Elected officials seek compromise with political opponents
Politicians who lose free and fair elections will concede defeat
Government agencies are not used to monitor, attack, or punish political opponents
Government statistics and data are produced by experts who are not influenced by political considerations
Mostly abnormal not in the sense that they shouldn't and did, but in the sense that it was unlikely they would, yet they did.
Government officials do not use public office for private gain
The law is enforced equally for all persons
Government does not interfere with journalists or news organizations
Even when there are disagreements about ideology or policy, political leaders generally share a common understanding of relevant facts
Information about the sources of campaign funding is available to the public
This seems abnormal that they would have to make that statement, but given the state of things it was good that they did.
The legislature is able to effectively limit executive power
Executive authority cannot be expanded beyond constitutional limits
Law enforcement investigations of public officials or their associates are free from political influence or interference
Impeachable, hence abnormal and important
The actions speak for themselves. Worst day of my life in 50 years of studying the Congress.
Second time in history, both disgraced presidents.
This strikes at the core of democracy. Elected officials have always been at some risk, but this goes way beyond that.
Didn't get his way, but got to present his case.
All adult citizens enjoy the same legal and political rights
All votes have equal impact on election outcomes
All adult citizens have equal opportunity to vote
The elected branches respect judicial independence
I disagree with some of the contents, but these are abnormal conditions, and the economy was in dire shape, starting with those most at risk (i.e., poor). Protecting airlines and the cruise industry, or setting up boondoggles without Congressional audit was a gross mistake.
Stupid, ill-chosen, probably corrupt, but banal.
Petulant and graceless, but he also would have divided TV attention.
Diplomacy is the purview of the executives, and any negotiations that lead towards more recognition between previous (not very) hostile states is a positive step.
Pelosi can say what she wants. I am glad that the JC were unresponsive, as much as Trump is a walking moral hazard problem.
The MyPillow founder isn't a credible person outside of a few people in the administration. I would really worry if Generals were saying the same thing to Trump.
Elections are conducted, ballots counted, and winners determined without pervasive fraud or manipulation
Government protects individuals’ right to engage in unpopular speech or expression
This essentially is an admission of extortion, as well as a non-negligible portion of Trump's base adopting terrorism-like tactics
I don't think there's much validity to the questions asking to evaluate best and worst states.  Most people, even political scientists, won't know very much about more than a handful of other states' politics in real time.
Voter participation in elections is generally high
Government officials are legally sanctioned for misconduct
It is abnormal that they felt they needed to make the statement. It is encouraging for our democratic institutions that they did, unanimously, make this statement.
If his retirement had been more recent, such as immediately before being appointed, this might be more concerning, but he had been retired for several years.
It is important that Vice President Pence, and other Republican elected officials, did attend. This makes it less important that former President Trump did not attend.
When the President conspires to send and armed mob to invade and kill elected members of Congress, this is a gross violation of laws and is an effort to subvert the Constitution. It is an impeachable offense. The Congress must respond with whatever power it has to penalize this behavior.
The point of winning an election is to implement policies. On issues regarding for example LGBTQ rights, this has happened historically when the Presidency changes parties.
Government protects individuals’ right to engage in peaceful protest
The geographic boundaries of electoral districts do not systematically advantage any particular political party
This is one of those Trump-era events that is difficult to predict from simply because no highly institutionalized democracy has ever sought to take a sledgehammer to its own institutions. So it is absolutely abnormal and it certainly looks important!
Thank you for doing this and including me!
Government effectively prevents private actors from engaging in politically-motivated violence or intimidation
Parties and candidates are not barred due to their political beliefs and ideologies
This is one positive sign for democracy; at least the military leadership appears to have no interest in a coup.
A clear indication that American democracy is no longer consolidated or considered "the only game in town". This is especially concerning because the insurrectionists were not primarily hot headed young men with nothing to lose but included middle class professionals and politicians and (ex) members of the military.
The chief executive of a country trying to pressure lower ranking officials in his own party to commit electoral fraud / overturn an election is highly undemocratic and very concerning
One key component of democracy is that decisions are made by elected officials. If such officials are intimidated by violent threats from making the decisions they would like, this aspect of democracy is being violated.
Here the legislative branch seems to be trying to curtail powers normally given to the executive branch.
I am not sure what you mean by "(ab)normal" in this question. Certainly military leaders having to make such a statement is not normal for American democracy. However, the content of their statement -- that violent citizens should not attack elected officials -- is indeed in keeping with the normal state of America: political violence is not normal here.
Given the recent nature of social media it's hard for me to assess this impact on democracy
I say this is abnormal because the need for the military to do this in the US is abnormal.
It's corruption in the extreme. We'll never get away from corruption altogether. This is a flagrant attempt at election fixing. If it happened somewhere else we'd be calling them a corrupt backwater. This is not a precedent that will help the U.S. The reason I picked GA as one of the most democratic states is because state officials stood firm against Trump on all of this. I don't know much about Georgia politics overall, but for the moment the state is a beacon of democracy.
It's more overt cronyism than were usually get to see in action, but the difference is of degree rather than kind.
My answer is based on the assumption that Trump knew his loss was real and he just didn't want to accept that news. In that case, this is straight-up election tampering.
It's ridiculous. The AGs have no standing. What example are they setting when they ignore the basic tenets of rule of law?
It would be completely abnormal if Trump hadn't just done it. It's important because it erodes the norm of civilian control over the military. Congress passed a law requiring seven years in civilian life before ex-military officials could serve as Secretary of Defense. Doesn't seem like they were too serious about that, if it is so easy to bend the rules. It's great to have an African American in the position, but surely there were other good candidates of color?
I think these people were afraid of having to vote on a 25th Amendment request and of the implications of doing so. So they bravely ran away in the last two weeks of the administration. People resign out of self-interest all the time. If the focus of the question is on whether the assault on the Capitol was unusual, then my answers would be different: abnormal, important.
Using force to prevent legislative action is thoroughly undemocratic. It's important especially if it becomes precedent, and news outlets are now saying DHS fears.
If the president is that unstable and unreliable, that can't be business as usual.
Citizens have access to information about candidates that is relevant to how they would govern
An important statement.  But the crisis that prompted it is not normal.
Challenge to the integrity of elections.
Important measure to deal with crisis.  Signing it is normal role for a president, although not for Trump.
Only time in history.  I'm not sure if it will make a difference.
Unusual in that Trump signs the authorization.
What makes it unusual is that military leaders felt they had to do it in the first place.
It is highly unusual.  It is important because it raises major issues of regulation and speech.
Some of the questions involved double negatives, which made them hard to answer.
The judiciary is able to effectively limit executive power
This is the erosion of democracy. Who will run for offices like secretary of state from now on? Fierce partisans determined to actually "find" those votes?
The power to pardon needs to be reined it. It is now being abused to purely partisan ends.
The issue here is more the pattern of less civilian control of the armed forces. Appointing persons who are not former military is generally preferable, but any one instance is not alarming in itself.
Peaceful protest/demonstration are protected rights. There are no rights to disruption governmental functions; forcibly entering lawfully secured areas; and certainly not physically threatening/assaulting security personnel or elected official in the lawful exercise of their duties under the Constitution.
US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of he President. However, prosecutors are empowered to see that justice is done. If there is no reasonable suspicion or basis in fact to launch a criminal investigation, then a prosecutor should not be punished for reaching such a conclusion.
Pardon power is pretty absolute for POTUS. The pardons listed "look bad" and do not pass the "smell test."  Perhaps it's time to amend the Constitution when it comes to Presidential pardons. No pardons for current POTUS' family members, no self pardons, no pardons for those appointed by current POTUS, no pardons for those in involved (paid/unpaid) in presidential campaigns of current POTUS.
Basic federalism; states run their elections and this is a matter for state courts not SCOTUS.   Funny that protection of "state's rights" is a core tenet of conservatism.
The President is given some discretion in how to best carry out the laws
Sad that  would even have to say it, but reassuring that they did so.
There was no basis in law or fact to challenge the results of the presidential election in 2020.
Judicial politics;  4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights.
Citizens can make their opinions heard in open debate about policies that are under consideration
This was a dark day for the United States and will be a black mark on our history for a very long time.
This was very unreasonable, but again the actions of a person who did not want to admit defeat.
Unlike a lot of individuals, I think this was mostly rhetoric from a sore loser who is used to hearing what he wants to hear from sycophants and got a harsh lesson in reality from the election returns.
This was done to send a message that the type of actions that the president engaged in that led to the riot at the Capitol will not be tolerated now or in the future.
This was one of the more significant events that the former president did that was quite positive.
This is exactly what should have happened under the (very unusual) circumstances.
This person is clearly an extremist who probably should not have been entertained by the president.
There was a mix of people involved with a mix of motives. The initial pre-planned assault was a storming, but I would not call it an insurrection. Other protesters followed peacefully in an opened Capitol building. Neither a storming nor an insurrection.
There is sufficient evidence to investigate. If everyone had just transparently done their jobs, none of this mess would have occurred. A president has the right, a duty, to have those in the DOJ do their jobs. Within the law and as a principle of democracy, these unelected officials are and should be accountable to the president.
If the elections were conducted contrary to constitutional provisions requiring electors to be selected in accordance with rules established by the state legislatures—not governors, secretaries of states, or courts—then they should be judged invalid.
This violated free speech rights. The federal government should prohibit the expenditure of any its funding that substantially supports these companies—no Twitter, Facebook, etc. accounts from any department or agency or congressional office.
I don’t recall any questions about the many election irregularities and reports of election fraud. Nothing about election observers being obstructed. Nothing about the use of vulnerable voting machines or the abuses of mail-in ballots. The variety of charges and evidence of mismanagement to outright fraud in this election was staggering and nearly none of this showed up here. Now some of what certainly appears to be evidence can be rebutted, but it can’t be so easily dismissed. Most of the court cases that challenged the results were dismissed on standing, not a refutation of evidence (as was the Texas lawsuit). It is as if no one has standing to object to the trampling of democracy! That is maybe to most upsetting aspect of this election. One more point—the blanket censorship by the traditional news media was an outrageous assault on American democracy. They stonewalled the Hunter Biden story as well as protected Biden from inquiry into his seemingly deteriorating cognitive acuity. No questions?
abnormal in that they normally do not need to make such statements. But normal in the sense of that is what they believe
The questions about normality of events is confusing: are you asking if the event itself is abnormal or are you asking if the underlying attitude/motive/belief is normal or abnormal??
Public policy is not determined by large campaign contributions
Those people should be thrown out of office.
1. Civilian control of the military; 2.. Military culture that follow constitutional oath.
The combo of social media, twisted religious beliefs, a me-first cadre of GOP incumbents, the slow but sure decline in a sense of collective public purpose has led us  to where we are.  Trump rallies will not destroy the Republic.  The seeds are deeper.  I keep re-reading Richard Hofstadter.
Finally, or maybe not so finally, party, tribe, base YES.  Constitutional, democratic, republic norms?   NO
combination combo of old-fashion corruption and finger in the face of constitutional norms,
Tough choice:  ACLU principals;   or   sludge flow of info. bile.  tough one.
Please consider asking questions that address alternative conceptions of democracy, particularly substantive democracy that focuses on the way economic inequity erodes democracy.
It is normal in the sense that the military has taken the stance that is has no role in election disputes. It is abnormal that the 10 living former defense secretaries had to share this.
There truly needs to be a measure beyond abnormal and beyond important for this. Even during the Civil War, such an event did not happen. I want to be clear, I'm not saying the insurrection means a Civil War; I'm only saying the National Executive ensured that insurrectionists did not reach the Capitol during the pivotal event. That this National Executive did not prevent this event is a threat to American democracy.
While there have been objections in the past (which prevents this from being the most absolute abnormal event), the scale of this objection was far beyond previous ones.
