Neil DeGrasse Tyson is so great. Tyson for Senate!

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

It's a great bit, but why is it flipped horizontally?

it's a normal trick to prevent videos from being disabled in youtube because of copyright infringement.

Why are there so few (if any) engineers, scientists, and mathematicians involved in politics?

Obviously because we're smart enough to know better.

Kidding aside, his underlying point that the House of Representatives does not actually represent (nor reflect) the American people is spot on. Perhaps it is more indicative of a broken election system designed to keep incumbents in their jobs...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher' to 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher, best arguers' - edited by calvados

the US political system was essentially designed to uphold the interests of the landholder class. it is no surprise then that politicians are typically representatives (lawyers) of the landholder class.

in the realm of checks and balances, many of the built in "checks" are against the interests of the general public.
The "electoral college" is a prime example, but so is having only two choices at the polls : rich asshole #1, or rich asshole #2.
and neither rich asshole gives two shits about you.

Scientists "generally" don't want to trouble themselves with the social sciences as many of them are either socially awkward and cannot relate to the average human, or they simply see things on a grander scale than our petty human problems.

That's what I would think, anyway...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher, best arguers' to 'law, congress, debate, neil degrasse tyson, bill maher, best arguers' - edited by xxovercastxx

*backup=[...snipped...]

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by blankfist.

"The practice, which for example, is bred in debating teams, for example, where you know the subject but you don't know what side you're gonna be put on to argue."

Would go a long way to explaining how an electee can appear to be just as passionate about what they do as they were about what they were going to do before they were elected.

Engineers and Scientists in Congress.

I don't think a good engineer or scientist could even get elected, because their approach to giving out information and answering questions isn't based around what provides the best platform/message.

If they could have a solid opinion on any subject when asked......they simply wouldn't be a good engineer or scientist. And people want to believe that the person they are voting for agrees with them, whether the voter is ignorant or well informed......a good engineer/scientist couldn't possibly know enough about all topics to give a definite answer that would give voters the warm fuzzies.

Or even more simply put: Engineers/Scientists aren't bred for deception and double speak.

So we're back to kill all the lawyers then? (oh god, I hope, I hope, I hope)

maybe being an elected official should be like jury duty. Have a handful of spots that are selected by random.

Sure we'd get some shitheads or some people who are truly stupid. But at least it actually would be more representative. At a certain point, I figure we can't do any worse choosing someone at random to represent us.

The problem is, we are incapable of measuring who is there to genuinely make the country a better place against who is just there to push an agenda or there for their own political motivations.

I am pretty sure I heard on the radio today that congress was going on a six week vacation. I find it sad and very telling, that is telling of the mentality and mindset of these elected officials. Here you have a country that is in financial trouble, unrest on many levels, and they find it fitting to take time off for a job not very well done.

The country is like a business, when your business is failing, you do not take time off and go kick back. Thats sad.

while I disagree with the "country is like a business" part...the rest of what you said is pretty accurate.

We elected them to do a job....they best do it.

I would much prefer the forthrightness of a scientist/engineer to. Unfortunately the citizens of our country don't work on reason or logic. They're much more oriented towards what they feel or what their gut tells them. Too bad their gut can't tell them anything accept whether they're hungry or not, and seeing as obesity is a problem in this country I'd say people's gut lies to them a lot.

Whats worse is people use words like reason and logic to defend their positions that are anything but.

>> ^Porksandwich:

Engineers and Scientists in Congress.
I don't think a good engineer or scientist could even get elected, because their approach to giving out information and answering questions isn't based around what provides the best platform/message.
If they could have a solid opinion on any subject when asked......they simply wouldn't be a good engineer or scientist. And people want to believe that the person they are voting for agrees with them, whether the voter is ignorant or well informed......a good engineer/scientist couldn't possibly know enough about all topics to give a definite answer that would give voters the warm fuzzies.
Or even more simply put: Engineers/Scientists aren't bred for deception and double speak.


while partially true, there are plenty of well spoken scientists, it's just a matter of them not being able to get elected because the money is behind those that fall in line with corporate ideals. They would get squashed on every side by negative media campaigns, lack of funding, lack of a platform for widespread dissemination of their message etc.

Oh Im not saying this wouldn't happen either. But if you wanted a true and good engineer/scientist in that kind of position, they should be able to say "I haven't had time to form an informed opinion on that." Which whether or not they had a funded and excellent campaign, is not what the public responds to. They want absolutes, their guy has to have an opinion on everything and pretty much line up with theirs. It would be very unlikely that any scientist/engineer you got elected was actually a good scientist/engineer, more than likely they may be educated in sciences but have an agenda they are willing to say whatever it takes to push forward.

So to simplify the point again: Politicians are all liars, and science is based in untwisted fact. To be a good scientist you have to take the facts as they are instead of twisting them to serve your purpose.

>> ^ghark:

>> ^Porksandwich:
Engineers and Scientists in Congress.


I don't think a good engineer or scientist could even get elected, because their approach to giving out information and answering questions isn't based around what provides the best platform/message.
If they could have a solid opinion on any subject when asked......they simply wouldn't be a good engineer or scientist. And people want to believe that the person they are voting for agrees with them, whether the voter is ignorant or well informed......a good engineer/scientist couldn't possibly know enough about all topics to give a definite answer that would give voters the warm fuzzies.
Or even more simply put: Engineers/Scientists aren't bred for deception and double speak.

while partially true, there are plenty of well spoken scientists, it's just a matter of them not being able to get elected because the money is behind those that fall in line with corporate ideals. They would get squashed on every side by negative media campaigns, lack of funding, lack of a platform for widespread dissemination of their message etc.

Lawyers...that's why we have a U.S. Senator, speaking on the Senate floor, spouting BS which was "not intended to be a factual statement". +1 for scientists and engineers (and not "truth engineers").

>> ^Bhruic:

It's a great bit, but why is it flipped horizontally?


To avoid youtube's automatic copyright video removal bots.

.tniop a sah nosyT essarGeD lieN

>> ^HaricotVert:
Why are there so few (if any) engineers, scientists, and mathematicians involved in politics?
Obviously because we're smart enough to know better. <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/wink.gif">
Kidding aside, his underlying point that the House of Representatives does not actually represent (nor reflect) the American people is spot on. Perhaps it is more indicative of a broken election system designed to keep incumbents in their jobs...


He understands this yet does nothing (From what I know, I am generalizing here) to change it? He is as wrong as the politians he points out as wrong. Also, @Boise_Lib he hasn't run, I believe. So that makes him more of a Monday-night quarterback than anything...

See, for me the sad part is that HE IS RIGHT. But what does he plan to do about it? (And if anyone has information that he is doing something about it, please post. I would be glad to support this man anyway I could.)

He hasn't run; have You?
He's doing nothing--he's using his national platform to speak out and tell the truth as he sees it; what are you doing?
Talk about Monday Quarterbacking.

I'm sorry if this seems like an attack on you, but the argument of, "What's he doing about it" is over used and usually not helpful.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^HaricotVert:
Why are there so few (if any) engineers, scientists, and mathematicians involved in politics?
Obviously because we're smart enough to know better. <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/wink.gif">
Kidding aside, his underlying point that the House of Representatives does not actually represent (nor reflect) the American people is spot on. Perhaps it is more indicative of a broken election system designed to keep incumbents in their jobs...

He understands this yet does nothing (From what I know, I am generalizing here) to change it? He is as wrong as the politians he points out as wrong. Also, @Boise_Lib he hasn't run, I believe. So that makes him more of a Monday-night quarterback than anything...
See, for me the sad part is that HE IS RIGHT. But what does he plan to do about it? (And if anyone has information that he is doing something about it, please post. I would be glad to support this man anyway I could.)

I am not Monday night quarterbacking only because I do something about my culture in my own profession. I don't speak about the changes that need to be done with the exception of practical effects (I promote truth over policy, for example.)

I feel better in my job than if I was in the spotlight where I would only be marginalized. I am not a scientist, so I wouldn't be effective. I don't have the clout that De has, and so policy would not change. But I change policy where I am...

And no, it wasn't an attack. Your perspective was amazing, actually Boise, and I must truly evaluate it. And perhaps apply it. But I will argue that he is not shining the spotlight much at all...

>> ^Boise_Lib:

He hasn't run; have You?
He's doing nothing--he's using his national platform to speak out and tell the truth as he sees it; what are you doing?
Talk about Monday Quarterbacking.
I'm sorry if this seems like an attack on you, but the argument of, "What's he doing about it" is over used and usually not helpful.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^HaricotVert:
Why are there so few (if any) engineers, scientists, and mathematicians involved in politics?
Obviously because we're smart enough to know better. <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/wink.gif">
Kidding aside, his underlying point that the House of Representatives does not actually represent (nor reflect) the American people is spot on. Perhaps it is more indicative of a broken election system designed to keep incumbents in their jobs...

He understands this yet does nothing (From what I know, I am generalizing here) to change it? He is as wrong as the politians he points out as wrong. Also, @Boise_Lib he hasn't run, I believe. So that makes him more of a Monday-night quarterback than anything...
See, for me the sad part is that HE IS RIGHT. But what does he plan to do about it? (And if anyone has information that he is doing something about it, please post. I would be glad to support this man anyway I could.)

@Lawdeedaw
Cool, maybe my own frustration at being unable to see a way to change things for the better has caused me to form a hard, cynical crust over my inner, hopeful being.

Business "men" shouldn't be in congress, because they already own congress. http://i.imgur.com/SOVSk.jpg

>> ^Peroxide:

Business "men" shouldn't be in congress, because they already own congress. http://i.imgur.com/SOVSk.jpg


Fuck, I can't believe he's been gone 3 years already.

Same video, non-reversed.

*backup=[...snipped...]

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by legacy0100.