Hello everyone,

I am an Indian American student looking at graduate studies in Political Economy at a Politics department in the UK. I was asked to provide a research proposal for a project for my top choice university. I have never written a research proposal before and certainly have not written one in the Britisher style. I would appreciate the help in the structure of a proposal, what it should include, and some examples, if you are comfortable giving, on what a research proposal should look like. I apologize if my use of "Britisher" is inappropriate. It is the colloquial term we use in my part of India and also I come from a low caste background so this is very much just how my parents and by extension speak.

I appreciate all of the advice and help!

I am not, by any means, an expert regarding political topics, so I wanted to get your opinions on the following doubt I have had as of late:

Do you think that one could think about 'the political' and 'politics' as two different concepts?

If so, what would you consider are the characteristics that set them apart? (Ontological, practical, etc.)

I wonder about it, for a friend of mine has repeatedly stated that 'everything is political', which is something common to say. However, I do not think I fully understand the statement.

Would that mean that everything is at the core in ontological terms a domain of politics? Or that being 'political' is an inherent ontological characteristic of all entities?

Does it mean that everything is susceptible to a political analysis or alike?

I'm eager to read your takes! Thanks!

I am bored does someone wants a talk about politics

Hello everyone,

it’s my first post here! i wanted to ask, i just graduated from UC Davis with a Political Science Degree with a minor in sociology and i’m struggling to find a job i can get into. I’m trying to get into the field of law whether that’s working for the district attorney or at a law firm, however i’ve had no luck. they all require so much experience in the law field which i don’t have. How do i even get that experience if nobody is willing to hire me?

I would appreciate any tips as to what to look for and what i should do? What job titles are recommended i should look at? i js feel like im applying at the wrong places and wasting their and my time 😭😭 please help meh

thanks you all :p

In china for every promotion in the party and bureaucracy and official should complete an official state laid list of developments and objectives in that area. China's party and bureaucracy is filled with highly qualified technocrats and experts which guide the country and is on insane growth. What if a party comes and implements such a system in our democratic framework.

Hey everyone!

I'm thinking of creating an Instagram group for people who are genuinely interested in geopolitics and international affairs.

The idea is to bring together people who enjoy discussing topics like global conflicts, international relations, foreign policy, world politics, and major developments around the world.

It would be a space to share opinions, exchange perspectives, have meaningful discussions, and learn from each other.

You don't need to be an expert — just have a genuine interest in geopolitics and be open to discussing different viewpoints.

If anyone is interested, comment below or DM me. If there's enough interest, we can create the group and add everyone!

Looking forward to connecting with fellow geopolitics enthusiasts.

"Has the PM become more presidential"

1) One concern is while the lit review could work- not much in the field to discuss presidentialisation -maybe i could find theories of presidency and fundamentals of that as a workaround but still a concern either way - small field.

2) My MAIN concern though is the analysis.

Sure I can think of factors to look at. Increased media presence, unilateral decision making in cabinet, use of executive powers, etc u get the idea.

Then I could look for papers discussing how say PMs acted in cabinets. Not sure what to do after that- maybe write a little on what each PM spefically did for tha factor...? Blair packed his cabinet with supporters, cameron did this etc. Idk how to do it.

Then comes abalysing all of them to see a pattern for that factor. Okay 5/10 PMs were unilateral. One was a weird outlier, of those 5 all of them were more recent. The 5 that werent maybe differed in some slight ways.

I just dont feel like that has much to say there. You see what I mean? Its very basic and not significant analysis I feel?

Not to mention such factors increasing doesnt rly mean much might indicate a trend towards presidentialisation: 1) correlation isnt causation

2) every PM is going to have different contexts they acted in - some more power because they have a majority etc -cant really map this increase fully/properly every case is unique

Discussed my main issue about analysis (not the 2 points above) - with a teacher. She says its fine since think about how papers we read have little analysis at the end but mostly just data or describing things -Id agree but this is a 10k words dissertation. Beyond just saying basic stuff about the trends for each factor then doing an analysis section of my overall findings. It just feels like ill have finished what to say very quickly and concisely.

Hope that is explained okay. I do worry noone is understanding as my nice teacher did not seem to understand my main worry either I feel.