While there have been SCOTUS cases involving the Electoral College (McPherson v. Blacker to Chiafalo v. Washington), it is abnormal that states without standing file such a request. This invalidates the Electoral College as being a federal institution. It tries to nationalize the institution, but nationalize it along the will of specific states. Since the Electoral College embraces the theory of federalism, this request was very important, as the theory of federalism was being challenged.
The only reason this is not abnormal is because Congress made actions like this before with President Nixon.
The fact that they felt obligated to do it is abnormal, the fact that they did it is, in its own way, a pro-democratic thing to do.
I say mostly, because they should have resigned long-before this event.
It is abnormal that they had to do it, it was normal that they responded after the event (and would have been abnormal if they didn't).
The most abnormal thing about it is that he is listening to the my-pillow guy.
Trying to overturn the results of a legitimate election is an undemocratic, authoritarian act.
Multiple secretaries resigning is very unusual -- but important to send a message that Trumps actions were unacceptable in a democracy.
In this case, unlike in previous cases, abnormal means unusual, but not necessarily bad. It's good that a cartoonish villain should not have access to the nuclear codes.
Elections are free from foreign influence
The question is ambiguous.  Normal/important that the military doesn't intervene, or that the 10 had to come out and say it explicitly?
This is the definition of an authoritarian movement:  rejecting a certified vote count and carrying the torch for an autocrat to continue in office.
One of many incidents of interference with the electoral process.
They are helping to reinforce the misinformation.
Although it is ironic given that he supported ignoring and/or invalidating valid and legal voting ballots.
He should have no say in the matter, and that is what dictators due without a very good and valid reason.
Political culture, rhetoric and ideology
Given that past presidents have also issues questionable pardons (Clinton and both Bushes specifically), I can't say that this is abnormal. But it only shows that the pardon is not working the way it was intended.
I marked "mostly important" because, symbolically, it is important that both the outgoing and incoming presidents appear together. Substantively, however, it has no impact. But symbolism matters.
While I have marked this as abnormal, that is different than saying I think it is wrong. To the contrary, it was the right thing to do, even if it was unusual.
Political behavior, civic engagement, religion and politics
My evaluation of both the normality and importance of this event is tied to the particular (and peculiar) circumstance of a nationwide pandemic.
I'm glad they resigned but again, they should not have to go to this extreme measure because of the links between the President and the violence.
I picked abnormal because military leaders in the US should NOT have to condemn something like this because it should NEVER have happened.
Over 60% of the Republicans in Congress not certifying a free and fair election where the winner won over 7 million more votes than the loser is undemocratic and an example of how our nation's democracy isn't functioning because one of its major parties, the Republicans, does not believe in democratic procedures.
Normal response to a economic downturn and government trying to address a national emergency produced by covid.
President Trump's collecting GOP officials seeking to overturn the election is horrible and not in keeping with democratic governance. Before the nation can improve its standing as a democracy, there needs to be accountability for these type of actions.
Abnormal but the correct decision to help ensure accountability in a democracy.
This is abnormal. The correct constitutional remedy would have been for Pence and the Trump cabinet to invoke the 25 Amendment or Congress to impeach and convict.
It is highly abnormal President Trump was president but couldn't be trusted to be on Twitter. I think that Twitter made the right decision.
it is hard to disentangle the normal/abnormal components of the statement itself. A violent invasion of the capitol is not normal. Condemnation of violence is, but the context is unusual that I'm not sure what the precise question is that I am supposed to respond to.
Transparent attempt at voter disenfranchisement, and a felony.
This was a transparent attempt to disenfranchise voters in these states.
A break in protocol, and bad for political appearances, but not a game-breaker.
National security issue, and a result of a badly disrupted polity.
Good democracies would have gotten it right the first time.
Executive actions are an increasingly normal form of governance in an era of high polarization.
PUBLIC POLICY, CONGRESS, NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE WEST
Nothing trump did was in any way "normal."
All republicans are also spineless cowards.
That is how the government is supposed to work. Sadly, all republicans are traitors.
There is no basis yet for social media stuff to be "normal" or "not normal."
If this is the best that you can do, you are pretty lame. I not waste any more of my time on this project in the future.
Almost no democrat condemned the violence, looting and burning of public and private facilities by BLM and antifa that occurred during the past 6 months. At least the pro-Trump insurrectionists did not burn down or destroy public property to the extent that BLM and antifa thugs did.
A study of the history of mail-in voting reveals some surprising things about its weak and tenuous electoral mechanism.
Doesn't have much impact on ACTUAL policies important to the American public.
Trump is obviously not a perfect person and he does have some serious flaws, but simultaneously Pelosi, and the Democratic Party as a whole for that matter, hatred for Trump is worse.
Just shows how biased the tech companies are against conservatives.
I believe there should be a balance between liberal and conservative viewpoints. Clearly, this survey seems to be biased towards a liberal (Democratic) viewpoint because there is absolutely no mention of evaluating leaders of the Democratic party. I am not necessarily saying that what conservatives (Republicans) are doing is all perfect, and I do admit that Trump has his flaws, but the absence of any self-reflection by the Democrats and the left-leaning mainstream media is appalling and I think more and more Americans are realizing the hypocrisy of the left.
Voter suppression and an attempt to illegally overturn free and fair elections, guided by the executive is a violation of democratic principles.
It is part of the continued erosion of civil-military relations in the US context, but has precedent in the last few decades.
The US has historically brokered deals within broader constellations of geo-politics specifically in the MENA region. The abnormality in this case is the product of the lack of balance within the administration, and the quid pro quo involved in the deal making, that is absent of political content.
intimidation of elected officials to such an extent where votes change undermine the free and fair elections principle. Which is doubly important for legislators
Excessive use of executive orders has become commonplace in American politics. I ascribe it more to the breakdown of partisan politics, than to the Biden administration per se
The absence of regulation of speech in the US has infiltrated into social media platforms. It is not the role of private companies to regulate speech, on the one hand, but in the face of a much larger threat - violence - it was appropriate for them to do.
In a democracy it is important actors react to non-democratic actions
Rule by fiat can be seen as necessary to get back to "normal" but using this tool runs the risk of normalizing a see-sawing of policy every 4 or 8 years.
Definitely a bit difficult to answer some questions, because it's hard to determine which part of the question to respond to (i.e., double-barreled). For example, on whether military leaders condemning the storming of the capitol is normal or abnormal... it is quite abnormal that such a thing was necessary, but "normal" that they condemned it... same with 2nd impeachment of Trump. Normal that he was impeached for what he did, but abnormal that he needed to be impeached again...
Multiple protest resignations are certainly unusual, but so are attempted insurrections. Given the stakes, this as an attempt to disincentive autocratic behavior in the future will ultimately be insufficient.
Speaker of the House is not Commander-in-Chief and this was a grave attack on the constitutional separation of powers that was not decried with enough vigor by prominent Democratic actors. Understandable given the political context but still a bad precedent.
Bright Line is a great resource. Thanks for making the data available.
This indicates U.S. democracy is rotting at the core.
If Trump pardoned him, for the first time in my life, I say, "Kill the turkey."
The best thing about Trump's slow-motion coup was that it was incoherent and incompetent.
Imagine if Al Gore (2000) or Hillary Clinton (2016) took such action.
The action is ambiguous: Is it to protest or to absolve oneself?
As President Biden said, that was the first thing he agreed with.
This is a throwback to the days of the spoils and retribution system before the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of the 1880s.
To even be aware of such nonsense is the normalization of stupidity.
I teach everything from Western Civ to State & Local Government.
The delegitimization of the constitutional government is a potential fatal threat to U.S. democracy. When terrorists storming the Capitol wave false flags and call themselves "patriots," civil government and the rule of law are in peril.
Again, confusing question.  Are you asking whether it was normal that Congress voted to over-ride a Trump veto, or that Congress voted to over-ride a Presidential veto?
Confusing question.  Are you asking whether it is normal that the Secretaries made a public statement, or normal that the had to make a public statement?
Symbolic issues are to be judged differently than tangible issues.
Again, confusing.  Are you asking whether is is normal that military leaders condemned the mob, or whether it is normal that military leaders had occasion to condemn the mob?
The option to click "Don't know," or "Don't care" would have been helpful in regard to some of the questions.
The election was probably stolen by Biden.  No one in media or power seems to care - and simply refuses a honest, transparent, and deep analysis of evidence widely available on social media.  Indeed, they only censor it.   This is an important indication that our democracy has fallen off the rails.  Stolen elections mean we are not democratic.
Rigged elections are not democratic, neither is media and institutional attempts to be honest and transparent with our people
these resignations were the result of PROFOUNDLY UNDEMOCRATIC lies and bullying from the democrats and their media wing
House dems hate their opponents.  They are acting like third world dictators in their treatment of political opponents.  It is disgusting.
See previous comment.  Pelosi is a monster.
democratic theory, civil society, resistance, American civil society
I have lost all faith that these results will be used in good faith, honestly, or actually improve our democracy.   The left has destroyed our country, and its their hateful disposition that is doing it, none of the things mentioned in this survey can cure anything until the left changes profoundly.  They are not fit to live in any democracy, and soon none of us will.
Criminal behavior on the part of the president. The president has no hesitancy in undermining the basic foundations of democracy.  At least Republican officials, who themselves have engaged in voter suppression in the past, refused to comply with the President.
On the one hand, it is normal that Secretaries of DoD would reach this conclusion. It is abnormal that they felt the need to speak on the issue. It demonstrates that among elites the threats to undermine democracy are recognized.
Highlights the extent to which violence now is accepted in US politics. The situation has moved from violent rhetoric to actual violence.  Highlights both the problem of conspiracy theories and elite conflict entrepreneurs as many of the insurrections claim the revolution is necessary as the "election was stolen" and they are no longer represented.  Highlights the need for the IC to move to a post-9/11, post-WoT mindset and with the FBI focus upon anti-system and anti-society groups in the US.
Elections are held according to the laws of the State. Other states should not interfere in these elections, including petitioning SCOTUS.  Hypothetically let us assume that elections in the four mentioned states were extraordinarily fraudulent: that too would be abnormal and important.
President Trump had many former military leaders in his first Cabinet. His first DoD also needed a waiver. It would be preferable if civilian control of the military was maintained, but Austin is in his fifth year of retirement. The law requires 7 years.
Really - the President calls for an attack on Congress because they are preparing to certify an election which he lost. This is a blatant disregard for the foundations of not only democracy but the US constitution.
Women's suffrage is important especially as PoC women continue to struggle against suppression and the ERA is dead. As with many monuments, it will be privately funded.
Congress should legislate, but it is polarized beyond compromise and functions in a quagmire. Many of the executive actions addressed pressing problems which President Trump as first a populist quasi-authoritarian leader and the a disillusioned lame duck ignited or ignored. Particularly issues related to COVID demanded action. In a perfect democracy, presidents should minimize the use of executive actions. The next president can reject there. The country needs long term, coherent, legislation for its pressing domestic and economic issues. Congress has acquiesced or obstructed on foreign policy for a longer time period. President Trump lacked the expertise to address foreign relations and he undermined the IC, DoS, and DoD in these regard. Biden does possess extensive foreign policy knowledge. While executive actions are not preferable, the specific situation seemed to warrant such actions.
violation of democratic norms. also illegal
sitting president inciting insurrection... decidedly not normal. So not normal that people don't know how to react
takes something that is normal -- presidential pardons -- and takes it to an extreme. would we have gotten to this extreme eventually? probably. but trump for sure accelerated it.
important for peaceful transition of democratic power, and showing that losers are not sore losers
all presidents seek to overturn some things that the predecessor did. the sheer number and scale of executive orders seems abnormal, however
important part of 25th amendment. but should not have been made public.
Congress can do what it wants. I think it was a stupid decision, but there is nothing undemocratic about it.
Ambiguous question, since voter fraud should be investigated. But strange for the White House to be involved. But the law should be upheld, and if local officials will not do it, the people of Georgia should have some recourse.
I think this is pretty trivial all things considered.
How do we know who is telling the truth?
Impeaching a private citizen is a serious abuse of power.
I do think this is important, and unfortunately becoming more common.
