LEGACY ADMISSIONS CLUSTER MUNITIONS AND SHOULD SOMEONE PRIMARY PRESIDENT BIDEN?

STAY TUNED FOR IVORY TOWER ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY, FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

I'M JOINED AROUND THE TABLE TONIGHT BY TY SEIDULE FROM HAMILTON COLLEGE, ANIRBAN ACHARYA FROM LEMOYNE COLLEGE AND RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY.

NOW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS ENDED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, RULING THAT RACE CANNOT BE A FACTOR IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS, PRESSURE IS BUILDING FOR SCHOOLS TO END SO-CALLED "LEGACY ADMISSIONS."

THOSE ARE THE APPLICANTS LOOKED UPON FAVORABLY BECAUSE THEY'RE CHILDREN OF ALUMNI OR HAVE A CONNECTION TO DONORS.

OPPONENTS OF LEGACY ADMISSIONS ARGUE IT GIVES AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE TO THE WHITE AND WEALTHY.

A BILL WAS INTRODUCED LAST WEEK IN THE STATE ASSEMBLY TO END THE PROCESS IN NEW YORK.

SO ANIRBAN, SHOULD SCHOOLS END THE PRACTICE OF LEGACY ADMISSIONS?

>> I PERSONALLY THINK IT SHOULD.

BUT THERE ARE ALSO OTHER ANGLES TO THIS.

LEGACY ADMISSIONS IS, FOR THE LACK OF A BETTER WORD, IS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR THE WEALTHY.

I WAS QUITE SURPRISED TO SEE THE STATISTIC THAT 36% OF THE HARVARD'S CLASS ADMITTED WERE LEGACY STUDENTS.

NOW, YOU KNOW, RACE WAS ALWAYS THIS KIND OF MODEST TOOL, ONE OF THE THUNKS THAT ONE COULD CONSIDER WHEN IT COMES TO ADMISSIONS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION ABOUT LEGACY ADMISSIONS, IT BRINGS FORWARD A DISCUSSION, AN IDEA THAT THERE ARE OTHER FORMS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION THAT GO TO THE RICH, TO THE WHITE, TO THE WEALTHY, AND THAT'S KIND OF HIDDEN FROM SIGHT.

I THINK LEGACY ADMISSIONS AND THE DISCUSSIONS ON LEGACY ADMISSIONS PUTS A SPOTLIGHT ON THAT.

AND THERE IS A VERY GOOD BOOK THAT I REQUEST MY VIEWERS TO READ.

IT'S CALLED "THE CHOSEN" HIDDEN HISTORY OF ADMISSION AND EXCLUSION IN HARVARD, YALE AND PRINCIPLESTON.

IT CAME OUT IN 2005.

SO, ON THE WHOLE, I THINK THAT LEGACY ADMISSIONS SHOULD BE LOOKED AT VERY SERIOUSLY BY ALL UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES.

AND, YOU KNOW, MOST AFFIRMATIVE ACTION-- POSTED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, I WOULD THINK THAT UNIVERSITIES WOULD CONCENTRATE MORE ON CLASS ISSUES AND TRY TO GET LOW INCOME STUDENTS AND HELP LOW INCOME STUDENTS TO HAVE A GOOD, MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCE IN THESE ELITE COLLEGES.

>> WHY WOULD SCHOOLS CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS PRACTICE?

BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR OF IT.

>> THEY HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR BECAUSE ONE IS TO GET A COMMUNITY, A MULTIGENERATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT YOU GET WHEN YOU HAVE LEGACY ADMISSIONS, AND YOU CREATE THAT COMMUNITY.

HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE SOME REASONS NOT TO DO IT.

AND IT'S NOT JUST LEGACY.

IT'S ALSO ATHLETE, DONORS AND CHILDREN OF FACULTY, AND THAT COUNTS FOR MAYBE 6% OF TOTAL ADMISSIONS BUT 30%-- 6% OF THOSE WHO APPLY, BUT 30% OF THE ADMISSIONS, SO IT IS A BIGGER THING.

AND ATHLETES ARE PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST FAVORED THAT NO ONE TALKS ABOUT.

AND IT IS MAINLY THOSE WHO ARE WEALTHY AND WHITE WHO BECOME THE ATHLETES THAT GO TO THESE SCHOOLS.

BECAUSE EVEN TO PLAY SOCCER, WHICH YOU THINK ONLY TAKES CLEATS AND A SOCCER BALL, REQUIRES TRAVEL TEAMS AND REQUIRES COACHES.

SO ALL OF THESE THINGS, AND THE DONORS AND CHILDREN OF FACULTY GET A LEG UP AND IT'S USUALLY WHITE AND UPPER MIDDLE CLASS OR WEALTHY THAT GET THAT.

SO I THINK THAT THE WAY TO DO THIS THOUGH, IS TO MAKE IT SOMETHING WHERE NEW YORK STATE OR EVEN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WHICH IS LOOKING AT THIS NOW DOES THIS ACROSS THE BOARD SO EVERYONE IS ON EQUAL FOOT.

I ALSO WILL SAY IT ONLY COVERS THE TIPPY TOP OF THESE SCHOOLS LIKE HARVARD.

MOST SCHOOLS ARE JUST TRYING TO PUT HEADS ON BEDS AND BUTTS IN SEATS AND FOR THEM, IT'S ABOUT TUITION NOT ABOUT THESE THAT ARE AT THE VERY TOP OF THE COLLEGIATE SCALE.

>> RICK.

>> A COUPLE OF THUNKS HERE.

THIS IS PART OF A BIGGER ISSUE THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CASE WAS PART OF, WHICH IS HOW DO COLLEGES MAKE DECISIONS AS TO WHO CAN ENTER FRESHMAN CLASS.

BECAUSE FOR MOST COLLEGES, THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS EXCEEDS THEIR CAPACITY.

AND SO WHAT CRITERIA ARE ACCESSIBLE AND WHAT ARE NOT?

-- WHAT CRITERIA ARE ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT ARE NOT.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT RACE, AND WE TALKED ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION LAST TIME.

THE LEGACY ISSUE, I'M GLAD TYE BROUGHT UP THE FACT THERE IS DISCRIMINATION IN TERMS OF ATHLETIC PROWESS.

THERE ARE STILL WOMEN SCHOOLS AROUND, WHERE THEY HAVE ADMISSION POLICIES BASED UPON GENDER.

THE QUESTION IS WHAT CRITERIA ARE ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT ARE NOT.

LEGACY ALSO MEANS SOMETHING DIFFERENT AT THE VERY TOP VERSUS, SAY, AT A UNIVERSITY LIKE UTICA UNIVERSITY.

FOR US, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AT CHILDREN OF PAST GRADUATES AS A WAY OF REINFORCING THE COMMUNITY THAT TYE SAID, PLUS, IT GIVES US MORE INFORMATION.

IT TELLS US SOMETHING ABOUT PERHAPS THE TRACK RECORD.

WE MAY BE ABLE TO BE MORE CONFIDENT THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO COME.

AND SO THERE ARE SOME GOOD REASONS BEHIND THAT.

SO CLEARLY I THINK SOME SCHOOLS ARE TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN 33%, I WAS SURPRISED AT THE PERCENTAGE OF THE HARVARD CLASS THAT APPARENTLY COMES FROM LEGACIES, BUT AGAIN, I ALSO WORRY ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT GETTING TOO INVOLVED INTO DETERMINING THE CRITERIA THAT COLLEGES CAN AND CAN'T USE TO FILL THEIR CLASSES.

>> I WAS LOOKING AT THE HISTORY OF IT, RIGHT?

IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF NOTE HERE THAT FOR ABOUT 200 YEARS, IT WAS A VERY WHITE CENTRIC POLICY THAT JUST KEPT NON-WHITE PEOPLE OUT OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

AND THE WAY THE LEGACY ADMISSIONS STARTED, IT TURNS OUT, WAS TO KEEP BLACK AND JEWISH PEOPLE OUT OF THE EDUCATION SYSTEM.

SO IT ALREADY HAS A TERRIBLY RACIST LEGACY BUT THE POINT OF ALLOWING-- COLLEGES DEPEND ON DONATIONS, COLLEGES DEPEND ON THE LARGESS OF THE WEALTHY.

