George Mason=future top 20? Forum

[ruleser]

It's not successful conservatives I can't stand. It's conservatives who catastrophically run the economy into the ground that I can't stand. To say nothing of ignoring human rights and chipping away at our freedoms.

Republicans contributed to downfall of the economy after they took office and stopped being fiscally conservative. So can we stop using the terms Republican and conservative as if they are still interchangeable?

Um, yes, coming into office and implementing every single tenet of conservative philosophy without need of one veto is somehow "stopped being conservative." Leave the lying/fact-skipping speeches to Romney and other nutheads. Conservative Repubs had control. They implemented their agenda. And the reality is "conservative" does not mean fiscally responsible, it means fiscally delusional - it means borrow and hand all the money to a few rich people, and pretend that helps everyone. That's the agenda. These are the results.

Now back to conservatives who pretend conservatism is not conservatism...

[neskerdoo]

so yeah, the bottom line is no top 20, right?

[GMUPatriot86]

I will agree with the others that Mason will probably not break the top 20 in our lifetimes.

I can say however that while GMU might give "conservative" signaling off to potential employers, the economics put forth in their program is not by any means conservative.

The main drive behind Mason's Law and Economics program was the work of Gordon Tullock who retired from teaching at GMU Law just last Fall. Tullock with James Buchanan founded the Public Choice school of economics (applying rational choice theory to democratic and political decision making). Buchanan won the Nobel in 1986 at GMU for this work, and each year Tullock's name is up there as a potential winner. Most who know a good deal about economics in general would describe Public Choice as libertarian, definitely not conservative.

In fact, the quote about "if you voted for Obama go to American, if you voted for McCain go to GMU" made me laugh. Tullock was outspoken about how he thought voting was generally irrational:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21uJUZuIcEo

I have had the pleasure of attending many lectures by GMU Law's Econ Professors (and of those of GMU PhD program) and they are just as critical of the likes of Mankiw and Laffer as they are of Krugman and Thaler.

[helvidius2010]

It's not successful conservatives I can't stand. It's conservatives who catastrophically run the economy into the ground that I can't stand. To say nothing of ignoring human rights and chipping away at our freedoms.

Republicans contributed to downfall of the economy after they took office and stopped being fiscally conservative. So can we stop using the terms Republican and conservative as if they are still interchangeable?

Um, yes, coming into office and implementing every single tenet of conservative philosophy without need of one veto is somehow "stopped being conservative." Leave the lying/fact-skipping speeches to Romney and other nutheads. Conservative Repubs had control. They implemented their agenda. And the reality is "conservative" does not mean fiscally responsible, it means fiscally delusional - it means borrow and hand all the money to a few rich people, and pretend that helps everyone. That's the agenda. These are the results.

Now back to conservatives who pretend conservatism is not conservatism...

Slow down turbo... nobody here is defending Bush or lobbying for Mitt. There was a time when "fiscal conservatism" did mean "fiscal responsibility". Perhaps the broken promises and irresponsibility of the past eight years has forever tainted its meaning and I should give up on actual fiscal conservatism. Whatever. I guess I'll go start the "fiscal responsibility party." But that doesn't include trillion dollar deficits for "years to come," so I'm sure that will go nowhere.

[screech]

Obama gave his econ speech at GMU last week (or week before), so it can't be a laughing stock, but, on the other hand, must be respectable for the Chosen One to speak there.

[HipHopAPotamus]

GMU had an amazing run in the 06 tourney, but thinking that a team that plays in the Colonial Athletic Association can get ranked in the top 20 is a bit of a stretch...

True, but have you seen VCU play? They're legit, and capable of making a run into the Sweet 16.

And if the conspiracy theorists could take a break that'd be great. Thanks.

Yeah, didn't VCU make a tourney run a year or two ago as well? Maybe a canidate for the 12-5 upset this March, if they get seeded as a 12.
I'd like to see GMU make another run as well; one of the best sports moments ever when they beat UCONN.

Why do people cite GMU's location as a plus; I'm assuming they mean close to DC/Virginia legal community and not the fact that it's buried in the middle of the suburbs.

[aed9]

Obama gave his econ speech at GMU last week (or week before), so it can't be a laughing stock, but, on the other hand, must be respectable for the Chosen One to speak there.

This is faulty logic... unless you're being sarcastic.

Yeah, didn't VCU make a tourney run a year or two ago as well? Maybe a canidate for the 12-5 upset this March, if they get seeded as a 12.
I'd like to see GMU make another run as well; one of the best sports moments ever when they beat UCONN.

I agree. Ole Miss's run a few years ago was great, too.

To the OP: I think that you are still competitive at GWU, so I wouldn't get too wrapped up in deciding b/w GMU and American until you hear from GWU. If you get dinged or WL, just go visit the two schools and see where you might be happier, since their difference in rank is practically negligible.

[bermuda]

.

[interestedbyestander]

Wow, three threads in one! GMU Law in the Top 20 ... Conservatism's last rites ... NCAA Hoops.

Where do I begin??? LOL

Ok,
- GMU Law is good, getting better, but will always be #3 in DC law schools.
- The shape Bush is leaving this country (econ, civil rights, world rep) is legally reprehensible.
- ACC will rule this year.

[aed9]

- ACC will rule this year.

TITCR.

[cavalierHoo]

Just read two different articles on how Obama is going to make DC "cool" again.

My guess is it's going to be THE place to go to law school.

[20160810]

For it to break into the top 20, it would have to displace one of (depending on the year): BU, GW, WUSTL, USC and... nope.

[dresden doll]

Obama gave his econ speech at GMU last week (or week before), so it can't be a laughing stock, but, on the other hand, must be respectable for the Chosen One to speak there.

Is that supposed to be a dig?

It's pretty funny how his detractors have generally been the ones to highlight some supposed Messianic aspects of his candidacy. But, yes, he is the chosen one insofar as he was chosen via majority voters' votes, which is a pleasant difference from 2000.

Either way, whether those that voted for Obama were just a bunch of starry-eyed, slack-jawed cult followers or not doesn't change the fact that GMU is highly unlikely to notably progress on the rankings ladder.

[pomona]

I will agree with the others that Mason will probably not break the top 20 in our lifetimes.

I can say however that while GMU might give "conservative" signaling off to potential employers, the economics put forth in their program is not by any means conservative.

The main drive behind Mason's Law and Economics program was the work of Gordon Tullock who retired from teaching at GMU Law just last Fall. Tullock with James Buchanan founded the Public Choice school of economics (applying rational choice theory to democratic and political decision making). Buchanan won the Nobel in 1986 at GMU for this work, and each year Tullock's name is up there as a potential winner. Most who know a good deal about economics in general would describe Public Choice as libertarian, definitely not conservative.

In fact, the quote about "if you voted for Obama go to American, if you voted for McCain go to GMU" made me laugh. Tullock was outspoken about how he thought voting was generally irrational:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21uJUZuIcEo

I have had the pleasure of attending many lectures by GMU Law's Econ Professors (and of those of GMU PhD program) and they are just as critical of the likes of Mankiw and Laffer as they are of Krugman and Thaler.

Thanks for posting this - it seems like a lot of people on this thread have confused conservatives (and "conservative economics") with libertarians and free market economics.

I do think GMU will continue to rise in the rankings; they've been attracting higher quality students (for FT class of 2011, median LSAT = 164 and GPA = 3.72) and have been bringing great faculty on board in the last several years. Whether or not they break the T20, who knows? There are a lot of factors at play, and no one knows whats going to happen to schools in the next several years. All we can tell is they've been on an upward track.

[androstan]

GMU fell to 42, who thinks it's because we went from a republican-party government to a democratic-party government?

[bk1]

GMU fell to 42, who thinks it's because we went from a republican-party government to a democratic-party government?

My head hurts.

[D. H2Oman]

GMU fell to 42, who thinks it's because we went from a republican-party government to a democratic-party government?

People who don't understand how the rankings work.

[duckz]

GMU had an amazing run in the 06 tourney, but thinking that a team that plays in the Colonial Athletic Association can get ranked in the top 20 is a bit of a stretch...

True, but have you seen VCU play? They're legit, and capable of making a run into the Sweet 16.

And if the conspiracy theorists could take a break that'd be great. Thanks.

Yeah, didn't VCU make a tourney run a year or two ago as well? Maybe a canidate for the 12-5 upset this March, if they get seeded as a 12.
I'd like to see GMU make another run as well; one of the best sports moments ever when they beat UCONN.

Why do people cite GMU's location as a plus; I'm assuming they mean close to DC/Virginia legal community and not the fact that it's buried in the middle of the suburbs.

........ GMU's law school is in one of the most dense parts of Arlington VA and is just over 2 miles from DC.

[gambelda]

This debate is stupid. Who cares what University you go to. Go to one of the two and kill it when you're there. Then the difference between the two in terms of jobs won't be a problem.

Your college alone will not land you jobs unless you perform.

P.S. Please no one ost "Harvard will" because I will punch you in the eye. You still have to "perform" at Harvard to get a job....its just that you need C's instead of A's.

[Pendulum]

GMU's rank has dropped a little over the last few years mainly because of increases in class size which held back the LSAT medians. The LSAT median was at 164 a few years ago, and then dropped to 163 when class size grew, but is now back to 164 again.

However, class size increase is partly compensated by the opening of a new building on the campus.

[Bildungsroman]

--ImageRemoved--

[duckz]

meh I could see if it was a few months but just one month....

[thexfactor]

Ok...so I hate to press this because I've posted on this in the past...but does this mean American would be a better "long term investment?"

I'm just nervous because many employers I've spoken with don't have a great impression with gmu(compared to wcl), and I can't tell whether this is changing/likely to change. I'm so torn!!

I think it's a simpler question than you think - it depends on who you are and what you want to study. The choice is pretty clear - if you are interested mainly in law and economics, go GMU definitely. If you are into international or PI, go American definitely. If you want a conservative slant, GM, liberal, American...

What if I want to focus on public interest but have a conservative slant (crazy, right?). And I know both are essentially equal, but I'm wondering if one (or none) is more likely to rise above in the future.

I'm really holding out for GW, but with a 167, 3.2, I think these two are about it.

PS-Thanks for the responses--this really is a great resource!

If you are just looking at employability I would go to a school in the emory/bc/bu/wustl range.... and look beyond dc.

GMU is prob 10-biglaw/midlaw bc/bu/UIUC/wustl is roughtly around 25% biglaw/midlaw

[Bildungsroman]

meh I could see if it was a few months but just one month....

The post you were responding to is from January 2009. The last post before you posted was from over two months ago. I award you no points.

[duckz]

well then I stand corrected.... so where did OP end up going lol?