Ethnic and National Conflict and Conflict Management
I doubt it will stick... he is a sick man
If he invades iran i will change my vote
Normally the loser concedes the election.
One could imagine George W. Bush doing this.
Would be more important if the courts or the clerks weren't doing their jobs.
It's unimportant since it didn't gain traction; conspiracy theories coming out of the White House are abnormal...
Such things are typically treated respectfully.
Economic development; corruption; foreign aid
It's hard to come up with unimportant and normal events...
Are you asking me if it is normal for right wing militias to do crazy things? Yes. This is very normal for the U.S. Thinking of McVeigh, CSA, others. Or are you asking me, do I think it is normal/right to plot to kidnap and kill a politician? No, I do not. That seems wrong to me.
I don't understand why, other than for professional reasons, this team continues to do these surveys. Who is the audience? What, from your own knowledge of public and elite opinion, do you think the impact of these surveys will be?
Undermines support for the electoral system and American democracy.  Trump's charges have no basis, and are designed to lower support for the electoral outcome.
Someone always declares victory before the race is officially over, and sometimes before it has been unofficially called once they can clearly see how it is going (more common the expected loser concedes before it is unofficially called). It is only problematic because it was clear that he was on his way to losing and that it indicated a strategy of opposing the results.
People hold press conferences at weird places all the time. It was only abnormal because it was obviously accidental.
This is what presidents do when they try and encourage a "national conversation." Trump's version is odious from my perspective, but it's not at all uncommon nor is it particularly important.
The cancellation was abnormal but reasonable given the abnormal behavior of one candidate in the previous debate. But debates are largely irrelevant - they're not actively problematic, but they're not especially important either
This is important not because it means he will be able to root out the "deep state" or anything, but because it represents one more stance in what has been an occasionally bipartisan tradition of undermining workplace labor and employment protections. It is basically the type of labor market reform that both parties generally praise in other countries, and its real significance is its antidemocratic nature in that domain than any other.
It is important in terms of policy outcomes, but this is absolutely the bread and butter of legislative politics.
The problem from a democratic perspective is the continued support for non-democratic states such as Israel and Sudan. But facilitating peace agreements is not itself a bad thing, nor is this one obviously objectionable.
The normality and importance will depend on whether this was a serious threat, or the type of cheap talk that federal agents regularly provoke for purposes of making arrests (an extremely common form of antidemocratic harassment targeting America's Muslim communities, for example). I don't know enough about the case to say whether it was a serious threat (in which case it would be an important and abnormal threat to American democracy) or a provocation by law enforcement, in which it would be depressingly normal and threatening to democracy from a different perspective.
A lot of the questions sort of miss the point. That's fine. The Barrett question, for instance, can be read as indicating that the supposed norm violation was detrimental to democracy (which it wasn't - it's a made up non-existent norm) or that the creation of a far-right majority on the Court misaligned with the administration and with public opinion is the threat (which it is, over the medium to long term).  Similarly, the value of judicial independence to democratic regimes is conditional upon other characteristics of the regime and the extent of independence and the use to which it is put. The US has a semi-independent court, and at this juncture the balance is likely one that it should be rendered more rather than less responsive and subservient to the democratic institutions.
Political Psych, Public Opinion, Poli Comm
Him calling the elections before all the votes were counted was a direct attack on a key democratic institution.
Again, a direct attack on a key democratic institution. He might also incite violence doing so.
Keep up the good work. I have shared your work regularly with colleagues and students.
Prior to 2020, this is the most quotidian thing I could have imagined!
The problem isn't that he claimed fraud; the problem is that he claimed it selectively and without offering any evidence at all. One more instance of this administration selling out America's government and political institutions if that's what's necessary for personal or partisan gain in the moment.
It holds American political integrity (and possibly rule of law) hostage to the immediate goals of one party. After four years of outrage after outrage against venerable American political institutions, I suppose this is an appropriate capstone. It makes me sick.
Career civil servants are there to provide expertise longitudinally. It's hard not to read this order as a partisan litmus test, which is inappropriate for the civil service, which should reliably serve any administration.
I don't know enough about this to comment
Cabinet members aren't elected officials, but a candidate can ask private citizens to stump for them. And I would expect pro-administration bias from cabinet members anyway. My issue is with the potential for employee coercion. (I've spent a lot of time on IRBs.)
It shows that the president is delusional, profoundly manipulative for personal gain, or both. More evidence that this individual is grossly unqualified for his office.
It shows that the president either doesn't care about reality or is detached from it. Either should be prima facie disqualification from office.
It shows just how deep the cleavages go in society. It's weird and bad for Americans to expect widespread violent attacks from other Americans.
This should be connected to his firing several other high military officials and then installing loyalists. Just pointing to the Sect. of Defense ignores the broader and more alarming pattern.
Independent political processes, especially electoral ones, need to be respected, not gamed.
QAnon is a bizarre and malign conspiracy theory. Trump's refusal to disavow this is of a piece with his general trafficking in conspiracy theories and refusal to accept facts.
If we saw this in another country, we'd recognize it for what it is: an alarming sign that a democracy is breaking down.
Some questions that get at the broader structural problems the US is having would be good: increasing economic inequality; the hollowing out of the middle class; the decline in the idea of a legitimate opposition, etc.
The question should clarify whether normalcy is relative to the U.S. or international normal. I assume the question has the U.S. benchmark in mind. This should perhaps be clarified.
Electoral Accountability and political behavior
need to condition normalcy on how close the vote is. If close, normal. If not close, not normal. The way it is unfolding with DJT, I would say abnormal.
The President had the authority under the Constitution to fill the vacancy and the Senate had the authority to give their advice and consent.
This should be based on merit and qualifications.
Unfounded rumors with no basis in fact are dangerous    unBiblical too!
In any other country, we would call this what it is.
Advancing values is common. But this is suspect as semi-fascist because of source and his record.
Peaceful orderly transition is key to democracy.
Compromising scientic norms, but crisis is compelling
Encouraging conspiracy theory, not evidence based government
Aberrant behavior encouraged by totalitarian leadership
Your survey focuses too much on words spoken by an amateur politician (i.e., President Trump).
Chose mostly abnormal because it is becoming less abnormal for candidates to claim widespread fraud after elections that produce clear results, especially Republican candidates.
Filing legal claims in and of itself is not very abnormal, but it is highly abnormal to do so without almost any actual evidence, and in situations where the vote count margins are not very close / are not close enough so that the eventual outcomes may reasonably be considered uncertain.
voting behavior and urban/local politics
Conflict studies, politics of authoritarian regimes, revolutions and political violence
Only important in any degree b/c it contrasts with Trump not doing so.
Debates, especially this year, have minimal influence swaying people, however Trump refusing to participate because it would be virtual reinforced Biden's attack that he was not taking the virus seriously.
Mostly abnormal in a broad perspective; completely normal for Trump
Main motivation appears to be that Trump sought votes in Florida. I doubt if he can pronounce Sudan.
Democracy is based on trust in the democratic process. These statements clearly undermine trust in the electoral process and this is especially concerning because the statements are empirically baseless.
Usually only totalitarian countries try to brainwash students
This question has many components that make it difficult to answer which is why I gave neutral responses: - That a President fires an official with whom he disagrees is a relatively normal procedure - For someone my age (50s) firing someone by tweet is not normal, but that might be the "new normal" for the 21st century - A President firing a military leader who has refused to use federal troops against civilians on the eve of refusing to concede an electoral loss is hugely abnormal in a democracy and extremely important. This is what is keeping me up at night!
It is routine for members of the president's party to campaign for him.
This is an important way for citizens to learn about those who would like to lead them. Fly = not normal!
Pandemics aren't really normal ... but this is a regular use of power.
Again, democracy is based on trust that the loser of an election will accept defeat and ceed power to the winner. I am also even more concerned about the president's trying pack the military leadership with his lackies.
they were right to boycott. the appointment was "abnormal"
Indigenous and Afro-descendant representation in Latin America; Central American politics
I would typically call this action "semi-important," but in the context of Trump's refusal to concede, its importance grows considerably.
it's not at all clear if he did obtain Biden's laptop!
QAnon is not a deep a threat as portrayed in the media (e.g., see work by Uscinski and colleagues--not I am not Uscinski!).
Oh gosh, this is a stain on the fabric of American Democracy, as it undermines confidence which is as important as the actuality of the functioning of a democracy.
This is a massive problem in the functioning of democracy.
There is a lot of context here to make the case, and that might be lost by focusing in on just the single act of boycotting the vote.
It takes a team to undermine democratic institutions, and these senators contribute to that in the absence of any real evidence of fraud.
Extremely annoying, but political figures have often tried to steer the retelling of history.
Importance rating based on hunch that it won't last, that the Biden administration may be uniquely well prepared to take over.
The co-partisan nature of the attack makes it more unusual.
Not sure what "normal" vs. "abnormal" means or how to evaluate.  It's certainly an unusual event.  But promoting corruption claims is normal.
Modern political thought; questions of liberal democracy
Now borders on a coup attempt, completely unacceptable in a democracy. Potential for violence and undermines legitimacy of elections and the Biden presidency. Puts national security and covid response at risk.
The President gloating about extra-judicial execution is abhorrent.
Unacceptable violation of law and norms.
The attorney general is not the president's public defender.
This is domestic terrorism and should be recognized as such.
Probably "Outside the United States" should either not have a Democracy slider follow-up, or should ask for a specific location to follow-up
Violates long-time norms as does most of Trump's behavior.
Presidents should be able to accept different ideas including those that conflict with their ideas. Trump is a dangerous moron.
Any senator should follow constitutional norms. McConnell simply salutes Trump.
Trump fosters fears and incites followers to use violence.
while I don't agree with the Trump campaign, it's their prerogative to file a lawsuit (however baseless)
with both presidential candidates being so old, the VP slot gains significantly in importance
this shouldn't really happen: very bad signal for domestic and foreign audiences alike
you misspelled Virginia when you listed all 50 states
Campaigns & elections, voting behavior, election administration
Reasonable decision given the potential for Covid infection
Use of state resource to favor incumbent
Unusual for most presidential administrations? Yes. Unusual for the Trump administration? Hardly.
These claims should be investigated by journalists but the timing suggests a typical political hit job, which is not that unusual in our current polarized system.
This is hypocritical given the fact that he fully accepts that Congressional votes are legitimate, clearly because Republicans kept control of the Senate. However, I believe he will accept the results once the legal pathways by the Trump administration collapse.
The FDA has been shamefully slow in approving treatments during this pandemic, so this welcome news. The U.S. bureaucracy is failing us.
Even if most Americans don't really accept the president's claim, simply making the statement exacerbates the growing information gap between partisans.
Legitimizing violence against citizens, no matter who or what they believe in, should be done with extreme caution.
Misinformation is a huge threat to a shared belief in democracy.
There is nothing new about right-wing militias in Michigan looking to disrupt the political system.
Democratization in post-communist Europe and democratic values.
Sudan's participation was coerced. The country wants to end US sanctions and this was used as leverage to force it to reach a peace agreement with Israel.
International Political Economy and African Studies
They are not electorally accountable to Republican voter base.
At this point, it's difficult to determine how troubling this move is, because the motives for the termination are still unclear. Trump may have fired Esper for petty reasons, or as an effort to install a flunky and loyalist at the top of DOD.
Mostly unimportant simply because this effort to discredit the Bidens was so transparently absurd.
The circumstances for the cancellation—the President's Coronavirus diagnosis—justified the cancellation
Though unofficial, democratic norms like conceding an election when it is clear one has lost it, is an important part of democratic culture, helping to sustain respect for the electoral system
Given this administration's strong signalling that loyalty to the President was more important than anything else, this executive order threatened to move the US back towards the spoils system, treating federal employees as the President's personal employees
Normalizing this practice runs contrary to the norm (and comes close to legal violation depending on how it's done) that government officials keep campaign activities distinct from government duties. Using the White House for campaign events was even more troubling.
This sort of political maneuvering is, unfortunately, the stuff of politics
This is entirely inappropriate for a President to do
This was a grave matter, for which one hopes that the legal process will be used to secure justice
In the competing election narratives, this one played into the "law and order" messaging from the President, but was an understandable response from business owners anxious to secure their livelihoods
presidential debates are getting pretty much theater these days
presidents should have more control over their administrations
it may have been the subset of questions that I got, but it all seemed pretty anti-Trump.  No questions about Biden?
This individual has diminishing credibility.
Egregious g\but not convincing for most informed people.
Strong statement, but no real impact. The real threat to democracy is the way two of the most recent nominations were handled. Delay Garrett, rush Barrett.
Imperils national security, accentuates fears of an attempted coup or major social unrest
Challenges based on evidence are always acceptable. This is an administration that rejects the need for evidence.
They are not likely to persuade many voters. But it is disturbing that Secretary of State and Attorney General were deployed. The most egregious statements came from Pompeo AFTER the election.
Hardly surprising given the President's past behavior, but highly dangerous. Legitimizing this conspiracy theory has long-term consequences.
That the legal challenges are frivolous makes a big differences. Borderline normal until we add that they are frivolous.
Biden has not been formally elected because the votes are finalized by the electoral college on December 14th. Remember what happened to Gore in 2000. Everyone can wait until December 14th to congratulate Biden.
I don't see anything wrong with this. Again, another loaded question.
Why is this happening AFTER the elections?
He was declared loser by the MEDIA, not the official process. Some states like Georgia, North Carolina, and Arizona haven't even finalized their vote counts, but the MEDIA was in rush to prematurely declare Biden as winner.
I hope the organizers of this survey are impartial and objective in the their assessment of current political events instead of being told how to think and act by LEFT WING media.
This is an attempt to destroy faith in democracy.
It threatens the peaceful transfer of power and is therefore dangerous.
Debates are good for voters, but not required.
The use of violent force is what authoritarians rely on to remain in power.
Too reminiscent of authoritarian states who seek to make sure the students learn the "right" history.    Yes, public school textbooks and education are always designed to help inculcate loyalty to the state, but that does not negate the acceptability--and need--for a critical approach to that history.
the only thing that would make it abnormal is the failure of President Trump to concede.  It is very important that those members of the opposition recognize and accept electoral victories.
I don't know if, in previous years, there has been such a boycott.  Its importance is in the reflection of the breakdown of cooperation and norms in the US Congress.
Firing by tweet is abnormal except perhaps by this president as is, I think, post-election firings.  It's important for two reasons (1) weakens any continuity of the defense (and same in intelligence) communities for the new administration and (2) risks a vacuum--or a preponderance of ideologues--at the top in a period when other states may take advantage of US weakness.   And it demonstrates the weakening of norms of civility and practice.
My understanding is that there is a practice of the DOJ staying out of these issues.  If true--and reflecting other statements by Barr--this suggests a partisan intent by one of the offices that should be least partisan.
As far as I know, this is abnormal given the clarity of the victory.  It is important because democracy relies on recognizing the electoral victors as the rightful government.
While right-wing militias have engaged in violence before and have threatened the "arrest" of government officials, the plan to kidnap a governor should not be underestimated.  Perhaps even more important was the president's failure to aggressively denounce the plan.
I will just note that the President is doing at the national level what conservatives have been doing at the state and local level for a long time.
Just as informal norms are important for the peaceful transfer of power, so are formal norms.  The lack fo access to national security data is at the moment more important than the money for the transition, especially since Biden is very experienced and knows how to work around some of this.