Why do we care about what a private citizen thinks? I'm more worried about about people who possess political power who think the same way.
The military's support of peaceful democratic transition is paramount in democracy.  In a consolidated democracy this is a normal occurrence. However, this is morsel of normality is extremely important given the context.
The fact that some people have odd opinions and poor advice is not abnormal, but the fact that such individuals have a private audience with a president who is willing to listen to them, is. It is semi-important for the same reason.
As private companies, the corporations are entitled to deplatform a public figure. However, that does not make it a normal occurrence.  It is mostly important, because removing a major avenue of communication for the most visible leader in our country has not been done before and signifies...something.
natural resources, violence, repression, development
It sets up a dynamic where states can and will challenge each other's democratic performance.
In a way, impeaching Trump seems normal. Like, I almost expect that the House could do it weekly or monthly. I marked abnormal because no previous president has been impeached twice. No President has committed such an extensive list of possible crimes.
This information after 6 January was the most critical piece necessary to signal to the world that the US was not going to lash outward.
Is it unusual, or normal?  Does usual and normal mean the same thing?  It is certainly unusual.  Is it abnormal for a state to use the courts against other states, no it's not.  They sue each other all the time.  Did it work?  No.  I guess I see a difference between abnormal and unusual.
It was normal in this case.    It was mostly unimportant because it was the end of the Trump admin.  I tend to find your surveys difficult because they are in deep need of some cognitive interviewing.  I often am unsure of your definitions.  For example, on your first set of questions no country comes up to standards.  I'd give them all low scores.  So giving the US low scores is no different from anywhere else.
The devils in the details on policy.  It's hard to support stuff without seeing details --broad abstract questions might be good for citizens, but as a voting rights expert it was really hard to give an accurate answer.
Social policy in the developed countries.
This action by the Speaker of the House was exceedingly unusual and an indication of a serious level of concern from a senior elected leader. But, this action was also in part political theater which is way I rated it "mostly important."
This is blatant corruption and an attempt at subverting a democratic election.
Such an attempt to disenfranchise voters and overturn the results of an election based on no evidence of widespread fraud or manipulation is a dangerous attack on the institutions of democracy.
This question is double-barreled.  Should I be responding to cabinet secretaries resigning (which is fairly abnormal and important) or the capital riots (which is absolutely insane and one of the most important events to happen in my life)?
It has happened before, but very rarely.  It was not substantively important, but it was symbolically quite important.  It undermined the appearance of unity and a peaceful transfer of power, especially in the wake of the capitol riot.
Individual citizens' opinions aren't that important compared.  The President's actions are incredibly important.  There will always be people with anti-democratic opinions.  It's unfortunately that media lately gives the the most extreme such a big microphone.
There were a number of questions at the start of the survey that were difficult to answer due to ambiguous question wording.  In some cases, I simply left them blank.  In other cases, I noted the problem in the comments section.
This is abnormal since security services here usually maintain their neutrality with silence.    This is important because of the perceived need to become openly and vocally neutral.
I marked these as the middle categories for a few reasons. This act was both normal and abnormal at the same time.   This has become relatively normal these days for strong partisan responses. Representatives are very closely tied to their party for re-election and are more frightened by their constituents rebuke in a primary than anything else.   In the importance dimension, it's only really important in demonstrating that House members are more loyal to the party than their own institution.  If anything it indicates the depth of loyalty to the party of Trump.
This is one of the most normal things that Trump had done in a while.  It showed that he was conducting typical Head of State business.  It's somewhat important in that respect, since it showed actions did happen beyond just conspiracy-mongering and trying to change the election results.
These are not really that important.  These officials resigned 1-2 weeks before they would have resigned anyway.  It's a bit unusual to have that many protest resignations in an administration all at once, but the timing makes it less strange and makes the statement of a resignation fairly weak.  This story really got lost in the noise as well.
While these deals happened without a lot of fanfare a lot of that is due to pandemic distraction.  The Morocco deal is part of fairly typical diplomatic work for the US.    The only thing that was a bit abnormal was the degree of horse-trading that went on in providing concessions on recognizing Morocco's claim to Western Sahara.  This is really classical diplomacy so it's not that strange, but it is a bit unusual for the US to make a decision in recent years that ignores the conflict settlement and takes a strong side on a border dispute.
It is unusual for the Speaker to get that involved in executive affairs.  I believe the importance in this particular instance is a bit overblown.  To me this incident was more of the Speaker signalling general concern over a specific threat.   Nuclear security was not really a big threat made by Trump, and Trump was not one to do things without warnings and bluster beforehand. The concern was made in Trump using offensive nuclear weapons to start a war, but that goes against his general pattern of events (and bragging about not starting wars).  A bigger concern would have been a failure to respond to the unlikely need for a defensive nuclear retaliation in the event of a surprise attack on the US or allies (with a particular emphasis on the latter).
The situation of the Capitol attack is the only thing really unusual here.  Military leaders acted in line with expectations of their mission.  The importance is that this statement made it clear that top military officials remained loyal to the Constitution not the the person in power.
I said mostly abnormal, because it seems par for the course with the My Pillow guy.  Having a pillow mogul trying to give advice to the President is a bit strange though.    Although Trump gets lots of ideas and inspiration from his visitors, this never seemed like something that was going to go anywhere.  The photo of the notepad was probably leaked intentionally to fire up supporters a bit.
A president incites a mob to storm the Capitol while votes were being certified?  The horrendous nature of the event and the evil behind it speaks for itself.
This is the action of a petty wanna-be dictator poisoning the electoral system to undercut the integrity of the election.
This, like the other actions raised here, was an attempt by Trump to overthrow the election and have himself installed as president despite the valid outcome.
It shows an total disregard and contempt for the democratic process.  The attorney generals knew better, but were servile to an authoritarian leader.
It is not normal for an out-going president to miss the inauguration of the incoming one, but Trump is not normal.  His absence is was necessary for the event to occur smoothly and, otherwise, normally.
Is it normal to impeach a president twice--much less once?  Of course not.  But it was essential given the horrible actions committed by Trump.
it was just one of many stunts played by Trump to undercut Biden and to attempt to leave his legacy--albeit a horrible one--on government.
The fact that such a statement had to be issued in the first place indicates a sickness with the democracy the authoritarians to which the statement was directed.
Co-conspirators in the overthrow of democracy.
Unclear if this was dissatisfaction or trying to duck participating in the 25th amendment.
Democracy requires the loser's consent.  Trump failed this test.
She had no choice; Trump was and is dangerous.
Another approach to over-throwing democracy.
I would like more emphasis on violence and polarization.
Given the broader context of the Trump administration's attacks on dissent and democracy, the monument seems like a public relations stunt.
American political development and the Federal Reserve
I don't think this is essential. I could imagine a country where it's just not a tradition for outgoing administrations to attend the inauguration of the incoming one. But it is highly unusual in the U.S. context, given the tradition and the fact that, whatever else one may say about the limits of U.S. democracy, the peaceful transition of power is a long-standing tradition.
Constitutionalism/law, race and ethnic inequality, crime and punishment
Law enforcers in state directly undermining Constitution -- few things are as bad as this.
Normal because it reinforces norm that this is bad behavor
abnormal because you would not think a social media company would feel compelled to do this to POTUS
US elections, political parties, campaign finance
Big bill, bit should be business as usual during an economic crisis.
It's mostly unimportant because it's a symbolic gesture highlighting a non-controversial event.
To be clear, the condemnation is normal, not the invasion.
When a criminal runs the police, the result is impunity.
It wold be normal except for Trump doing it, as he has been a sexual predator.
Needed to correct abnormal Trump decisions Important becau0ue the issues were important.
re: earlier Q: I tagged don't know on interference with agency info because Trump did and I think Biden does not.
environmental sustainablity, walkable neighborhoods, transportation pricing reform California politics
I like the pithy and accurate phraseology for the various issues.
Better that he wasn't there given all the preceding drama.
state and local, movements, religion and politics
If the military gets involved in an election, they could also take over government. I do not believe that the military should be involved with elections unless its to keep the peace.
This is very abnormal, but it's important because Trump was unwilling to transition power. It is not likely that he would have done anything with the nuclear codes, but I do not trust him period.
You've got a problem with the survey on these events, and this question reveals it most clearly. You ask if the the Secs of Defense coming out and saying the military has no role in the election dispute. This is "normal" in the sense that in democracies the military should not resolve election disputes. It is "abnormal" in the sense that the Secs of Defense should not have to come out and say this publicly. Yet there is no way for you to distinguish what your respondent means by their choice. The same was true of a few other similar questions.
Again, more reason to impeach Trump for his overreach and unconstitutional behavior. Looking for these votes and pressing Georgia officials about this is illegal.
Each person needs to be tried and charged for treason.
Trump needs to be impeached for his seditious attack on the capitol on jan. 6th.
Race and Ethnicity Politics; Political Behavior; Elections
Not earth shattering, but because of how rare Congress bucked Trump, somewhat significant.
Ceremonial and stupid, but funny in that it calls attentions to all Trump's corrupt pardons.
Signifies a lack of the rule of law; one system of justice for Trump's friends, another system for all others.
Symbolic, but also indicative of the Secretaries cowardice in avoiding the invocation of the 25th Amendment.
Symbolic and ceremonial, but signifies a peaceful transfer of power,
This is not the sign of a healthy democracy.
It's important to commemorate women's suffrage, but the cognitive dissonance of the pussy grabber in chief authorizing it is jarring and insincere.
That the military needed to say anything on this topic is alarming.
It is terrifying that this issue required clarification.
Much of this event's abnormality stems from how quickly these orders were signed, not that an incoming president repealed the policies of the outgoing one.
The decision to deplatform President Trump is appropriate, but it is disconcerting that private businesses have the control to withdraw an individual's access to the "public square."
Should be "important" -- I don't ever recall a mass resignation of Cabinet secretaries over presidential action in my lifetime. But the media and population barely shrugged.
Never before in US history has a President been impeached twice.  Not merely "abnormal" -- historic.
A shocking rejection of the rule of law.
One wishes that it didn't have to happen.
Feed the big defeense companies. Critical to re-election
Highly unusual. Why didn't the governor intervene?
Remarkable achievement during tumultous times
We still have a Congress. Last I checked the Democrats had both houses
Your questions about strategies are not strategies, they are policies
DJT was engaging in a crime and attempting a coup.
It reveals their fear that DJT would try to use the military in his unfolding coup attempt.
It was an attempted coup in contravention of constitution, law, and democratic principles.
Direct effort to undermine democratic election.
It reflects their attempt to evade a 25th Amendment role and/or protect their images from being further tarnished by Trump.
That it was necessary suggests how unstable the President was judged to be. A person with such power over others should be mentally healthy.
Thank you for your continued surveys. Very informative.
I did not answer the questions on the quality of democracy in US states because I do not feel qualified to assess.
Worst active attack on institutions of the American government by its own citizens since the Civil War.
It is one of the largest numbers of votes in support for a position that is both incredibly important and utterly without any basis in fact. It is not shocking and not terribly surprising.
Its only important because it points to a much deeper lack of respect for norms. The My Pillow founder himself is largely irrelevant.
Veto overrides are rare, and generally signal a president willing to defy strong bipartisan sentiment. In this case, Trump's commitment to a racist policy (confederate names) was designed to rile his base, rather than produce policy.
There really is no precedent; this is more than half the House GOP, supporting election objections that were patently invalid.
Presidential administrations put pressure on public officials all the time, but in the context of an election where the incumbent has lost, this is a clear abuse of executive power.
That a set of AGs would support this completely specious and dangerous case suggests that a huge chunk of the GOP -- even the establishment GOP -- would be willing to support the overturning of a democratic election.
The peaceful transfer of power is central to democracy. Trump's failure to observe a norm that has been honored for more than a century was a huge blow to American democracy.
It probably should be more normal, but these companies have been hugely solicitous of political conservatives, fearing backlash and (rightly) worrying about becoming speech police on their platforms.
National political institutions and public policies
Although objections by House Reps are not unheard of, these particular objections were categorically different and the proportion of the party caucus objecting makes this event completely different than previous instances.
Congress and the Senate can jointly override any presidential veto on any bill.  Usually, military bills are not vetoed, which makes Trump's veto unusual.
Given the Georgia recounts, no electoral fraud was found.  Firing a US Attorney for refusing to give credence to unsubstantiated allegations of fraud is unusual.
Presidential pardoning of a turkey is a nice tradition, but does not affect the essential functioning of democratic institutions.
The safety of US Congresspersons is of the utmost importance.  Usually, politics does not descend to threatening family members.
Never before has a US president been impeached twice.  Being impeached twice indicates a president who has little regard for the law.
The US military leaders stood by the democratic tradition of the country.  The US public expects the military to abide by the Constitution.
Martial law is to be used only in emergencies and not for the president's personal political gain.
To deplatform the US president is unusual, but given the circumstances, necessary.  A US president can use social media to incite his/her followers, so social media companies have to be on the watch for this.
It is appalling that this occurred.  Peaceful protests are one thing, but violence, open insurrection, violating the peoples' houses, threatening members of Congress...these are horrible.  The Capitol Police were underprepared.  And Donald Trump incited his followers to commit violent, criminal acts.  Everyone involved who broke the law should face consequences, including any members of Congress that are proven to have been involved.
States' Attorney Generals took an oath to uphold the laws of the land.  This is appalling.  They should all be fired as there has been no proof presented that elections or ballots were fraudulent or tampered with.
Most of the cabinet members who resigned did it at the last minute, so it is pretty meaningless.
Again, the fact that this needs to be said is a troubling sign for U.S. institutions.
The most consequential thing that has happened in U.S. politics in the last 50 years? A cause and a symptom of deep partisan loathing, and the Republican party becoming a full-on extremist party.
This is a huge deal, but still only third craziest thing that's happened in the past year. Ughh.
This is a big deal for two reasons. 1) Social media companies are coming under increased scrutiny and reasoned that it was worth all the accompanying controversy to deplatform POTUS.   2) Most concerning is that POTUS WAS SAYING ENOUGH CRAZY STUFF TO VIOLATE SEVERAL SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES TERMS & SERVICE TO SUCH A DEGREE TO GET DEPLATFORMED (YES, CAPS LOCK WAS INTENTIONAL HERE).
Political Violence and Political Psychology
I think it might interesting to add questions about what steps other experts think should be taken to deal with the fact that a large part of the GOP--both the base and it's political representatives--are increasingly illiberal and anti-democratic.
There is normally not a need for such a stimulus, but it is normal for a president to sign such a bill when necessary.
That this statement ever needed to be made is a tragedy by itself.  I am glad they made the statement, though.
This should be prosecuted as a crime (election fraud)
I don't think he was welcome in the first place, but he is an aberration in this regard (first since A. Johnson)
Obviously important since the bill otherwise would not have gone into effect. But that it happened by override is unimportant.
Loaded formulation by calling them "insurrectionists". Suspect they would call themselves "protestors".  It became important because the partisans and media made it so.
Posturing by GOP, had no real effect on anything.
Red meat for the base since Dems know the Senate will not convict.
Dangerous for democracy for a small number of platform monopolies can choke off speech like this.
It is important because of the symbolic signal it sends to the losing candidate's supporters.
Some of the single events were hard to rate, because the current threat is composed of many events that, on their own, do not really pose a threat to democracy in the strict sense. I.e. if X was the only untoward thing that happened during an entire presidential administration, things would be mostly fine. But seventeen things like X happened in the space of two weeks, and that is problematic. This additive nature is hard to express in a survey like this, because it's hard to know how to add up seventeen "mild" threats - is that one big mild threat or does it become a severe threat?
These sorts of statements indicate that a coup is unlikely, and that the military respects civilian power and control and the Constitution.
This is a tricky question that depends on how one sees the legitimacy of election claims. For me, when a lot of people have concerns about the legitimacy of the vote, and public officials decline to investigate, then they are not doing their jobs, and are rightly removed from their positions. BUT, again, this all depends on how you see the matter of election fraud. I don't like how this question contains a sub-rosa/implied question about whenter I think there actually was election fraud. Is it legitimate to fire someone who isn't doing their job? Yes. Was there election fraud in the 2020 presidential election? I have no way of knowing this. Did the White House abuse its power here? Most definitely. But, US presidents have been abusing executive authority for decades now, so this is now "normalized".
This is normal for the US. US politicians--given electoral politics and corporate pressure--need to stay popular, not matter whether they're right or not. Trump is poison for politicians with a political future. This is normal for the US, but a serious problem for democracy.
The media is holding onto Trump because he sells advertising and subscriptions. They can't make money these days without him.
Fear and ambition and greed drive US politics. This is disastrous for democracy. While in the past, ambition and greed were common motivators, the addition of relatively widespread fear for physical safety is relatively new in the US context, for politicians on both sides of the aisle. Seems many Democratic politicians are scared too, alongside GOP counterparts.
More executive orders than anyone else, ever, in the opening weeks of their first term as president. I think using executive orders to sidestep Congress is a huge problem, but not unique to Biden. That said, he's certainly taking this farther than his predecessors.
People say stupid stuff about politics all the time, so this is normal. What's interesting and important are other things about this story: a. that news of this guy's political views travelled so fast and far (thanks, social media); b. that anyone actually cares what the My Pillow CEO thinks about politics; c. that our public officials and Tech Titans care so much that they censor him. Saw a great comment online about this: "You know the established powers are weak and trembling when they care about and go after this guy." I agree with this sentiment. Going after the My Pillow CEO is a transparent attempt at social discipline, a warning to others to remain quiet. I think that bad political speech should be met with more speech, not censorship.
I feel that you should have people with a variety of political viewpoints and perspectives review and edit your survey questions. I'm an unaffiliated voter, and subscribe to a complex and nontraditional set of political ideologies, I found your questions to be loaded ones. I also found that many of them begged the question that they were trying to ask.
Demonstrates disrespect for normative behaviors in a "civilized society" with distinct norms and behaviors.
Implies cult nature of last administration.
The complete lack of accountability for the presidential pardon power invites abuse.
I say normal in reference to the military being independent from politics, not that the capitol invasion was normal. It is sad that the military felt the need to express this, but not abnormal that they remained independent.
This is an awkwardly formed prompt. What happened was abnormal, but conditional on a violent invasion of the Capitol, condemnation by top military leaders strikes me as appropriate and expected.
It is important because these men felt they needed to make this statement.
It's not totally abnormal because this kind of apalling behavior has come to characterize the GOP.  How low will they go?
Guard rails of democracy under pressure.
Morocco is not a front line state that opposes Israel so while this is significant it is not as significant as the Trump administration has claimed.
Abnormal because they have not had to do this in the past!
Appalling but necessary The beginning, I hope, of social media firms submitting to existing norms that have not yet been applied to them.
Last time around, I could not bear to fill it out because of Trump on a rampage.
It's totally normal to have a range of lunatic conspiracy theorists trying to make inroads in government. The abnormal part is that the White House invited this person in and may have entertained his ridiculous proposal.
I wish the US was less invested in everything Israel.
Not sure it can get more important than that - having a major political party deny the democratic election of a member of the opposing party.
Abnormal in that why in the name of all that is holy does a man who's company is called "My Pillow" have any influence whatsoever with a president of the United States.
Normal to issue pardons; abnormal to pardon so many people who committed serious political crimes for his own political benefit.
Trump's overall behavior toward the transfer of power has been very important but attending the ceremony was a minor part of it.
hard to rate; a healthy response conditional on the abnormal circumstances
Again, what was abnormal was the riot. I would hope that the "normal" aftermath would involve Cabinet resignations (which are an important signal of how unacceptable such a riot was as well as an acknowledgement of the 45th President's role in inciting the riot.
This was more important than it would otherwise have been because Donald called the election results into question.
Trump was the president, like it or not, and there are prescribed processes for removing presidential power from the person holding that office. This was not one of those processes.
What's abnormal is the politically motivated invasion itself. If such an event were to happen 1,000 times, though, I would hope and expect such a joint statement to be "normal."
It's just a custom, but it is one that he broke going back over 150 years.  That said, his presence would have been unwelcome anyway.
What Trump can do by E.O., Biden can undo the same way.   But in the long-run passing laws in Congress is better.
These companies are non-government entities. They have that freedom.
The presence of the objections is not in and of itself outside the range of normal behavior. If the question were asking about the basis of these objections on false claims of election fraud and the continuation of objections immediately after an attack on Congress, I would move the rating to abnormal.
Pardons are normal as an action, pardoning people based on personal ties is abnormal.
It is the need to comment on a violent invasion of the Capitol that I find abnormal, although JCS releasing such a statement is not particularly normal. I rated this mostly important because while I do not think it will have a lasting change on policy, I do think it had dramatic short-term consequences in terms of responding to the attack, limiting ongoing challenges to the election results, and preparing for the inauguration.
Again bizarre that there should even be a need for this
Desecration of the pardon power - pardoning friends or those who might have helped commit criminal acts
Total politicization of a a government lawyer job to protect the interests of the state residents
I mean in one sense it has not been done before, but on the other hand it was used to reverse actions by the prior administration
I mean abnormal in the sense that this should never have to happen. The need for the military to issue such a statement is insane
I believe it to be bordering on treason.
You may have some challenges interpreting the meaning of people's responses to some of these measures - e.g., whether respondents consider "normal" to be "usual" or "acceptable." I know you've defined these terms in the study, but we respondents are an independent lot.
Needing an override for the military spending bill is abnormal but that it was overriden isn't that abnormal as military funding is rarely an issue.
It's important because it's needed, but generally these kinds of bills get worked out and passed.
The gesture of attending the inauguration is important, but not as important as the previous administration dragging their feet on the actual transition process.
It's pretty normal as we have tons of monuments to all kinds of things.
It's pretty normal for a new president to work to undo the legacy of a president of a different party.
It's abnormal because it's rarely happened before, even when accounts violate the terms of service.  Whether it's important or not depends on whether the bans get reversed.
A bad call by Trump. He should have known after four years in office that Congress doesn't like presidents to mess with military spending the way he tried to.
What to say? Of course it is not normal, and esp. not for the president to call "protesters" to D.C. and urge them to go to the Capitol on the very day that Electoral College votes are being tabulated. I applaud the efforts by the FBI and other law enforcement to identify and arrest those who broke into the Capitol that day. And I hope during the second impeachment trial that the blame is laid squarely on Trump and his supporters who tried to overturn the election that he so very clearly lost by a landslide.
Time will tell how important the peace agreement is. I doubt that this signals lasting peace in the Middle East. Next time, under Biden, let the professionals handle foreign policy.,
Too little and too late. In the larger picture, not all that important.
One of the most important and poorly covered actions of Trump's last few months in office. Consistent with his view of independent professionals in the federal work force, but still way out of line. And it wasn't just budget analysts.
Trump's actions in so many areas, from environmental protection to labor relations did not reflect the public's views or interests. His actions deserved to be overturned quickly. I would prefer that major policy shifts be made through the legislative process, but these days that just isn't possible, and certainly not with the speed of action of executive orders.
The insurrection is a signal event, and it was important for the military to quckly disavow the actions that took place, particularly when Trump loyalists kept the National Guard troops from being sent swiftly to protect the Capitol.
Trump grossly abused his access to social media and fostered disinformation campaigns. He deserved what he got, and social media companies need to do the same to others, left or right, who regularly circulate such disinformation. The impact on the nation is grave.
Public policy, environmental policy and politics
Glad you are continuing to do it. How about more focus next time on H.R. 1 and S. 1 to try to ensure American democracy through elections going forward.
The restriction that required a waiver is there for a reason: to maximize civilian control over the military. That the restriction was waived in both the Trump and Biden administrations is not good news for the principle underlying the restriction.
