There are those groups where you keep wondering why they let you in. I’m not talking about impostor syndrome (I went to graduate school – I know that of which I speak), but the kind of group where you are pretty sure folks know exactly who/what you are and they let you stick around anyway. Maybe it was an older sibling letting you tag along when you were younger. Maybe it was a pick-up basketball team that doesn’t care about your lousy jump shot. Maybe it is your life partner.
If we exclude my partner (what was she thinking?), my “that group” is Science for the People*. Starting in 2010, I gradually migrated from fan, to brief guest, to occasional source of information, to official team member. I still maintain that I have the easiest job on the crew.
That is why I’m so pleased that we have launched the Science for the People Patreon Campaign. Science for the People has been a labor of love by the entire team for years. The Patreon Campaign is designed to make it possible for those that labor the hardest on producing Science for the People can keep producing the best science podcast** you can find.
*Here, I am in the position to make people put up with me, the poor bastards.
**Conflict of interest disclosure.
This week we’re back at the intersection of science and politics, comparing economic data to partisan talking points and polling predictions to election results. We’ll talk to Jim Stanford, economist at Unifor, about his report “Rhetoric & Reality: Evaluating Canada’s Economic Record Under the Harper Government.” And we’ll speak to pollster and consultant Donna Dasko about the science and art of polling in Canadian federal elections.
The Finch and Pea 