Informal norms around the transfer of power are VERY important
The constant media barrage of elections makes debates less important - we all go in looking for a big "gotcha!" moment that we then can say turned the tide, but given the state of the electorate, I doubt that the debates make much of a difference.
On the one hand, most of these people were out the door anyway.  On the other hand, I know that there are concerns about what the president will do in the next 60 days if not "supervised" by the bureaucracy.  At this point, given past behavior, this all seems like throwing toys out of the pram rather than any systemic attempt to do something nefarious.
Democracies rely on having shared sources of reliable and accepted information for broader deliberation.  QAnon clearly does not qualify, and the social media echo chamber these people operate in (and that is getting even more closed off with the mushrooming of right wing alternatives to Twitter and Facebook like Parler).  So I would say that the President's refusal to disavow QAnon is less important than the fact that these groups exist, and that social media fuels levels of paranoia and disinformation that are truly dangerous.
2020 has been just a crazy year in general, so I am loathe to offer big takeaways on this, especially since some of the "rioting" in cities like Chicago last summer was actually organized looting, and I have to wonder if that is really what businessowners were worried about, not political unrest.  But admittedly, I was one of those people who did not plan to be out and about after the election, simply because I did not know how things were going to go, and the entire nation seems on edge.
European politics; political and social citizenship in Europe and the US
Undermines the legitimacy of elections and the process.  Trump also defiles the office of President.
This is the type of thing that happens in authoritarian regimes.
It was vulgar, rude and unseemly--but so what?
He is a hypocrite and terrible for the functions of governance.  He makes it  nearly impossible for government to "work."
A severe threat to the rule of law, public institutions and is treason.
Comparative Political parties and Political Theory
international security and American foreign policy
While candidates can declare victory before the race has been formally called, it is abnormal for a candidate to do so when so many votes have not yet been counted and when there is a very small margin of error. It is important because it seemed like an attempt to halt vote counting, particularly in states where continued counting benefited Biden.
Key part of the norms of peaceful power transition
Do we really still think that debates matter? This was a notable event for the _reasons_ it was canceled, but the cancelation doesn't seem particularly important
It is a "seriously? Wtf?" moment, and abnormal because it represents the further reality-TV-ification of US politics under Trump
Legal challenges in an of themselves are a normal part of the electoral process in the US. however, legal challenges in states where the margin of victory is in the tens of thousands is not normal. This is important because in normal times legal challenges can help guarantee transparency and free and fair elections. In abnormal Trump times, however, these legal challenges seem like a systematic attack on democratic processes
Shows the wide reach and consequences of Trump's intimidation tactics, and further casts doubt on transparency and election fairness. It introduces unnecessary partisan politics into a regular political process
Rise of anti-democratic, sexist, and racist militias under Trump. This is a part of America that is not new, but has been emboldened by Trump's rhetoric, and shows how these movements have grown in strength and organization since 2016.
Assessing the "normality" of anything related to COVID-19 seems rather fraught...
You should ask professors about their party identification and political ideology.
Barr is a disgrace to the office of Attorney General
McConnell's refusal to recognize Biden as the winner is not immediately a threat, but it is corrosive and foster's contempt for the democratic process
The debates this year did not address issues and the reason for cancellation (COVID) was acceptable.
SoD is a critical member of the NSC. Instability in this office has been great throughout this administration but the appointment of an interim who is a likely political sycophant opens a potential risk to national security.
Demonstrates ongoing lack of accountability and disrespect to the media, but this has been the MO for this administration
We need apolitical expertise. In an odd fashion, the bureaucracy is not democratic so possibly tampering with the bureaucracy should not be a problem for democracy. At the same time, it is critical for liberal democracy. Democracy can be simply majoritarianism. Liberal democracy necessitates rule of law and minority and individual rights, both of which apolitical civil servants (especially in the Justice Department but also in DoHS and even under Trump in DoD) help to sustain.
The existence of QAnon is disturbing to social capital and civil society in America. It demonstrates an acceptance of intolerance and ignorance, as well as potentially political violence. While disturbing that the President refused to disavow QAnon, it is even more disturbing (and therefore important) that other elected officials embrace QAnon, and therefore it will persist beyond President Trump. This is in contrast to when the GOP and President Bush encouraged voters to support the Democrat rather than David Duke who won the GOP primary.
This is only mostly abnormal because unfortunately these types of plots and actions are becoming more acceptable. That too, is why they are very important.
This is critically important to the health of a democracy
We know where you are swinging from.  Trump's mostly abnormal, but I can't believe anyone was surprised he did it.
If there is widespread fraud, that should be troubling.  If there is not widespread fraud, people should listen to Trump's claims so they can be debunked later.  In Democracies, claims of fraud are investigated.
Flag waving is so boringly normal that it is the most unimportant thing mentioned.  It is more notable that someone wrote a survey thinking that flag waving is in any way surprising for a Republican.  Democrats like 1776 too.
Biden will be elected in December.  We have one President at a time.  Heck, they aren't even done voting yet.  In Democracies like Australia and Great Britain they count ballots and declare winners on election night.  The election chief declares the winner with the candidates on stage.
I didn't see it, and I have been following the election.
It was awfully late in the game for a nomination.  It kind of showed that the hearings are always Kubuki.
Waste of time to have a debate between stand-ins.  I guess I know they are each willing to break ties in the Senate.
Who declared Biden the winner?  I will be deeply offended if he doesn't concede after the Electoral College meets.  It's a close election.
You missed a chance to ask so many important questions. 1) How might mail-in balloting have been handled better, so Trump couldn't make claims that the system was rigged? 2) What are the chances there really was fraud in the election? 3) Would it be possible to govern the United States if the Supreme Court overturns the election? 4) Would it be a threat to Democracy if Congress refuses to certify the results? 5) Is it a threat to Democracy when social media and search engines fact check seemingly untrue statements from public officials?  For background information, you should have asked who we thought won the race: Biden Will the Supreme Court allow the Secretaries of State to certify the election results: yes Who will be President be on January 20, 2021 at Noon: Biden  I am sure that you have enough information to know that I am very cynical about the Nov. 3rd results.  You probably don't get a lot of people who are troubled by the results when their side wins, but asking about the desperate efforts to control the outcome by a guy who will stop being President in two months and seven days, seems a lot less important than the mess we are in right now where the losing party in each of the last two elections is as sure it was robbed as the losing party in Venezuela or Mozambique would.  That's the problem; you didn't need a survey to know that Trump behaves abnormally quite often.
The intent appears to be to elevate a false (and white supremacist) narrative of American history, to discourage discussion of some very standard topics in the history of politics, and to exclude particular racial, ethnic, gender, and religious groups from the narrative of the founding of the nation.  Ultimately, it is an intent to define who is a legitimate American and who is not.  And, like the Lost Cause myth of the Confederacy, to reinvent history to whitewash anything some people find unsettling, and to promote a false narrative of heroism and villainy.  It would make addressing the problems of racial and gender inequality (and religious tolerance) impossible.
Because the Biden team has extensive government experience, they may be less harmed by this action than would have been the Trump team in similar circumstances.  The intent is a more serious concern-- to deny the legitimate outcome of a fair and transparent electoral process (in which Biden appears to have won by a similar electoral college vote to Trump in 2016, but by larger margins in some of the contested states, and with a larger popular vote margin than in 2016).  It is clear that Trump's intent is to deny that Biden has been legitimately elected, to fail to recognize the will of the voters, and, potentially, in an act of spite, to risk U.S. national security in the process.  His actions are self serving, rather than serving the good of the nation.  Thus, he is violating his oath of office, an oath which he never seemed to understand to begin with.
The consequences for Americans are serious; but, this is a typical political action and not isolated to this actor.  McConnell similarly refused to negotiate such an agreement prior to the election.  McConnell's actions appeared to be a cynical partisan gambit; Trump's appear to be more of a self-involved act of anger in the aftermath of his electoral loss (because he supported such legislation prior to Election Day).  He appears to have little interest in the pandemic, or the economy, at this point.  He is mostly checked out-- meaning he doesn't seem willing to do his job as president, or is not fit to do so.
The information around this killing appears to indicate a planned killing of an unarmed citizen as retaliation for an alleged crime for which that individual had neither been tried nor convicted.  It was a lynching at the hands of federal agents who were usurping the role of local law enforcement for the political agenda of the president.  That the president praised and promoted this action, as did other members of the president's party (and some elements of the news media) is even more concerning.  It challenges our ability to adhere to the rule of law when the target is disliked.
Elections, public opinion, voting behavior
Embarrassing and unprecedented; but not as embarrassing and unprecedented as the lack of pushback from elected Republicans.
Striking incompetence at the highest level of the campaign
These Republicans are making an effort to restore civility and normality to the Presidency, while other Republicans are working to support Trump's efforts to make normal democratic politics the site of conspiracy and danger.
Democrats making an effort to draw attention to the way the Republicans pushed for a pre-election decision after previously, under Obama, refusing this position.
His behavior shows an inability to manage anger.
Trump Republicans show a striking refusal to respect normal democratic politics and the integrity of state officials to do their jobs in government without political interference.
A striking violation of the division between government and partisan politics.
Because of the Trump administration's larger incompetence with foreign policy issues, I would expect the agreement to be defective in the absence of important stake holders to the treaty.  I would expect it to be inadequate.
A truly terrible case of lack of public confidence in political institutions and policing.
Public Policy and the Politics of Education
President Trump has absolute right to disclose and challenge this election. Look at the rally before election: Tens of thousands of Trump supporters vs. dozens of Biden allies. Then Trump win all the swing states, then all DEMOCRATIC states stopped counting…  You think American people are all blind and brain dead? The "Hammer & Score Card" and Dominion voting system cheating is fake? If this fraud is not revealed, there is no hope for America and this will be the last election.
It is better than teaching students to hate their country as left does ...
They hate president Trump, that is why they congratulate his rival regardless.
Every American with brain and eyes see what happened in the Democratic battle states that night. Why this happened only in democratic states not republican states? It is a democratic governors and mainstream media engineered COUP. Those are involved are criminals. American people won't let them steal this election.
It proved that FBI directors were so corrupt and biased by unclassified documents, of course they need to be fired and prosecuted. No wonder people lose confidence to FBI, CIA, etc. Those civil service employees betrayed their duties.
Of course, no one is going to recognize a thief to be this country's leaver. Look at hard-evidenced corruption of Biden family (billions of dollars of deal with Ukraine and China & Hunter Biden's rape of children). Why do you cheat yourself by ignoring it? Biden should be banned for election at all... and subject to investigation.
Since mail-in vote causes so many opportunities to fraud, as well as Biden & Pelosi themselves revealed they have a systematic voting fraud team regardless the voting outcome, President's moves are absolutely correct, actually should be more than just that ...
Again, Kamala's claim that president lost the trade war. Where does that come from? Who says president lost the trade war? Look at her husband's millions of dollars deal with China. Shame on her!!!
I don't know the purpose of this survey but I felt the surveyor has prejudice against president Trump. I hope everyone should read both sides of information not just the mainstream media otherwise you will be brainwashed. Today's media is less about journalism than a propaganda outlet.
I reject the premise that he said this was a hoax.
I do not accept the premise that he refused to disavow QAnon
How about left-wing groups like Antifa causing burning and looting? Bias?
I found it somewhat biased against conservatives. For example, there was no questioning the tech companies or liberal media  exhibiting liberal bias in banning coverage of conservative tweets and news reports or questioning .Dems like Hilary Clinton claiming Trump "stole" the election of 2016.This reflects a liberal  bias in academia.I regret.
Some legal challenges have become normal since 2000. Filing so many that lack evidentiary basis is what makes these more abnormal and important.
This is in corrupt dictatorship territory. Totally unacceptable in modern democratic systems.
I should say that I'm not familiar with this ever having happened in previous transitions but I cannot say for sure. Certainly the refusal to accept the outcome of the election and share resources with the incoming administration is unprecedented, at least in modern times, and very worrisome.
It certainly has precedent. Reagan fired federal air traffic controllers. But it's unusual, I think, and worrisome because it suggests targeted firings of people with opposing political views.
I don't know much about these issues, to be honest. But certainly negotiating peace agreements is squarely within the power and precedent of U.S. presidents.
I say mostly abnormal because it certainly would be 'normal' for a President to praise law enforcement for neutralizing a violent threat to Americans. But President Trump's actions were different in two ways, I think. First, it doesn't appear that killing the suspect was necessary for public safety and second, the type of praise the President offered - gloating and boasting -- is not only unseemly, it suggests that violence against such individuals is not merely necessary but desireable.
Again, here we are in corrupt, dictatorship territory in terms of the types of leaders that engage in this behavior.
Armed extremist groups attempting, essentially, a coup in a U.S. state is extremely dangerous
Public law, race and ethnic politics, American political institutions
administrator remains within letter if not spirit of the authorizing statute. Transition is critical to good governance, lack of ascertainment keeps incoming administration away from materials prepared by executive branch agencies and EOP. Most  critical is access to PDB and classified information.
not done for substantive policy reasons, replaced with less experienced/motivated actor, increases U.S. vulnerability/reinforces declining international trust of reliability/capacity of U.S.
Expected, signals efforts at/preparation for continuity in governance
Though one can disagree on policy terms (as I do), within presidential  authority to undertake such efforts.about. Important for Middle East, for signals about U.S. and human rights
This is completely unacceptable since it actually rejects the election results and prevents a successful transition
The open embrace of disinformation is troubling
He's classless douche, but this isn't that big of a deal.
Again, embrace of open lies and disinformation seems new to me. Politicians have always been full of it, but this takes it to another level
If there were substance to suits being file it would be normal but in every case there has been no substance to the allegations.
Seriously undermines our electoral system.
Crime and Political Behavior in Latin America
Especially abnormal given that it was telegraphed for weeks as part of a plan to cast doubt on election results and to try to stop vote counting
The creation of the commission itself matters less than what its work might have eventually been turned to in practice: censorship, violations of academic freedom, and potential direct targeting of individual academics or institutions for political reasons
Undermines potential functioning of incoming administration at a time of national and global crisis
This is important because it is part of a long-term effort to erode trust in the media, spread disinformation, and undermine truth in order to benefit President Trump and his allies, in this case as part of an effort to cast doubt on unfavorable election results
Part of efforts coordinated with Trump administration to undermine faith in election results and to potentially help Trump hold onto power and Perdue and Loeffler in their own Senate races
People are aware that cabinet members are political appointees, but their duties are supposed to be to the American people first and foremost. This extreme politicization undermines the trust in and independence of government agencies
Without knowledge of any internal political reasoning behind the authorization, this seems fairly normal for a public health crisis, even if the administration has tried to claim credit for it
Continued violation of norms, part of a broader effort to impede President-elect Biden, and casting uncertainty over Trump's own plans for leaving office...or not
Though normal for Trump's, his [mis]behavior is a poor reflection on himself and his party, and the Presidential office.
Politics as usual.  For example, H. Clinton said in a new interview that Joe Biden should not concede the 2020 presidential election “under any circumstances."
Again, both parties were already prepared to file legal challenges depending on the outcome.
Not unusual for parties to investigate opponents to uncover information that brings into question their ability to lead.  The information uncovered is as important to investigate as it was when Trump affiliates were accused of foreign collusion.