(Anyway, now I'm stressing about what other dissertation questions I could do instead 😭

You lovely people on Reddit have given me loads of suggestions too, but now I've got like 35 options and no idea how to narrow them down 😬

Honestly, all I really want is a manageable British politics topic with plenty of literature, a straightforward structure, and enough to analyse without overcomplicating things. Something I can just get on with and grind out.

Would it be worth sharing the options here, or does anyone have advice on how to narrow them down?)

If this doesn’t belong here, then please let me know and redirect me to a better place to ask this question. I would appreciate it.

I was looking at my state’s sample ballot. I consider myself pretty well read, but we all know ballot jargon can be confusing on purpose sometimes. What does this really mean? Is it as straight forward as it implies or is it a bit more sinister? Is it trying to make it harder for the homeless or people in similar situations to vote? Is it possible to be a newly naturalized citizen, but not be a resident of any state? is there a difference between being a “citizen“ of a state and a “resident” of a state?

I want to learn politics at a deeper level, but I'm not really interested in just following political news or learning political ideologies.

What I want to understand is how a country actually works as a system:

• How are policies actually made?
• Who has the power to make or block them?
• What is the role of politicians, bureaucrats, courts, businesses, interest groups, the military, voters, etc.?
• How do different institutions constrain each other?
• Why do governments sometimes make decisions that seem contrary to what would benefit the general population?
• How can I analyze who benefits from a policy and why?
• How do I distinguish the official justification for a policy from the underlying incentives and interests?
• How do domestic institutions, economics, and international pressures interact?
• Most importantly, how can I develop enough understanding to predict what a country/government is likely to do and explain why?

I'm looking for a structured learning path rather than just a list of political books.

What fields should I study, and in what order? For example, comparative politics, political economy, public policy, public administration, political sociology, international relations, game theory, etc.

I'd especially appreciate recommendations from people who have studied political science or related fields.

I need to choose a political party from india be it national or regional, help me choose and i need to present it on a A2 size paper give me creative ideas for presentation

can anyone help me find a free version of this book: "The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Six Democracies"

every time i read something related to the colonial era im sent into an awe thats almost weird like how can almost an entire continent just come to a conclusion that they are better that the entire world just because the way they speak n look oh my god isnt that absolutely mind boggling to u

For a month or two I've been trying to really get into theory about anything regarding politics and political science. I've read about fascism, nazism, communism & socialism, a few pages of the communist manifesto, I've researched commodity fetishism and Che Guevara, but no matter what I do I can't seem to fully grasp and/or remember what I've just read. I'm talking theory. It's awful to read over twenty pages at a time with passion but struggle with every word to make sure the meaning doesn't dissipate mid-sentence. I consider myself a smart individual, I've been told so, so I'm very confused why this happens. I've always been passionate about this subject and just lately got serious about studying it. Do you comrades use any tactics or study methods to research, understand, and memorize the information better? It seems like it's endless and ridiculously complicated.

I've been working on a political election forecasting project called Neiman's Political Predictions.

The website features independent predictions for the 2026 elections, interactive electoral maps, historical election results, and a tool where visitors can make their own predictions using Safe, Likely, Lean, and Toss-up ratings.

It also includes election betting odds and community discussions.

I'd love feedback on the website, especially the interactive maps and prediction builder.

Website: https://neimans-predictions-2026-new.vercel.app/

What features would you want to see added?

Were they all military junta governments? I read about Estonia being a dictatorship from a Farmer Party candidate as well as Poland being a dictatorship from an independent chemist, but it's all a confusing mess. Anyone know anything about the topic?

Explain pls

Hello, I’m currently doing a political science PhD in North America and I wonder if private sector could be a possible path for me. I know very well the academic side, but I don’t know the private one. I’m doing a quantitative dissertation using LLM and large database in a public policy context and I’m wondering if I can recycle this experience in the private sector after my defence instead of doing a post doctoral contract. What kind of company I could work for in what kind of position?

I've wondered this ever since I've heard the term. Now, while the question may seem nebulous, I imagine current systems could evolve into certain systems as opposed to others

I'm no big poli-sci guy myself, but I figure if I'm going to ask anyone anywhere, it might as well be here.

Idk if this is the right place to post so apologies. Ok so idk how to explain but i have a friend who thinks this is the matrix. Shes says stuff like she doesn’t believe in doctors, sunscreen doesnt save our skin, and school is the matrix. Like she basically just says capitalism is matrix but she still like buys into capitalism, basically she thinks shes better. Shes always saying stuff like this but today she said something ridiculous she said school doesn’t even teach us real stuff and then she said “ the rothschild family removed an elemnt named ether from the periodic table” which is not true search it up anyways me and my other friends told her thats not true and I literally even showed her on a google search it said its wasnt true but she denied it she said “ thats what they want you to believe”.

