In the News
-
November 10, 2016
“I have tenure, so if I have a gap between grants, it wouldn’t be disastrous. But I know a lot of people who are earlier in their careers and are really worried about what it means for funding right now,” said Meghan Duffy, associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, on President-elect Donald Trump’s impact on future funding of scientific research.
The Washington Post -
November 10, 2016
“President-elect Trump’s proposed China policies are even more likely to increase dramatically tensions between Washington and Beijing. Perhaps this is what the American electorate wants: policies of economic nationalism, isolationism, and anti-globalization. But they will have disastrous effects on our own economy,” said Mary Gallagher, professor of political science.
China Daily -
November 10, 2016
“Trump’s election throws the future of environmental policy, both in the U.S. and globally, into confusion. … (But) let’s wait and see how his positions solidify in the coming days of his administration,” said Andy Hoffman, professor of management and organizations, and natural resources and environment.
Scientific American -
November 9, 2016
“Trump could impose a large tariff on vehicles and parts coming in from Mexico. This would clearly hurt the profitability of the auto industry in the short run. The companies would respond to those tariffs by moving the location of plants that mostly export to the U.S. to other countries,” said Don Grimes, economist at the Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy.
Bloomberg Markets -
November 9, 2016
David Dunning, professor of psychology, was quoted in a story about how election uncertainty can make a person physically ill.
Quartz -
November 8, 2016
Michael Traugott, professor emeritus of communication studies and political science, addressed the relative lack of enthusiasm by young voters for this year’s presidential candidates compared to the support shown to Barack Obama in the two previous elections.
FOX News -
November 8, 2016
Jeff DeGraff, clinical professor of management and organizations, said Americans did not ask enough tough questions of presidential candidates, such as how their plans would actually work or much they would cost: “You would ask the same questions to someone who was going to remodel your kitchen. Why not ask them of someone who claims they are going to remodel your country?”
Michigan Radio -
November 8, 2016
“Normally, (the Russians) would be a little wary of someone who seems erratic. They like predictability in the same way they like conservatives. Probably the fact that Trump has said these positive things about him, like he’s a better leader than Obama, certainly affects him. But Putin is a very calculating guy,” said Melvin Levitsky, professor of international policy and practice.
U.S. News & World Report -
November 8, 2016
“If people think elections are unfair or rigged or fraudulent in some important way, this has an important impact on their basic commitment to democracy,” said Mark Tessler, professor of political science.
The Huffington Post -
November 7, 2016
“If people select between Clinton and Trump by using rejection rather than choice, then the information they use to make their decisions will be different. … In our research, we saw more deliberation in rejection decisions and less of a tendency to be swayed by emotional, in-your-face information,” wrote Aradhna Krishna, professor of marketing, and Tatiana Sokolova, postdoctoral researcher in marketing.
Newsweek
