A new study shows that Democrat presidents overwhelmingly place fellow leftist partisans in government-paid, political appointments. The graph reveals President Donald Trump made the most balanced political appointments of any president in decades, leading many to suggest his administration was stymied by his own sense of fair play.

A study titled “Ideology and Performance in Public Organizations,” done by researchers from Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management and University of California Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, provided the data.

The study notes: “Democrats make up the plurality of civil servants. Overrepresentation of Democrats increases with seniority.”

The report also notes the effects of “presidential transitions,” including “a general ‘morale effect'” on bureaucrats who are not ideologically aligned with the new president. This is an effect “whereby misaligned bureaucrats are less motivated. Our results thus help to shed light on the costs of ideological misalignment within public organizations.”

Of particular interest is the percentage data of political appointments of the last four presidents (Bill Clinton, George Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump). The data comprises several types of political appointments, including “presidential appointments” and “non-career senior executive service.”

The data reveals over 80 percent of political appointments under Clinton and Obama were Democrats, with only 10 percent being Republicans and 10 percent being Independents. Bush’s appointments were closer to being balanced, with approximately 60 percent of appointees being Republicans and around 30 percent being Democrats.

In contrast, under Donald Trump, only around 50 percent of political appointees were Republicans, while approximately 30 percent were Democrats and around 15 percent were Independents.

Despite the constant media claims that Trump was so ideologically divisive and polarizing, Trump made the most ideologically balanced political appointments of any president in decades.

In Washington, D.C., the phrase “personnel is policy” is often used to express dissatisfaction with Republican presidential achievements. The data appears to bear out some of the frustrations around the Trump administration being repeatedly stymied from within.

Chris Buskirk, editor of the conservative, American Greatness magazine, tweeted about the study. He stated: “For those wondering why the Trump Admin was less effective that they might have hoped, here’s part of the answer. It wasn’t just “deep state” resistance.”