This was a very important positive development. It is "mostly abnormal" because the Trump administration has not been noted for the quality of its diplomacy.
We live in perilous times, and it is completely believable that there would be violence against members of Congress of both parties who took actions to anger a segment of the population. I do not doubt that there were Republican members of Congress who were concerned for their safety and the safety of their families if they voted for impeachment. There are extremes associated with both the left and the right that would take violent action under the right circumstances.
Trump was ill-suited to be President of the United States, but the first impeachment was shaky from the beginning. This second impeachment is based on the argument that Trump incited the attack on the U.S. Capitol, which is a much more serious action warranting condemnation. Trump was, in my view, at least partly (largely?) responsible for the attack on the Capitol. Had this occurred earlier in his term, impeachment would be an extremely important issue.
The MyPillow guy is not a serious political actor, and his comment did not cause me to worry that we would see martial law imposed. But it is very disturbing that a U.S. citizen would call for the imposition of martial law over an election results.
This action is becoming increasingly normal, and it raises huge questions about free expression rights in the U.S. Of course social media companies are not covered by the First Amendment, since they are not government entities, but they do represent a major platform for expression.
Public opinion, political behavior, legislative politics, public policy
Political maneuvering that parties have done for the past decades
Especially after being primed with those earlier questions on freedom of expression in a democracy
Comparative Political Economy/Public Policy of OECD democracies
This has been one of the most stunning events of my lifetime. I never imagined this would happen.
Too little, too late. What a joke these cowards are.
If he had owned up to his defeat in the election, it would have been better for the country if he had attended. Absent a clear, unequivocal concession admitting defeat in the election, however, it was better for everyone he was not there. Much better that the country could just experience the joy of a new president being inaugurated, without the former president's toxic presence.
They should have done this long ago. Social media companies were violating *their own rules* by allowing what they allowed him to do on their platforms.
Legacies of authoritarianism in new democracies; Latin America
Abnormal that such a statement has to be made.
Abnormal that such an event would take place.
The president must respect the outcomes of elections, as must all political officials and all citizens. This is an example of an egregious abuse of presidential influence.
Those who stormed the Capitol and those who support them believe, on the basis of no evidence, that the presidential election was decided fraudulently. They have raised no objections to elections of members of congress or local office and regard their members of congress as legitimately elected, which suggests cognitive dissonance on a grand scale.
These members of Congress are objecting to the peaceful transfer of power according to free, fair, and non-fraudulent elections.
In an effort to ensure civilian control over the military, Congress requires the executive to obtain a waiver for nominees to the position of Secretary of Defense who are within seven years of active duty. I do not think that even a seven-year hiatus from active duty is sufficient to ensure sufficient "civilianness" for the Secretary position; upon retirement, a career military officer becomes a civilian only in name.
I characterize impeachment #2 as normal because it is an activity that falls within Congress's congressional powers. It is unusual, but it is constitutionally sanctioned.
This is important for two main reasons: the statement affirmed the military's support of civilian rule in a context that many were considering to be a coup, and it sent a clear message of disapproval to former soldiers who participated in the revolt.
Congress was using the procedures at its disposal to ensure legislation gets passed. I rated it borderline normal because like many events, this should have been pro forma and turned contentious.
While important that they came down on the "right" side of this question, the defense secretaries advocated for and pursued policies that were politicized and weaponized by the GoP over the past twenty years. You break it, you buy it.
I don't even know what to say. The fact that the capitol police held the door open for insurrectionists to leave, and that multiple agencies either ignored or withheld intelligence about the impending risk of mass insurrection is just gobsmackingly problematic.
Again, at a loss for words. The reprisals for people doing their jobs - especially members of the Republican party - and the 11th hour replacements in the DoD and intelligence communities especially, are so profoundly troubling.
It just fans the flames for the wingnuts who believe the election was stolen.
The GoP has lost control of the mob it created. The people distancing themselves from the Qanon followers have been more than happy to benefit from their votes, all the way back to the creation of the Tea Party Patriots. It's completely disingenuous for them to disavow the violent extremists now after having reaped the rewards of the escalating political divisions over the past twenty years.
What's amazing is that anyone voted against the impeachment.
This is emblematic of the general decline in expertise and trust in experts.
It's profound to see the state of affairs in the U.S. quantified in a poll like this.
Th abnormality is not their condemnation, per se, but that the military would issue a statement on such an event in the first place.
Political parties and political behavior; religion and politics
I am glad that they made this statement.  But, it is not normal in a functioning democracy.  Indeed, it is a sign that our democracy is in distress.
Use of executive orders, for good or ill, is becoming more common
Typical diplomacy, not that important in terms of Middle East politics.
Role of fear of violence in elite decision-making
Military leaders do not comment on domestic events normally; important because it shows that military cannot be mobilized for domestic political purposes.
This sort of use for the pardon power delegitimizes the Presidency
Civilian control of the military is a bedrock principle of American democracy- but Presidents should be allowed to pick their own Cabinets. This probably balances out if it is rare- and it is probably preferable to having some garden variety Republican, which seems to have been the practice with Democratic Presidents going back a while
When a government is so broken that top-level administrators feel that they cannot perform their jobs something is badly wrong
It is usually good when the US is a leader on diplomatic issues
Encouraging insurrection is bad. Also, I've heard those pillows are terrible
On-line platforms are private, and should have standards. When those standards are violated the social media is within their rights to kick people off. Nobody has a right to Twitter
Presidents have pardoned some persons that may be high profile, or even known to them, but pardoning those convicted in the presidents own crimes is outrageous.
They SHOULD resign after such an event prompted by the administration in which they serve (which would be 'normal'), but the whole thing is abnormal, unprecedented and imagined.
Damage done by EO can be undone most quickly by EO
US cabinet officials rarely resign out of principle, but it was only 2 weeks before the end, so mostly meaningless.
A strong indication of the degradation of the current Republican party.
Their actions were relatively trivial (given the timing of their response and their previous lack of response)...   but they were an indication of something far more important.
Graceless and indicative of Trump's basic lack of commitment to Democratic norms.
It is important because most reverse or revise undemocratic actions
My Pillow CEO is a marginal character, at best... ... it is important as an indicator of Trump's erratic temperament.
Public Policy (health and envrionment);   state politics;
Interesting...    especially in contemplating how to formulate a survey about these events...   and what meaning to attach to the results... Would want a bit more about the ideological and partisan leanings of the respondents.
State politics, public law, parties and elections
I think in some important ways y'all continue to fine tune and improve in ways that get closer to important matters. There still seems to me an inherently liberal--note the small "l"--bias that for some of us on the "extremes" (at least in the US context; in the frozen tundra of Northern Europe I'd be right at home, lol; small town Texas, not so much) is kind of problemtaic. I'd love to see y'all dive a little deeper into what constitues democracy pratcically and theoretically as well as small "d" democratic behavior. What does it mean to lead or have a democratic life? Thanks for reading.
Democratic Transitions  / Civic engagement / social movements & outgroups
It is normal, but bad. The military should be run by civilians, not recently decommissioned officers or defense contractors.
It might have been constructed if it had been done without corrupt motivations and consequences.
Civil service protections were a hard-won reform to insulate many public employees from influence by elected officials.  Corrupt politicians like Trump, McConnell, DeSantis can't govern the way they want if there's a protected civil service.
Thank you for doing it.  Please don't stop.
Very hard to answer normal/abnormal. If officials are opposed to some action of their president, it is "normal" for them to resign. But these are just extraordinary circumstances that compelled the resignations.
Politics of identity, political violence, democratic struggles, Middle Eastern politics
Always happy to participate in your surveys, which are great service to our discipline and broader community in these perilous times.
Abnormal but appropriate. Conviction by the Senate would also be abnormal but appropriate.
Clear violation of law and ethical standards of government.
Congressional independence of the executive is important to US constitutional system.
Civilian control of military is essential to democracy.
Need to undo abuses and misguided actions by previous prez.
Appropriate reassurance from military that civil order is important to national security.  Sadly needed in this case.
Of more immediate relevance than most previous surveys.
Public opinion & elections -- partisanship, ideology, violence
All of the election stuff is abnormal but the SecDefs aren't all that important.
It is abnormal because we are in abnormal times but normal for government to try to respond to abnormal times. It is too small to be very important.
Election results are nothing to fuck with.
The Capitol Riot is very abnormal but those secretaries had very little time left in office and probably could have done more to stand up to Trump.
It is very abnormal but not that important because their votes would not have been pivotal.
This is a strange encroachment on separation of powers. If Trump cannot be entrusted as Commander-in-Chief, then he should just be removed using one of the constitutional provisions for doing so.
This is abnormal but a good and important check against misinformation.
It is very, very difficult to think about which state governments, beyond my own, are more or less democratic. I chose GA and WI as less democratic because of recent and salient attempts to restrict voting rights, but other states would be worse.
Finally, the GOP exhibits some integrity.
Again, mob-style behavior unsuited to a real president.
It’s probably the only one who deserved it!
Trump simply can’t accept losing.  We have to remember that Trump feels very profoundly he is more important than the truth.
Fascist climate of fear established by Trump and his domestic terrorist allies.
It takes New-Deal style action to correct for all the malfeasance of Trump's four years.
Law and policy, emphasis on the environment
quantitative studies of elections and partisanship
The Democrats have now established a precedent for treating the impeachment process as wholly political.  I hope that it comes back to bite them in their collective asses.
moral, legal, political philosophy, history of political thought
Now that the illiberal left is in control of all of the major national institutions of the country, will you continue to ask questions about the connection between an imperial presidency and democracy or will you accept that the election of a senile buffoon as the president is an emblem of democratic greatness?
Vitally important and a direct challenge to the constitutional system of checks and balances on power.
Democarcy is about peaceful transition of power and accepting losses rather than manipulating incumbency to remain in power. Similar to Nixon's firing of special counsel.
Clear effort to deny the constitutional requirements of losing power after losing elections and strong-arm officials into engaging in treasonous acts.
So clearly unconstitutional that it raises the question of why it was done at all.
Undermines the democratic  institution of peaceful power transitions
Unprecedented in my lifetime to have such serious concerns about competency of POTUS that the Speaker of the House needs to take such a step. Unclear if any such instruction from the Speaker to resrtict CINC's military and foreign policy authority would be constitutional.
Vitally important for an institution viewed as apolitical and popular to reinforce that it is not a tool of tyrants and that it supports the electoral process and peaceful transfer of power.
Under the circumstances it was normal in spite of the large amount of money involved.
This depends on whether one thinks they were acting on the basis of principle versus simply trying to avoid their association with these events damaging their reputations. In either case, it is not normal, but what one thinks of their actions can depend on this distinction.
Well, normally this would have been done by Congressional action, but most of these reversed Trump's executive orders when he could not get Congressional support for controversial actions.
This depends on whether one thinks Pelosi's actins were not normal because they were inappropriate, versus whether Trump's behavior required the Speaker of the House to do something that is not at all normal, but was essential in this situation.
The insurrection was not at all normal, so the action was unprecedented, but what one would normally expect from the DOD/JCS leaders in the face of such an attack on US institutions.
Well, this was absolutely crazy but it was mostly unimportant because even Trump didn't follow-up on this advice in spite of many other abnormal actions on his part to overturn the election outcome. If he had followed up it would have been a major anti-democratic action unprecedented in US history.
A few of the questions were a bit ambiguous about which part was to be considered normal or abnormal, especially when they involve normal (or at least reasonable) responses to very abnormal or downright crazy actions that present very real threats to democracy.
Overriding a veto is a power Congress has, and has used many times before.
The threat of violence was clear at the January 6 event, and the demonstrators clearly wanted to overthrow the will of the majority of American voters.
Not the first and not the last stimulus bill.
The president has full authority to issue pardons, but he is not usually pardoning friends, former colleagues, and family members.
This is odd behavior by state AGs; the important thing about it is that the court system worked as it was supposed to.
Whether this is important depends on if we are setting a trend to move away from civilian oversight of the military. It's too soon to tell.
Congress members should not feel pressured to vote a certain way out of concern for their lives or those of their families. They were elected to represent their district or state, and should be free to do so.
veto overrides are rare in any presidency, and thus are always somewhat abnormal
Some of my answers turned on the wording of questions. For example, I moderately support term limits for SCOTUS justices, but think that such a change could not be carried out through federal legislation (as the question specified), but would require a constitutional amendment. Similarly, I support making election day a federal holiday, but oppose having it overlap with Veterans' Day, for fear that it would overshadow the appropriate recognition of veterans.
Shows sitting president committing a felony and attempting to subvert the results of an election that he lost. Shows an effort to illegally maintain power.
Evidence of states attempting to invalidate election results because they did not like the results as part of a broader conspiracy to keep Republicans in power illegally.
Civilian control of the military is essential, though Secretary Austin seems to be a good pick given his desire to get rid of white supremacist terrorists from the military's ranks.
This is evidence of the effects of political violence, specifically an armed insurrection, which is dangerous for democracy.
While it may seem like ruling by executive order is undemocratic, considering the severe democratic backsliding the regime experienced under Trump, these moves were absolutely necessary to begin to rebuild the US's democratic regime.
This has become an unfortunate but increasingly normal practice.
It shouldn’t have been necessary but it was.
Deplatforming was a necessary but potentially dangerous action.
Abnormal but not necessarily bad for democracy
Unimportant unless he has influence on the president.
Normal function of government to engage in public spending (including emergency spending) and important for the country and role of the state in society. Abnormal perhaps was the politicking that went on by the President to delay the stimulus given the importance for the goals (stimulus).
Borderline normal in that it follows established rules; and upsets a long standing norm - so semi-important.
Resignation of cabinet members who no longer support the head of government is not by itself abnormal - but is borderline is the US. The circumstances behind the lose of confidence in the head of government (the riot a the Capitol) is totally abnormal.
Important in this context due to the need to signal a peaceful and broadly accepted transfer of power from government to opposition. Breaks with contemporary norms of American politics.
They are honoring their oaths and their consciences
Trump is sociopathically abnormal, and a degree of correction was on the horizon.
CYA behavior. Not protest. Merely evasion.
Pence stepped up to his Constitutional duty (aside from ignoring 25th amendment previously).
Congress did its constitutional duty. Senate with an exception defected from its duty to date. No one got executed, which is best that can be said for democracy at this stage about that.
Mr Pillow has an unfortunate past, as do many citizens. Trump is pathological beyond belief. Citizens, however, had their say about him, unfortunately disregarding or defying Cassinelli's "rationality" assumption for democracy.
Crying fire in a crowded theater is an abuse of freedom.
Abnormal and problematic because signals dissent and weakens validity of election.
Symbolic waste of time that will allow elites to keep the Trump era cleavages in the news.
Banning a President from a medium of communication is clearly abnormal.
The responses above reflect the invasion of the Capitol and the need for military leaders to condemn it, as opposed to the leaders' condemnation itself.
The response above reflect the fact that a MyPillow founder could get this sort of access to the POTUS.
Public opinion, voting, religion & politics
Thanks for the important work you're doing.
I didn’t love any of these pardons but the president has this authority & a wide degree of latitude about how to use it
What happened four years before? If you don’t think this is an outcome driven by the Hamilton electors effort? You’re not reading this right. Didn’t like what trump did don’t like what his opponents did four years ago
The only person who should have resigned, Trump, of course lacked the dignity to do that. The Secretaries, just like VP Pence did, stood up for the system unlike their boss who incited a riot
Biden breaks norm by firing two people nobody had in four decades on his first day in office. Seems similar to me.
How come you didn’t ask what should be done about President Trump. It’s an interesting question.,
belief in free and fair elections are a bedrock of establishing and keeping a democracy. failure to acknowledge that the elections were fair undermines that belief.
That it took them this long is proof that they were more concerned about their own reputations than about democracy or about the fitness of the president.
undermines the integrity, professionalism, and independence of the civil service, who are there to serve the country, not necessarily the president. this act seeks to make them more dependent upon political appointees.
A strong message to active military that they should support the constitution and not any particular occupant of the white house
Under my copy of the Constitution, Congress includes the Senate (See Article 1, Section 1), so I am dismayed by the wording for this entry.   That said, passing the defense budget is one of the few things where some remnant of bipartisanship lingers, despite bitter fighting over its composition.  Trump's petty politics in this regard are somewhat unusual, but not a major departure from the increasingly imperial executive behavior we have seen over the past 20 years.
That we pay any attention to such an obvious declaration is perhaps abnormal, but I suspect we could find similar statements in prior years (we just paid them no mind).
This too reveals the extreme partisanship afflicting the US.  The certainty on both sides of the aisle that they alone are imbued with the "correct" ideology and have all the answers, and the willingness to demonize all who disagree leads to this.  The US education system which has abandoned efforts to instill a respect for free speech and instead embraced political correctness bears a major share of the blame.
This demonstrates the cancerous partisanship infecting the polity and the triumph of overt political self-interest over the national interest for our elected officials (highlighting the need for a constitutional amendment emplacing term limits for Senators and Representatives).
This level of spending, which followed a prior massive spending bill, is important in that it indicates an abandonment of fiscal discipline and a surrendering to a more socialist system in the US.   The fact that Trump signed it is of no significance as Trump lacks any coherent ideology and is motivated purely by perceived self-interest.
Had these resignations occurred when the Secretaries had more time left in office, it would have had greater impact.  The last-minute nature of the resignations diminished their impact.
If true and if applicable to a significant number of representatives (and these are two very big ifs), this is damning to the state of democracy.   However, given that I have not seen an exodus of Republicans from Congress - as one might expect if family safety was truly at issue - I am highly skeptical of this report.  I don't doubt a congressman said it; rather, I doubt the accuracy of his report.
Empirically, it is unprecedented, meaning it cannot be considered anything but abnormal.  Politically, it is important b/c it reveals both (1) the extraordinary level of partisanship afflicting the US today, and (2) the extraordinary (and outrageous) conduct of the former President, Donald Trump.
Given the degree of polarization in the country, it is not surprising most politicians, in this case Republicans, would go along with their President.
Presidential firings of U. S. attorneys for political reasons is not unprecedented, but in the context posed by the question it is abnormal.
An abuse of the pardon power, but it is plenary so from time to time abuses are to be expected.
The attempt of the President to overturn in election in this manner is unprecedented in US history, and an important as a threat to democratic elections
The request was so frivolous-as the Court's testy dismissal indicates- that it is abnormal but mostly unimportant.
Mostly  reflection on Trump's character, both personal and democratic, and therefore mostly unimportant.
Brokering the normalization of relations between the two countries is part of normal diplomacy. However, the concession offered to Morocco-recognition of its sovereignty over the disputed Sahara- is somewhat abnormal and makes the agreement only semi-important
Trump does not have personal, direct access to the codes; no President does There is a chain of command that runs through the Secretary of Defense, among others. Pelosi was aware or should have been aware of this, so this was mostly unimportant grandstanding on her part.
This survey is important and the results you publish are a great teaching tool
abnormal in that it is literally atypical, having only happened once before.
question about same-day & universal voter registration was double-barreled; had trouble distinguishing between scale points on the threat to democracy scale (e.g., what's the quantitative difference between "serious" and "grave"?)
What to say here? They ought to condemn it, but no, it's not normal to have to
I approve of it but there is no denying the whole situation is highly abnormal
This was important for some economic relief, and even if I might have problems with many of the provisions, a government providing economic relief and trying to fuel the economy during an economic crisis is very much normal
Cabinet secretaries resigning in response to a crisis or disagreements with the executive is normal, but there were countless other times these officials could have spoken up against Trump's anti-democratic rhetoric or behavior and they did not. Wolf was never legally in his position at DHS anyways, the administration just ignored legal rulings against him.
For a president who has trashed norms, this was not unexpected, but it is far less consequential than countless other things Trump did. It does, however, deepen partisan divides and make less graceful transfers of power potentially more likely in the future.
It's normal for governments to try to broker peace deals, but the Trump administration's policies with the so-called 'Abraham Accords' have primarily been in the interests of the Israeli government, not the US, and the Morocco accords included US recognition of Moroccan claims to sovereignty over Western Sahara, reversing a long-standing position and rejecting the international consensus. This damages US relations with Algeria, and also rewards colonialism (though of course the US still has its own colonies in the Caribbean and Pacific islands).
The cowardice of Republican members of Congress and unwillingness to challenge Trump is to be expected at this point, and while for some this may be a convenient excuse rather than an actual motivation, it is, unfortunately, quite plausible that extreme Trump supporters would engage in violence against 'disloyal' politicians or their families and homes.
The coverage of this was somewhat misleading, given that Pelosi asked about the possibilities and basically had the chain of command explained to her, but bad and Congress should make changes by legislation, not end runs using the military.
Military leaders issuing statements on domestic politics is not good, but in this case, especially given questions around National Guard deployment, worries about Trump advisers pushing him to declare martial law, issues with extremism in the military and veterans' involvement in the invasion, and invaders and their supporters' claims to support the military, this was important.
This is essentially an effort to shakedown an official who has acted in accordance with the law to operate illegally to commit an egregiously unlawful act, and that demand is coming from the individual with the highest level of political authority in the country.
One doesn't ordinarily get to see a full scale insurrection of this sort egged on by the President. I mean I lived through the 60s and early 70s in some of the hotspots of civil disobedience. But nothing like this event. And no president or, for that matter, any other politician was encouraging violent behavior or, in effect, sending a thank you note later to the insurrectionists after day and damage was done. To accept that this event or those who instigated it and enabled it is normal or should be accepted as normal is a genuine sign of how imperiled our constitutional republic has become.
It doesn't help that we have an absolutely insane and frequently undemocratic system for electing presidents that makes it an easy mark for corruption. In some cases where the popular vote is close in key states, there are real ambiguities. However, this was not such a case in 2020. Moreover, the case of illegal votes, must of necessity also invalidate the down ballot outcomes which were relatively favorable to Republicans. There is no way that one can avoid the obvious: namely, that this was a bad faith effort to corrupt the electoral system. It was a partnership, so to speak, between an aspiring dictator and ruthlessly ambitious enablers seeking the would-be dictator's blessings for their aspirations to become one themselves.
Presidents and AGs have previously put their hands on the scales of justice. The G. W. Bush administration got rid of a lot of U.S. attorneys for purely political reasons, though, to my knowledge, not because of a direct order to commit a fraudulent investigation. Trump was (is) in a league of his own. It was not only a worrisome sign that he came to power but that 75 million Americans wanted to return him to power. The man and his all too many enablers present a clear and present danger to sustaining liberal democratic government.
Well, of course, it is important to the turkeys involved! However, this is one of those purely ceremonial and symbolic occasions taken in fun before a national holiday.
It is clear that there is a detent between Arab countries outside of the Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian-Lebanese orbit and Israel. A sort of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Israel and Morocco were never really direct adversaries to begin with and are geographically some distance apart from one another. However, there was a UN resolution on Western Sahara that proclaimed it to be autonomous of Morocco which has been occupying it. Most UN resolutions are without teeth. (See the West Bank.) This is another one. But as part of the deal, the U.S. recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara. So, it was another of many signs of disrespect for international law, however fragile that is.
This is truly sui generis. There has to be a first time for everything I suppose. The second impeachment may imply several things: (1) the president being impeached is an utter scoundrel; (2) they didn't get it right the first time; (3) recent presidents have been getting impeached at an enormous clip or being threatened with it if we include Nixon; (4) there is stark political polarization and divided government which makes this route a go-to option; (5) Congress has not much else to do; (6) recent presidents have taken Frank Hague's dictum, "I am the law" seriously. (Hague was the mayor of Jersey City back in the 1930s). Any one or all of these might fit.
Requesting the exercise of martial law is very important. However, the person making the request has no authority at all. So, from that standpoint a request to do something utterly outrageous is coming from someone with no capacity to affect this demand.
