On Bluesky, you often see commentary on and jokes about clips from White House Daily Briefings--but have you considered *why* the White House does them? And to what end?
I (with @benjaminsnoble.bsky.social and Erin Rossiter) investigate in a new paper 1/N
www.davidryanmiller.com/files/Presid...
Thanks Joel!
🗣️ Do US presidents attack the opposition instead of seeking compromise?
➡️ Using 90 years of speeches, @benjaminsnoble.bsky.social shows presidents target the outparty when gridlock looms, mobilising allies and shaping future power, not immediate policy www.cambridge.org/core/journal... #FirstView
Thanks Steven!
Thank you to everyone who provided support and feedback along the way!
You can read the full article here:
cambridge.org/core/journal...
Presidents promise unity, but institutional constraints push them toward negative partisan appeals that help electorally—even though they complicate lawmaking and our notion that presidents are "above party."
Some behavioral evidence: Using monthly TAPS panel data (2012–2017) from WUSTL, more presidential negative partisanship in month t leads to lower co-partisan approval of the out-party in month t+1. Out-partisans’ views don't change—so this is mobilization, not persuasion.
Case, Obama 2009–10: After Democrats lose their 60th Senate seat, Obama’s GOP references nearly triple and become much more negative—exactly as the argument predicts.
Where? Less so in major national addresses like the State of the Union. Out-party references are prevalent in rallies and campaign-style remarks—consistent with an electoral (not legislative) goal.
Sentiment? References are more negative in competitive periods and during divided government.
Frequency? Out-party references rise with (a) "insecure majorities" i.e., 1947–1956 and 1981–2024 (Lee 2016), (b) during divided government, and (c) as elections approach.
I collect all presidential speeches from 1933-2024 from the American Presidency Project. I count out-party mentions (party labels, recent out-party presidents, congressional leaders) and score sentiment of each paragraph using a contextual embedding model.
This is not an isolated incident. Why do presidents increasingly use negative partisan rhetoric?
My argument: When legislative prospects are poor, presidents attack the out-party to mobilize co-partisans now and win the next Congress, where policymaking will be easier.
Biden didn't try to compromise or accommodate. He hit back, promising “the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican friends”—at odds with classic “going public” persuasion.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6jm...
The story starts in February 2024: a conservative-leaning border package looked viable. Then Republicans backed away. McConnell called it “weak,” and one House Republican said he refused to help Democrats in an election year.
edition.cnn.com/2024/01/03/p...
FirstView day for my PSRM article, “Presidential Negative Partisanship.” 🥳
I show presidents attack the opposition most (not persuade) when legislating is least likely to succeed—and those attacks mobilize their own side.
cambridge.org/core/journal...
Read on for the 🧵 version...
In none of these examples does AI replace me or my expertise.
I never uncritically copy/paste AI output.
In each case, I apply my own judgment, knowledge, and taste to achieve outcomes that would be impractical or impossible without AI.
6️⃣ Writing a custom textbook: LLMs helped me transform rough lecture notes into polished chapters. Reviewing and editing the output took a couple hours per chapter, but students loved this bespoke, living textbook.
Check it out! understandingamericanpolitics.substack.com
5️⃣ Creating exam questions: ChatGPT aced my multiple‑choice causal final. So I ditched MCQs and used AI to simulate datasets for open‑ended problems that truly tested my students' understanding.
4️⃣ Making slide images: Sometimes you want a custom graphic. AI image generators can produce playful illustrations—think “I’m Just a Bill” for bureaucracy—that make slides memorable and keep lecture-writing fun.
3️⃣ Getting critical feedback: I gave a practice talk to ChatGPT and got back a 2,000‑word review. Not every suggestion was great, but many were helpful (just like peer review).
2️⃣ Synthesizing literature: Early LLMs hallucinated citations. With “deep research,” they search for 10–20 minutes and produce a report summarizing real sources. I use these reports to orient myself, spot gaps, and decide what to read next.
1️⃣ Debugging code: I used to puzzle over why my `mutate()` call didn’t work. Now I paste error messages into ChatGPT and get a tailored fix. It’s low effort/low reward, but those small time savers compound.
I share...
3 for RESEARCH:
• Debugging code (ok duh)
• Synthesizing literature (it's good now)
• Getting critical feedback (peer revAIew?)
3 for TEACHING:
• Making slide images (silly, fun)
• Creating exam questions (try it)
• Writing custom textbooks (no, really)
Academics are skeptical of AI.
"It plagiarizes!"
"It hallucinates!"
"It’s killing critical thinking!"
And sure—it’s not perfect.
But after a year of experimenting, I've found 6 AI applications that have transformed my research and teaching 🧵
benjaminnoble.org/blog/six-ai-...
Though Trump II often claims it is "maximally transparent," it hides a lot of information about relationships with outside groups/individuals
One such type of information is records of White House visitors
I explain why this is problematic for democracy at @thehill.com
thehill.com/opinion/whit...
Dems in…array on GOP’s CR? This copy-paste messaging strategy aligns with my research with Gechun Lin (WUSTL): minority parties are consistently better at staying on message than the majority.
Trump 2.0. Making Neustadt (1960) great again.
Did you, or someone you know, write a great dissertation on executive politics in the last two years? Email me (b2noble@ucsd.edu) to submit it for the George C. Edwards III Dissertation Award, recognizing the best dissertation on executive politics.
With class starting Monday, I was running out of time to update the vignettes from my 2023 Intro slides on collective action problems in Congress. Turns out, procrastination pays off!
