Skip to content ↓


Political science

Download RSS feed: News Articles / In the Media

Displaying 16 - 30 of 155 news clips related to this topic.

The Washington Post

Writing for The Washington Post, Prof. M. Taylor Fravel explores how Chinese and Indian forces have disengaged and created a buffer zone at Pangong Lake on their disputed border. “The disengagement and buffer zone creates space for further talks,” writes Fravel. “In the short term, discussions have already begun to address disengagement in other “friction areas” such as Gorga/Hot Springs. Longer term, political talks about the border may be possible if a complete de-escalation occurs.”

The Washington Post

In an article for The Washington Post, graduate student Aidan Milliff and Saksham Khosla of Dalberg Advisors explore why farmers are protesting in India. Milliff and Khosla write that farmers are concerned that new laws aimed at deregulating agricultural markets in India could create a situation where “farmers would see less long-term stability, and could be at the mercy of big business.”


TechCrunch reporter Devin Coldewey writes that a new study co-authored by MIT researchers finds that debunking misinformation is the most effective method of addressing false news on social media platforms. “The team speculated as to the cause of this, suggesting that it fits with other indications that people are more likely to incorporate feedback into a preexisting judgment rather than alter that judgment as it’s being formed,” writes Coldewey. 


“Dealing with the present constitutional crisis requires more than removing Donald Trump from office," writes Professor Charles Stewart III. "It requires creating the conditions for electoral politics to marginalize opponents of constitutional government.”

The Washington Post

Prof. Vipin Narang speaks with Washington Post reporter Elizabeth Saunders about the process by which the U.S. president can order a nuclear strike. “The president, and the president alone, possesses the sole authority to order a nuclear launch, and no one can legally stop him or her,” Narang explains. “Despite reports that Pelosi received assurances that there are safeguards in place in the event the president of the United States (POTUS) wants to launch a nuclear weapon, any such meaningful or effective safeguards would be illegal.”

New York Times

A new survey by researchers from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab found that long waiting times were more common for early voters during the 2020 presidential election than than they were on Election Day, reports Kevin Quealy and  Alicia Parlapiano for The New York Times. The researchers found “14 percent of Election Day voters waited more than 30 minutes to vote, an increase from 2016.”

The Wall Street Journal

A national survey led by Prof. Charles Stewart III found that Americans generally had smooth experiences voting in the 2020 presidential election, reports Alexa Corse for The Wall Street Journal. Stewart explains that he thinks many voters will continue voting by mail in the future. “I think there will be less reeling back than the rhetoric is suggesting right now,” says Stewart. “State legislatures are going to discover that a lot of the security questions they have are based on exaggerated claims.”

NBC Boston

Prof. Charles Stewart III speaks with NBC 10 about mail-in voting during the 2020 presidential election and the impact of USPS delays. It was really heartening to see not only the experiment going well, but everything it took to make it happen,” said Stewart. “Voters have taken a bite of the apple and many of them are going to continue voting by mail.”

The Washington Post

In an article for The Washington Post, Prof. Charles Stewart III examines how the rural-urban divide is reshaping American politics. “Between 2016 and 2020, votes shifted most in the middle of that rural-urban continuum,” writes Stewart. “These regions’ voters are likely to be most prone to shifting again in 2024.”

New York Times

Prof. Charles Stewart III writes for The New York Times about claims of voter fraud in Philadelphia. “The evidence available in the public record demonstrates on its own that the claim of widespread fraud is itself a fraud,” notes Stewart.

The Wall Street Journal

Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Prof. Charles Stewart III notes that the administration of the 2020 presidential election was a success. “Even as we enter a contentious stretch of litigation, in which every aspect of the election infrastructure will be scrutinized,” writes Stewart, “the U.S. should be thankful for the heroic—and successful—efforts of election administrators around the country.”

The Guardian

Prof. Charles Stewart III speaks with Guardian reporter Sam Levine about what might happen after the polls close on election night. “In most states, the pace of counting and reporting is going to be slowed by a few hours. In some states, they’re going to be feeding more ballots into scanners after the polls close, and that’s going to take some time,” says Stewart. He adds that he believes we’re going to “know more than you think on election night.”


Prof. Charles Stewart III speaks with David Brancaccio of Marketplace about the history of voting technology. “Voting would be very different in the United States without the use of computing technologies,” says Stewart, “much like all of public policy, and actually all of our commercial lives, would be very different without the use of information technology to create the networks to do all of the transactions and allow us to do almost everything we do hundreds of times every day.”


Writing for WBUR, Prof. Charles Stewart III argues that “whether an actual constitutional crisis emerges in the days following the election will depend on the careful, serious counting of every single vote that has been cast. As citizens, we need to be focused on that process, and not on distractions and delays of a desperate candidate.”


Prof. Charles Stewart III speaks with Steve Inskeep of NPR about early voting in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. Stewart notes that, thus far, we’re seeing, “the sort of friction we get in a high-energy election on the first few days. Voters are eager to vote, and election officials are learning whether they have enough capacity at their early voting sites. And some places, it looks like they don't.”