TO THAT EXTENT, I THINK THERE IS A POINT THAT YOU ADMIT SOME LEGACY STUDENTS OR, YOU KNOW, BASED ON ALUMNI, AND SO ON.

BUT IT DEPENDS UPON WHAT PERCENTAGE.

AND AGAIN I'LL COME BACK TO THE IDEA HOW ARE UNIVERSITIES ACTIVELY HELPING LOW INCOME STUDENTS TO ENTER THEIR UNIVERSITY AND HAVE A SUCCESSFUL GROUP WITHIN THAT UNIVERSITY.

THAT'S IMPORTANT.

SO I DON'T THINK IT'S-- IT'S GOOD THAT LEGACY ADMISSIONS COULD BE NOT TAKEN OUT BUT I THINK THAT'S THE OTHER PART THAT'S IMPORTANT.

>> THERE IS ONE ASSUMPTION HERE.

THE OPPONENTS TO LEGACY ADMISSIONS ARE SOMEHOW AZOOMING THAT IF WE DON'T HAVE LEGACY, THAT THOSE SPOTS ARE GOING TO GO TO LOW INCOME MINORITY STUDENTS.

AND WHO SAYS THAT THEY ARE.

THEY MAY GO JUST TO OTHER WEALTHY WHITES.

>> ESPECIALLY WITH THE END OF THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> JUST BEFORE THIS WEEK'S NATO MEETING IN LITHUANIA, PRESIDENT BIDEN AUTHORIZED SENDING CLUSTER MUNITIONS TO UKRAINE THE WEAPONS WOULD HELP DISLODGE DUG-IN RUSSIAN DEFENSES.

BUT CLUSTER MUNITIONS ARE BANNED IN MUCH OF THE WORLD-ALTHOUGH NOT BY THE U.S. OR RUSSIA-BECAUSE OF THE DANGER TO CIVILIANS.

THIS DECISION PRIORITIZES MILITARY CONSIDERATIONS OVER HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS.

TO BEGIN WITH, CAN YOU GIVE US AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT A CLUSTER MUNITION IS?

>> ALL AMMUNITION IS DANGEROUS TO EVERYBODY.

CLUSTER BONDS ARE A DUAL PURPOSE IMPROVED CONVENTIONAL MUSICIANS AND A 155-MILLIMETER ARTILLERY SHELL BREAKS APART IN THE AIR AND BOMB LETS COME OUT.

HALF GO AFTER ARMORED VEHICLES AND THE OTHER HALF GO AFTER PERSONNEL.

THEY'RE WAY MORE EFFECTIVE PARTICULARLY AGAINST AN ENTRENCHED ENEMY THAN REGULAR ARTILLERY SHELL.

THEY'RE VERY EFFECTIVE AND WE HAVE LOTS OF STOCKPILES OF THEM AND WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM TO UKRAINE BECAUSE A: THEY ASKED FOR THEM.

AND B: IT'S ON UKRAINIAN TERRITORY AND C: WE HAVE RUN OUT OF REGULAR AMMUNITION.

THAT'S WHY WE ARE GIVING IT TO THEM.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY HAD A DUD RATE AND ALL AMMUNITION HAS DUD RATES BUT BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY OF THESE BOMBLETS, THE RATE IS HIGH.

WHEN WE USE THE OLDER CLUSTER BOMBS, THERE IS A HIGH LEVEL OF DUD RATE AND IT HAS MAIMED AND KILLED LOTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

>> WHEN YOU SAY DEAD RATE.

>> DUD RATE.

IF YOU HAVE 88 OF THESE BOMBLETS COME OUT, IT USED TO BE THE RUSSIANS HAD 30 OR 40% WAS DUD.

OUR RATE IS 2%.

CONGRESS SAYS IT SHOULD ONLY BE 1%.

>> IF WE USE THEM OR SEND THEM TO UKRAINE, DO WE LOSE THE MORAL HIGH GROUND, RICK?

>> WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE?

BOTH SIDES, BOTH RUSSIAN AND UKRAINE ARE USING THE CLUSTER BOMBS, SO UKRAINE HAS REQUESTED MORE OF THEM AS THEY'RE RUNNING OUT OF MUNITIONS OF ALL TYPE.

THEY CLEARLY-- THERE IS CLEARLY A SHORT-TERM VERSUS LONG-TERM ISSUE HERE THAT, IN THE SHORT-TERM AS TYE SAID, THEY'RE VERY EFFECTIVE BUT IN THE LONG-TERM, IT CAN BE USED LATER AFTER THE WAR, WHEN MANY OF THESE DUDS ARE SITTING AROUND IN WHAT IS NOW GOING TO HOPEFULLY BECOME POPULATED AREA, WHERE CHILDREN AND OTHER CIVILIANS ARE MAIMED.

SO SHOULD THEY BE USING THEM, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, WE HAVE A STOCKPILE OF THESE.

WE HAVE NOT SIGNED AGREEMENTS BANNING THEM.

SO I'M ON THE FENCE ON THIS ONE ACTUALLY.

>> SO, TYE MENTIONED IT'S ON UKRAINIAN TERRITORY.

SHOULD THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE ANIRBAN?

>> AS YOU POINTED OUT, U.S., RUSSIA AND UKRAINE ARE NOT SIGNATORIES, 70% OF NATO ALLIES ARE SIGNATORIES OF THE TREATY TO BAN THE CLUSTER WEAPONS.

THESE ARE HORRIBLY CHILD MAIMING WEAPONS.

THOMAS GREEN FIELD SAID THAT THEY HAVE NO PLACE IN THE BATTLEFIELD.

SO IT IS KIND OF IRONIC THAT BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS NOW TOUTING THIS AS A WAR FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, AND ARE QUITE READY TO USE A KIND OF BOMB THAT WILL MAIM AND KILL AND HURT CHILDREN FOR AGES TO COME.

LET ME JUST PUT IN A COUPLE OF STATISTICS HERE.

NOT ONLY IN LAOS, COS VICTIMS WERE 40% LIKELY TO BE UNDER 14 YEARS OLD.

AND 40% LIKEWISE CHILDREN IN SYRIA, SO THIS IS A HORRENDOUS WEAPON AND IT HAS BEEN LIKEWISE BANNED BY 70% OF NATO ALLIES.

SO I...

I WOULD SIMPLY SAY SHAME ON THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION FOR USING THESE KIND OF CLUSTER WEAPONS AND SENDING THEM TO UKRAINE.

IT'S A TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE IDEA AND IT'S FINE, THIS IS LEGAL, I GUESS BUT IT'S MORALLY WRONG.

AND YOU KNOW, U.S. TALKS A BIG DEAL ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS, THESE ARE THE KINDS OF ISSUES THAT JUST SHOWS IT'S COMPLETE FIASCO ON THIS ONE.

TERRIBLE.

>> TOTALLY DISAGREE.

MORALLY WORSE TO LET PUTIN WIN.

AND THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD NOT GIVE THESE TO UKRAINIANS WHO ASK FOR THEM WHO ARE FIGHTING AGAINST A REPREHENSIBLE AND CRIMINAL REGIME, AND GIVE THEM EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO WIN, I THINK THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS DOING EXACTLY THE RIGHT THING BY GIVING THEM THESE MUNITIONS AND LETTING UKRAINE DECIDE WHAT SHOULD BE ON THEIR OWN TERRITORY.

IT'S NOT AS IF THEY'RE PUTTING THEM IN RUSSIA.

THE WORST THING THAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN IS TO HAVE PUTIN WIN AND THESE WILL HELP PREVENT PUTIN FROM WINNING.

>> AND ONE THING, YOU MAKE A PERSUASIVE CASE AND YOU DO, TOO, WHEN IS WHY I'M ON THE BORDER BUT I BELIEVE CURRENT LAW SAYS HE CANNOT TRANSFER THESE WEAPONS IF THERE IS MORE THAN A 1% DUD RATE.

AND I'VE SEEN NO ESTIMATES THAT COME CLOSE TO 1%.

I MEAN THE BEST I'VE SEEN IS 4%, AND SOME SUGGEST 10 TO 20%.