Executive Politics -- Presidency and Bureaucracy
You may want to ask how likely the remedies you propose are.  I’m in favor of lots of them, but several look like magical thinking.
Probably the most important and abnormal event I've ever been asked about in these surveys.
Checks and balances and has to be bipartisan
This is a little more extreme than usual but getting rid of USAs is not unusual
Should attend, but if you are a thin-skinned baby..
Single moron, should not be given oxygen
Normally this particular piece of legislation doesn't advance so far without some agreement with the White House. It's significant insofar as I believe it's the only time Congress overrode a WH veto, and showed a modicum of resistance to the President's demands. Wasn't this also a situation where the President had a fit of pique and acted out, when in fact the bill had earlier been vetted by the WH?
So dumb, so cute. Even Trump couldn't corrupt this chestnut.
Abnormal in the number of rogues directly related to him among his pardons. Every president does a favor or two -- that's their prerogative. Nobody really exculpates everyone attached even remotely to federal investigations into their campaign and administration. Then again, most people don't have so many associates under federal investigation. Or convicted of crimes...
Not the *most* important thing, but a nonetheless significant symbol of a legitimate transfer of power. It would have arguably been even more impactful, as they say, this year given that the insurrection had been in his name.
Peace accords or friendship pacts or whatever are nice gestures, and I firmly believe in diplomatic relations between all states. That said, Morocco and Israel weren't really in a conflictual relationship, let alone a war, so it's not that big of a deal. In fact, in lowering the ambition from a regional agreement to bilateral compacts, the move somehow diminishes the United States as a power broker. Calling all of this the "Abraham Accords" is a real disservice to Abraham.
Unprecedented. Also, he's the only president who encouraged the violent disruption of a constitutionally-mandated meeting of Congress in order to overturn the election he unquestionably and objectively lost.
Ultimately nothing came of it and the guy's a clown so who really cares -- buffoons occasionally gain access. The scandal and abnormality here is that such buffoonery increasingly became the norm with Trump as even the semi-respectable coterie of competent advisors around him dissipated, leaving only schmucks like the MyPillow and Overstock.com guys.
His social media presence has been an organ of strife since before he began his campaign in 2016. It should have happened long ago.
Modern German and American Political Thought
Thanks again for all your work. I look forward to reading about the results.
It is a totally normal thing to say and an important principle for democracy. It is unusual that it needed to be said.
A symbolic act to destabilize and delegitimize an elected official conducted with no hope of success but seeking to gain media attention and enrage supporters. This had no purpose in strengthening the country, addressing a problem or using valid powers for a positive purpose. It was a media strategy.
It is a valid power of the president in regards to something he believed was lacking from a federal prosecutor.
Valid action of appointed officials to register displeasure with the president they are supposed to support. Mainly symbolic.
Valid power of the president to order the creation of a monument and this is a historic movement of importance. Determining what deserves a monument can be controversial but this seems to be something with broad support.
It is a valid power of the president but used in an invalid manner. It creates the incentive for subsequent presidents to use the same tactic increasingly over time. That only serves to destabilize government.
It is a valid use of a presidential power that has steadily increased as Congress has grown disfunctional. The next Republican president will immediately cast 25 executive orders to rollback Biden's EOs. It is unfortunate and destabalizing but valid.
Totally normal for the military to affirm its opposition to an attack on government. The event itself was abnormal.
Good example that something remains of checks and balances
The peaceful transfer of power based on free and fair elections is a hallmark of this country. For 147 Members of Congress to disavow this basic principle tells me that our country is doomed.
More crazy activities to undermine the election outcome
Speaks to ongoing efforts to undermine the rights of workers. Part of a bad pattern
We used to lock up people who espoused such dangerous ideas. Now they get invited to the White House, again and again.
I love it and am happy to see it continued.
The action is normal but what was sacrificed for the deal is certainly well outside the norm for this kind of deal-making. So, making the deal is normal, the contents of the deal are fairly abnormal.
direct, violent attempt to undermine democracy, encouraged by the president and his supporters who spread lie that the election had been stolen/was illegitimate.  Then President Trump praised the attackers after the fact and has never expressed any regret for what happened.
pretty shocking, even if no longer surprising.  Classic authoritarian tactic.
Terrorism is defined as violence or threat of violence intended to cause fear in order to achieve a political or social objective.  If a Republican member of Congress (or perhaps more than one?) was afraid to vote to impeach, that suggests to me that terrorism has been effective--which is, of course, appalling.
this is the kind of thing one would expect to happen as a matter of course in a normally functioning liberal democracy
Trump took some unilateral actions that undermined liberal democracy--for example, declaring a national emergency as a pretext to work around Congress.  Biden's order rescinding this emergency declaration helps to shore up liberal democracy.
if Pelosi was this worried about Trump illegitimately ordering a nuclear strike, only available tool would be impeachment and removal.
Glad you are doing this--danger continues even after election.  Jan. 6 assault on Capitol was stunning, even if not wholly surprising.  Failure to hold President Trump to account is very dangerous.  Concerned more violence could follow.
Trumpism has led to politicians promoting the person over the country - and the basis for their claims are completely fabricated.
This had been hashed out in Congress because the American people need help amid the pandemic. The politics of it are what they are in a divided country - the fact that he almost didn't sign it after his administration helped negotiate it would have been abnormal.
Let's be real - these people are scum and traitorous. However, presidents always pardon the folks that they work with. Not surprised by it - hopefully, the state courts will be able to follow through. Personally, I don't like the blanket-pardon power of the executive, but I am glad that he didn't try to use it on himself and create another Constitutional issue.
The rule is good to prevent people/special interests from exploiting the position and influence in theory. In practice, this happens on a daily basis. The policy is good, if ineffective. The waiver is appropriate to request an exemption to the policy.
Sadly, I believe it. trump has really tapped into a terrible element in our country who maintain a completely different idea about what America is about.
The former president had stopped performing his duties after he lost the election and began orchestrating an attack on Congress and his own VP using  his racist supporters. In the course of discussions about invoking the 25th (abnormal), talking about securing the arsenal is prudent. It is an important conversation to have about a potentially devastating deployment of WMDs (ostensibly to strike another country -Iran? - in the finals days of his ability to do something like that). However, there are additional safeguards and delays in place that it seems unlikely that it could have been done.
Corporate folks have always had the presidents' ear and there opinions weigh heavier than regular Americans because they can buy clout. What is abnormal is that the president seemed to be inclined to listening to this option. The agenda of a wealthy lunatic is worrisome because it was entertained not that it was proposed.
I don't think the current events teased out symbolic importance from functional importance.
state & local government, public policy, woman & politics
Representatives have a right and obligation to object to certification of votes if there is substantial evidence that certification was improper.  Here, every legal challenge to the validity of state certifications was dismissed.  Therefore the actions by Congressional Republicans were harmful to democracy.
Minor but positive foreign policy achievement.
The president's supporters--both those holding elected office and members of the mob--used and threatened to use violence against elected officials who voted to certify the election results.  The fact that the president and his supporters permitted and in some cases actively encouraged these threats of violence poses a severe danger for democracy.
Highly unusual; reflects extraordinary nature of threat to constitutional democracy posed by Trump.
That they condemned the violence is appropriate.  That they were in a situation where they needed to do so is highly abnormal.
Utterances by extremists are not unusual.  Trump's willingness to invite them to the White House is not normal--but in itself not as important as many other actions Trump took.
politics of economic inequality in US, Russia, China
Orderly transitions of power are essential in a democracy. So is a degree of respect for the truth.
I wonder whether the turkeys would have pardoned Trump...?
Important not just because it violates the principle of peaceful transitions, but also because it is part of the process of turning one of our two major parties into a batch of groveling worms...
I wouldn't object to the appointment based on the guy's qualifications, but it does bend the boundaries of civilian control of the military to a degree --
Amazing that those Cabinet members decided to join the ranks of the vertebrates, but the administration was within two weeks of leaving office anyway...
Somewhat abnormal because usually the military types don't need to do such things; absolutely important in terms of orderly transitions of power --
Mr. Pillow is the sort of person Trump takes seriously, because he says what the Don wants to hear. Its importance might be mitigated somewhat by the fact the the Pillow Guy's head contains the same stuff his pillows do.
Keep 'em coming, please -- this is an excellent project --
Congress is meant to have a say in spending AND war.
undermines free and fair election. completely unacceptable.
as before: undermines free and fair elections. puts party (and personal) interests over country and even over constitutional institutions and processes.
Bit of a empty offering, considering they ignored all sorts of other unacceptable behavior, but still something.
Something previous presidents haven't managed (whether Republican or Democrat). Impressive that a president who is so destructive at home can accomplish great tasks abroad. Shame he couldn't (or wouldn't) replicate that here.
Perhaps a matter of national security, but also a matter of blatant politicking. There was never a real threat that Trump would abuse that position and, according to reports Colin Powell and others, there was no way Trump could have unilaterally abused that position. I'm sure Pelosi knew that, and just snatched at the chance to play more partizan politics. poorly done.
flies in the face of constitutional institutions and processes. unacceptable.
It's censorship, albeit private. I disagree with Trump on so much, and am in favor of social media companies clearly regulating for disinformation, but to deplatform entirely is an extraordinary step that just foments more exclusion, tribalism and, in this case, makes Trump a martyr.
great survey. the last few questions would have been more accurate with a 5th (middle/neutral) option. For example, I'm neither opposed to, nor in favor of, felons having the vote. I would have voted "neutral" on that and one other question.
The condemnation is "normal," but the event precipitating the condemnation was not.
I presume both were male and he only pardoned the white meat
Empirical application of formal models of political processes
It's not normal for a Presidential veto on this bill, but it says nothing about democracy.
Stimulus bills are not normal, but they are normal during an economic crisis.
We should be weary of over-militarizing civilian leadership of the armed forces.
This is a normal response to such a break with democracy. It is crucial that enablers resign in protest to draw attention to the break (although some may stay to shape from within).
The acceptance of defeat is an important feature of democracy.
Democratization, civil-military relations, LGBT politics
The US is now appears to be an unstable democracy.
The US Constitution's credibility is under attack.
The former president thought he could run a nation like his personal business, ignoring the US Constitution.
It is important for the previous administration to acknowledge the legitimacy of the next administration, especially when it involves a political party shift.
This was a rare, but good foreign policy achievement that the next administration can build upon.
Speaker Pelosi did the right thing, but this necessity is abnormal in a stable democracy.
Trump's veto of the military spending bill was very abnormal; the override, in that context, normal.
The pro-Trump attack on the capitol was an effort to overthrow American democracy.  Had it succeeded, tyranny would have followed.
This vote shows that the Republican party has been radicalized.  A majority of Republicans now oppose democracy.  As a result our democracy hangs by a thread.  It will be destroyed if the Republican party wins another national election before its autocratic element has been tamed or purged.
It was kinda late to be taking a stand at that point.  I'm not even sure why these folks resigned.
Such things occur in authoritarian states, not in healthy democracies.
This was an act of arson against the American state.
US foreign policy, international security, causes of war
Judicial process and theories of justice
Shows the fragility in executive orders but also exposes the potential for massive swings in policy.
Social media companies are essentially governing themselves and giving platforms for many extremist groups without much consequence.
The last section was a tad misleading. It wasn't clear if the questions were asking about the act causing the listed behaviors, or the statement themselves being a threat to democracy. For example, it's good for democracy with SCOTUS throws away election fraud claims, but it's bad for democracy that they have to do so.
There is no rule of law when felons convicted of political offenses are pardoned by the president on whose behalf the crimes were committed
election fraud does happen (although not to any major extent in the 2020 election!) and in theory state AG's should act to protect the integrity of the vote
there is always a danger to civilian control of the military in having former military officials run the military
Cabinet secretaries resign from time to time
peaceful transition of power is a hallmark of democracy
I wish the scales went higher for this one
Highly undemocratic; undermines legitimacy of elections.
