Sean Gailmard
@sean-gailmard.bsky.social
Herman Royer Professor of Political Economy, University of California - Berkeley, Department of Political Science
What is the point of democracy in this world?
The existence of this photograph (which is a real photo of a real person at a Mamdani campaign event) is enough to establish for me that voters writ large have absolutely no grasp of what policy is or how any given policy impacts their lives. It's all vibes.
October 30, 2025 at 4:11 AM
What is the point of democracy in this world?
This sentiment is more common in my field than I expected when I entered it. In this line of thinking, what is the role of a demos in a democratic system?
I need some people to stop treating public opinion as an un-moved mover of politics, and instead identify strategies not for following public opinion but for leading it.
September 29, 2025 at 7:34 PM
This sentiment is more common in my field than I expected when I entered it. In this line of thinking, what is the role of a demos in a democratic system?
Grumbach is external validity pilled, it's happening
This is an excellent point. It’s not really a ‘methodology’ problem because these experiments are very internally valid. It’s that they don’t generalize externally to politics. That requires us to believe actual voting would really be different if Dems used nearly identical message A vs message B
By the way, there’s a fourth page I cut for length, but on it you can see that the best-testing and one of the worst-testing messages are nearly identical. In other words YOUR METHODOLOGY IS TRASH.
August 25, 2025 at 8:42 PM
Grumbach is external validity pilled, it's happening
I'm sympathetic to Dave's points, but also wonder what did we collectively expect? The political actors doing this stuff do not see academia as a non-ideological truth machine, and I'm not sure we make a convincing case that they should. It's easy to find colleagues who explicitly reject that model.
Wait til red states start folding their humanities & social sciences departments into these ideologically-driven conservative centers & making those centers these faculty’s tenure homes. Bc that’s coming next. And when that happens, academia as a non-ideological truth-seeking enterprise is dead.
August 21, 2025 at 8:13 PM
I'm sympathetic to Dave's points, but also wonder what did we collectively expect? The political actors doing this stuff do not see academia as a non-ideological truth machine, and I'm not sure we make a convincing case that they should. It's easy to find colleagues who explicitly reject that model.
Students are entering a world where Gen AI will be widely available. We must teach them to use it as a complement for the skills we teach, not resist it as a substitute.
A corollary is, we must teach skills that AI cannot reliably replicate reasonably well. Being honest, we often don't.
A corollary is, we must teach skills that AI cannot reliably replicate reasonably well. Being honest, we often don't.
I have seen some faculty say there should be a total ban on AI use in classes.
Maybe for some classes but I don’t think that is a tenable or desirable policy on the whole.
Also not worrying about it isn’t tenable.
What’s needed is thoughtfulness and a middle way.
Maybe for some classes but I don’t think that is a tenable or desirable policy on the whole.
Also not worrying about it isn’t tenable.
What’s needed is thoughtfulness and a middle way.
July 28, 2025 at 8:09 PM
Students are entering a world where Gen AI will be widely available. We must teach them to use it as a complement for the skills we teach, not resist it as a substitute.
A corollary is, we must teach skills that AI cannot reliably replicate reasonably well. Being honest, we often don't.
A corollary is, we must teach skills that AI cannot reliably replicate reasonably well. Being honest, we often don't.
This is true. But it’s also true that SS/HUM defines literatures, fac lines, and whole fields in ways that appeal to progressives and reinforce their worldview. It’s not healthy for academia, intellectually or politically.
I’ve said it before but “diversity of thought” is a trojan horse designed to help mainstream unserious crackpots who would be laughed out of any self-respecting graduate seminar. Yaving is only notable because his billionaire backers are even less capable of discerning a good idea than he is.
May 6, 2025 at 3:39 PM
This is true. But it’s also true that SS/HUM defines literatures, fac lines, and whole fields in ways that appeal to progressives and reinforce their worldview. It’s not healthy for academia, intellectually or politically.
Bednar is providing great content and clear voice on administrative problems under Trump. This is essential reading.
