The Science of Politics
The Niskanen Center’s The Science of Politics podcast features up-and-coming researchers delivering fresh insights on the big trends driving American politics today. Get beyond punditry to data-driven understanding of today’s Washington with host and political scientist Matt Grossmann. Each 30-45-minute episode covers two new cutting-edge studies and interviews two researchers.
Episodes
Wednesday Jan 15, 2020
Wednesday Jan 15, 2020
The emerging consensus is that Donald Trump won the 2016 election by divisively appealing to voters’ views on race and immigration. But Justin Grimmer and Will Marble find that Trump gained votes over Romney among low-education white voters, largely independents and moderates, who had centrist views on race and immigration. In contrast, John Sides and Lynn Vavreck find that the 2016 campaign activated voters’ attitudes on race, immigration, and identity, making them more important in driving voter decisions. A large all-star panel reviews the central debate over the 2016 election and its implications for the 2020 campaign ahead.
Thursday Jan 02, 2020
Thursday Jan 02, 2020
2020 marks the 100th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment guaranteeing women's suffrage. Christina Wolbrecht of Notre Dame and Kevin Corder of Western Michigan take the opportunity to review women's vote turnout and choice over time, tracking gender differences and similarities. They find that women increasingly vote at higher rates than men and vote more for Democrats. They show that scholars and commentators have changed their views of women voters over time, often using stereotypes and using men's voting as the baseline. We talk about the history and what's ahead for gender and voting in this election year.
Photo Credit: Public Domain.
Wednesday Dec 18, 2019
Wednesday Dec 18, 2019
Black turnout was down in 2016, costing Hillary Clinton pivotal votes and raising questions about whether post-Obama Democrats can mobilize Black voters. We know President Trump is angering and mobilizing a lot of White Democrats but that may not translate the same way for Black voters. Davin Phoenix finds that Black Americans express less anger than White Americans and anger does not stimulate them as much to participate in politics. Christopher Towler finds that African-Americans who strongly disliked Trump did turn out at Obama-level rates; but not everyone feels that strongly. Both say Black turnout is hardly destined to rebound in 2020, especially if Democrats don't change their strategy.
Photo: Phil Roeder under CC BY 2.0.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tabor-roeder/43105749360
Wednesday Dec 04, 2019
Wednesday Dec 04, 2019
Republican and Democratic politicians offer very different agendas and proposals, but do they translate into real differences in outcomes? John Holbein finds that party control of government does not have any near-term impact across dozens of social and economic outcomes. But Jacob Grumbach finds that recent party control is associated with big changes in policy in some issue areas, sometimes producing real differences in directly-related outcomes like health insurance rates. Parties influence policy and some related outcomes, but perhaps not enough to declare one party better at improving well being.
Photo Credit: Julio Obscura under CC By 2.0 Generic.
Wednesday Nov 20, 2019
Wednesday Nov 20, 2019
Although the 2020 presidential candidates are investing huge shares of their time and resources in Iowa and New Hampshire, new research suggests early-state momentum may not matter much in our nationalized presidential race. John Sides finds that Donald Trump dominated media coverage well before election results in 2016, crowding out his opponents. Marc Trussler finds that state election victories didn’t seem to cause bigger-than-normal shifts in polls in 2016, with any campaign day just as likely to see an influential media event. Momentum may be dying with the growth of pre-primary media coverage and an earlier cementing of candidate coalitions.
Photo credit: Excel23 under CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PeteButtigieg2020SBI.jpg
Wednesday Nov 06, 2019
Wednesday Nov 06, 2019
The House is moving toward impeachment. What are the electoral risks for Democrats in pursuit and Republicans in defense of President Trump? We learn from research on the role of the impeachment of Bill Clinton on the 1998 and 2000 elections and compare how things look today for Trump. Gary Jacobson finds that other factors overwhelmed impeachment in congressional elections, but a few Republicans may have been hurt. Irwin Morris finds that parties can work to protect their members who vote against their constituents’ opinions on impeachment. Both are expecting near-party-line votes this time with limited electoral effects, given polarized public opinion that is unlikely to move.
Wednesday Oct 23, 2019
Wednesday Oct 09, 2019
Wednesday Oct 09, 2019
Most policymaking occurs in federal agencies, rather than Congress, and interest groups know that’s where the action is. That’s led many to fear that agencies are captured by regulated industries and can’t make good policy. But Rachel Augustine Potter finds that agencies strategically propose complicated rules and design short rulemaking periods when they are facing interest group pressure, avoiding pressure from lobbyists and other branches of government. Maraam Dwidar finds that agencies do change their rules in response to the interest group comments, but especially if they come from coalitions representing organizationally diverse constituents. Big data text analysis now helps scholars see bureaucrats in action.
Wednesday Sep 25, 2019
Wednesday Sep 25, 2019
Republicans have gained a lot of electoral ground in the states, while building an impressive infrastructure of conservative organizations to push policy rightward. But have they succeeded? Alex Hertel-Fernandez finds that organizations of conservative legislators, advocacy groups, and think tanks jointly shifted state policy and neutered their political opponents. But Matt Grossmann finds that despite major gains in the states, Republicans did not transform the size or scope of state government or counteract liberal social trends. Where they did have influence, the results on the ground were limited. These studies pinpoint both the strengths and limits of the conservative ascendency in the states.
Photo credit: https://www.pexels.com/photo/silhouette-of-four-person-with-flag-of-united-states-background-1046398/
Tuesday Sep 10, 2019
Tuesday Sep 10, 2019
The American Public's Growing Ideological Sophistication by Niskanen Center