>> BUT THE PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO OVERRIDE THAT WITH AN EMERGENCY, WHICH THIS IS.

>> WHERE IS THE LINE-- WELL, WE WON'T GO THERE, IN TERMS OF PROVIDING AID?

>> I THINK WE HAVE JUST DESTROYED THE LAST CHEMICAL MUSICIANS IN THE AMERICAN INVENTORY.

JUST DESTROYED LAST WEEK.

THERE ARE DEFINITE LIMITS ON WHAT WE WILL AND WON'T DO.

AND OF COURSE WE WON'T USE NUCLEAR, BLUEJAY, CHEMICAL.

THESE ARE-- BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL.

THESE ARE BEYOND THE PALE.

AGAINST A CRIMINAL REGIME LIKE PUTIN'S, THIS IS GOING TO GIVE THE UKRAINIANS A BETTER CHANCE.

>> WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE?

AS YOU SAID, RUNNING OUT OF NON-CLUSTER MUNITIONS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT OPPONENTS TO THIS GIVE US ANOTHER SCENARIO THAT UKRAINIANS CAN USE.

>> THAT'S A PRETTY INTERESTING FACT IN THERE THAT WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF OTHER ARTILLERY TO SEND TO THEM.

>> THEY ARE.

>> BUT WE ARE, TOO, RIGHT?

>> AND WE ARE GOING TO SEND WEAPONS THAT WILL KILL CHILDREN FOR YEARS AND YEARS ON END AND I GUESS... >> SO THE ALTERNATIVE IS FOR THE UKRAINIANS TO DO WITH FEWER MUSICIAN-- MU NUTIONS.

>> THE ALTERNATIVE IS NOT TO CONTINUE THE PROXY WAR AND HAVE THE UKRAINE SIT DOWN FOR A PEACE ACCORD AND GO WITH THE AGREEMENTS AND DO THE FOLLOWING.

U.S. IS NOT DOING THAT.

(ALL TALKING AT ONCE).

>> HOW WILL THAT WORK IF RUSSIA IS CONTROLLING 20% OF THE UKRAINIAN TERRITORY.

>> THERE WERE NEGOTIATIONS IN PARIS AND...

BUT THE... BORIS JOHNSON WENT AND SAID WE DON'T WANT THOSE NEGOTIATIONS, RIGHT.

WELL DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE.

WE WANT TO CONTINUE THIS WAR IN ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WE DON'T REALLY CARE THAT UKRAINIAN LIVES ARE LOST EVERY DAY.

WE WANT THE WAR TO CONTINUE SO THAT WE CAN DEGRADE PUTIN.

THAT'S OUR MAIN GOAL.

SO LET'S SAY THAT OUR MAIN GOAL.

WE DON'T HAVE HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERNS.

WE DON'T HAVE CONCERNS THAT CHILDREN WILL BE KILLED FOR AGES SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.

I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.

>> REMEMBER THERE IS A BAD GUY HERE.

IT'S NOT BORIS JOHNSON AND IT'S NOT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

THE BAD GUY IS VLADAMIR PUTIN AND HE HAS INVADED A SOVEREIGN NATION AND PUT THE ENTIRE EUROPE AT RISK.

AND THAT'S WHO WE SHOULD, I THINK WE SHOULD-- TO ME IS THE BAD GUY HERE.

>> PUTIN IS EVIL BUT IS THE SOLUTION KILLING CHILDREN OVER SEVERAL DECADES?

I DON'T KNOW.

>> PUTIN HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF KILLING CHILDREN.

>> OKAY, POLLS SHOW PRESIDENT BIDEN TO BE WIDELY UNPOPULAR.

THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT HIS AGE AND MENTAL SHARPNESS.

HE NOT INFREQUENTLY MIS-SPEAKS.

HE AVOIDS THE PRESS.

HE SAID HE WOULD BE A TRANSITIONAL PRESIDENT BUT HE'S RUNNING AGAIN.

IN 2020 HE WAS ABLE TO STAY OFF THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL DUE TO COVID, SOMETHING HE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THIS TIME.

RICK, IS HE THE BEST DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE?

SHOULD HE BE PRIMARIED?