Sadly this has become normal in U.S. politics.  It doesn't mean it's right, but the question asks if it's normal. Both parties had already lawyered up before the elections; had the outcome gone the other way, Pelosi would not have recognized Trump as the winner. The outcome of the election was much closer than polls suggested, and given the unprecedented large number of mail-in votes that needed to be tabulated, it was prudent to wait for official results and legal suits to be resolved before declaring an official president.  (The media made the declaration, not official results).
The POTUS should be a facilitator of peace, not conflict.
I have no idea what QAnon is nor have I heard Trump's response to it.
The rise of violent anti-government groups, including Antifa, Anarchists, Looters and Mobs that aim to burn down American cities to get political attention are all destructive to democracy.
Questions focused on narrowly on some of Trump's actions, rather than questions designed to assess the stability of our democratic institutions and the political record.  At best, the questions ask about our opinions and seem to have a confirmation bias built into it against Trump; studies indicate that the vast majority of political scientists lean left.   I am no fan of Trump (independent, swing voter), but Biden's integrity and his party's record also weigh into our democratic decline, as does the media.
Political behavior and political communication
One candidate had Covid 19.  How often does that happen?
These guys are really fearful of taking on members of the Trump cult.  Principles?  Try the number zero.
Well, I suppose there's reason for brainwashed FOX viewers to keep on hoping.  There may be a few Tumpsters who will protest the Biden transition, but it'll be much like Trump's inauguration.  Some, but not many, will show up.
O.k..  So there may have  been some influence peddling, then again, maybe not.  He doesn't need to look very far to find corruption since his employer excels at it.
What do you get when you do your job well in government.  You get criticized by slime bags.
All Mitch cars about is Republican control of the Senate and there are two races left to decide.  He does not want to anger the Trump base.
Publish findings in PS?  It should be a good article.  Best wishes.
International conflict and military technology
Giuliani shouldn't be able to command any national or media attention--he's not an elected official, serves in no official capacity, and he spreads lies and disinformation for the political benefit of Trump. He cares nothing for the country. I think that is the larger issue. The media is like a cat chasing the shiny thing. They haven't learned yet that they are being wagged.
Who TF does she think she is? She works for the citizens, not Donald Trump. She needs to be fired immediately.
The appointment was such a hypocritical, political and cynical move.
I believe this is important due to national security considerations, and also, there are only two months until the inauguration, so what is the point? Pettiness and vindictiveness are the points and nothing else.
Dangerous to our democratic process, hypocritical, cynical, partisan and moronic. Just like each of them.
Why and how does this matter to our country? If it does, I'm not aware.
There is not enough space for me to explain my response and without cursing.
The expectation of violence due to the outcome of a presidential election is not normal in our country and is an indication of sore-loserness and extreme partisanship.
Black political participation and public opinion, immigration attitudes, race and ethnicity
Interesting survey. I'm glad I responded. Please send me results when tabulated. Thanks
No president has done more to weaken democracy and put the nation at risk.  Personal interest comes before national interest for Trump.  He has offended our allies and cozied up to our enemies (Russia and N. Korea).
All I can say is that Trump has engaged in a pattern or practice of behavior which is consistent:  he lies about almost everything.
No credible leader “walks out” or “whines” that the press is asking tough questions.  That is their job.  Clearly Trump was unable to defend his own positions.
Under appropriate conditions, any candidate has the right to exhaust legal remedies before conceding.  These are not normal conditions.  Trump trails Biden by over 5 million votes and Biden has a substantial electoral college majority.  Trump is putting his interest before the national interest and is putting the nation at risk by refusing to share needed information with the president-elect.
Circumstances matter.  In this case, Trump has not demonstrated sufficient grounds to challenge the outcome of the elections.  It is more a delaying tactic to try and prevent Biden being declared the winner when democratic nations recognize that a winner has been chosen by the electorate.
Like Trump’s accusations, based on personal belief and not fact, the attorney general must spell out clearly what “apparently credible” accusations exist, and the justification for his position.
Any president who praises the killing of American citizens is engaging in immoral behavior.
Asking this question is abnormal.  Any group or individual engaging in such behavior is a threat to democratic norms.
I dOn't like the wording of this item - do we really know that this was the hard drive from Hunter Biden's laptop?
Campaigns and elections, voting behavior
Near the end, assessing the likelihood of events, I couldn't tell which VP you are revferring to?
It was abnormal, unimportant, and hilarious.
This is a genuine threat to democracy in the United States.
Thoroughly amusing and, given the present administration, unsurprisingly incompetent.
Essential in a democracy for the peaceful transfer of power. It should be more people congratulating Biden, though.
Debates do not matter in terms of actually educating the public. They are important as political theater, but in terms of real-world implications do not mean much.
This is something more normal given GOP politics. Presidents constantly fight over gaining more political control of the bureaucracy. Presidents like Eisenhower and Carter have found ways to get more control; Trump is more in that vein than not, though his reasons/rationales are more transparently authoritarian.
I could see this happening a few years ago, as well. In terms of a fully functioning democracy this is abnormal (though given the present GOP it is somewhat more expected). It is also somewhat important, given that it further undermines faith in democracy. Since these are politicians from a single state, though, it's less concerning than national leadership issues. It's more symptom than anything else.
It's not hard to disavow Nazis. The fact that he refuses to do so is immensely troubling.
A result of the present administration's refusal to condemn right-wing extremist violence. Like the president's suggestion of election fraud, it is a major threat to this nation.
This survey is a marvelous idea! Thank you for doing it!
The lack of a concession is less troubling than the repeated trumpeting of unsupported allegations of fraud.
It does more harm to reputation a democratic country than it does to actually harming our democracy.
It has no effect but erodes norms of comity.
If there were fraud this would be an important process. Since there is not it contributes to Democratic backsliding.
The civil service protects the aspiration of neutral law and equal justice under law. It cannot be threatened without democratic backsliding.
It is baseline unethical and every campaign manager would say so. If he obtained the laptop with help of a foreign power it is corruption at a much higher level.
Unimportant for democracy, of course important for policy.
The American public have written many laws and created snd funded institutions to supply the president with the most accurate information upon which to make decisions. That he does not avail himself of that information betrays his oath to faithfully execute the laws.
The influence this action has on the public is critical.
The tool here, the EO, is conventional, but the order's substance is a deep violation of the civil service's independence and integrity.
Not an “illegal” act, but rather a highly flawed undemocratic practice.
This nomination was completely inappropriate and should not have taken place.
Inappropriate, and contravenes norms of fair and reasonable practices.
A sleazy violation of one’s basic right to privacy and property.
This is a politically motivated attack, and highly inappropriate.
A desperate appeal to SCOTUS to come to the rescue. This time there are not enough brothers of the President governing battleground states, and there not enough Secretaries of State in such states to behave badly; and, not least, the fiasco in Florida 2000 has not been repeated ---hanging chads etc.  The Electoral College works easier to signal a transition when one state is not pivotal.
An appropriate reaction by the Commission. It should come down stronger on unreasonable candidates.
Politicians walk away from tough questioning frequently, which is why we don't see more of it. Regrettably, some media organizations, and journalists prefer soft interviews and "access"  to performing their watchdog role.
One inference many were allowed to draw was that the role of the Secretary of State was to "fix" the elections for his party colleagues.
The majority-leader in the House has a special responsibility for respecting constitutional convention---even if the convention is not hard law.
Its breaks important constitutional conventions.
It shows that the soon to be ex-President has truth-aversion, and assumes that upwards of fifty per cent of the electorate are "suckers."
An anticipated childish reaction from a childish man.  The moment explains  the reasons why he was impeached; the Republican reaction shows why he was not convicted. The aftermath is important: so far, it  shows that he appears to be incapable of organizing a coup, though there may be a lot of scorched earth actions as the Trump administration leaves the white House. Most importantly it suggests that one party is not willing to tell its leader when he is spinning a fantasy, even if it is one he may believe himself--as a diagnosed narcissist.
This is the type of action that keeps me up at night. No doubt it undermines public faith in democracy, as elections (and their legitimacy) are the bricks and mortar of our constitutional form of government. If there was actual evidence of irregularities (like in 2000 FL or 2004 OH), then I would be willing to accept the President's right to complain. However, his claims do appear quite baseless... legal bridges to nowhere.
Republicans (and Democrats) have a long history of meddling in U.S. education, particular in the content and framing of history. The President's 1776 Commission seems misguided, but no more problematic than, say, Texas' schoolbooks.
It's clearly a vengeful act for a lame-duck president, especially in that Esper's term is set to expire in January. Still, it is a problematic episode for democracy because it sets the (possible, germinal) precedent that loyalty in executive branch officers will be paramount over all else. I'll be much more worried if FBI director Chris Wray is fired, given the nature of his term and the norm that the FBI (unlike the Pentagon) is supposed to be isolated from presidential machinations.
Displays a willingness on the part of these two incumbents to challenge a free and fair election merely because it did not result in victory for their party at the presidential level. The strategy here is to keep the base fired-up for the GA runoffs, which means that it's probably just public posturing. However, in that these statements undermine faith in the electoral process, and in that these incumbents serve as opinion leaders for many GA GOP voters, the (psychological) damage could be quite significant.
It's quite normal for the President to engage in meaningless conspiracy.
He's certainly not the first president to note sympathy for problematic fringe groups.
Election rules and reform; public opinion; American democracy
Wonderful project! Will use the data for my upcoming class.
As CEO of the nation, he had all the powers to ensure that no fraud took place during the election. He didn't take any steps. On the contrary, he appointed a crony to be the PMG so that he could prevent genuine votes from being counted. Just a bad loser !!!
Absolutely disgusting, callous and totally abhorrent that a GSA administrator could even think of declining to release funds to an incoming administration.
A tweet is surely an abnormal way to fire a member of the cabinet under any circumstances, but even worse as a lame-duck HoS/G.
It does not behove the holder of the highest office in the land to behave in such a manner.
Not worthy of comment. Never thought Rudy Giuliani could plunge to such depths of ignominy.
This is a fundamental norm. Its failure makes us look like a 'Banana' Republic
Crass disregard for the poor and unemployed in the country, esp. during this horrific pandemic we are going through.
People have the right in a democracy to know the views of their leaders.
Would be interested  to hear the results of this survey
I feel this is justified during a pandemic
I'm not expert on presidential transitions, but release of funds within a week seems a little early.  Biden and his folks are just trying to get a head start, a reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.  GSA will release the funds.
Trump, though mostly demonstrating he is a moron, got a lot of attention over this behavior.  His campaign and his presidency thrives on attention.
Suggests fear of protests over outcome, but, for the most part, those fears were not realized.
Political behavior, voting and elections, interest groups
It was weird, but good because it highlighted the abnormality of what he was saying.
Good to see at least some Republicans acting normally
They are undermining the foundation of the democratic process
The transition is a time of peril as power transitions from one administration to the next. It leaves us vulnerable and firing the Secretary of Defense in the interim period is unwise.
Breaks with DOJ norms and rules. Further evidence that Trump has politicized the agency to fight his political battles. Very troubling. Especially given there is no credible evidence of significant issues with the election.
Abnormal, but normal considering the context.
That's obviously sarcastic and immediately recognizable as such, rather than trying to purvey a fake reality. What is not normal is not the specific sarcastic message but refusing to accept the election outcome.
Giuliani is a private actor not a government official. If he was a govt official this would be 'important' rather than 'mostly important'.
in itself this is 'mostly important'; together with many other violations it cumulates to an 'important' violation
It helps promote peace using established means (that I know of)
U.S. education has always been biased towards the "victors" and prioritized White Americans, specifically men. That said, having a president officially declare a federal policy (educational content is historically a state-level responsibility) and especially one he deems favorable to himself and his followers (because that's what he means by "patriotic") is unnerving. This declaration was also in response to the 1619 Project further suggesting "patriotism" is ignoring the institution of slavery and the impact it's had on the country.
The statement it sends to the American people is loud and clear and violates our democratic norms and procedures, but it's impact on the actual transition is (at this point) not entirely detrimental.
This is another example of the president (and his supporters in and outside of government) promoting fake news and tampering with our free press.
The move is largely unprecedented. While cancelling a debate during a global pandemic could be understandable, the specific conditions matter. The president would not agree to the virtual format. He placed his personal preferences above the democratic process.
For the Senate leader not to acknowledge election results, largely because the President won't, is yet another example of elected officials denying the democratic process and throwing doubt in the American electoral process. This is what could have lasting implications on future elections.
This is a traditional part our the country's democratic election process and it should continue to be.
Nothing is "normal" during a once-in-a-century global pandemic, but emergency authorization has been provided in the past and seems like a necessary step to address the crisis. It is important, though, that such authorization is not due to pressure from the president.
Presidents should not praise the murder of any U.S. citizen/resident. It also clearly shows he is "taking sides" and drumming up additional fear and anger amongst his followers.
US foreign policy, Latin America, climate change
I teach in a political science and MBA program; I study the effect of popular culture and the media on political perceptions and the media
This was totally normal for the Trump administration/campaign, but totally abnormal historically
Firing a Sec Def is normal, but doing so via tweet with two months left in the administration is abnormal
It was a tight election, so it's normal for senators to encourage the losing candidate not to concede so quickly.
I hope it doesn't create a new norm, but these swing states were very close. Filing these lawsuits is a desperate move, but they are the only recourse to keep fighting.
Normal for Trump and his people, abnormal historically.
Asking a secretary of state from one's own party to step down in order to win favor with voters that support baseless claims of election fraud and tampering are dangerous precedents
Thank you for your effort. It is a worthy endeavor.
One of the questions asked about campaign contributions and their effect on public policy. you should rephrase so the question isn't only about contributions to campaigns--the amount of which is restricted at least in federal elections--but also to PACs and 501c4 organizations. Big money to the latter has more influence on policy than to campaigns per se.
The question assumes that it is really Hunter Biden's laptop, but there is little evidence substantiating that. The wording should have been "alleged laptop" or something similar.
This action is very threatening to the long-term health of our institutions.
I see this action as mostly a piece of political symbolism.
Given the danger of violence in the wake of the election, bipartisan gestures can be important.
It's a visible indicator of the extent of polarization among political elites and the  increasing dysfunction of our institutions.
Blatant partisanship  and dishonesty undermining the credibility /legitimacy of the election.  Further his action is an incitement to violence..
McConnell is undermining the legitimacy of the country's democracy in the interest of preserving his own power.
East Asia (China and Japan) ; Developing Countries
It normally would be routine and not noteworthy, but with Trump's actions calling into question the legitimacy of the election, these acknowledgements matter much more than they normally do as they VALIDATE the legitimacy of the election.
Presidents should be held to the highest level of accountability, and Trump had previously done interviews with Leslie Stahl and should know her questioning style (investigative and persistent), so to agree to an interview and then storm out part of the way through is an effort to avoid being accountable and therefore deplorable for any POTUS.
Candidates have the legal right to pursue litigation if there are actual violations.  Trump's lawsuits have, so far, all been tossed by the courts because they have no merit.  So, this is much ado about nothing at this point.  If Trump continues to fight and undermine the results of the election after losing the remaining cases, then this becomes more important.
Civil servants, unlike political appointees, are supposed to be ideologically neutral and protected from the whims of any elected politician.  This is what gives us the best chance of having good bureaucratic administration, and trying to fire civil servants who do not share a president's ideology is a violation of that civil service code, unless it interferes with their ability to do their job.  Trump's firings had little to do with job performance and much to do with a perceived "lack of loyalty" and that is "banana republic" level garbage.
