Way back when, we noted that mathematical odds and political science all but ensure that eventually, scandals happen in presidencies. But the Obam...

We strongly encourage Congress to support restoring full funding to the National Science Foundation's political science program. It makes an enormous difference to scholars, their students, and, ultimately, anyone who cares about the functioning of their government.

Why did his Senate colleagues agree? Why not some other social science discipline? Why not all social science? In the end, politicians don't appreciate scrutiny, which is exactly what political science does.

A measure limiting National Science Foundation funding for political science research projects passed the U.S. Senate on Wednesday, quietly dealing a ...

Big presidential speeches do not help shape and shift opinion. The power of the bully pulpit is overrated. Presidents typically evince support for pol...

The reviews from Thursday night's debate are in, and the macro story, essentially, is that Vice President Joe Biden "managed to right the listing USS ...

Presidential campaigns tend to focus on the contrasts between candidates. There is some evidence, though, that in one key respect, Obama and Romney are more similar than they'd likely care to admit: their personality traits and characteristics.

Disturbing to many of us in the academic world is that the push for laissez-faire "legitimacy" by its ideological advocates runs counter to more than 230 years of historical evidence.

America will never be great again under a Romney administration. It will be great for rich people, while everyone else will be asked to dial down their expectations of what it means to be an American, again.

...

It was Winston Churchill who first used that term, "the crunch," in that way. It means, of course, that crisis when a leader has to make a judgment. It is when lives, perhaps millions of them, hang on the outcome of the decision the leader makes.

BOSTON -- Political scientist James Q. Wilson, whose "broken windows" theory on crime-fighting helped trigger a nationwide move toward community polic...

Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul all have reasons to not drop out. With each passing primary, there's a chance the Republican nominee will have to deal with the fallout from the first brokered convention since primaries and caucuses became the critical method of choosing nominees.

This time the conventional wisdom may turn out to be wrong, and the independent candidacies the Americans Elect online delegates select might win.

The Iowa Caucuses are mere days away, and that means two things. First, it means we all get to say, "the Iowa Caucuses are mere days away." And second, it means that we get to stage the perennial argument over whether Iowa is representative enough of the country at large for it to have such an outsized role in determining the eventual winner of the presidential primary season. Ultimately, there are a lot of reasons we have this argument, but there are also a lot of reasons for why the argument doesn't go anywhere.

I wish our senators all the best in their attempt to manufacture Christmas cheer, but what I'd really like to know is how I can get hooked up with the Federal Reserve's "Secret Santa" exchange, which seems much, much cooler.

Don't let the dreadlocks fool you: There's a profound conservatism about Occupy Wall Street.

In recent days, journalists, bloggers, and commentators have reared up to bash a fictitious conventional wisdom about election forecasting.

The pattern is quite clear. When the White House party was in its first term, it has won reelection in five of six cases since 1960, with an average share of 55.5% of the two-party vote.