The Science of Politics

Americans mistrust services provided by the public sector, even though they increasingly rely on government programs. Amy Lerman finds that citizens perceive public services as inefficient and lower quality, causing them to misperceive good services as private and opt out of public services. Suzanne Mettler finds that Americans increasingly rely on government for their income. But because programs are hidden, their views of government don’t become more positive even if they directly benefit. Both agree government is facing a reputation crisis, even where it is succeeding. Studies: Good Enough for Government Work and The Government-Citizen Disconnect Interviews: Amy Lerman, University of California, Berkeley; Suzanne Mettler, Cornell University Photo Credit: Sage Ross under CC by 3.0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Libertarian_Party_(United_States)#/media/File:Tea_Party_Protest,_Hartford,_Connecticut,_15_April_2009_-_031.jpg

When and why do presidential debates change voter views? How, if at all, did they help Donald Trump last time? Ethan Porter finds that the post-debate commentary changes voter views as much as the debate itself, with Fox and MSNBC viewers getting quite different impressions--but not enough to change who they support. Patrick Stewart finds that candidates go for applause lines and laughs to reach voters and create meme-worthy moments, which are reflected in the in-person audience reaction. This season of debates might also produce a television star, but voters' initial instincts may be hard to change. Gage Skidmore [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Republican_Presidential_debate_2016_by_Gage_Skidmore.jpg

Conventional wisdom holds that Trump won the 2016 election by appealing to voters left behind in Obama's economy and may win re-election based on a stronger economy in 2020. But new research casts doubt on both stories. Sean Freeder finds that the effect of economic performance on the president's re-election has been declining since the 1980s because citizens both misperceive the economy and selectively credit the president to match their partisan bias. Robert Griffin finds that 2016 Trump supporters were actually better off than Clinton supporters, especially racial minorities, once you minimize the effect of partisan bias. And real economic distress may still hurt Trump in 2020.

Our geographic divides are central to contemporary politics, including the election of Donald Trump. Election maps show dense liberal cities in a sea of sparsely-populated Red, advantaging Republicans in our geographic electoral system. Why are Democrats concentrating in cities? Jonathan Rodden finds increasingly concentrated left parties around the world, disadvantaging liberal cities. It started with unionized industrial railroad hubs but accelerated with the changing cultural values of the party’s new coalitions. Will Wilkinson finds urban and rural areas are becoming economically and psychologically distinct, with cities concentrating those open to new experience and working in the technology-driven economy and rural areas retaining those averse to social and economic change. Studies: "Why Cities Lose" and "The Density Divide" Interviews: Jonathan Rodden, Stanford University; Will Wilkinson, Niskanen Center Photo used is in the public domain: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election#/media/File:United_States_presidential_election_results_by_county,_2016.svg

White liberals are quickly moving leftward on racial issues in what has been called “The Great Awokening.” Zach Goldberg finds that white liberals are greatly increasing their perceptions of discrimination, their tolerance of academic identity politics, and their support for immigration and affirmative action, coaxed along by rising liberalism in social and online media. But Emily Wager finds that in diverse states, rising economic inequality is making the public more conservative on economic policy, as whites feel less connected to the people of their state. Like the international pattern, it may be hard to simultaneously advance diversity and liberal social welfare. Studies: “America’s White Saviors" and “People Like Us?” Interviews: Emily Wager, University of North Carolina; Zach Goldberg, Georgia State University Photo credit: Lorie Shaull from Washington, United States [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)]

Despite a broad field of qualified women and minority candidates, two white men are now leading the Democratic presidential field. Even after supporting women for Congress, why are Democrats shying away this time? Neil Visalvanich finds that neither party discriminates against women or minority candidates in congressional races, with Democratic Party donors actually favoring white women. But that may not apply to this year’s presidential race. Seth Masket finds that, when told that Hillary Clinton lost due to a focus on identity politics, white women are more likely to support men running on an economics message than women running on discrimination. Studies: "The Party’s Primary Preferences" and "You Had Better Mention All of Them” Interviews: Neil Visalvanich, Durham University; Seth Masket, University of Denver Photo: Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore under CC by SA 2.0.https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/47687273722

Atop Democratic primary polls, Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are re-igniting a debate about whether moderates are more electable. Are voters pushing the candidates to the extremes or just looking for moderate alternatives? Andrew Hall finds that moderate candidates are more likely to win general elections, but that they are running for office less often than extremists. The benefits of office are declining and the costs are increasing, especially for potential moderates. But Stephen Utych finds that moderates are far less advantaged in general elections over extremists than they used to be. Partisan polarization means voters increasingly treat politicians in each party as interchangeable, lowering the costs of nominating extremists. Either way, voters are not the main cause of polarization. Studies: "Who Wants to Run" and "Man Bites Blue Dog" Interviews: Andrew Hall, Stanford University; Stephen Utych, Boise State University Photo credit: Gage Skidmore under CC by SA 2.0. https://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/19197596204