It is in line with current GOP behaviors and so it is disturbing but not surprising, and I don't think it will have much effect on the upcoming special election in Georgia.  Republicans are gonna Republican, at this point.
Negotiations are often highly conflictual, and blaming the other side for breakdowns is rather common, whether the accusations are true or not.
The FDA has provided emergency authorization for a number of vaccines, both before and now during the coronavirus pandemic, so this is not really out of line.
I think many of us look at Trump as throwing a mantrum after losing and, in the end, he will leave office regardless.  But, his actions and words are undermining the legitimacy of the elections and of American federal institutions, and that is much more noteworthy and dangerous.
American Government and Politics; Native American Government and Politics
The first scale on the US democratic institutions, the one that went from something like "mostly fulfills this requirement" and "fulfills this requirement" was somewhat confusing, the mostly category seemed to be 'more' than the one without mostly. This did not make a lot of sense to me.   Also, the abnormal/normal and important/unimportant exercise was also somewhat confusing, I'm not sure I answered that properly.   Thanks!
I think that we need to do more to educate students about our American history. I do not know the details President Trump's study curricula. If I had better information, I might support this or I might vehemently oppose it.
The Republican Party has become the party of Trump. This is evidenced by the Republicans not producing a party platform at their 2020 convention. Rather they deferred to his judgement. This is dangerous since Republicans seem to be at the threshold of being the party of authoritarianism. Party leaders who engage in normal activities - undermine this trend and help preserve traditional American rights.
In my opinion, President Trump engages in behaviors that divide Americans politically. This kind of dialog activates his avid supporters and pokes a finger in the eye of civil libertarians. It also normalizes abnormal behaviors, which further allow him to engage in further escalated abnormal behaviors, without creating alarm. I believe this facilitates his apparent goal of establishing a dictatorship in America.
The president CAN call on radicals to defend his presidency. No one knows whether President Trump WILL call on them. Similarly, no one knows what opposing radicals might do. From a business perspective, I think the boarding up was prudent.
Once again, I think this mostly serves Trumps personal vanity.  The consequences here are very high since it risks setting a norm of not accepting defeat.  The key feature of a political party in a functioning democracy is to accept defeat in free and fair elections and adapting to increase the likelihood of winning the next round. Unfair, unfree elections would indicate a system other than functioning democracy.
It's abnormal to have that low degree of professionalism, but has become part of the Giuliani mystique of late.    In the bigger picture this is mostly an embarrassing distraction and if it had never been reported, would have made no difference in the bigger picture.
This is something in the middle on both counts.  It's technically not too bizarre in the sense that election results are not official yet, but it's also becoming harder and harder to maintain that logic.    If the GSA opens the funding in the next week or so as key states wrap up recounts and certify results, this is relatively unimportant.  If they withhold funds into December (particularly after the Electoral College votes) then it jumps into seriously important territory.
Democracy is about grace in defeat and learning the lessons to be a better competitor.  In that way this is really as normal as it gets.  The reason I rate it as only mostly important is that these two figures have been largely pushed aside by their party.  It would have been much more important if it were coming from Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy.
This is very abnormal, but largely pandemic-related rather than political. Trump made a spectacle out of it for a few days, but I haven't really thought about it much since the third debate was held.    Not joining in any debate is a classic Putin trick (being above it all).  Trump's willingness to participate in the 3rd debate made this become fairly meaningless.
Abnormal for a public official, but not really that strange for Trump.  His love of reality TV drama came through here.    It's kind of unimportant since it's his TV theater.  It's kind of important because of the unprofessionalism and disdain for the press.  In the scale of things Trump has done to the press, this rates fairly low in importance when compared to the "enemy of the people" and "fake news" language.
I chose mostly important rather than fully important even though I was on the border there.  The main reasons were: 1 - QAnon is still a relatively small fringe group and 2 (most importantly) - Trump's typical motive in these situations tends to be for personal vanity rather than a consistent promotion of any particular fringe political organization.  He tends to flit from group to group in a shallow manner rather than consistently backing one (unlike Russian President Putin who tends to favor particular groups like the Night Wolves or Nashi).    If there were more consistency, I'd rate it higher in importance.
Boarding up for civil unrest is not really something abnormal in a functioning democracy.  In fact street protests are a fundamental expression of raw, uncontained democratic sentiment.    The focal point of the elections is the major concern here.  Although mass violence did not materialize, it's still a concern that it was considered a real enough possibility for people to act on.
Elections and Parties in Competitive Authoritarian Systems
With no evidence of electoral irregularities or fraud, this is highly unusual and dangerous.
McConnell has consistently put party and ideology above democratic norms.
what is not normal is the complete lack of factual basis for challenges
misinformation designed to discredit the opposing party
Trump is the worst president since Buchanan
Trump is ths worst President since  uchana
Unimportant except for the degree of incompetence it reveals.
Africa, Political Economy of Development
Trump is subverting the legitimacy of the incoming administration and the legitimacy of democratic elections.
There is a reason federal officials have civil service protection: to prevent a presidential administration from appointing partisan hacks or loyalists. Imagine what this would do to career attorneys in the Justice Dept.
Could have been worse if the press had picked up the story, but they didn't.
This is bullshit--- according to the definition, a made up statement designed to subvert the idea of truth.  This erodes any basis for democratic discourse.
There may be reasons for a candidate to hold off conceding---Al Gore in 2000---but there is no question that Trump is refusing to concede to subvert the legal outcome.
American Political Development and Black Politics
should not do it. Don't complain, VOTE.,
secretary of state, at least, needs to stay out of it.
Important for democracy, once vote count is clear.
If it said, "a swing state," I would have said somewhat normal. "Swing states," plural, is abnormal.
Why do the survey designers think political scientists have special insight into the meaning of or importance of democracy? Most are behavioralists who understand “democracy” only as a dependent or independent variable that they happen to arbitrarily value as a good thing.
Executive authority is vested in the president.
I said normal because it is completely normal during a horrible pandemic but the horrible pandemic is (hopefully) abnormal.
If he refuses to concede after congress verifies him on January 6, that would be abnormal. There are many examples of candidates for lower office who take considerable time to concede.
Hampering transition efforts and stalling the governance process for Americans under the new administration.
This is incredibly unprofessional and such a public announcement is a threat to our national security.
A president who supports extremist-leaning conspiracy theories is harmful and leads to more dangerous thinking among his biggest fanatics.
This refusal to concede is the biggest threat to our democracy. It is also the most evident indicator of white male entitlement.
This survey made me more anxious about the upcoming weeks. The questions were precise, well-written, and straight-forward. However, it is absolutely frightening to reflect on how short we've fallen from our democratic principles and how much more is left to be determined.
They broke the united Republican front on this assault on democratic norms.
Over 150 years without some level of bipartisan support for a confirmed Supreme Court justice.
Not abnormal if credible issues. But abnormal because there isn't credible evidence and the DOJ is being used politically -- the DOJ has become a political arm.
disturbing how little attention was paid to it
Trump is pursuing haphazardly a coup d'etat based on deep beliefs disconnected from reality and the danger is how many people will break the law and become traitors to enable him. At the moment, it's the GSA head.
Its important because he has no evidence and it becomes part of a conspiracy to overthrew the government of the US.It is hard for people to get their heads around. The leaders of government have not been traitors before.
The facts do not justify attacking the Secretary regardless of party. Powerful people lying about basic facts destroys democracy. We have no scientific information I know of to explain why so many people do this and the extremes of belief, emotions, vitriol, and violence at the ends of the spectrum. The GOP/Fox is the worst bot there are plenty on the left.
It is not McConnell, he is the creature of his caucus. It reflects  how far the GOP has gone in abandoning democracy for the sake of power, one example of much evidence. In turn, their voters also care more about power than democracy even tho unaware of what they are doing. Their emotions allow them to ignore the rules of democracy. They are paying attention to media reinforcing unreality and cut off from sources of factual information.
Having them campaign is a normal part of politics. The problem is the disconnection from truth as most educated, socially knowledgeable people with factual information sources see it.
The problem is not the blame but the extreme personal partisan untrue rhetoric that is added on. It is one thing to walk away from the bargaining table and another to blow it up.
It is not clear to me  how we get from now to an inauguration. It may be  up to the Secret Service and the military to simply not do what DT orders and carry him out of the White House.
citizen policy, complex advocacy, sustainability
European political economy, institutions, democracy
Normal given we are in the midst of a pandemic. Would be abnormal otherwise.
This is a big deal. Even if it’s performative. Any time the a Republicans  lose elections in the future, are they going to call them illegitimate?
We are in the middle of a pandemic—unusual, yes, but not a core democratic issue in IMO.
President praising potential extrajudicial killings is a big freakin deal.
Political violence and political psychology
The slide bar with percentages looks a little funky when taken in mobile.  But other than that, great survey.
The problem is the violation of norms...    (but it might be more than that, depending on whether the statement was regarded as typical bloviation or whether it was taken as a guide to further action)
Even if this was typical bloviation, it still nurtured the sense of grievance among his followers
Silly stuff, but dating back to Gingrich (or Atwater) in the practice of partisan conflict...    no rules, no boundaries...
Giuliani has become a marginal figure -- but, given the attention devoted to this thread, it should have receive less attention and more push-back than it did...
The problem is the fact that it fit into the larger pattern of Republican party politics in recent years.
McConnell was mostly playing to the audience of one (Trump), but it continued a pattern of being slow to push Trump toward reality.
Symbolic, but still nurturing partisan division in unacceptable ways... A violation of an important norm... and a blow to civility.
Public Policy (Health, Environment);   State Government (emphasis, South Carolina)
Would be important except that he's a lame duck.
An obvious attempt by this particular administration to fire people who are "disloyal"- which is not remotely democratic.
Shows that loyalty to Trump is more important than to fellow Republicans.
Normal but important in that it was, indeed, normal in a time of extremely abnormality.
I'd expect any administration to help fund and facilitate therapeutics for a global pandemic.
It's abnormal for previous presidents but completely normal for Trump.
deliberative democracy and political communication
It is a threat to the legitimacy of the republic.
It undermines the legitimacy of the republic.
I don't know what the press conference was about, so it seem unimportant to me.
It is fine to delay for a short time while waiting for the final votes to be cast. Withholding the information after November 13th (when all states were called) is unfair to the incoming administration.
These things happen prior to elections. No one wants to look weak. Everyone wants to force the other side to concede to their wishes under the pressure of a crisis.
This delegitimizes democratic processes and justifies illiberal actions by the state.
I believe it is abnormal and mostly important because it demonstrates the lack of professional management of a presidential campaign in the world's most powerful democracy.
Presidents often engage in personal diplomacy.  The substantive foreign policy significance is not great.
This is dangerous and reflects the encouragement of violence against opponents by Trump
Voting Rights, Public Policy, political participation
It is not necessarily the filing of the legal challenges that is abnormal; what is abnormal is the substance of these legal challenges. That the courts are summarily rejecting most of these challenges is empirical evidence of the abnormality of these challenges. Yet, assuming the rational goal of reelection, it makes sense how this action is being taken by the actor to achieve their preference.
Abnormal and important in the sense that they were driven to it by the abnormal and important manner in which the Republicans filled the Scalia and Ginsburg seats.
Middle East, but also US race and ethnic politics
Thank you for this, and I look forward to continued surveys for at least the next four years!
Normal - it's a press conference to announce a legal defense of some aspect of the executive Semi-Important - while the subject (sanctity of the vote) is extremely important, that someone wants to file a legal challenge is rather mundane
Does not reflect on quality of democracy. Reflects on handling of pandemic.  Did we televise virtual debates in the last pandemic?  Exactly.
SCOTUS appointments are very important.   Democrats participated in the debates then made a show of not voting as opposed to lodging what would have certainly been a slate of no votes. Not sure there is a real difference - and this behavior has been seen before in state legislatures.
Designers of the survey - can you unpack these into a single issue.  Is the issue the firing of the SecDef? Normal.  Is the issue firing by tweet? Abnormal.  Is firing by tweet important? No idea.  Is firing the SecDef important? Yes.
Elections, Political Parties, and Political Culture
Thank you for continuing this important work.
False information is preventing voters from knowing the policy positions of candidates; there can't be rational voting if no one knows what votes mean.  Fake headlines are part of the false information campaigns by certain people or and the Republican party generally.
Part of the patten of false information campaigns
Calling for officials to resign if you get fewer votes than you wanted is undemocratic.
I don't know if this is illegal if they are not using govt resources and are acting individually.  I also don't know if other presidents have done this. so I don't have enough info to answer this.
Sudan-Israeli relations don't seem important to me, but maybe they are to Israelis and Sudanese
you should repeat the meaning of the 0 and 100 in some of the early questions on which states are democratic  i did not have a basis for evaluating most other states' level of democracy and would have preferred a "i don't know" option rather than having to choose some states
presidency, right wing militias, popular culture
Latin American politics/international political economy
Giuliani's press conference will no doubt be among the most memorable, if not also symbolic, moments of this election. I can't say, however, that I think the event itself will be particularly impactful, or consequential, for the outcome.
An extending of congratulations to the winner of a presidential election by past and/or present leaders of the losing party is not exactly abnormal in the history of our politics. Under the circumstances, however, with a sitting president refusing (against all evidence) to acknowledge or to accept the election outcome, it seems to me to rank as an important and commendable initiative.
Another instance of norm-violating behavior by Trump and/or his campaign, which (as we have seen repeatedly over the course of this election cycle) tends to give Republicans generally, and Trump-supporters in particular, a sense of authorization to mimic these  behaviors. Needless to say, they threaten to corrode the culture that supports free and fair elections in the U.S.
I cannot recall another occasion when a president, or high-ranking government official, abruptly ended a serious, if hard-hitting, interview because the interviewer was unwilling to entertain propagandistic responses, or leave unchallenged a false narrative. Insofar as it contributes to the further erosion of the norms by which public officials conduct themselves in such situations, I would rate it "mostly important."
I don't believe that this "strategy" will succeed in overturning the election, but it is yet another norm-violating and potentially corrupting set of measures taken by the Trump campaign.
It's hard to assess the importance of this bit of diplomacy in relation to the broader and ultimate goal of bringing peace to the region. But, for that reason, I don't believe one can rule it out as potentially a significant step.
The concerns and fears that led businesses to take these unusual steps were certainly not without foundation. However, the election transpired without any major incidents, and in a manner not unlike previous elections. I therefore rank these precautions as "semi-important."
Ancient Greek and modern German social and political thought
Political theater that will be rolled back in a few months.
It's one thing in a long list of Trump nonsense.  Is this one thing particularly important?  Not really.  The long list is semi/mostly important.
It's almost exhausting to respond to these because they are CRITICAL elements of a democratic nation and the defiance of them is crucial, even if he finally admits the loss, the impact on norms is extensive -- and will last beyond his presidency.
Valuing party over democracy is so dangerous -- and when the legislature cannot check the power of the presidency, it heightens the danger even more.
This is the MOST abnormal of all, since the peace transfer of power is so central to our democracy.
Some of the questions were very odd and quickly dated; better to ask standardized surveys items to monitor changes in responses to liberal democracy.
Social policy in the developed countries
Covid makes it hard for me to separate out all the causal forces here.
The resort to boycotting and other kinds of obstructionism points to worsening political polarization.