>> WELL, LET'S TAKE A LOOK IN TERMS OF THE PRIMARY.

WHO WOULD RUN AGAINST HIM AND WHAT WOULD THE GOAL BE?

HOW WOULD THAT HELP DEMOCRATS?

YOU ARE RIGHT, HIS PUBLIC OPINION POLLS SHOW THAT THEY'RE PRETTY LOW, BUT RECENT POLLS HAVE SHOWN HE IS RUNNING AT LEAST EVEN AND SLIGHTLY AHEAD OF DeSANTIS AND TRUMP HEAD TO HEAD.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A NATIONAL ELECTION IN 2024.

REALLY WHO IS GOING TO ELECT THE NEXT PRESIDENT ARE THE VOTERS IN GEORGIA, ARIZONA, WISCONSIN, YOU KNOW, BIDEN WON EACH OF THOSE STATES WITH LESS THAN 50% OF THE VOTE.

HE WON PENNSYLVANIA WITH 50.1%.

MICHIGAN WAS ALSO CLOSE.

SO MY FEAR IS THAT IN A DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY, USUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THE CANDIDATES GET PULLED TO THE LEFT IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES AND TO THE RIGHT IN THE REPUBLICAN.

AND I THINK PULLING BIDEN TO THE LEFT IS GOING TO BE PROBLEMATIC ON MOST ISSUES IN THOSE STATES WITH PERHAPS THE EXCEPTION OF ABORTION.

IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT NORTH CAROLINA WAS THE ONLY STATE THAT WAS VERY CLOSE FOR TRUMP.

HE WON THAT STATE WITH LESS THAN 50% OF THE VOTE.

THE NEXT TWO CLOSEST STATES IRONICALLY, FLORIDA AND TEXAS.

I DON'T THINK DEMOCRATS THINK THAT THERE IS MUCH OF A CHANCE OF CAPTURING THOSE.

SO I THINK GOING FORWARD, HE'S GOT TO HOLD THOSE STATES.

>> WELL, I THINK IT IS INTERESTING THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE RUNNING IN THE PRIMARY.

IT'S ROBERT F. KENNEDY,, JR., AS WE USED TO SAY IS A FEW SANDWICHES SHORT OF A PICNIC.

HE IS AN ANTI-VAXER AND MARIANNE WILLIAMSON.

THE LAST TIME WE WE HAD A DEMOCRAT RUN IN THE PRIMARY WAS TED KENNEDY AND IT HURT JIMMY CARTER.

SO THE IDEA THAT YOU SHOULD DO THAT IF YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT, NO, YOU SHOULDN'T.

THE LAST THUNK IS WHEN IS THE LAST TIME THAT WE HAD A PRESIDENT THAT VOLUNTARILY SERVED ONLY 4 YEARS AND THAT'S RUTHERFORD B. HAYES 1877.

SO THE IDEA THAT BIDEN WASN'T GOING TO DO THIS IS JUST A NON-STARTER.

SO I THINK BIDEN TEAM IS DOING THE RIGHT THING HERE.

THEY JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE DOING BETTER MESSAGING BIDENOMICS NEEDS TO GET OUT MORE BUT A PRIMARY IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.

>> AS A PERSON TRYING TO REDUCE CAFFEINE INTAKE, BIDEN'S SPEECHES ARE NOT HELPING AT ALL.

BUT JOKES APART, WHY DOESN'T HE SIT DOWN FOR INTERVIEWS OR TAKE PRESS CONFERENCES?

AT THE PRIMARY WOULD YOU HELP TO SHOW THAT HE IS ACTUALLY GOOD FOR RUNNING AS PRESIDENT.

THIS IS NOT AGEIST.

IT'S THE FACT THAT HE IS AVOIDING UNSCRIPTED CONVERSATIONS WITH HIS VOTING BASE, WITH THE MEDIA, AND WITH EVERYONE ELSE.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

PRIMARY, DEBATE, SOMETHING TO SHOW THAT HE DOESN'T NEED, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING OR SOMEBODY ELSE TALKING TO HIS EAR TO MAKE SENSE.

AND THEN ALSO HE MAKES SO MANY LIKE MISTAKES AND SAYS STRANGE THINGS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ALTERNATIVE DOES DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAVE?