This opinion is a good introduction to the debate in the Appointments Clause. I have one gripe, which is just shameless self-promotion. The gripe is about whether unitary executive theory is "efficient." The efficiency argument ignores administrative capacity. 1/
Judge Howell rejects Trump's attempt to remove NLRB Commissioner Wilcox and rejects Trump's extreme version of the unitary executive theory.
Spot-on citations to the real history by @jdmortenson.bsky.social @kexelchabot.bsky.social, among others - Awesome!
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Spot-on citations to the real history by @jdmortenson.bsky.social @kexelchabot.bsky.social, among others - Awesome!
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
March 7, 2025 at 11:20 PM
Bednar is providing great content and clear voice on administrative problems under Trump. This is essential reading.
I wish this were true. I don't think it is.
March 7, 2025 at 10:13 PM
I wish this were true. I don't think it is.
It’s unfortunate that Defund was such a profoundly bad idea, that it now takes up all oxygen in conversation about parties and law enforcement.
It’s also not a serious argument whether the D party is full top to bottom of electeds and allies that favor less robust law enforcement and prosecution.
It’s also not a serious argument whether the D party is full top to bottom of electeds and allies that favor less robust law enforcement and prosecution.
As president, Joe Biden made “fund the police, fund them” a pause-for-applause line at the State of the Union.
Senate Dems unanimously voted against defunding the police and publicly touted that afterwards.
They literally did the suggested “move to the center” on this. It’s not a serious argument.
Senate Dems unanimously voted against defunding the police and publicly touted that afterwards.
They literally did the suggested “move to the center” on this. It’s not a serious argument.
"the only things dems need to cave on are race, gender, policing, and immigration" what kind of victory would this be
March 7, 2025 at 3:45 PM
It’s unfortunate that Defund was such a profoundly bad idea, that it now takes up all oxygen in conversation about parties and law enforcement.
It’s also not a serious argument whether the D party is full top to bottom of electeds and allies that favor less robust law enforcement and prosecution.
It’s also not a serious argument whether the D party is full top to bottom of electeds and allies that favor less robust law enforcement and prosecution.
One thing I always wondered about work on extremism penalties is, how to better account for strategic choice of platforms by candidates.
If candidates chose to maximize e(vote share), then any randomly assigned deviation should make them do a little worse, but locally, its effect should be small.
If candidates chose to maximize e(vote share), then any randomly assigned deviation should make them do a little worse, but locally, its effect should be small.
[email protected] & I have been looking at whether moderates perform better in general elections. We updated w/ more recent data
Here are the RDD results (excluding the imbalanced period)
If there ever was an extremism penalty, there isn't now (if anything extremists do better)
Here are the RDD results (excluding the imbalanced period)
If there ever was an extremism penalty, there isn't now (if anything extremists do better)
March 7, 2025 at 4:05 AM
One thing I always wondered about work on extremism penalties is, how to better account for strategic choice of platforms by candidates.
If candidates chose to maximize e(vote share), then any randomly assigned deviation should make them do a little worse, but locally, its effect should be small.
If candidates chose to maximize e(vote share), then any randomly assigned deviation should make them do a little worse, but locally, its effect should be small.
This is a great paper
Say you’ve got very good causal IDENTIFICATION. Can you say you have causality, can make a causal general claim, and can say what “THE causal effect” is?
NO
We explain why in new article at Journal of Causal Inference.
www.degruyter.com/document/doi...
NO
We explain why in new article at Journal of Causal Inference.
www.degruyter.com/document/doi...
The necessity of construct and external validity for deductive causal inference
The Credibility Revolution advances internally valid research designs intended to identify causal effects from quantitative data. The ensuing emphasis on internal validity, however, has enabled a negl...
www.degruyter.com
February 22, 2025 at 4:29 PM
This is a great paper
People will literally say "I don't do formal theory, that's just making stuff up" and then use polity scores
This is giving strong doomsday clock vibes.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
If you've ever used the Polity data, read this from Monty Marshall.
tl;dr Polity is coding recent US events as an executive self-coup and an adverse regime change.
tl;dr Polity is coding recent US events as an executive self-coup and an adverse regime change.