This is "normal" now, i.e. for members of each party to try to dig up dirt on each other rather than actually governing. And it's important, mostly because of the efforts our multinational media conglomerates took to brush it under the rug. Corporate power in American politics is the biggest threat we face to democracy today. I wish your survey had more questions about this.
I think this is more "normal" than the hyperpartisanship of the last several years. It's nice to see people in the same party arguing about democracy and  transparency and checks and balances. I wish we saw more intellectual and political diversity within parties, and between parties. I wish we had more parties.
I don't think anyone should concede a political race unless they are sure the candidate actually lost. Gore withdrew his concession in 2000 owing to concerns about the electoral process. This is as it should be. And, are we really surprised that McConnell wouldn't concede with the Georgia Senate run offs coming? He can't do it, strategically-speaking, which is also a typical kind of consideration for leaders in both parties. The perennial problem with electoral politics is that leaders are often concerned about reelection.
Presidential debates, and VP debates too, are theatrical performances for TV audiences that help parties spin narratives around their agendas. They are PR events. I typically learn very little about policy or anything else that matters to me in such debates. But, this is what American politics looks like, so it's "normal".
This is what leaders are supposed to do. But I still can't wrap my head around Trump's successes here. I cannot comprehend his success here.
I think it's important for politicians to care about the truth, and to seek it and disseminate it. I also think it's improper to support a theory that accuses people of pedophilia and other serious crimes without evidence.
Please include more questions about the role of corporate America in our political processes. Looking only at parties and leaders eclipses crucial context necessary to make sense of the current situation.
May be too soon to gauge the importance of this event.
It's importance concern what it says about the Republican Party and the state of our democracy more than the immediate, tangible effect it will have on the electoral outcome.
Elections, US National Political Institutions
Elections -- elected institutions -- political parties
Respecting the legitimacy of elections even when you lose is paramount in a democracy.  Questioning their legitimacy is only reasonable if there is credible evidence, not because the incumbent is unhappy with the result.
There have always been clowns in politics.
In the absence of any real reason NOT to let Biden prepare for a transition, this is just another attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the election, albeit one that is more likely to have direct security consequences (increased vulnerability to security threats and poorer management of the pandemic) than some of the other steps that have damaged the long-term legitimacy of US democracy.
Recognizing the legitimacy of transitions of power is paramount to the long-term survival of a democracy
Senate Democrats were absolutely right to boycott to draw attention to the fact that the Supreme Court is a partisan body and not a neutral one, and Americans should stop pretending otherwise.
Again, recognizing the legitimacy of democratic results even when you lose is essential to democracy's functioning.
Praising excessive use of force by state security forces is a hallmark of authoritarianism.
The intrusion of violence into politics is clearly a breakdown of rule of law, to say nothing of democracy.
It is not unheard of in American history, but it is problematic.
This is a deeply corrupt act that is inconsistent with past practice.  While still within the technical scope of the GSA administrator's power, that discretion is being abused in this situation in a way that has never been done before.  It further undermines democratic legitimacy.
It is unusual, but of little consequence.
It isn't the filing of the suits- it is their absolutely baseless nature.  That is what is so corrupting to democratic legitimacy.
Since Giuliani is not an official government actor, it is less important than it otherwise would be.
This is what we expect presidents to be doing.  The only reason it is not more important is because it isn't clear how much it changes the underlying dynamics for Israel.
This is a horrifying justification of extra-legal killing.
This is the kind of violent activity that is encouraged by the President's rhetoric.
Looking at the history of past U.S. Presidents and political leaders, they are generally cordial to newly elected presidents. The abnormal thing is people thinking it is a striking blow to Trump.
Debates have become spectacle and uninformative. Mostly it's people waiting for a gaffe or the next punchline.
This is was mostly symbolic in nature. They knew it wouldn't prevent GOP from moving forward since they had the votes.
The President has excluded himself from being asked tough questions or availing himself to legitimate concerns of the people.
This is sowing seeds of doubt among their constituents, setting the state for growing political tensions and possibly violence.
This is about undermining people in legitimately elected office who disagree with them politically, even if they are from the same party. This is troubling.
This is unprofessional and irresponsible. The Senate Majority Leader has a responsibility to enforce the Constitution and uphold norms.
We have a president sitting in office who is not only undermining past presidents and history, but the U.S. military.
Just a quibble. As of the time of this survey, Biden is not the “president elect.” The “presumptive president elect” or the projected winner of the presidential election” would be more accurate.
It is important to wait until all questions and/or allegations related to the election have been addressed and the states have certified their electoral outcomes before beginning a transition.
This would be typical partisan bickering.
This is typical petty partisan bickering.
It is important to examine the allegations/evidence against Hunter Biden - and/or his father.  Selling influence should be illegal and should be prosecuted.  Also, allegations of child abuse could be involved.
This is typical partisan bickering.  While an additional stimulus package clearly would have helped Trump's chances of being re-elected (it's the economy stupid), the country clearly cannot afford to spend another $2 trillion or more.  Total US government revenue for 2020 is projected at only $3.2 trillion.
These are emergency measures in the wake of a global emergency/pandemic
I don't recall this ever happening.  Did Trump ever actually say he believed the conspiracy theory?
International political economy, international organization, the Middle East, and Europe
The survey questions - or at least presented to me - seem to be a bit left leaning
He constantly violates democratic norms and federal laws.
The Commission made the correct decision.
Psychologically and emotionally, Trump is between 12 and 14 years old.
McConnell is a traitor to the USA. He has been the most important enabler of President Trump's fascism.
tens of thousands of people are suffering because of the Screaming Unstable Yam's actions.
No US marshal killed the right wing suspect who killed people in Wisconsin.
The Trump presidency has, in general, been absolutely atrocious.
The Republican Party has sold its soul to Trump.
Actually, American politics/comparative politics/political theory/history of the state/political economy
As stated before, Giuliani is now an all in fixer.
Trump is theatrical.    This is about building an audience.
A one man performer doesn't work well with others.
It tells us more about Giuliani than about Hunter.   He has descended to a level that exceeds that of the Watergate Plumbers.
Presumably he is trying to accommodate the President.
The effort to build a pro-Israeli coalition is somewhat countered by the absence of an effort to equally empower the Palestinians.
We see now a series of efforts to speed a vaccine,   The times are not normal.
Perhaps it is a bit too media -centric.   Focuses too much on the Narcissist-in-Chief, and might do better to add comments on incoming administration.
America has a long history of strong armed ideological tactics from the White House. Think about the anti-communism rhetoric throughout the Cold War. I’m not crazy about the “1776” business but we can ignore it.
At least on “The Apprentice” he had the balls to fire them face to face. This guy lacks all sense of norms, decorum, decency, or even pragmatic common sense.
The peaceful transfer of power and accepting election outcomes as legitimate is vital for democracy.
Nothing about Rudy Giuliani is normal nor has it ever been. I feel sorry for people who admired him during 9/11
America is too polarized and partisan but nothing new there
The line between campaign and official business is fuzzy for incumbent Presidents running for re-election. Trump is abusing the system but far from the only one on this score.
But this is 2020. We’ve had street riots for months in every major city.
Part of the problem in America is the absolute failure of R1 universities, specifically political science faculty, to devote attention to teaching...we have a couple of generations of our best and brightest undergraduates who got taught by TA’s and took multiple choice exams while you were AWOL doing some revise and resubmit for AJPS. So we have lost fundamental citizenship skills.
Again, irresponsible and troublesome, but has had limited effects, perhaps because the President is so clownish on these matters in general.
This is one of a few reasons that I have actually downgraded my expectations for the future of American democracy despite Biden's victory.  I expect the doubts sown about American elections to bear bitter fruit in the future, though I am pleasantly surprised by the relatively restrained reaction of Trump's hardcore supporters this time.
Kudos and gratitude to Republican public figures who continue to behave normally, though few of the people that likely matter in terms of deterring future political violence really take cues from them at this point.
It is despicable behavior but appears to have a more limited effect than other things he has been doing.
Does anyone on either side listen to Lindsey Graham any longer?
It would be more important if there were a ghost of a chance that these lawsuits would succeed; fortunately the judiciary is proving reliable in these matters for the time being.
Political Psychology, Political Communication, Political Polarization
He has never spoken proper political-ese.
Again, there are legal challenges. When those are lost, it would be abnormal for others to tell him not to concede.
Intra-party squabble of this magnitude is pretty uncommon.
One does not concede if one is legally challenging the outcome. Al Gore conceded when SCOTUS ruled against him as was appropriate.
Despite not voting for him in 2016 or in 2020 I do not see Trump as the threat seen by many. I'm one of the folks who takes him seriously but not literally. I don't like him referring to the media as "the enemy of the people," but I have lost almost all respect for mainstream "news" media in the past decade. They aren't fake news but rather selective news that fits their narrative. I see the systematic de-legitimizing of Trump from before he was inaugurated to today as a greater threat to democracy than his shenanigans. I don't have to like him (I don't!!) to see his opponents as threats equal to if not greater than him.
As someone who teaches the courses he is targeting, I am concerned about academic freedom and ideological government interference in education/ higher education.
Presidents get upset at the press. I don't remember a time when one stormed off, but it fits his narrative of a hostile, fake press. It's a performance.
It's normal to challenge results through legal action, if you have evidence. It's a candidate's right and maybe an obligation to do so. What is strange about Trump's challenges is that he has no evidence of fraud that impacted the election outcome, so he's using the law as part of his rhetorical strategy.
State-sanctioned killings of civilians have no place in a democracy.
QAnon beliefs facilitated the Pizzagate shooting, so their beliefs have real world consequences. Trump could have easily disavowed them with little political blowback (because, as any cult expert could attest, they would have come up with an explanation for his disavowal), but he didn't. Like failing to immediately condemn white supremacists over the years, this is troubling.
Trump has instigated violence with his followers. It's very strange that businesses were concerned about violence following an election. Disturbing.
it's important because it causes questions about the legitimacy of the final results of the election.
it would be more important if he had won re-election.  When I taught in Russia on a Fulbright, the universities had Deans of Patriotic Education.
As President-elect Biden pointed out, this is important because people may die.
It is less important than usual because of the unique challenges we're facing during this pandemic.
Peaceful succession and loyal opposition are two of the most important traditions we inherited from the British.  His stubbornness undermines them.
I think this should be done, but not by the government or at the suggestion of the president
As noted earlier, to prevent in the future
The attempts are mostly normal, the accomplishment is not, and quite welcome
Other examples for Democrats: Gore 2000, Clinton 2016, Stacey Abrams - Trump will lose the challenge, but it is important to point out the cheating that goes on, for any candidates
Generally pretty good, but I would have liked to see a few more questions about things that Biden, Pelosi and others on the Dem side did that could be seen as troublesome.   The ones on Trump are fine.   But the Dems are hardly blameless.
A violation of the law and the law's intent, placing the country at greater risk for narrow, selfish reasons.
In normal times it would be unimportant but since Trump has refused to concede it takes on greater importance.
It was an informative signal to the audience that he was not willing to answer "hard" questions and so did little damage and has little lasting consequence.
Since Chester Athur signed the Pendleton Act and beyond, Presidents have been taken out of the civil service appointment process exactly to eliminate corruption, cronyism and nepotism. This is a very dangerous shift back to a corrupt, crony-ridden civil service.
He did not require investigations and did not claim irregularities exist.
Very costly during the pandemic but this is, alas, partisan politics as usual.
Perhaps it would seem more important if it wasn't just a single example in an onslaught of disinformation peddled by the Trump campaign.
Political elites, politics of developing countries
The culmination of a chaotic, capricious and dangerous administration lead by an unstable and narcissistic individual who as it appears, is becoming unhinged once again (the last time was during the impeachment).
Generally this would not register as anything more than perfunctory and the upholding of tradition. However, given the President's refusal to concede, and the support the President has received from formerly respected office holders such as Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and David Perdue--the willingness of prominent Republicans to go on the record as opposing Trump by supporting Biden takes on significant meaning.
An intentional attempt to prop up a conspiracy of lies promulgated by the administration and its supporters about the nature of those loosely affiliated as anti-fascist or 'antifa'
The speed in which this dangerous conspiracy theory has spread signals its destructive potential. The president's tacit approval of what is a completely fantastical and baseless set of assumptions--already shown to have potentially lethal consequences for Democratic office holders-- is shocking and without precedent.
It undermines democracy by arguing that the election was not legitimate.
Senators choosing not to vote is normal.    More broadly:   Senate republicans have fully engaged their constitutional role over the past ten years regarding supreme court judges.  Consistent with the advise and consent provision, they chose not to consider Garland.    Democrats, in contrast, have consistently engaged in norm breaking regarding the judiciary.  They eliminated the filibuster for judges.  A group of democratic senators formally warned, through an amicus brief, that they would "restructure" the court if it did not rule in ways that they want. The continuing rhetoric among progressives against the court is the biggest threat to judicial independence in the modern era. why isn't it in your survey?
(1) The surveys seem to be designed to support a conclusion that Trump is abnormal and dangerous.   (2) The surveys often reflect left-leaning conspiracy theories about impending conservative authoritarianism, none of which has been shown to be true.   (3) The surveys rarely address the ways that progressives and others on the left increasingly support rhetoric and proposals that would threaten things like judicial independence, freedom of speech, freedom of liberty, and democracy in other ways, many of which are deeply abnormal and fundamental threats to our democracy.   (4) The surveys would do well to have partisanship measures.  Surely the very partisan composition of the discipline is affecting results.
Severely compromising for faith in our elections.
It's not out of the realm of past actions (2000) and since Biden is a former VP, it hasn't affected his transition as much as it would for some.
Definitely odd, but not completely out of the norm given past decorum violations. Important as a symbolic gesture for the base, but not important in the realm of political significance.
Very odd, and degrading confidence in our elections.
Definitely abnormal, but not all that important, as cabinets are politicized at this point anyway, not likely to move the needle much.
This specific CT is not all that important, but if it were a different CT (like around voting) it would be VERY important.
political psychology, race, ethnicity, gender
I would describe all of Trump's acts of political communication as abnormal. Most are only important because of the outsized attention they receive.
Obstructionism by the opposition party is becoming increasingly normal. And it's important because it demonstrates profound dysfunction in mechanisms of democratic accountability. It's a symptom of a lack of democratic accountability.
This seems like standard-issue electoral tactics.
With ongoing recount activity, it seems borderline normal.
Diplomacy is an expected activity of presidential leadership, and an important area of executive branch authority.
Threatened and actual right-wing violence against government actors has been a recurring feature of American life since the 1990s. Its importance seems self-explanatory: it threatens the functioning of democratic government.
The questions asking political scientists to assess the quality of subnational democracy seems *pretty darned specialized*. I did not feel capable of knowledgeably answering that question.
Bush and Romney reinforced the norm of transferring power peacefully when the time for transfer has arrived.  Our civic order depends on this norm,
These legal challenges include a (false) claim that the election was unfair.  Such claims leads the public to lose faith in the fairness of the American democratic system,  This primes the public to accept the destruction of US democracy and its replacement with authoritarian rule.
The integrity of the US federal service system is an important reason why the US federal government is notably free of major corruption, relative to the national governments of other democracies.  By corrupting the federal civil service President Trump degrades a national institution that has served Americans well.
