

The Science of Politics
Niskanen Center
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
Mentioned books

Feb 7, 2024 • 49min
How Bureaucrats Deal with Political Chaos Above
Exploring the challenges faced by career civil servants under the Trump administration, the podcast discusses limited resistance within the bureaucracy, the impact of vacancies at the top of federal agencies on job satisfaction and retention, and efforts to increase presidential control over federal employee appointments.

Jan 24, 2024 • 54min
Elites Misperceive the Public
Are political elites in bubbles, out of touch with the American public, not recognizing how their views and conditions are not reflective of most people’s experience? Prior research found that elites tend to overestimate conservative policy positions in the American public, but there are wider misperceptions across the political spectrum. Alexander Furnas finds that unelected political elites—from government officials to lobbyists to media figures—all assume that public opinion more closely matches their own opinions than it really does. Adam Thal finds that politicians overestimate the level of financial struggles facing constituents. But correcting those misperceptions does not change their opinions.

Jan 10, 2024 • 58min
The Deterioration of Congress
Former members of Congress discuss the deterioration of Congress, including polarization and challenges faced by women candidates. Insights from a survey reveal stark differences between Republican members and Republican voters. Concerns about the decline of the legislative branch and potential reforms for Congress are explored. Members' views on the best presidents and the importance of collaboration between scholars and practitioners are discussed.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.