Posted by Jim Lindgren:
The new HNN rating of presidents.--
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_05_22-2005_05_28.shtml#1117123917


   The History News Network has published the [1]results of an informal
   survey of historians and found George Bush to be a failure (tip to
   [2]Instapundit).

   With Steve Calabresi, in 2000 I wrote up the results of a survey of
   politically balanced panels of historians, political scientists, and
   law professors for the Wall Street Journal, an article in
   Constitutional Commentary, and a chapter in Presidential Leadership (a
   Wall Street Journal book edited by James Taranto and Leonard Leo).

   One thing became clear to me: for recent presidents, such as Bill
   Clinton, any ratings reflect more the political makeup of the rating
   panel than judgments about the president being rated.

   I replicated this study this year for a revised version of
   Presidential Leadership due out this fall (we added economists this
   time).

   The political split I find in rating recent presidents means that it
   is likely that the HNN study merely tells us what the political
   orientation of their pool is.

   This is a measurement issue. You may think you are measuring GW Bush,
   but you are really measuring the politics of the panel surveyed. I am
   not saying that, if someone were to do a representative study of
   historians, they wouldn't find Bush a failure (given the political
   makeup of the profession, they probably would); what I am saying is
   that this result would be determined by the politics of the raters,
   not GW Bush's successes or failures.

   In rating presidents, one should either politically balance panels or
   measure the politics of the raters and assess their impact on the
   ratings -- or both (the informal HNN survey does neither). Otherwise,
   you are not measuring what you think you are measuring.

   Our new 2005 study should be released in the early fall as part of a
   revised version of Presidential Leadership. Sorry, I can't release the
   results. You'll have to wait another few months to learn how a
   politically balanced panel of historians rate GW Bush.

References

   1. http://hnn.us/articles/5019.html
   2. http://instapundit.com/archives/023265.php

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to