Partisanship Bias II

by on April 18, 2009 at 7:34 am in Economics | Permalink

David Leonhardt points to another example of partisanship bias, this one from the latest Gallup Poll:


Despite Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s solid roots in the Bush administration, new Gallup polling finds 64% of Democrats nationwide feeling confident in Bernanke’s input on the economy, compared with only 36% of Republicans. This is a complete reversal of the Fed chairman’s image among partisans a year ago, under President Bush, when Republicans had the greater confidence in Bernanke, 61% vs. 40%.

Richard April 18, 2009 at 7:51 am

This may not be the best example. In the last year Bernanke has proven himself much more interventionist than observers likely expected given his academic reputation as a conservative. Thus, it is easy to tell a story whereby Bernanke has won over Democrats and alienated Republicans because of his policies, not because of a change in the White House.

Candadai Tirumalai April 18, 2009 at 9:47 am

The Fed was created as an independent institution but Fed Chairmen pay
attention to elections and to who is in the White House. That explains at
least in part the shift in relative support among Republicans and Democrats for
Chairman Bernanke.

Andrew Smith April 18, 2009 at 11:00 am

I guess it would prove first-past-the-post is complete shit. I’m sure it was state-of-the-fucking-art in the late 18th century.

Andrew Smith April 18, 2009 at 11:02 am

I guess it really proves first-past-the-post is complete shit. I’m sure it was state-of-the-fucking-art in the late 18th century.

Daniel Reeves April 18, 2009 at 11:06 am

Typo: I meant “two party system,” not “two party equilibrium.

Ted Frank April 18, 2009 at 12:02 pm

Dozens of parties surviving in equilibrium, however, gives non-median voters excessive say in coalition governments: witness the control the Orthodox Jewish minority has over secular Israeli life because their single-issue parties are critical to governing coalitions. It’s far from clear that a new government nearly every year, as in Italy, is preferable to a two-party system.

Daran April 18, 2009 at 12:43 pm

As Richard says in comment #1, people may feel that new facts have come to light between the two polls. Changing your mind is not necessarily indicative of partisan bias.

Ted Frank April 18, 2009 at 1:15 pm

Current education policies in the US regarding evolution reflect the median voter, for better or worse: only 13% of Americans believe in naturalistic evolution, another 38% believe in theistic evolution — and creationism isn’t taught in a single American school district.

Only 18% of Americans are willing to raise gas taxes 50 cents to adjust for global warming, even though it would be impossible to have carbon limitations without a substantially higher gas tax.

As for the public choice problems of special interests such as UAW in two-party politics, you have not demonstrated that those problems are even slightly dissipated by proportional representation, rather than exacerbated.

floccina April 19, 2009 at 9:14 pm

i was unhappy when Bernanke was named and I he has not changed my opinion.

nike sb July 9, 2009 at 5:33 am

Thanks for your useful info, I think it’s a good topic.

air jordan sneakers July 10, 2009 at 2:27 am

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: