This isn't exactly a unique trait in our line of work. Grow up.
Leave her alone. I've never heard any of these things about her and I am definitely in a position for it to have pinged my radar. If anything, I've found her helpful and friendly.
That’s the thing. ER doesn’t want to be left alone. She wants people to know how smart she is.
Well, that’s the thing. She is not as smart as she’d like to think she is.
This isn't exactly a unique trait in our line of work. Grow up.
Leave her alone. I've never heard any of these things about her and I am definitely in a position for it to have pinged my radar. If anything, I've found her helpful and friendly.
That’s the thing. ER doesn’t want to be left alone. She wants people to know how smart she is.Well, that’s the thing. She is not as smart as she’d like to think she is.
This describes 100% of political scientists
As a recent grad from the program, I can assure you that none of this is true. I loved working with Emily and the notion that she is a subpar researcher is simply ridiculous.
Oh, she didn't tell you to check out the tables in the Appendix and compare them to the presentation in the piece? Interesting. As a recent grad of the program, you're fine with rain as an instrument?
@Geraldine: Of course she was sweet to a grad student. What could be more ego inflating than a grad student fawning on you?
What are you talking about? Her research design was intended to demonstrate the folly in using rain as an instrument. If you're s**tting on anybody at Vanderbilt, it should be JH. That guy is just a straight dickhead.
What are you talking about? Her research design was intended to demonstrate the folly in using rain as an instrument. If you're ***** on anybody at Vanderbilt, it should be JH. That guy is just a straight dickhead.
From the article: "First, rainfall is an exogenous predictor of dissent onset, meeting the key criteria for the instrumental analysis to allow for causal inference." So, c'mon... @Jennie, perhaps on the rainfall use, but the Maidan was three years later, the Umbrella protests were four years after, and Occupy was a year after. You're ok with the timing? And no, the reviewers didn't read the Appendix. That's the whole point. One of her best placed pieces counters her main theory. That's something, no? You don't have much experience if you think the cmte read the appendix. What's my problem with the whole thing? She's an above average political scientist, who is often wrong, with a premium job. I have a better job, much better pay, and a better situation, but I like the leveling effects of this platform. If she were the least bit humble...