Obamacare substantially increased American health coverage, but now some states and the Trump administration are acting to curtail benefits. Do Obamacare exchanges and Medicaid help stimulate new voters or even help Democrats win? Jamila Michener finds that Medicaid mobilizes voters, but only if it is well-administered and effective. States, counties, and even neighborhoods matter to how beneficiaries react. Vlad Kogan finds that, while Medicaid and Obamacare generally helped Democrats, a last-minute sticker price hike in 2016 moved votes to Trump. Democrats were able to win votes with new policy, but Republicans also win votes by undermining it. Photo credit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tea_Party_rally-_sign_about_how_Obama_lies_will_kill_grandmothers_(4430071537).jpg

Expensive housing in major cities is holding back the American economy because new housing developments commonly spark a big “Not In My Backyard” local backlash. Why can’t new housing overcome the resistance? Katherine Einstein finds that the people who show up to planning meetings where projects are discussed are very unrepresentative. They take advantage of reviews and restrictions to oppose or limit housing development. Michael Hankinson finds that renters, not just homeowners, often oppose new housing development in their neighborhood. Citizens recognize the need for supply but still don’t want affordable housing in their area. Photo credit: Marco Raaphorst by CC by 2.0 https://www.flickr.com/photos/raaphorst/9757222035

The Green New Deal has focused renewed attention on policy to address Climate Change, but also raised concerns about how to pass and sustain energy policy in a polarized system. Economists say the obvious solution is pricing carbon, but Barry Rabe finds that carbon tax and cap-and-trade policies have faced big hurdles in passage, implementation, and sustainability. Leah Stokes finds that other policies like tax credits and renewable portfolio standards have proved popular after initially passing without much notice. But fighting fossil fuel companies for any sustainable climate policy remains an uphill battle. Senate Democrats [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)]

The college admissions scandal finds the rich still buying their way into elite colleges, drawing attention to the role of college in perpetuating inequality. But university education remains a source of social mobility and increasing group equality in America. Deondra Rose finds that federal higher education policy empowered women to become majorities of college graduates and voters. Yet recent trends in the economics of higher education have been less positive. Brendan Cantwell finds that inequalities between colleges are increasing, leaving poor students to pay the price in higher tuition and loans. Policy is central to higher education's roles in both equalizing opportunity and undermining mobility. Photo credit: https://www.pexels.com/photo/steel-gate-of-brown-brick-building-159490/

Studies: "White Identity Politics" and "Whitshift" Interviews: Ashley Jardina, Duke University; Eric Kaufman, Birkbeck College Racial change is making some Americans fear the decline of White majorities, helping Donald Trump and making immigration increasingly salient. Negative views of racial minorities play a key political role, but what about positive feelings toward white identity? Ashley Jardina finds that white identity drove opposition to Obama and support for Trump. White identity also leads to immigration opposition, but it increases support for entitlement programs rather than decreasing support for welfare. Eric Kaufman finds that the impending end of white majorities across Western countries is increasing support for far-right alternatives, with nativists finding an outlet for views they were forbidden to express by rising progressive norms.

Philanthropic foundations are getting more criticism as we learn how their efforts shape our politics. But that impact has a long history, including pivotal roles in the Civil Rights Movement and the California farmworker movement. It turns out the money often comes with quite a few strings attached. Megan Ming Francis finds that philanthropy shifted the NAACP from its early focus on lynching and mob violence to its education-focused litigation. Erica Kohl-Arenas finds that foundations repeatedly encouraged the farmworker movement to pursue non-profit services over radical politics. Both say foundations still shape what social movements can pursue and what gets left off the table.

Amazon’s headquarters decisions are drawing attention to economic development incentive programs designed to bring businesses and jobs to states and localities, while local opposition in New York drew attention to their role in inequality. Why do states and localities continue to offer them, despite academic research showing they are ineffective? Nathan Jensen finds that voters reward politicians who offer (even unnecessary) incentives, meaning they keep on offering bigger checks. Cynthia Rogers finds that state incentives increase the gaps between the rich and the poor, but they remain an ever-popular tool. Studies: “Incentives to Pander: How Politicians Use Corporate Welfare for Political Gain" and "Income Inequality and Economic Development Incentives in US States.” Interviews: Nathan Jensen, University of Texas and Niskanen Center; Cynthia Rogers, University of Oklahoma Photo Credit: Thierry Ehrmann under CC By 2.0 https://www.flickr.com/photos/home_of_chaos/37909812316

Online politics and social media are being blamed for a lot lately, from the spread of misinformation to the rise of incivility. But we also want online media to reach young people and increase participation. Although early studies showed limited effects, the latest efforts show the online world is impacting the offline. Jamie Settle finds that Facebook increases our negative views of the other party--not because we talk a lot about politics, but because we think lots of social media posts reveal our friends’ politics and come to see them as caricatures. Katherine Haenschen finds that online banner and video ads can encourage young people to vote in local elections, perhaps reaching new voters. Online media has benefits and risks for our politics. Studies: “Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America” and “Mobilizing Millennial Voters with Targeted Internet Advertisements.” Interviews: Jamie Settle, William and Mary; Katherine Haenschen, Virginia Tech Anthony Quintano from Honolulu, HI, United States [CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mark_Zuckerberg_F8_2018_Keynote_(41118893354).jpg