The Science of Politics cover image

The Science of Politics

Latest episodes

undefined
Jan 3, 2024 • 1h 4min

The Two Sides of Immigration Backlash

Voters are upset about disarray at the US-Mexico border and the increase in illegal crossings under President Biden. But they also reacted negatively to former president Trump’s crackdowns. In both ways, immigration has become more important in our politics, making it more like Europe. Ernesto Tiburcio finds that flows of unauthorized migrants into the US have moved Americans and local governments in a conservative political direction. Areas that have seen more unauthorized flows start voting more Republican and redirect expenditures away from services and toward enforcement. But the backlash may run both ways. In Europe, Alexander Kustov finds that radical-right party success has softened views of immigrants and immigration. But his work also finds that anti-immigration voters prioritize the issue more than those who favor immigration.
undefined
Dec 13, 2023 • 47min

Previewing 2024: How Voters Judge Presidents

Discussing how voters judge presidents and the unreliability of early polls in predicting election outcomes. Exploring the Republicans' Electoral College advantage and the impact of upcoming trials. Analyzing the role of voters' perceptions of the economy and their evaluation of presidential performance. Exploring the decline in ruling parties' vote share after economic crises and the rise of populism. Debating between using polls or fundamentals to predict elections and the potential insights from prediction markets.
undefined
Nov 29, 2023 • 53min

Do presidents have the power to act alone?

Courts have overruled key policy changes from President Biden acting alone. But Republicans are gearing up to enact a suite of policy changes on Day 1 of a potential new administration, reigniting fears of an imperial presidency. Jon Rogowski finds that presidents act unilaterally quite often, beyond executive orders to include a lot of other tools, especially under divided government. But Dino Christenson finds that significant executive actions are scarce because the president can be constrained by Congress and the courts through the potential reaction of the American public.
undefined
Nov 15, 2023 • 59min

Why presidents still spend their time raising money.

Even with low approval, President Biden is still a big fundraising draw. In fact, presidents spend lots of time fundraising and the campaign is now year-round. And Biden has big competition: former President Trump never stopped fundraising or campaigning. Brendan Doherty finds that changes in campaign finance law have enabled a formidable presidential fundraising operation for the party as a whole. It’s a window into the president’s connection to their party and another sign that the divide between campaigning and governing has collapsed.
undefined
Nov 1, 2023 • 1h 5min

The decline of union Democrats

The decline of union Democrats is explored in this podcast, with discussions on the political evolution of unions, the impact of social and cultural issues, the changing image of the Democratic Party, the differences between industrial and building trades unions, the role of gun clubs and unions, and the impact of online interactions on civic engagement.
undefined
Oct 18, 2023 • 1h 2min

What explains the diploma divide?

College-educated Americans are more liberal on social issues and are moving towards Democrats. White voters are flipping fastest by education. White college graduates are now more liberal across economic, social, racial, and foreign policy issues. Less educated white voters are polarizing the electorate on non-economic issues.
undefined
Oct 4, 2023 • 55min

Can state politicians be held accountable to the public?

Most people don’t know who their state legislators are, much less what they are up to. So how do voters hold them accountable to public views? Steven Rogers finds that voters don’t know enough about state politicians and most legislators are not facing competitive elections. Electoral mechanisms are not enough to keep them from diverging from the people they represent. But Chris Warshaw finds that state policy has grown more representative of state publics and more responsive to changes in opinion, only partly because elections change who is in power. State officials also follow public opinion in between elections and out of fear of electoral threat.
undefined
Sep 20, 2023 • 53min

Partisan election administrators don't tip the scales

In the aftermath of the 2020 election, local election officials became objects of unfounded conspiracy theories and attacks. But local clerks, even those elected in partisan elections, do make and implement key decisions about voting opportunities and election procedures. Do they tip the scales to favor their party? Daniel Thompson finds that electing a Democrat vs. a Republican as a county clerk does not affect subsequent election results or turnout. Thompson says reasonable concerns about the partisan effects of election law changes often do not materialize in real advantages.
undefined
Sep 6, 2023 • 52min

Do the media drive presidential primaries?

In 2016, Donald Trump dominated media coverage in the race for the Republican nomination and he is on track to do so again this time. Does the media react to events and signals of public support, moving from one candidate to the next, or does it just focus on the frontrunner? And is media attention the main moving part in presidential primary campaigns? Zachary Scott finds that the media only sequentially highlights candidates in some nomination contests. But Trump dominated coverage more than others, in part due to his fearful and personalized rhetoric. Kevin Reuning finds that public interest follows rather than brings media coverage. Media attention led to increased poll support for Trump in 2016, but not for the other candidates. At least in 2016, the conventional story that Trump garnered outsize coverage and benefited seems correct.
undefined
Aug 23, 2023 • 59min

Are claims that social media polarizes us overblown?

Do our social media feeds polarize us, with algorithms that lure us into echo chambers and trap us with viral political content and misinformation? Andy Guess is part of four new papers that suggest these claims are overblown. The big social science collaboration with Meta found that reducing exposure to content shared by those that agree with you politically does not change political attitudes. Neither does reducing reshared content or changing algorithmic feeds to reverse chronological feeds. Some conservative Facebook users are in a bubble, but we may not be able to blame the algorithm for our polarization.

Get the Snipd
podcast app

Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
App store bannerPlay store banner

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode

Save any
moment

Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways

Share
& Export

Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode