Local News


UNLV kicks off election-themed lecture series

Series leads up to presidential debate on Oct. 19
UNLV kicks off election-themed lecture series
Posted at 2:06 PM, Sep 06, 2016
and last updated 2016-09-06 17:06:10-04
UNLV is kicking off its election-themed lecture series on Sept. 8. 
The general public is invited to attend all nine talks, which feature university professors and renowned scholars discussing themes surrounding the Oct. 19 presidential debate at UNLV.
Each event in the Presidential Debate Lecture Series is free and will be held in the auditorium of Greenspun Hall:
Obama/Romney Debates
Sept. 8, 1-2 p.m.
David Zarefsky, professor emeritus of the Northwestern University School of Communication, discusses what led to President Obama’s poor initial performance in the first 2012 debate against Gov. Mitt Romney and his "comeback" in the second debate.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Social Media Use and Debate Viewing 
Sept. 12, 4-5 p.m.
This lecture is led by Mitchell McKinney, professor and chair of the University of Missouri Communication Department. His research interests include presidential debates, political campaigns, civic engagement, media and politics, and presidential rhetoric.
Politeness in Presidential Debates 
Sept. 20, 4-5 p.m.
Edward Hinck, a College of Communication & Fine Arts department professor at Central Michigan University, will lead the talk. He studies political debates and is co-writing a book on how face-saving and face-threatening strategies shape audience's perceptions of candidates in presidential and vice presidential debates.
Risky Business on the Campaign Trail: Why Candidates Fear Presidential Debates 
Sept. 27, 7:30-9 p.m.
Northeastern University School of Journalism professor Alan Schroeder delves into the history of the first ever televised presidential debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960 — and why the event has become a pre-election expectation for voters, but a source of trepidation and resentment for many candidates since Day 1.
Do Presidential Debates Matter? 
Oct. 11, 4-5 p.m.
The lecture is led by Kathryn Olson, professor and chair of the College of Letters & Sciences at the University of Wisconsin, who uses rhetorical criticism and argumentation to examine American texts, issues, movements, images, and debates with public consequences.
The following events in the University Forum Lecture Series are also free, and will be held from 7:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. in the Barrick Auditorium unless otherwise stated:
Originalism After Scalia 
Sept. 7
Justice Antonin Scalia was probably the nation’s most outspoken advocate of the judicial philosophy known as “originalism,” which looks to the original meaning of constitutional text for interpretive guidance. UNLV law professor Ian Chamberlin Bartrum explores the future of originalism in courts and classrooms in the wake of the justice’s passing.
Presidential Power: Legitimate and Fabricated Sources
Sept. 19, Student Union’s Cohen Theatre
American presidents rely on legitimate powers that include those expressly enumerated in the Constitution and certain other powers that are implied in it. Constitution Project scholar-in-residence Louis Fisher will discuss three presidents who, on four occasions, claimed “inherent” powers but lost every time. To explain why this happened he will analyze the concepts of “prerogative” and of the “Unitary Executive.”
American Indians and U.S. Presidents: Building Nation-to-Nation Relationships
Oct. 5
Since 1783 American Indian leaders have traveled to the nation’s capital to negotiate with their titular equal – the President of the United States. UNLV history professor William Bauer, Jr. will detail how American Indian diplomats and leaders tried to create their sovereignty, self-determination and nation-to-nation relationships by meeting with presidents of the United States, from George Washington to Barack Obama.
Thomas Hobbes and Public Order
Oct. 12
This lecture is led by Brian C. Anderson, editor of the City Journal at the Manhattan Institute. Thomas Hobbes, in the Leviathan, articulates a view of security that is based on police-enforced order. Jane Jacobs, among others, advocates a conception of neighborhood security that relies on enforcement by shopkeepers, pedestrians, and other “eyes on the street.” Anderson will argue that the two conceptions are complementary and perhaps even mutually reinforcing.