February 12, 2025 at 7:01 PM
People will literally say "I don't do formal theory, that's just making stuff up" and then use polity scores
This is giving strong doomsday clock vibes.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
If you've ever used the Polity data, read this from Monty Marshall.
tl;dr Polity is coding recent US events as an executive self-coup and an adverse regime change.
tl;dr Polity is coding recent US events as an executive self-coup and an adverse regime change.
February 12, 2025 at 6:39 PM
This is giving strong doomsday clock vibes.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
Building a scientifically credible measurement scale for socially important events takes a very special kind of disposition, and I do not think this is it.
I do not see how this is *not* about policy disagreement. The reason to upend constitutional order is to change what the government does, I.e. policy.
This is why every political scientist you know has been in a state of panic for the past week. This isn't about policy disagreement, it's about the Constitution being destroyed before our very eyes.
My depressing thought for the day: it seems increasingly inevitable that quite soon, Trump decides to simply disregard a court finding that some of his actions are illegal or unconstitutional. Impeachment is attempted & fails thanks to loyal Republicans. At which point there are no good options.
February 6, 2025 at 1:55 AM
I do not see how this is *not* about policy disagreement. The reason to upend constitutional order is to change what the government does, I.e. policy.
GOP presidents take different (legal) actions to control the executive branch, not because they have stronger will, but because they face a more acute problem of control. The agency loss for a GOP president is larger than for Dem presidents, and the difference is growing.
Once again, a Trump presidency is an amazing lesson in how much authority the president has.
Not referring to his illegal actions but his legal actions that many people on this app don’t like.
My point: Democratic presidents have under utilized their executive power.
Not referring to his illegal actions but his legal actions that many people on this app don’t like.
My point: Democratic presidents have under utilized their executive power.
February 3, 2025 at 9:10 PM
GOP presidents take different (legal) actions to control the executive branch, not because they have stronger will, but because they face a more acute problem of control. The agency loss for a GOP president is larger than for Dem presidents, and the difference is growing.
This is as good a time as any to post a paper I've been working on with @LindseyGailmard: The Persistence and Fragility of Bureaucratic Capacity.
We ask: what makes bureaucratic capacity persist, and what makes *threats* to bureaucratic capacity hard to reverse?
We ask: what makes bureaucratic capacity persist, and what makes *threats* to bureaucratic capacity hard to reverse?
January 31, 2025 at 5:24 AM
This is as good a time as any to post a paper I've been working on with @LindseyGailmard: The Persistence and Fragility of Bureaucratic Capacity.
We ask: what makes bureaucratic capacity persist, and what makes *threats* to bureaucratic capacity hard to reverse?
We ask: what makes bureaucratic capacity persist, and what makes *threats* to bureaucratic capacity hard to reverse?
Why are critics of social media companies so interested in the personal status of their CEOs? Who cares if Mark Zuckerberg is a pathetic nerd, you don’t have a personal relationship with him.
remarkable to me that far from seeming cool or masculine zuck seems like an even bigger loser — the kind of nerd who preemptively gives his lunch money to the bully and thanks him for the opportunity
January 11, 2025 at 4:50 PM
Why are critics of social media companies so interested in the personal status of their CEOs? Who cares if Mark Zuckerberg is a pathetic nerd, you don’t have a personal relationship with him.
Not a FB user, but I am glad they are getting rid of fact checking. It seems pointless at best -- the shared commitments that support a healthy polity are not really about neutral referees -- and often does seem to favor Democrats in specific cases. The study below is not convincing to me.
🚨In Nature🚨
Meta is dropping fact-checking to avoid anti-conservative bias- but is there actually evidence of bias?
We this test empirically & find that conservatives
* ARE suspended more
* BUT share more misinfo
So suspension isn't necessarily evidence of bias www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Meta is dropping fact-checking to avoid anti-conservative bias- but is there actually evidence of bias?