This stimulus is badly needed.  This is clear to all who have eyes.  Why are Trump and McConnell against it?  Nobody knows.  The mainstream press hasn't explained, leaving us all to wonder.
It's democracy at work. We need more public debate. Question time in the UK parliament is a good thing.  Let's bring it here.
In a tyranny the state kills its citizens at will.  In a free country people are not put to death by the state before being tried, convicted, and sentenced to death.
QAnon is a death cult that incites hatred and violence against American public officials and public figures.  The President's refusal to disavow QAnon amounts to tacit approval of it; hence to tacit endorsement of the violence that QAnon endorses.  American leaders may be killed as a result.  Trump's silence is step toward barbarism.
International security, US foreign policy, war and conflict.
Again, Biden is not President Elect, so it would be highly unusual to do otherswise.
I think it reveals the preference Democrats, and legislators in general, have shown to play to the media than do their job.
Its a contested election, so why should Trump concede?
There is nothing normal about Hunter Biden.
Portland has been tearing itself apart, and there has been a disastrous lack of leadership in the PNW. The president doing the job of the governor is a good thing, given the circumstances.
"Right wing" is inaccurate. They were anarchists, closer to Antifa than anything else.
This should be obvious. Threatening violence if your political opponent wins is extremely abnormal in the USA.
I think democracy probably should have been defined. Most of my fellow faculty disagree with each other about what it means, so I'm not sure how useful this survey actually is.
No need for comment. It's undemocratic, unethical and disgraceful behavior.
President Trump never made a clear distinction between the government and the campaign.
I do not believe in the durability of this negotiation. President Trump has invested nothing in strengthening the diplomatic ties or institutions that guarantee this.
Post-election violence in the United States is not normal.
Some questions were missing words. Needs another round of editing.   Also, some questions seemed geared towards listing extremes. Threat and not-threat to democracy question prompts seemed oddly as either not a threat or the worse possible threat.
Political leaders should be free to express support for whomever they wish. It is a little unusual for Rs to congratulate a Dem, but it is a Presidential election and the results are in, so it's the classy thing to do.
It was largely cancelled because of the pandemic and outlying effects - so that's abnormal but wouldn't necessarily happen in a normal election cycle.
Nothing Trump does is surprising to me these days. He's a crass, rude, luddite and he's not going to change.
Given that this was a crisis level decision, it's not necessarily fully compliant with democratic norms - but potentially a necessary one under the circumstances (even though the treatment wasn't as effective as initially thought).
The President should not be promoting such nonsense. It's dangerous and sets a bad example.
QAnon is dangerous, anti-intellectual, and fundamentally anti-democratic. Regardless of their private beliefs, Presidents have, in the past, eschewed such dangerous nonsense. His support helps perpetuate this.
That is domestic terrorism - incidents like this represent a clear and present danger to our country.
Government cabinets in parliamentary systems, immigration & influence on political party families; FDI
Nope - it would be interesting to see the results!
in the curcumstance we have when election is contested it is normal
they will  benifit form republican base anger next election cycle
address his concerns and with concrete revew process only that we have he cannot realy on others to do it for him
same as before. he thinks there are irregularites and acts upon them using tools provded by the system
we do need to try different avenues to find effectuve treatment
elites are to agree about the only game in town for stability
would like to see the results of it so please send us the link when you finsih it
Claiming widespread voter fraud with no evidence is abnormal and destroys trust in the American electoral process/system.
Further erosion of democratic norms not previously seen.
The number of legal challenges, as well as the lack of evidence to support them is not normal-- although using the court as a legal means to make a case of a fraudulent election is relatively normal.
These are activities that display partisanship and occur even in a relatively well functioning democracy.
Trafficking in conspiracy movements is the stuff of dictators who want to control the narrative regardless of whether it is based in facts.
Race and ethnic politics; identity politics
Who needs Putin to undermine our system?
We thought we had to worry about Russian interference in this election cycle - but it turns out that we have met the enemy and he is us (or rather the former Republican party)
Rudy is a grifter who works for a grifter
The nomination and confirming of a SOJ days before an election was abnormal, so it's difficult to assess what would be the normal response of the opposition to those events.
While the Courts have stepped in before to make determinations related to election disputes (ex. Bush vs. Gore, 2000), the key difference is that in that case there was evidence of a problem that required resolution. In contrast, there is no evidence of widespread fraud or error in the 2020 Presidential election. President Trump is using lawsuits and the court system to disenfranchise voters and overturn the results of a fair election. This is democratic backsliding. While Trump is very unlikely to succeed, these actions will do significant damage by impeding the peaceful transition of power, creating distrust in democratic institutions and especially elections, and setting up the Biden administration for a legitimacy crisis.
The vice presidential debate is a norm of U.S. electoral politics, and it's important for voters to know the vice presidential candidates who are second-in-line for the presidency.
The U.S. has a long tradition of peaceful transfer of power and rapid concession from the losing presidential candidate, which has served to maintain democratic norms and trust in the legitimacy of institutions. By eroding this important norm, President Trump is undermining trust in democratic institutions with lasting impact. This increases the likelihood of democratic breakdown going forward.
Assaults on truth erode democratic institutions and --&gt; instability.
Many people had already voted by then; one more debate likely wouldn't have changed (m)any minds. But there is a symbolic importance as well.
Shows disdain for the fourth estate. Contributes to undermining a free press as it demonizes those who ask tough questions.
Undermines faith in democratic institutions. Contributes to future such unwarranted, meritless challenges.
Threatens the professionalism of civic service employees, politicizes the professional levels/ranks. Creates a culture of arbitrary rule and rule-making.
Undermines a peaceful transition of power. Contributes to the culture of cancellation that, as it elevates, threatens stability and mutual respect for peaceful conflict resolution.
History of political thought, with additional emphases in American political thought and U.S. constitutional law.
Thanks for taking the time to undertake this important work.
Like so  many of his proposals, this would not result in any meaningful action
The questions are not clear; thus, they are not likely to yield reliable findings.  For example, regarding the normal-abnormal ranking, am I supposed to make the assessment according to my understanding of democracy, compared to other countries, or in light of the US history?  I also find the prediction questions not very useful.
At this point about 1/4 of America think that everything he says is absolutely true, 1/3 who believes everything he says is a lit, and the people in the middle who realize he lies most of the time but don't really care.
This is the new normal. The Republican Party is not the Republican Party that has existed since Lincoln. It is Trumpism and it is normal for followers to defend the Dear Leader.
The norms of good governance have been obliterated and it will take decades to repair them, if there is even any effort to repair them.
Again, it is a destruction of norms and violation of election laws.
He has shattered every norm and shown his lack of understanding of government. A effective Covid19 policy could have won him the election.
Pres. Trump has had success in his Mid-East peace plan, but his efforts have been overshadowed by his destructive nature.
This is not what we do in our democracy. It is wonderful that we did not have major problems, but Americans should not fear elections.
It is demonstrative of intense partisan polarization.
Given congressional dysfunction this seems pretty normal, but very bad.
While inappropriate and reflective of the administration's efforts to undermine confidence in the elections in my view this is more an embarrassment that an event that will mark, on its own, political events
The President spreading lies and misinformation directly to people is one of the most dangerous trends
The way debates worked this year is reflective of the overall issues of american democracy, but on its own less consequential for the future of democracy
same, president spreading lies and misinformation is dangerous on every level
State and local government (public pensions)
High and Low democracy states-should have said no more that two in the request/question.
Undermining public confidence in the fairness of elections is a classic autocratic move.
The politicization of the civil service is another example of Trump's efforts to undermine confidence in government and challenge the norms and values upon which US governance depends. I also question the legality of this order.
This is another example of effort to undermine the public's confidence in the fairness of our elections.
This is another example of Trump's efforts to create doubt about the truth and undermine the public's confidence in government.
His failure to concede alone wouldn't be a problem. However, his failure has also disrupted the transition because Biden has not been given the usual access to resources and government agencies.
Considering how few Republicans have spoken out to affirm what actually happened in the election, this is pretty important.
The debates are pretty much worthless as a method to help people make up their minds about candidates. And we can't know for sure if this one was cancelled because of COVID or because of Trump's behavior in the first one.
It indicates a disdain for the press, but it does not stop the press from reporting or publishing what it finds out.
Legal action in and of itself should be available. Using it in this case is simply obstructing a normal transition to the next administration.
It gives too much permission to his supporters to believe the conspiracy theories promulgated at QAnon and deepens the cultural and political divide in the nation.
It indicates a move away from peaceful protests and peaceful processes that can become a dangerous trend.
The social and political philosophy of Karl Marx
The level of abnormal depends on the control over the content and what is allowed to be discussed and whether it is factual or propaganda
Difficult to comment on given the role of Covid
Filing lawsuits is not abnormal or anti-democratic, refusing to accept the results of a free and fair election, however, would be.
This is the riskiest factor for democratic norms and institutions and will increase political polarization
Disrespects the core principle of free and fair elections.
Seems like more a campaign blunder and failed attempt at saving face.
Peaceful transition of power is a core tenant of democracy.
Major parties and campaigns should not knowingly or willingly distribute misinformation, and they should offer corrections when it happens accidentally.
Confusing the public about official government act/actors and campaigning degrades democratic values.
Follows principle of election deliberation
Respecting rule of law is a core tenant of democracy.
as of Nov. 18 (today) it is borderline acceptable to call the election still in doubt. Once the results are certified (11/20, I think) it is no longer acceptable given the costs of delay.
Undoing civil service protections to politicize the bureaucracies is a reversal of decades of professionalization.
This is not just a norm. It means delaying the transition. And it gives succor to supporters who may resort to violence to prevent the "steal" of this election.
Shows how extremely biased the media institutions have become.
Questions are biased against Trump, yet again.
Public Administration; Research Methods and Statistics
Unsubstantiated accusations of mass election fraud by someone exercising the enormous powers of the president are a fundamental attack on our democracy.
This is a fundamental threat to American democracy, especially since Trump is actively using his presidential authority to bolster his efforts to remain in office despite losing the election.
Unfortunately decorum has broken down between the parties, which has led to behavior that before would not have been seen as acceptable.
The Secretary of State should not be campaigning when in another country.
Representatives holding a press conference in and of itself is not a problem. The location, while funny, is a bit of a red-herring, at least in my opinion.
I think the phrase made popular by President Trump is "It is what it is." Look, the Republican Party is not a friend to popular government right now.
When civil society feels threatened, that's not a good sign.
Department secretaries serve at the pleasure of the president
American public must have full confidence in our election system. Revenge politics will destroy our nation.
Federal civil service unions should not exist. Having worked in federal government on multiple levels, there is significant deadwood.
Meets the criteria established on a risk nomogram
This survey is loaded with bias. I can't consider it valid or reliable in any way.
Typically, this would be unimportant, but given the reluctance of most GOP party leaders to do so, it is more important than typical.
The DOJ appears to be signalling that there were credible allegations of irregularities--thus undermining trust in democratic outcomes.
They seem to be trying to undermine the trust in election results.
It is semi-important because of the consequences, but fairly typical for partisan politics.
It is a signal of the decline in trust of voters and democratic outcomes.
Its not abnormal for presidents to have pet projects... the fact that the pet project here is nationalism is worrisome. Whether or not this is important depends on if people/educators listen...
Again here I dont know enough about how this usually works. It seems reasonable to me (post the 2000 election) that people wait until votes are certified. However, Biden won by so so much that this is definitely a stall tactic, which is frustrating (especially given COVID and the need to respond) But! I dont know when that normally happens.
Again, filing suits where there is reason to expect irregularities is a good thing!! But what is abnormal here is that there is no evidence of irregularity.
Honestly I dont know enough to respond here -- in my understanding the president has full discretion to fire his appointees... but that gets blurry when we start to go "down" to "regular" civil servants,
The state should investigate credible allegations of election irregularities. What is abnormal and worrisome here is that the Trump admin insists there are irregularities when there is no evidence of any sweeping irregularities.
Since the votes have not been certified, this is not a big problem (in my eyes) and the norm of waiting until all votes are counted to concede might actually help left parties (thinking here of how Abrams refused to concede until all votes were counted as a way of preventing voter suppression). Now, if McConnell doesnt publicly recognize Biden as president-elect after certification, then that is very abnormal and very important.
This is gross. We have a judicial process to determine guilt and to determine a punishment. Celebrating the subversion of rule of law/judicial process is gross and dangerous. Not to mention: this signals to non-officials that punishing/using violence against those who are the president's opponents is acceptable and good. Trump is so clearly encouraging violence.
Again, we see the Trump admin and his supporters using violence rather than political and legal processes.
This is a little weird becasue I have seen reports of earlier surveys. Its possible that my reading other people's answers the things like this changes my opinion about the severity... my guess is that many faculty have seen reports about earlier versions, so we cant really treat each person's responses as independent.
Both normality and importance depend upon interpretation of motives. It is normal to create means to civic education. It is abnormal to establlish such bodies to suppress racial equality and diversity.
As a pattern of manufacturing false information to smear political opponents it has serious implications for democracy. In this case the desired effect was not greatly achieved and therefore less consequential.
The use of high-level cabinet officials (State, Justice) was abnormal and important.
Facilitating peace agreements is commendable. Doing so for political gain is not unheard of.
Either he is deranged or he is actively encouraging derangement in others, or both.
South Asian politics and security, political thought, administrative ethics
Thanks again for your good work on this.
He's been claiming this since 2016. Again: normal. The problem is that we keep giving lies oxygen. That needs to stop.
Republicans's violation of norms in the name of partisanship is "normal" now.
This material spread online and was quickly debunked. However, it is very abnormal for a campaign to engage in such obviously and clearly invented misinformation.
It is not unusual for politicians to give other politicians political covers, but it is unusual for such a high-profile politician to disregard obvious facts about an election. Additionally, it sends signals to other politicians in his party that this is acceptable behavior when is should not, in fact, be.
These people are government officials, not campaign flaks. They are paid with taxpayer dollars. The Hatch Act, if it means anything at all, should prohibit this behavior.
New medications in response to novel public health crises is not unusual.
QAnon is an absurdly complex conspiracy theory that has no relation to actual events in the world. Moreover, people who believe this nonsense have engaged in behavior that threatens the health and safety of others.
This also points toward the erosion of democratic norms and truth, both of which undermine trust in democracy
This is important because it helps to support an important norm during elections that the losers acknowledge the victor and the legitimacy of the process.
Promoting peace anywhere in the world is one of the most important duties of leaders.
Under the current conditions, it seems appropriate to make all efforts necessary to speed up the development of a safe and effective vaccine for Covid-19
Again, this points toward the willingness of the president to advance misinformation and undermine trust in institutions (in this case the military and the previous presidency) and even reality.
This points toward the influence of misinformation in American politics, which is a significant problem because it undermines trust in democracy
The question about rating the level of democracy is all fifty states of the U.S. is not feasible. It's impossible to know enough details about the specific democratic practices of all states to rank them with certainty. My ranking for example, was based on my knowledge of politics in the two states I ranked rather than my full understanding of all aspects of democracy in each state.
Misinformation, creating distrust of important democratic institutions for personal political benefits, can't we hold leaders accountable for this behavior?
Few Republican leaders have been able to openly accept the election results and congratulate Biden. There seems to be internal party pressure preventing others from doing so.
Democratic senators protesting against the unfair application of executive powers to assign a supreme court judge (when the same senate leader and rule prevented appointment of a judge during the election year, vs. the current situation of appointment within less than 10days of the elections).