I REALLY DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE BIDEN WOULD BE ABLE TO WIN THIS.

SO ON THE WHOLE I THINK HE SHOULD BE PRIMARIED THOUGH.

>> YOU DO THINK HE SHOULD BE.

FOR YEARS.

WE HAVE HEARD WELL THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A BENCH.

THEY DO HAVE A BENCH.

THERE ARE SOME PRETTY STRONG DEMOCRATIC GOVERNORS, GRETCHEN WHITMORE, GAVIN NEWSOME, PRITZKER IN ILLINOIS.

>> TO GET THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION, HAVE YOU TO GO THROUGH A SERIES OF STATE PRIMARIES.

MANY OF THOSE STATES ARE GOING TO TRY TO PULL THE DEBATE TO THE LEFT.

CALIFORNIA, NEW YORK, THESE ARE STATES THAT ARE MUCH MORE LIBERAL THAN THE STATES THAT ARE BATTLE GROUND STATES.

I THINK THAT KEEPING BIDEN ON TASK, ON HIS POSITIONS, AND AGAIN, LET'S BE HONEST.

IF TRUMP BECOMES THE CANDIDATE, MUCH OF THIS OF THE DEMOCRATIC AGENDA IS GOING TO BE PAINTING TRUMP AS THE EXTREMIST, GOING BACK TO ALL THE STATEMENTS HE HAS HAD.

SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE TIME REALLY TO EXPERIMENT WITH YOUR BENCH TO TRY TO BRING IN SOMEONE.

I THINK THE ONE POSITION THAT YOU COULD TALK ABOUT IS WHO IS THE BEST VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, AND IT MAY NOT BE HARRIS.

>> INCUMBENTS ARE INHERENTLY THE BEST CANDIDATE AND THE IDEA THAT YOU ARE GOING HAVE AN INCUMBENT PRIMARY IS NOT GOOD FOR YOUR PARTY.

>> SHOULD HIS HANDLERS TURN HIM LOOSE?

THAT'S WHAT ANIRBAN IS SUGGESTING.

LET BIDEN BE BIDEN KNOWING HE IS GOING TO MAKE GAFFS.

HE ALWAYS MADE GAFFS, EVEN WHEN HE WAS 50.

>> HE HAS ALWAYS MADE GAFFS SO I THINK THAT HE DOES SPEAK TO THE MAJORITY-- HE DID BEAT TRUMP ONCE WHEN TRUMP WAS AN INCUMBENT.

THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD TRACK RECORD.

NOW THE TABLES WILL BE TURNED.

HE IS INCUMBENT.

I WOULDN'T PUT MY MONEY AGAINST HIM.

>> SO YOUR ADVICE THEN IS TO HAVE A BETTER MESSAGE, A BETTER MARKETING STRATEGY.

BIDENOMICS.

>> BUT HE IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST MESSENGER, NOT AT LEAST OFF THE CUFF.

>> HE IS NOT EVEN OUT THERE SPEAK TO PEOPLE.

>> DEMOCRATS ALWAYS WANT THIS INSPIRATIONAL FIGURE.

THEY WANT CLINTON, THEY WANT OWE OBAMA AND THEY'RE NEVER HAPPY UNLESS THERE IS SOMEBODY THERE INSPIRING.

GREAT THAT YOU WANT SOMEBODY WHO IS THE GREATEST SPEAKER EVER BUT LOOK AT WHAT BIDEN DID IN HIS FIRST TERM.

WAY MORE THAN OBAMA EVER GOT DONE.

I THINK YOU SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT HE DID, NOT JUST HOW HE SPEAKS.

AND HE IS A STUTTERER WHICH PREVENTS HUM FROM DOING A GREAT JOB ON THE BENCH.

>> TIME FOR THE As AND Fs, TYE, YOUR F. >> IT'S SUMMER AND MOSQUITOES ARE BACK AND THEY ARE TERRIFYING.

HERE IS A STATISTIC.

OF THE 108 BILLION HUMANS WHO HAVE EVER LIVED ON EARTH, SCHOLARS BELIEVE ALMOST HALF DIE FROM MOSQUITO INFECT.