She lowkey always does this and she like makes us feel dumb but truly her argument doesnt make sense at all. Like also she says school is tge matrix and whwn we tell her we wanna study in high school so we can get into good unis and have good careers she says were “were in the matrix” like idc what you believe but stop making people feel dumb. Also she said the taliban is tuff and shes afghan btw like isk what shes on anyway and she never accepts shes wrong, honestly i like her but at one point cmon bro u have to stop what do u guys think? Also idk if this helps but shes muslim which isnt a bad thing at all im also muslim its just ridiculous sometimes.m

An opposition party can win with support from voters who want incompatible policies. In foreign policy, some may favor withdrawal from a conflict, others negotiations and others a more aggressive strategy. Their votes count toward the same victory without expressing agreement on what should follow.

That creates a problem for interpreting mandates: evidence that voters rejected an incumbent doesn't necessarily show that they endorsed the winner's explanation of that rejection.

It helps to separate three things: the formal authority an election gives officeholders, the policy preferences of the coalition that elected them and the mandate they later claim. They can overlap, but they aren't the same.

A detailed platform could make a mandate claim more credible. Still, elections bundle issues. A voter may back a party despite its foreign policy because economic policy matters more to them. Post-election approval of a particular policy is additional evidence, though it doesn't show that the policy caused the victory.

The institutional setting complicates this further. In a presidential system, a legislative majority can change while the executive stays in office, and both can claim legitimacy from different elections and coalitions. An opposition victory may authorize greater scrutiny without identifying a shared alternative policy.

Governments don't need unanimous agreement before acting. The narrower issue is what evidence distinguishes a policy-specific mandate from the ordinary authority to govern after winning.

How can that distinction be operationalized when studying elections? What would show that a policy helped produce a winning coalition, rather than being accepted as part of a broader party choice or attributed to voters after the result?

Why was he voted out so quickly? Was he hated or?

I recently graduated from a state school with a political science degree. Honestly, I really slacked off in college and did terribly. I know this is a huge factor, but I literally can't even get an interview and I don't know what to do. I've been applying to internships because I didn't have one in college, and still nothing (I did try to get internships in college, many interviews led to nothing). Does anyone have any advice? I've been considering jobs not related to my major just to get the professional experience on my resume. As of now, I've been working a serving job to keep up with the cost of living. I have also gotten my resume edited through my college counselor and multiple sources online.

I have been looking at any job somewhat related to political science and government.

For reference, I'm in Phoenix, AZ and my degree is from a school in Arizona. Please be nice, I know I really messed up in college grade wise but I'm just trying to turn the situation around.

Hi I am losing my mind over this its for an undergrad dissertation -10k words.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Academic Context: didnt care in first year of uni -resits to pass to year 2, mental health severe decline- nearly failed uni -person close to me helped me push through and do resits for an entire yesr straight to get into 3rd year. Essentially dont know my degree at all really - just passed by reading specific readings for assignment questions never actually learned anything 😅😬😬.

Now I have absolutely No idea what to do for my dissertation.

(Had 1 idea about have pms become more presidential but i think its too difficult/vague.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look i know it sounds bad but given my situation I just want something straightforward and easy to do - something with lots of papers on it.

I am starting to think the easiest things to do would be to analyse:

.causes to outcomes of specific events -case studies (eg why did corbynism fail, why was there instability in the conservatives)

.Reform questions (eg replace house of lords,constitution)

.Or maybe analysing effectiveness of things (eg parliamentary accountability).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Honestly no idea?!? analysing case study/studies could be good but it would have to be something be enough papers and varying arguments -gotta make a good argument comparing sources not just be descriptive yk?

Reform questions - most boring thing but I mean could be done- i just dont think theres much to say in analysis though? idk if it would get to 10k words worth?

Please if anyone has any ideas for questions please tell me!!!

I just want to pass uni and this is really causing me stress I cant decide on a topic and deadlines are soon to pick.

Thank you for your time I really appreciate it.

[Edit: I appreciate the suggestions pls keep them coming 😅🙏. You all are so kind and non judgemental)