We need to respect election results and smooth transition of power. When an existing leader does not respect election results because it votes them out of office - it represents a coup!
If there are 'credible' election irregularities, they must be investigated from a bipartisan perspective. Not to support one political party or leader.
Misinformation and blaming opponents wrongfully within the political process. There is a thin but important line between playing politics and wrongfully spreading misinformation
Promoting extremism and racism in the country. Its not illegal for him to support them, but it is unethical in the position of the Presidency.
Abnormal for well-functioning democracies but somewhat normal for the U.S. in which the franchise has always been contested and fought.
prejudicial to fair and open democratic practice
undesirable to change the conditions of democratic competition once a campaign is underway.
indicates partisan bias and undemocratic values
innovative, we need more surveys of this sort.
His blue-ribbon commission(following the alleged voter fraud in 2016) was disbanded with nothing to report; the current allegations are more of the same (sour grapes by a loser)
While I believe that greater emphasis on citizenship education/rights and responsibilities could/should be enhanced in our public schools and universities, the premise in Trump’s brand of patriotism seems biased and presumptive
Ascertainment and over-all support for the transition is necessary  — it differs from Inauguration!
While the boycott was understandable, NOTHING about that “democratic process” was very democratic—too autocratic (Trump and then McConnell) from start to finish
Tweeting appears to favor a following rather than the needed process of informing the American public through the press; further, the firing appears to be retribution and personal rather than in our nation’s interest
The President’s motives were made clear long before Election Day—if he won, it was an honest election while a loss would spell “corruption”
Apparently another of our norms cast aside for super-partisan effect!  I worry for our country
Am not as familiar with E Lilly drug but can only HOPE that process was the safeguard it was intended to be—based on scientific and medical norms and NOT POLITICAL
You ask important questions!  It would be a good thing for our country if your results could be debated and aired on national stage on neutral ground (not Fox nor MSNBC — though I hesitate to imply they’re on equal footing) by a mix of ideological adherents who are respected and true scholars
If the committee members did not want to give credibility to the hearings, they should not have participated in either the questioning of the candidate in committee or the Senate vote.  It was just political grandstanding.
Until the Electoral College meets, no candidate is declared the winner.
Respondents should be asked about their political ideology.  I suspect that conservative respondents will respond to the survey in a different manner than progressive respondents.
His legal challenges were spurious and qualitatively different from previous elections.
Claiming fraud is not by itself so odd, though the intensity level and scope of the claims is
internal party conflict mostly, so the party's problem more than the country's, though it is yet another illustration of how one of the country's two main parties is going off the rails.  In a two-party system, this jeopardizes the competitiveness of the system
The effects are more important than the beharior, though it does highlight the inability/unwillingness to work with the opposition
So far the precautions have been unnecessary, but it says something important when businesses conclude that there is a real risk, and so this is a sensible thing to do.  One of those things that's normal enough in unstable systems, but not in what people think are stable ones.
normal enough in autocracies; not so normal in countries that like to think they're democracies  May amount to nothing more than a significant disruption, though it's too early to say
The survey was a bit biased but, good polling data is hard to find these days...
obviously undermines subsequent peaceful democratic transitions following election results
almost all mass protest produces property damage as an unavoidale byproduct
My answers reflect the question as you put it. Is it unusual for the president's lawyer to hold a press conference? No. Was the content of the press conference unusual and important? It was both.
Latin American politics, US politics, gender and politics, political behavior
The credibility and legitimacy of American democracy are being manipulated for personal gain
GSA is strictly following the rule under pressure from the out-going president. The funds are somewhat important to allow the new president a chance to begin organizing his administration, but not a fatal flaw.
Ridiculous lies that have little impact other than to feed red meat to the uneducated and willfully gullible
The strict rules were followed and the Democrats reaction (any reaction) would have little consequence
They have no basis for the claim and place American democracy at risk. Encouraging undemocratic behavior in a president is mostly abnormal, yet they have done little to put their own careers on the line (making it "mostly abnormal")
Important because circumstances dictate action but blame shifting is cowardly but not that unusual
The fact that they did it is very important, but the White House (non) response was unconscionable because it implies tacit acceptance of domestic terrorism
Political Behavior and Regime Transitions
Simultaneously the most frightening and hilarious event held by a presidential administration.
The media is usually the ones at fault here ("Dewey defeats Truman" headline). But elected official may get their cues from the media.
In the great scheme of things it is less important than much else, but it is important in what it says about Trump.
Giuliani should no longer be allowed to be a key player. He is dangerous.
Shows that not all Republicans are alike. Some try to do their job honestly. Some don't.
Not sure what the previous track record is on this.
Timing is unusual and repercussions regarding the Middle East are as yet unclear.
It is illegal, dangerous, treasonous, and inspired other groups. Also important because it was certainly fueled by Trump's rhetoric.
Important because it is hindering the transition process at a very critical time in our history.
Are we judging the US against all countries or all democracies?  You need to clarify!  My ranking of Kentucky is based on the ability of our governor (Dem.) and Secretary of State (Rep.) to work together to provide a free and fair election, and on the willingness of courts to uphold our governor's emergency pandemic actions against our Republican AG and some lawmakers. When our increasingly Republican legislature meets next, my assessment will probably change. And my ranking had nothing to do with Mitch McConnell--other than his attack ads.
I always struggle with ways the US democracy is simultaneously vibrant (protests, free press, largely effective administration of elections) and structurally deeply broken and unrepresentative (electoral college, senate, gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement).
Respecting soft norms around federal presidential political transition is central to US democratic health.
While I don't appreciate the federal effort to control civic education, and it is a signal at Trump's authoritarian instincts, (unfortunately) I also don't find this sort of federal propagandizing particularly abnormal in the US.
The GOP power push on this nomination was itself rather anti-democratic. The Dems trying to send a signal that they would not legitimize the GOP process was a reasonable response within an unreasonable process and an important marker of Dem senators' refusal to along with that process.
The lack of timely recognition of the results of the presidential race is another troubling sign of eroding American democratic norms from Trump and other GOP pressures.
Trump crossed a line on this, as on so many things. In this case, the line between cabinet members supporting their chief's re-election and campaigning seems murky enough that Trump's actions are more a matter of degree than entirely novel.
Trump's general willingness to promote conspiracy theories as president is very bizarre; this particular one is not among the worst ones he has pushed. The phenomenon overall is important though.
This level of propagandized, violent response to the legal actions of a legitimately-elected governor is an important indicator of the breakdown of democratic norms.
Since a political system can not necessarily control business judgments about whether post-election disorder is likely, the perception that this disorder might occur is significant but the issue itself may be less important than other signs of US democracy in crisis.
Comparative politics and law (I am a JD/PhD), especially in the Middle East
Trump's authoritarianism is idiosyncratic on the level of personality, but I do not think of his administration as an aberration.
Is there anything less intellectually robust than the teaching of American history? It is triumphalism all the way down. Trump's assertions change nothing.
Debates have not been especially informative this cycle.
A large segment of Trump supporters will question the legitimacy of the election results.
Barr has so compromised the integrity of the DOJ that it will take a long time to repair the damage.
No matter the outcome of the run-offs, the legitimacy of the election process will be questioned.
These should not be political appointments, but of course they are.
We seem to be in the midst of a slow civil war.
Contemporary and Environmental Political Theory
It would be more important if Trump had credibility with a majority of Americans.
political institutions, representation, quality of democracy, gender, race, Latin America
Hilarious and fitting - it is sad to see how far Giuliani has fallen from his days as mayor of NYC...
This was a direct attack on the effort to expand social studies education to include accurate portrayal of slavery, segregation, and racism, as documented in the NYTimes '1619 Project' by Nikole Hannah-Jones.  This was more than the usual conservative effort to promote 'patriotic' education.  It was an effort to cast a more accurate U.S. history curriculum as unpatriotic and subversive.
The transition is an important part of a president-elect having access to information needed to assess policy priorities and choose staff.  It is another example of the Trump Administration setting up obstacles for the incoming Biden Administration.
More stupid Trump campaign tricks...pathetic.
It is rare for presidential campaigns to file legal challenges to election results without substantive evidence.  These challenges undermine public trust in the electoral system, a fundamental cornerstone of democratic participation.
McConnell is the epitome of political calculation, opportunism, and amoralism.  No surprise at his lack of grace...
Trump continues as a unique (one hopes) occupant of the White House who refuses to accept the outcome of an election that produced a wider margin of votes and margins in swing states than the 2016 election.  If he refuses to physically leave by January 20th, there will be quite a line-up of staff from security and intelligence agencies that he has attacked who will be more than willing to help with the packing and moving...
Public policy, elections, public opinion research
Good questions - interesting to think about.
Race, ethnicity and politics, and Southern politics
This is what leaders in authoritarian regimes do.
This is completely undemocratic. Not only did Trump lose the Electoral College. He also lost the popular vote by over 5 million. These public leaders demonstrate no shame about turning on the majority.
There is no evidence that substantial irregularities exist. Barr serves the loser who is refusing to concede. There is evidence that Barr changes the choices of the DOJ to please the personal interests of the President. This is a breach of the rule of law.
Demonstrates an assumption that important segments of the population refuse the fundamental acceptance of the vote as the way the people speaks as an essential part of our regime.
democracy, grass roots politics, urban politics
A clear attempt to establish a false narrative of victory and establish a basis for (we now know falsely) challenging legitimate election outcomes. This is exceedingly dangerous.
The curiosity of the 4 Seasons Landscaping aside (with the bumbling incompetence that is suggested therewith), the personal attorney of the president holding a press conference after an election, making wild and unsubstantiated claims of election fraud, vowing to contest the election results, and normalizing and legitimizing the president's false claims of rigging or election theft -- that is exceedingly abnormal and extremely important. This is where democracy dies.
The pandemic sets up a dynamic where abnormal is necessary. However, the refusal of Trump to accept an alternative format that has become commonplace in our uncommon circumstances pushes it higher in the abnormal category and it is quite concerning -- it suggests a disregard for our norms and conventions and a lack of interest in giving citizens another opportunity to hear from candidates and assess their options and that is strikingly undemocratic. This is what we do in the US - no candidate should be above it.
This is both destabilizing and is an indicator of the personalism that is characteristic of authoritarian systems where loyalty is expected to be given to the leader rather than to the country or office.
Politicizing and weaponizing the bureaucracy to subvert the popular will is unvarnished authoritarianism.
This is one of the worst elements of this post-election debacle. We have come to expect aberrant and anti-democratic behavior from Trump, but for the pinnacle of Republican leadership (apart from Trump) to cooperate in delegitimizing the election outcome and normalizing the president's anti-democratic behavior in doing so highlights just how far our democracy has slid -- it isn't just one anti-democratic figure but now much of the party has been coopted and moved down this authoritarian path. This has enormous and troubling long-term implications.
Cabinet positions are overtly political appointments. HOWEVER, it depends on how it is done. If the surrogacy is happening in completely campaign-related contexts and there is a *clear line* delineating the campaign/political activity from any official activities as a Cabinet member, that would be one thing. ANY significant blurring of those lines, however, and that puts it into the category of irregular and possibly illegal.
Political fights are pretty normal but in the midst of a crisis like the pandemic, it pushes this toward abnormal. Moreover, add in the context of the president convulsing as he refuses to accept election loss and it pushes it even more toward abnormal and truly problematic given the urgency and magnitude of the crisis facing the country, both in terms of health and economics (with the economic problems not being fixable until the health crisis is mitigated).
Creating a new norm around firing.  Sending a problematic signal about the peaceful transition of power.
The election is not decided until the votes are counted. He planned to do this for months before the election. It was not a surprise but still deeply damaging to democracy
They offered to have a virtual debate, when Trump refused to participate cancellation seemed appropriate. I supposed they could have held it without him but it seemed fine to cancel.
Politicians get irritated with journalists but they usually find a way to cover it up.  It is not that important, especially since Trump regularly lies to reporters
A meritocratic civil service was a major advance forward for American government in the 1880s, We can't have a functioning government when trained bureaucrats are replaced by political operatives.
The willingness of the Republican party to go along with the president's refusal to recognize the results of the election is very dangerous for our democracy. It undermines the peaceful transfer of power and it will undermine the next president by convincing Trump supporters that the election was illegitimate.
Trump's use of cabinet member was more extreme than in the past
It is important because we need a government that functions to support people in need in such an unusual time.  But party politics is not that unusual. (at least for the last 20 years, this type of party politics)
Trump tries to cloud what is true with falsehoods. The constant lying is bad for democracy
Press conference, normal; mistake in the location, hilarious.  Irrelevant otherwise.  It may have had less media coverage if it had actually been at the other Four Seasons.
The delay is not permanent.  I expect them to release the funds soon.
This should be completely unimportant, but Trump's insistence on loyalty in the Republican ranks makes the normal seem important when it shouldn't be.
This is symbolism born of frustration.  They couldn't stop the confirmation.  The real problem is the Republican party's hypocrisy, even though they had the legitimate power to both block Garland and confirm Barrett.
The problem here is the sneer quotes around "clear and apparently-credible allegations".  I suspect, as do many people, that non-credible allegations will also be probed.  That we suspect as much is part of the problem. As far as I can tell no credible allegations exist to be probed.
Traditionally we allow the media to call races, but legally McConnell has a leg to stand on.  It's a weak leg and does not reflect well on him, but it is neither unexpected nor important in the long run.  The Republican party has been the party of NO and obstruction for over a decade.
Vice presidents are less important than presidents, though with two old folks running this debate took on some added significance.
This was fun.  Thank you. (Maybe democracy needs some definition since American democracy is not the only type.)
Trump is an aberration here, as in many other things.
I follow presidential politics pretty closely, e.g. 10 books and 100 articles on the presidency (latest in 2021) but did not see any story about the doctored newspaper headline.
Not familiar with the specific example, so difficult to judge
Better than the last one.  The idea of democracy is inherently in some tension with a democratic republic.  Democracy is not the same as rule of law. So there is some ambiguity in some early questions. In the future perhaps distinguish democracy from constitutionalism and rule of law.  For example, some parts of the Constitution are not strictly democratic, yet they are crucial for the rule of law and limited government. Sorry, but I do not have sample questions that would resolve these ambiguities. You are to be commended for this whole exercise.
It's a symbolic gesture;  the abnormal and important step was bringing her nomination to the floor.
Saying you are going to win before it's over is common.  We have seen many campaign look at early returns and say it's going to turn around for us - and been right as well as wrong.  SO the statement isn't abnormal it was the statement as prelude and not as something said at the time.   Because it could've been just something that was said, but because everyone knew it was prelude and setting the stage for fraud claims that's why I scored it semi-important.
Abnormal for politics, sadly normal for this president. Bad for democracy.
It is a continuation of the rise in party discipline in the US but I am not sure how it would different from other high party discipline states where the outcome of a vote is a foregone conclusion and all that really might be at stake is whether anyone will defect.  Americans are seemingly surprised by party discipline but it's not like our country is the only place it occurs.
The idea of challenging in this way is new but it is not clear that it is without precedent and it is not clear what calling means.
I noticed you didn't ask anything about media consumption or a sense of how well informed about events in the US respondents felt they were.  Obviously most of the events were BIG news but one wonders if the certainty attached to responses is correlated to feeling well informed or not.
international organizations, international human rights
The importance of this action lies in what it may foretell about the President's foreign policy decision-making in the next two months before he leaves office. We may only speculate at this point.