THEY'RE THE APEX PREDATOR OF HUMANS, 115 TRILLION OF THEM AND SINCE 2000 MOSQUITOES KILL AN AVERAGE OF 2 MILLION HUMANS A YEAR.

STATES NORTH AND SOUTH SPRAY TO KEEP THE POPULATION IN CHECK.

THIS YEAR, HOWEVER, U.S. MALARIA CASES ARE UP AS ARE WEST NILE CAUSED BY MOSQUITOES.

THIS SUMMER WIRE YOU ARE BARBECUING, PLEASE SWAT ANY MOSQUITO.

YOUR FELLOW HUMANS THANK YOU.

>> GROWING NEWSPAPER CALCUTTA, I KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

F TO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION DECISION TO APPOINT ABRAMS TO THE COMMISSION ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY.

YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WAR CRIMES TO CONVICTION FOR MISLEADING U.S. CONGRESS.

BUT FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER FRANK McNEIL PUTS IT BACK.

HE IS THE KIND OF PERSON THAT PRACTICES A DOBERMAN PINCHER SCHOOL OF DIPLOMA.

>> RICK,.

>> MY F GOES TO REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE FOR USING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT AS A VEHICLE FOR THEIR CULTURE WARS.

THE NEARLY ONE TRILLION APPROPRIATIONS BILL INCLUDES A 5.2% RAISE FOR THE MILITARY BUT THE FAR RIGHT IS INCLUDING RESTRICTIONS ON ABORTION, TRANSPARENCY THERAPY AND DIVERSITY TRAINING PUTTING ITS PASSAGE IN DOUBT.

>> AS.

>> I LIVED AT WEST POINT FOR 20 YEARS AND LAST WEEK WEST POINT AND ITS COMMUNITY AT HIGHLAND FALLS, THETOWN OUTSIDE THE GATE RECEIVED ALMOST NINE INCHES OF RAWN.

THE PICTURE YOU SEE IS RIGHT BELOW THE HOUSE I USED TO LIVE IN.

WEST POINT HAS 900 HOUSES AND 500 OF THEM FLOODED.

YET THE PEOPLE ARE COMING TOGETHER TO HELP EACH OTHER OUT.

TO MY FRIENDS, KUDOS FOR SHOWING ALL OF US HOW TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE TOGETHER.

>> ANIRBAN.

>> MY A GO SABRINA SIDIKI WHO ASKED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS ABOUT DEMOCRAT DELEGATION AND SYSTEMIC HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MUSLIMS ON THE DOMESTIC FRONT DURING THE STATE VISIT TO THE U.S.

ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT AND COMMENDABLE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS IN THE FACE OF SHAMELESS DISPLAY OF ONLINE HARASSMENT BY ARMIES.

>> MY A GOES TO THE INFLATION NUMBERS RELEASED WEDNESDAY.

THE ANNUAL RATE OF INFLATION FELL TO 3% BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE CORE INFLATION RATE, WHICH EXCLUDES VOLATILE CATEGORIES OF FOOD AND ENERGY AND SHOWN HERE INCREASED BY ONLY .2% IN JUNE, THE LOWEST RATE SINCE AUGUST 2021, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MONTHLY INCREASES WE HAD BACK BEFORE THE PANDEMIC.

ONE MONTH'S DATA DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE WON THE WAR.

THE FED IS EXPECTED TO RAISE INTEREST RATES IN JULY BUT THIS REPRESENTS THE BEST EVIDENCE TO DATE THAT THE WAR ON INFLATION MAY BE HAVING ITS INTENDED EFFECT.

>> SO THERE IS YOUR PLUG FOR BIDENOMICS THERE.

TYE, YOU MENTIONED MALARIA, A CHANCE TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO THE CENTER FOR GLOBAL HEALTH AT UPSTATE THAT IS WORKING TO COMBAT THAT.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING.

FOR COMMENTS YOU CAN WRITE TO THE ADDRESS ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THE SHOW AGAIN YOU CAN VIEW IT ONLINE AT WCNY.ORG.

I'M DAVID CHANATRY.

FOR ALL OF US AT "IVORY TOWER."

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.