Polity's measurement problems have been known since the 90s. Vdem was made bc of them. The new score is below 1800s levels which is impossible. So what are we supposed to make of people who know that instrumentally citing it when it gives a measurement they want? Science!

And all tagging each other like the collapse of American institutions would be something to high-five over.

Methodological rigor starts with measurement. Half of the sophisticated modeling we push is laundering garbage data to tell pre-decided stories. Whether Polity's obvious problems makes someone happy instead of sad tells you a lot about where they land on that.

Here's a challenge. You give me a decade in American history that was more democratic than now. We'll go comb through the historical record and see how much enfranchisement, how little political violence, how just and inclusive government, and uncorrupt and selfless politicians.

Would probably avoid the 70s, 60s, 40s, 30s, 10s, 1890s, 1870s,1860s, or 1830s.

Somehow we've landed in a special methodological circle of hell where we're treating American history ahistorically as a series of completely idiosyncratic cases while simultaneously recording and modeling it as if it were systematic and consistently measured. Worst of both.