We this test empirically & find that conservatives
* ARE suspended more
* BUT share more misinfo
So suspension isn't necessarily evidence of bias www.nature.com/articles/s41...
Differences in misinformation sharing can lead to politically asymmetric sanctions - Nature
We find that conservatives tend to share more low-quality news through social media than liberals, and so even if technology companies enact politically neutral anti-misinformation policies, political...
www.nature.com
January 8, 2025 at 8:27 PM
Not a FB user, but I am glad they are getting rid of fact checking. It seems pointless at best -- the shared commitments that support a healthy polity are not really about neutral referees -- and often does seem to favor Democrats in specific cases. The study below is not convincing to me.
This is all true, but there are deeper problems than not *pulling* punches. Much of academia has a strong ideological slant, which makes it hard to think of a full range of critiques of a given piece of research in the first place. We think of the ones that educated liberals are inclined to notice.
and you're actually doing your own allies a disservice when you pull punches in this way anyway. LOTS of it on left in the post-2015 world and the ideas were weaker and less battle-tested as a result, causing people to be surprised by policies that performed worse and were less popular than expected
January 5, 2025 at 11:42 PM
This is all true, but there are deeper problems than not *pulling* punches. Much of academia has a strong ideological slant, which makes it hard to think of a full range of critiques of a given piece of research in the first place. We think of the ones that educated liberals are inclined to notice.
My dispatch from way down in the termite mound: Chatbots in academia seem something like having a research assistant that is extremely diligent, cheap to the user, and about as capable for many tasks as a college junior (+/- ). I guess I don't know if that's good or bad...
December 27, 2024 at 6:04 AM
My dispatch from way down in the termite mound: Chatbots in academia seem something like having a research assistant that is extremely diligent, cheap to the user, and about as capable for many tasks as a college junior (+/- ). I guess I don't know if that's good or bad...
I won’t opine on what constitutes real economics, but one good reason to impugn the rationality of individuals in politics is to justify ignoring their inconvenient demands.
@pkrugman.bsky.social taking zero prisoners. You love to see it.
paulkrugman.substack.com/p/america-th...
paulkrugman.substack.com/p/america-th...
December 23, 2024 at 7:11 PM
I won’t opine on what constitutes real economics, but one good reason to impugn the rationality of individuals in politics is to justify ignoring their inconvenient demands.
Occasional reminder that formal modeling is free
Here's a provocative new paper
"Confronting the New Gatekeepers of Experimental Political Science"
doi.org/10.33774/aps...
"Confronting the New Gatekeepers of Experimental Political Science"
doi.org/10.33774/aps...
December 4, 2024 at 9:59 PM
Occasional reminder that formal modeling is free
I’m afraid that part of the problem is we make the attacks very easy. My university published a sample DEI rubric which downgraded applicants who aspired to treat all students equally. This isn’t a “liberal value” I recognize and it creates an exposed right flank.
Rufo relies a lot on branding liberal values to make them sound evil and dangerous. He is also seeks to exploit those values to his ends. So, for example, he pushed for "transparency bills" to force teachers to present every detail of their lesson plans.
open.substack.com/pub/donmoyni...
open.substack.com/pub/donmoyni...
The purposes of the new education "transparency" bills
An off-shoot of the anti-CRT movement takes center stage
open.substack.com
November 27, 2024 at 2:51 AM
I’m afraid that part of the problem is we make the attacks very easy. My university published a sample DEI rubric which downgraded applicants who aspired to treat all students equally. This isn’t a “liberal value” I recognize and it creates an exposed right flank.
Strongly recommend this book
Anyway if you want to know about the history of the first tariff in the U.S. check out my book, paperback out in June 2025
www.amazon.com/National-Dut...
www.amazon.com/National-Dut...
November 26, 2024 at 4:27 AM
Strongly recommend this book
Reposted by Sean Gailmard
I made an HPE starter pack, please join in if you are here for HPE and Broadstreet!
November 11, 2024 at 10:30 PM
I made an HPE starter pack, please join in if you are here for HPE and Broadstreet!