| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
167341
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Scholars tend to assume that consolidated democracies are free from the global retreat of democracy due to their strong institutions and economic development. Yet, populist forces that challenge the liberal democratic model have started to increase their support even in Western countries. However, in no country has democratic backsliding taken scholars by more surprise than in the United States. This article addresses the question of how a populist figure like Donald Trump managed to win the presidential election and subsequently undermined the democratic institutions in one of the world’s oldest democracies. We contend that the upsurge of populist leaders in contemporary Western democracies resulted from the political establishment’s failure to juggle responsiveness and responsibility simultaneously. In addition to our discussion of American politics, we draw parallels with the Turkish case to demonstrate our causal argument and offer suggestions on how to reverse democratic backsliding in the United States.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
167335
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
167340
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
167361
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
167346
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The politics of public policy is a vibrant research area increasingly at the forefront of intellectual innovations in the discipline. We argue that political scientists are best positioned to undertake research on the politics of public policy when they possess expertise in particular policy areas. Policy expertise positions scholars to conduct theoretically innovative work and to ensure that empirical research reflects the reality they aim to analyze. It also confers important practical advantages, such as access to a significant number of academic positions and major sources of research funding not otherwise available to political scientists. Perhaps most importantly, scholars with policy expertise are equipped to defend the value of political science degrees and research in the public sphere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
167352
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
167356
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
167354
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
167367
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
167364
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Contemporary political discourse often presents controversial policy topics (e.g., public lands, climate change, and immigration) in a bimodal manner—either for or against. As a result, can our classrooms provide a space for students to learn how to construct solutions that broker various perspectives? For students to reconcile policy differences, I designed a series of debate panels across a semester. The focus of this article is to describe the details of the debate panels so they can be replicated in educational settings. Moreover, the debate panels embody active or experiential learning for students to become informed participants of US public-policy making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
167360
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
167345
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Graduate-program decision makers face a similar challenge: how to design an admissions process that screens out applicants who are unlikely to succeed but does not provide too high an entry barrier for students who can be successful. This study catalogs the use of standardized testing in Master of Public Administration admissions and finds that less than one third of programs require standardized tests for all applicants. Moreover, program prestige, program diversity, and program size do not affect the likelihood that a program requires the Graduate Record Examination. This study also reviews the various standards that universities use to provide test waivers and also discusses other common application materials. The results should be of interest to undergraduate academic advisers and graduate-program directors as well as scholars and practitioners of higher-education administration more generally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
167349
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
167350
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
167343
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this follow-up to “Five Laws of Politics,” I show that the original estimates of electoral outcomes describing the five “laws” hold up with twice the number of elections and three times as many countries as in the original article. The analysis yields long-run equilibrium values for several electoral parameters that set limits to incumbent support in a democracy. The evidence lends additional support to the notion that elections in democracies appear as if governed by “laws of politics.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
167362
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
167363
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
167337
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
167348
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
167358
|
|
|