple weeks when I received a flyer for an American football tryout at a local sports club. There are actually several such teams in the area, and I ended up joining one and playing full pads, full contact football for the first time since high school. I was even able to find a bar in my city that was showing football highlights on SportsCenter. And then came the Super Bowl.

What I found interesting is that many Germans think about American football the same way Americans think about soccer: they’re generally not that interested, but the championship is another story (sort of how a lot of American’s don’t watch any soccer for four years and then throw a big party for the World Cup Final). Just like in the US, in Germany the Super Bowl can be an excuse to throw a party and drink more beers than one probably should on a Sunday night.

I went to one such party with some German friends from my university. The party itself wasn’t too different from others: we sat around the TV, beers in hand, waiting for the game to start. Because viewers in Germany probably aren’t so interested in the stats and careers of a bunch of American football players they’ve never heard of, the German announcers seemed less interested in analyzing the teams and more on explaining football. Fans of the Youtube videos “NFL Bad Lip Reading”would have laughed with me when the announcers cut to several clips of football players’ and coaches’ voices being dubbed over to say ridiculous things in German (a coach saying “Wilkommen bei McDonald’s” into his headset, for example).

Finally the game started (12:30 a.m. German time), and I realized that I would probably spend a lot of it explaining the rules (to be fair, I have to do that at American parties, too). I was not wrong: after the first play, I found myself having to explain what a safety was (after I stopped laughing at the Broncos’ blunder, of course).

What came as a disappointment was that I was not able to watch the Super Bowl commercials (and I heard they were pretty good this year). There were German commercials instead, which to their credit seemed to amuse my friends, but the humor was lost on me. The halftime show went on as usual though, no surprises there.

In third quarter, I could feel the football enthusiasm leaving the room. Whether that was due to disinterest in the sport, the fact that it was now past 3 in the morning, or that Seattle v. Denver turned out to be the equivalent of a Varsity team playing a Pop Warner team, I couldn’t tell. We sat around and finished our beers after the game ended, then, at 4:30 in the morning, called it a night.

Watching the Super Bowl in Germany had been fun, interesting, and my friends had gotten a taste of how we party for our big game in America. I can’t wait to see how they party for their big game when the World Cup comes around!

That last sentence is funny in retrospect. Germany won the world cup in 2014 – and ohhh did they party.

—

Connor Ruby is a graduate of Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts and a political consultant for Bulldozer Health. Connor studied comparative government at Clark as well as abroad at the University of Trier in Germany and covers politics and political processes in the US and abroad.

‘Big Pharma’ Game and the Ethical Dilemma of for-Profit Pharmaceuticals

A new game called Big Pharma is out to make a point about it’s subject matter – with a twist. The game allows the player to play as the executive of a pharmaceutical company, making decisions about purchasing lab equipment and developing medications. At a glance, it may not be so different from other management simulation games, the objective of which is to develop the most successful business plan and company possible. That is, however, part of the point.

A key message of the game is that a pharmaceutical corporation is often like any other – it’s main motive is profit. However, the products of the pharmaceutical industry are not like other consumer goods: they exist not for leisure or profit but for health. The game explores the ethical dilemmas that occur when the interests of a company and the needs of patients clash.

As the game’s maker, Tim Wicksteed, says, “You can deliberately hold off producing your tuberculosis remedy until it infects half of Africa, in order to maximise your profits.” The game’s makers also note that many players indeed do not think twice about sacrificing quality of the drug for the sake of profit. This can, of course, be attributed to the fact that Big Pharma is a game and the players are not affecting real people’s lives as a pharmaceutical company would by making a similar decision. What the game does is highlight that there is a disconnect between what is best for the company and best for the patient.

An important point is that the game is not out to inherently demonize the pharmaceutical industry. While there can be instances of corporate executives prioritizing profit over patients, it is important to remember that many of these companies perform groundbreaking research on the toughest diseases and create drugs which improve and even save many lives. Rather than denouncing the industry altogether, the game puts the player in the same position of power as the executive, and allows them to make their own decision.

Consider, for example, the recent outbreak of Ebola. One theory as to why a cure for Ebola had not been developed sooner was that there was little incentive for profit-driven companies to invest in curing a disease that primarily affects poorer nations which cannot shell out large sums of money to pay for the drug. This is the kind of dilemma that the player is allowed to explore in Big Pharma. So the real question this game asks is: will the company do what is best for its customers (in this case, patients), or what is best for its own bottom line?

Connor Ruby is a graduate of Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts and a political consultant for Bulldozer Health. Connor studied comparative government at Clark as well as abroad at the University of Trier in Germany and covers politics and political processes in the US and abroad.

Brian the Andal

This article contains spoilers for HBO’s Game of Thrones, and no spoilers for NBC Nightly News

After four months in limbo, NBC has made its decision regarding Brian Williams.  Williams, longtime anchor of NBC Nightly News, was suspended by NBC after it was discovered that he had exaggerated his experiences covering the Iraq War and an internal NBC investigation found that he had made several other inaccurate statements about his professional experiences.  Brian Williams will take a pay cut, be demoted and transferred to MSNBC’s breaking news desk, and must publicly apologize for the falsehoods he perpetuated.  Williams has said, “I let down my NBC colleagues and our viewers, and I’m determined to earn back their trust.”  Deceit in a time of war, followed by a pledge to earn redemption, it almost sounds like something out of Game of Thrones, doesn’t it?

Funnily enough, Game of Thrones does actually feature a character with a similar story (and even some resemblance) to Williams.  Jorah Mormont, or Jorah the Andal, as he is sometimes called in Essos, was in many ways a faithful and devoted bodyguard to Daenerys Targaryen.  In many ways, but not all.  For much of his time in her service, Mormont was secretly spying on Daenerys for King Robert Baratheon, who wanted her dead.  While he did eventually cease his espionage, Jorah never told Daenerys of his betrayal.  When his secret was discovered by Daenerys, he was banished.

Image credit: Twiitter – @Japoco_della_Q

Not content to be cast out, Mormont seeks to regain the favor of the Mother of Dragons any way he can.  When bringing her a member of a rival house, Tyrion Lannister, does not appease her, he attempts to win glory fighting in the Great Games of Mereen.  The tournament ends with an assassination attempt against Daenerys, which Jorah is instrumental in foiling.  A brief reunion before Daenerys is spirited away on the back of her dragon implies that he has at least partially redeemed himself.

Needless to say, Brian Williams’ return has not been quite as epic as Jorah Mormont’s, with Williams appearing on the dragon-less Today Show to acknowledge his mistakes.  However, the similarities between the two are striking.  Both Williams and Mormont were well respected and trusted until a scandal broke which threw their credibility into serious doubt. After a hiatus, both have returned, although likely not in the same capacity as before, and the outcome of their quests for redemption are far from certain.

Connor Ruby is a graduate of Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts and a political consultant for Bulldozer Health. Connor studied comparative government at Clark as well as abroad at the University of Trier in Germany and covers politics and political processes in the US and abroad.