It's importance lies in the unsubstantiated allegations he and his proxies have made in most/all of these states, as desperate attempts to undermine a relatively clean election and incite unrest.
I wouldn't have seen this as quite so abnormal or as important were I responding to this survey in the immediate few days following the calling of the remaining key states. But at sixteen days out from Election Day, and 10-12 days since it was called, this has become completely abnormal, and even more important with each passing day (5-7 days ago I would have already rated it Important). It entrenches and fans baseless distrust of our elections, it makes it even harder and more unlikely that the President will ever concede, and increases the danger of violent conflict when some factions among his supporters wrongly view this as a "stolen" election.
Thank you for inviting me to participate.
Claiming fraud and THEN looking for it is completely abnormal and incredibly disturbing. Continuing to claim it publicly while not claiming it in court is also damaging.
positive for democracies to be able to adjust to global pandemic
encouraging distrust of all credible  knowledge as well as the government itself--and reaping the Liar's Dividend to be the source of "reality, "truth," and government control. Dangerous to political culture of democracy
I understand why you would have a question about foreign interference but it implies that there usually is not. I think there usually is given the degree of global interdependence - thus my answer of "not sure". It might be useful to caveat it with illegal or some such to clarify what I think you mean.
It is abnormal because of the (a) reason and (b) manner.
This is beyond abnormal. It's ludicrous.
science, technology and international affairs
Acceptance by the party that lost an election -- as expressed by public figures associated with that party --  is important for helping people who supported the party that lost to accept that the result is fair, even though of course they would have preferred a different result.
When the opposition in a legislature feels that the only way it can register its opinion is by boycotting that is a strong system that the institution is not functioning well.
Unfortunately for President has fired multiple members of his administration via tweet.  Frequency, does not equate with normal, which I would hope has a connotation with "good", or in this case with governing in a way that benefits the country.
It is an attempt to change the rules by which elections are decided (or in this case the way election disputes are decided) after the election has already started.
It is prompting some of his supporters to question the outcome of the election, and fomenting deep questioning about whether elections in the US are fair.  And it is also important because it does not incorporate that the Republican Party has worked to repress voting by groups in society who are likely to vote against the party's candidates.
They are enabling a president and disabling a country.  Again, it demonstrates Party above Country and it is beyond shameful.
It delegitimizes our elections, democracy, and system of government.
Making unsubstantiated claims of corruption sows seed of distrust in government and specifically the incoming administration.
We want to know if election irregularities existed and DOJ would be involved in the investigation but in this case he was simply doing the president's bidding, which is shameful but expected.
It demonstrates Party above Country. I want to scream "this is not who we are as a country!"  They (David and Kelly) care more about their own power and self interests than they do their constituents or their country.  That is clear!
Police preparing for post-election riots is not something that has happened broadly across the U.S. in at least a couple generations, and probably longer.  The last time police had to be reminded of their sole duty to protect the validity of the election was the progressive era and Tammany Hall.  It is extraordinary and saddens me greatly.  The worst part is that President Trump encouraged this type of behavior and actually suggested it!
This shows that businesses expect violence and lack of acceptance of the election results which should not occur in a healthy democracy.
This was a regrettable necessity given the president's behavior.
This is a breach of the fundamental democratic norm that losers must concede in elections. It is the first step towards a coup d'etat.
Much of this is motivated by racism and the idea that minority protestors will be violent.
No comments could capture how abhorrent this is.
Necessary given the circumstances of the Covid and the health of the President.
given the rushed process, i understand their hesitancy to participate but they should still participate and vote their opposition.
A Secretary of State who are doing their job following the law should not be bullied.
intimidating and threatening elected officials is not good on any level for democracy
public policy concerns - labor, housing, and immigration
How can we know the aggregate results of this study? Will we be sent a link to access the results?
Two of the questions at the beginning of the survey are worded weirdly. I had to reread them several times before I could understand what they meant.
It is a recognition of a fair election and legitimizes the election.
Trump has  lied about more important matters.
Totally undermines the election and US democracy. It also undermines their legitimacy as leaders with any moral compass.
One state ok. Just too many states. Undermines the legitimacy of the election.
It sends a message of doubt about the legitimacy of the election. It also supports President Trumps narrative that there is doubt about the legitimacy of the election and that he, Trump, won.
It is an important foreign policy move whether you agree with it or not. To do this as part of an election  campaign is unfortunate.
If it was one state in which he asked for a recount OK  but too many states and too many cases...unsubstantiated cases.   Legitimate elections is one of the key requirements for a democracy. Trump is undermining our democracy on this most basic point!!
International relations of the Middle East and Turkey
Glad you are doing this but I am much more worried about our democracy than I was able to express through these questions. You did ask about undermining the press and the election..how about the Department of Justice? How about the attempt to misuse the armed forces at home? The undermining of our institutions is enormous and threatening. How bout his encouragement of hate groups? How about his encouragement to use violence against minorities? How about Trump's unwillingness to condemn Neo-Nazis? How about the firing of important public servants and advisors with whom the President does not agree? How about so many lawmakers unwilling to stand up for democracy? How about lies, lies, lies about everything that is basic to democracy in the U.S.?
comparative study of parties and elections; statistical methodology
These challenges amount to efforts to overturn the clear results of the election. This is the behavior of aspiring authoritarian rulers.
The issue of its importance is not in the fact that a candidate claims fraud, but in the public's reaction to the claim.  Its importance is directly relations to the proportion of people who believe it,
The abnormality is driven by the norms that have existed rather than the actual law, which is open to interpretation.  Its importance has to do with the tenor of the times and with the experience or inexperience of the incoming president.
The nonrecognition is unimportant except as a possible indication of what McConnell's action portends for his approach to the incoming administration.   Republicans congratulated Obama but worked to stymy his every move.
In general, it is abnormal for Presidents to judge the character of law enforcement actions.  But it does happen (Trump praises harsh punishment, others label the death of suspects at the hands of police officers as murder), though rarely.  It is only important as an attempt by an administration to shape the character of public discourse.
The conversation about the threat to democracy has to do with the benchmark of assessment.  There are features of the US policy that are undemocratic given some ideal standard.  The assessment of what threatens democracy is different if we take the nature of US democracy as given.  Finally, the character of US governance reflects a set of institutions, laws, and norms.  Much of the contemporary conversation has to do with the implication of the violation of norms.  Most of the foregoing questions were about norms.  Some have called Trump's violation of norms the equivalent of a coup, but that just butchers the term and is meant to inflame.  The country's reliance on norms is what constitutes the threat to democracy, and it is omnipresent and does not require a Trump to be a problem.  Would you have undertaken this survey asking about the implications of Gore conceding and then unconceding and pressing a claim in the courts?  If the answer is no, think about what it is about Trump the makes it seem more problematic.
Campaigns & Elections, Political Science pedagogy
Abnormal and most important - given his relationship to Donald Trump.
The decision *seems* politically influenced.
Highlights growing polarity of the public; America has had a two party system for some time now and the level of concern necessary for a business owner to board their businesses for fear of post-election violence and protests is very concerning.
Glad that you continue administering the survey.  I use it in class.
I don’t know how much corruption occurred. Either there was a lot and it is important to uncover it, or there was not a lot and Trump is simply poisoning the well for the new administration.
VP candidates have only a marginal impact on the electoral outcome, with occasional exceptions like 1960 (Texas).
It may be one of his most important accomplishments (of which there are few).
This is completely dangerous in a free society, but we can hope that it is isolated incident.
Businesses can and should make precautions.  One would hope that they wouldn't feel the need to do so, but it is 2020.
Democracies need orderly transfers of power
I'm clicking "important" so often. Maybe you need "extremely important" as an additional category.
This is an example of making accusations without any evidence.
Trump is attempting to set an alternative narrative, which is troubling and misleading.
Trump is attempting to undermine democracy for personal gain.
The claims were outrageous, but the mistaken setting was pretty funny. Again, red meat to the base. But the allegations were ludicrous and likely had little effect on 70-80% of the country.
Nothing burger. Red meat to the red base. No real consequence.
This really seemed to be the norm in years past. Bush and Romney so far are outliers this year. To quote the reason: "Sad."
It's a weird time, and Trump is a weird candidate. Wrangling over debate format and timing recurs occasionally.
Guiliani lives in an alternative reality and is clearly game to do anything for his client. Still, there didn't seem to be much of largescale importance on the hard drive, even if it was legit. And its credibility is far from clear.
Any peace deal of a majority-Islamic country and Israel feels pretty important, especially if it involves formal recognition.
This one was a head-scratcher, though it is clearly true to Trump character. That it was accompanied by assertions that Obama had the Seal team assassinated made it even weirder.  It's unclear to me who believes this stuff, but then I look at my own brother and brothers-in-law, and I'm reminded. (Great guys generally, by the way, but they really need better information sources.)
The antifa guy appeared to have been violent, so the law-enforcement action seemed fairly routine, if on the extreme side. Trump's praise of the action doesn't seem super out of the ordinary. I could imagine GW Bush touting it as well.
Interesting survey. Brightline Watch does interesting and important work, so I'm happy to contribute.
Democracy and authoritarianism, law and courts
The whole electorate needs to perceive events accurately.
Cancelling the debate is a good precedent, but will likely have little impact
That he was fired in part for his reluctance to invoke military powers at home makes it semi-important. otherwise it is mostly unimportant.  That it took place via tweet right after the president lost electcion makes it abnormal
The President's lawyer running an independent sting operation on his opponent is important even if it was very badly executed.
Direct pressure on election officials by elected officials is bad.
This is not the important for democracy even if it is important for public health.
erodes norms of legality and degrades public discourse about law
As long as these theatrics don’t affect the election results, I’m not particularly concerned.
She is enabling Trump’s attempt to stay in office by illegitimate means, and harming the transition.
Having a conspiracy theorist in the White House is dangerous for democracy.
Very interesting and thought-provoking questions.
This is the first time this has ever happened and it is ridiculous and mean-spirited.
Sore losers. I am sure other candidates have done stupid things in the press in the past as well.  This does undermine journalism and peoples' belief in the integrity of most news reporting.
Covid-19 has made everything weird, so health and safety are important.  Plus if candidates don't agree to follow the rules why have a debate?
Democracy is based on the peaceful transfer of power.  Graham, Cruz and others are undermining democracy with this ridiculous behavior.  They are also making the transition difficult for Biden and Harris.
Trump is firing people for political retaliation not based on work abilities.  This is unfair and should not be allowed.
The job of the Attorney General is to uphold the law and investigate real allegations about misconduct not made-up ones.  He is a disgrace to his office.
If he were incompetent or breaking the law that would be fine, but he did not cow-tow to Trump supporters and throw out ballots.  Since he is doing his job the assertions by Perdue and Loeffler are ridiculous.
McConnell is impeding the democratic process.  He is a disgrace for this and holding up any debate for legislation in the Senate.  He blocked the appointment of a Supreme Court judge during the Obama administration and shoved through an nominee in the current administration. Fire him from the Senate leadership--he is not a leader!
International Law, International Political Economy
This shows a serious lack of regard for the press.
Republican leaders should be faulted for failing to uphold democratic norms.
Trump's litigation is also outrageous and represents a significant attack on democratic norms.
The health of democracy depends on professional and objective public administration.  Trump's efforts to politicize the administrative workforce is a serious violation of political norms.
Targeting family members of political opponents is a clear violation of democratic norms.
The calls to step down were outrageous.  But I marked semi-important because they were of limited impact.
Regardless of one's opinion of the deal, this is the kind of activity that a president should be involved in.
Trump's encouragement of conspiracy theorizing stands as a significant attack on democratic discourse.
There are no words. I think all sports teams should do the same. Just declare they won irregardless of the score.
This still has me chuckling. It still is my favorite campaign moment and second is the hair dye running down Rudy's face during the recent press conference.
Civility by leaders sets the role model for citizens
Another instance of pettiness. We assume a president is not petty.
More distorted reality and turning the blame on anyone else. Trump loves to create a problem and then want credit for solving it.
Presidential standards assume they tell not dwell in a world of hoax
Again, no words for this behavior. So dangerous.
Very, very, very abnormal.  Very, very, very important.
Trying to control history for political purposes is a hallmark of dictatorships. Did anyone realize that "patriotic education" is the term used in China?
Importance depends on nature of the challenges and the circumstances of the vote. One would expect legal challenges in case of a close result. In 2020 the result was not close except in Georgia and Arizona. Challenges to a wide margin claiming massive fraud are not at all normal.
Issue in this case seems to be timing. Barr issued his statement before election results were certified, which is abnormal. An investigation at another time might be normal. "Clear and apparently credible" limits the directive and distinguishes it from a purely political act.
Perhaps a poorly presented question. Small extremist groups hatching violent plots are unfortunately normal in the US. What is utterly abnormal, and totally important, is the implicit support to this behavior by the President and the Republican Party.
Please see comment on question about the threat in Michigan.  Thank you for doing the survey.
It would be considered unimportant under normal circumstances, but is important given Trump's reluctance to acknowledge Biden's victory
Trump's COVID infection and his refusal to wear mask created the conidtion for canceling the debate.
Represents a direct attack on the foundational principle of democracy that loses accept the results of the election
Gives unfettered authority to the President with no accountability
Anticipation of violence is what makes this act abnormal
A contextual factor which you don't ask us to consider in the scenario is the fact that there are no credible allegations of the sort Barr is thinking of. Given the context, I would call his move abnormal.
Demeaning the legitimacy of our elections and our elected president.
Mostly important because Trump has tried to force the press to treat this as a serious matter while it is not.  Fortunately the press has covered it as a media issue rather than a substantive one.  Also mostly important because if that becomes an accepted practice, individuals will be open to harassment.
Interference in the judicial process for political purposes by the president.
A sign that our electoral process was threatened by the president and his party.
Important because it undermines people's trust that elections are free and fair.
Most difficult question was evaluating which states other than my own were most and least democratic.  Because lack of enough information to evaluate.  So went with North Carolina and Wisconsin as the least because after their current Democratic governors were elected the Republican legislators tried to strip them of the powers typically enjoyed by governors.  California and New York chosen as the most because under Democratic governors and legislatures they have had the most progressive policies.
Comparative Political Behavior, European Politics, EU politics
The abnormality and importance of this isn't solely that he's doing this, it's how many challenges he's filing, and the super-low quality of the claims he's making in these challenges that is so abnormal and important.
What's so important about this is all the enabling of Trump that Republican leaders are doing.
Public Law with a focus on U.S. judicial politics
Thanks for all the important work you are doing!
Cabinet members speaking to tout an administration's record seems normal to me.  But some of the things these members have done border on or look like Hatch Act violations, so that's abnormal.  Pompeo's politicizing the State Department is especially egregious.  That's why I land in the middle of the scale on normal or abnormal.
It is normal to have a VP debate, which is why I rated things as I did.  But it is not normal (in a good way!) that a woman of color is participating.
Abnormal because, by definition, emergency authorizations are not typical.  But in other ways this is normal given that FDA is following established rules for this decision.
Thanks for allowing explanations on the "normal" and "abnormal" questions.  Some of those are difficult to answer depending on how you consider the questions, so I was glad to have a chance to explain my answers.
history of pol. phil. and recent analytic social philosophy