Resignations have more impact in rejecting bad behavior if they are done early in the bad behavior.  These secretaries has tolerated a lot of bad behavior without any reaction.
Private citizens are entitled to their opinions.  It's a bit concerning that the president would entertain such recommendations when public officials and experts were opposed to the idea.
Abnormal because of the riot.  Morally demanded because of the riot and how it was instigated.
This is what thuggery looks like.  The Brownshirts did this.  Call Leni Riefenstahl.
He was mostly fulfilling campaign promises, which is normal behavior for Presidents.
They were sending a signal to the troops and the officer corps that members of the military are legally bound to disobey illegal orders.  And, they were sending a signal to Acting SecDef Miller and the White House that the professional officer corps would not accede to a declaration of martial law as retired LG Flynn and Trump were contemplating at the time.
You should get some interesting results. :)
The invasion was highly abnormal, the statement was a... normal response to it, I guess? Point of the question was unclear...
A sign that the government can actually respond to a national crisis, although the fact that it was so difficult to make happen is problematic.
Hard to tell if they were just hoping to avoid weighing in on the 25th Amendment.
Symbolism matters, but after his behavior it would have been worse if he was there.
Violates the notion of an independent civil service - which is less about "democracy" and more about an effective functioning government.
If they had actually had to do it, that would matter more.
I guess it depends on how receptive Trump was to the argument.
Who knew these questions would feel so vital to us as a nation?
Legislative politics, gender, race, and ethnicity politics
Some of the questions were a bit unclear. For example, whether Trump's second impeachment is un-democratic was hard to answer, on one hand the fact that a president is impeached twice is serious and signals a potential threat to democracy, BUT the fact that the House is following through on accountability measures is a clear sign of a strong democracy...
Abnormal that they would need to make such a statement. Normal in sense that military is not playing a role in elections.
In the last section of the survey, you asked about making changes through federal legislations, such as imposing 18-year terms for U.S. Supreme Court justices. I would be more likely to support such things if the provisions were instead done through constitutional amendments. This is because the terms of SCOTUS justices are specified in Article III of the constitution already.
Not sure what important means.  Like for politics or for constitutional functioning of system
It's not abnormal to believe the statement, it's abnormal that they felt like they had to say it.
that they had to say this is what is abnormal and important, not the statement itself
The military has no place in political debates. We need to protect our country from military power.
It is outrageous to pardon people directly related to your own crimes.
I think it contributed to the norm violations that the riot was unacceptable. But they are no heroes.
It is a continuation of the politicization of facts.
As a Trump opponent, I am nonetheless deeply concerned about the role of social media in governing speech.
Only borderline normal because the number of executive orders set a record; but most were reversing Trump's executive actions.
Important due to the nature of the crisis.
This is extremely unusual and unacceptable behavior after elections, with no precedent.  The Attorneys General were not from these states, so it was an attempt to undermine the state sovereignty of other states.
This has become a pattern, but could diminish the civilian control of the military (the same was done with Jim Mattis in 2017, I believe)
Not unprecedented, but still problematic behavior that hurts the legitimacy of the president.
Highlights hyper-hyper partisanship, especially in the Republican party, and demonstrates how the tool of impeachment cannot effectively check the power of the Executive.
Presidents often sign many Executive Orders on their first day.  It shows that Executive orders can be easily reversed.
American Political Development and Public Law
It's very important, but also very tied to the particular administration.
It's difficult to assess yet how real this is.
I have chosen "mostly unimportant" because these secretaries resigned so close to the end of their terms. Had they registered dissent at an earlier stage, their resignations would have been more important politically.
Primarily public law, also political theory
Veto overrides are normal, but the details of this particular override and the fact that a president vetoed a military spending bill were a little odd.
There is so much abnormal and important packed into this particular event I’m not even sure where to start.
Only "mostly normal" because it was an extreme measure to meet an extreme situation. Hard to gauge the "importance" -- it was a matter of politics and policy, not democracy as such.
important only because of the significance Trump placed on private expressions of opinions by his supporters
Not entirely clear if the question is asking about the abnormality of the military leaders' condemnation (given the circumstances), or the abnormality of the circumstances that led to it.
"Insurrectionists" is a disputed description.  One should refrain from ideological claims in survey question wording.
If these were state legislators, they could investigate claims of irregularity and (arguably) select alternative electors.
Important, and alarming, as tech companies should not exercise so much control over national political discourse.
Avoid using disputed characterizations of events...
courts dismissed cases, so not that important.
standard change of administrations stuff.
The only thing "abnormal" about it was Trump's veto. This is because he never understood that the power of the veto is in the threat to veto, not the veto itself.
This is insurrection. This was an attempt to undo the results of an election with force. This will go down as one of the most important days in modern US history.
Presidents have, sadly, abused the pardon power before. But like everything Trump did, this was just that much worse.
Way too little, way too late. The writing on who Trump is has been on the wall for years. Resigning one week early is hardly a protest; it's simply trying to preserve their ability to be seen in "polite society." Sadly, it may work.
Normally, presidents don't take advice on overthrowing the government from pillow salesmen. Normally.
Deplatforming a president is a big deal. None of this is normal. We don't have coups every week.
Keep up the great work! It's especially important to keep it going during Biden so we can have a baseline to compare the Trump years to.
Well done.  Would like to view results.  Keep me on list.
It indicates a complete disregard for democracy on his part.  Also, it indicates that narcissism is not conducive to democracy.
The military understands that our system should be run by the people not a junta.
This was one of the worst attacks on our democracy I remember in my life.It is not something that should happen in a democratic system.
It indicates a lack of respect for our elections.
Inciting surrection and sedition should have consequences.
Given his misogyny this seemed like damage control.
The military showed continuing support for our democratic system.
Urban Politics, Criminal Justice Policy, Gender Policy
This is insurrection and it needs to be punished both for Trump and others who incited this behavior and those who invaded the capitol. The next attempt to overthrow the legitimate outcome may not be so inept.
Legislators who refused to state that the election results were valid and Biden  was a legitimate winner undermined our democracy and encouraged the rioters. The current Republican Party is a danger to our democracy.
The phone call with the GA officials would I think be an illegal act on Trump’s part. He should be held to account.
They did this at Trump’s request. Some state Republican officials stood up and defended out democracy, Others, as in this instance, did not.
The filibuster has become a minority veto in the Senate and it has become standard practice for the minority to use it to block the majority from any legislative accomplishments. This is a relatively new development that is not based in the Constitution and would be anathema to the founding fathers. The Senate was intended to be a place of deliberation and discourse, but ultimately majorities decided outcomes. This is not true today.
This was completely outside the bounds of normal activity.
This is the defining event of this quarter century.  Uggh!!!
This is an absurd and deeply in democratic act by the president
It’s only unusual that it had to be done.  And it’s very important that our military was not going to be used by a president seeking to overturn the election results.
This represents a deeply disturbing move to undermine the integrity of our elections based on nothing more than partisanship
That they resigned rather than support  this president indicates their disapproval to the public - especially Republican voters. On the other hand, one could argue that these resignations were really efforts to escape any culpability for the insurrection
Presidents have long been involved in Middle East diplomacy and policymaking.
The President has always held the nuclear codes.  For the Speaker of the House to speak with the military about protecting the US from the President is a first, and is an effort to find a means to limit the president’s power through extra-Constitutional means
Very important that this be fully condemned. Especially by the Republican Party leadership, since it was their president and congressional leaders who encouraged this
there should be national pardon board that offers recommendations from which the president may select
should have been a greater number of resignations  but at least some did.
I think it was critical that he not attend give it would have distraction attention to incoming president Biden
It was unusual given the reasonable inference that the president incited the crowd with his rhetoric  and in so doing turned a crowd into a mob that did storm the capitol and Trump was belated in his public statements to ask them to withdraw..
what remains deeply troubling was the extent of support among a large number of people that the election was falsely won  because President Trump  claimed that it was.
Instead of resigning, I wish they had invoked the 25th Amendment
the necessity of preserving electoral outcomes from political pressure but especially where the highest electoral office is concerned
Presidents do in fact exercise political calculations over such appointments. In this case the political resonance of the action in direct connection with presidential self interest raises much higher concers
Not unprecedented for president to offer politically relevant pardons  The scale of these and their direct relevance to presidential behavior in some cases makes this more problematic
Policy-relevant resignations should be perhaps more normal than they are.  However, resignations to dodge responsibility not particularly impressive
Legal logic of impeaching and convicting a former president unclear  Call to account for actions therefore subject to debate
the principle of civilian control of military action is confronted here with the concern that civilian leaders are encouraging insurrection  under normal circumstances one would not welcome military opinions on civilian activities
Bad precedent?  Reflective of the unsettled state of social media platforms and exchange of misinformation and information
The military should not have any role in domestic politics.
The determination of the results of an election should be non-partisan.
Votes of elected officials should not be influenced by fear of retribution/injury/death.
Restrictions on free speech of a president or former president is cause for concern, especially since social media platforms are largely unregulated by the government.
The visit itself is abnormal. Also the idea that this is an influential business person. If it was GM, it might be less abnormal but more important? The question has two parts that operate a little differently. (Visit by fringe person, advocacy of martial law)
It is normal that people would resign following such a betrayal of constitutional principles. It is not normal that they should have to do so.
Unusual times may require unusual actions by those who support Demo.
While he signed it his gamesmanship with the process and his apparent lack of knowledge of the components of the package are highly alarming.
I struggled with this since it is proper for a cabinet to express its horror at the events of 1/6.  My question is what took them so long?
Transfer of power is important, and indeed is the single thing that I believe defines a participatory society.   For Trump to skip the inauguration is abnormal, but not unwelcome.
It is normal for Presidents to make these gestures.  I rate it as semi-important only because the other events of the month overshadow it.
I agree that Trump should be deplatformed. I find it highly abnormal that the President of a democracy would actually NEED to be deplatformed owing to his lies and propensity to cultivate violence among supporters.
I study state failure and nation building in "shithole" countries.
It would have meant a lot more if they had resigned before January 6th, for example when the president refused to accept the results of the election and openly pressured public officials in Georgia.
It is an absolute disgrace. When such self-serving political opportunism fosters beliefs in lies that have been actively circulated by President Trump and contributes to violence, there should be a mechanism to punish those who engage in this reckless and dangerous behavior.
U.S. presidents have been involved in efforts to resolve the Middle East crisis for decades. Hence, negotiating normalized relations between Morocco and Israel is mostly normal.  But in conjunction with other efforts to broker relations between Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Israel, the Trump Administration has abandoned the Palestinians, which is a serious break with U.S. foreign policy of the past several decades and is deeply disturbing for those concerned with justice issues in the Middle East.
It counts as abnormal in that it has never happened before, but it sets an important standard for Executive accountability in the face of egregious offenses by President Trump.
Efforts to program failure for his successor are despicable.
Trump's refusal to recognize the 2020 presidential election returns raised serious questions about his mental health and his grasp of reality.  Given the destructiveness of nuclear weapons, the safety of the world warranted efforts to ensure that Trump could not act unilaterally.
feminist political theory, women and politics, gender and globalization
Latin American Politics; Indigenous Politics
Raises questions about impartial law enforcement
Pardons are normal but two of these involved individuals who participated in activities affecting the president
Resignations are not abnormal though the reason for these is abnorma;
It is normal since Congress has the Constitutional authority to override a presidential veto. It is rare for such an override to occur when the president and the Congress are of the same party. It is mostly important because it was the first override of Trump.
It was an attempted coup. Trump should be tried, convicted, and barred from ever holding an office of public trust in the future.
The president has no authority to oversee the action of a state government official. So much for federalism.
States have no authority over other states. Plus, states have never asked other states to invalidate millions of votes before. The states making the request were asking SCOTUS to ignore millions of votes.
This is the third time that a president has made that request: 1) Truman for Marshall, Trump for Mattis, and now Biden for Austin. I hope there is not another such request for decades.
First president since Andrew Johnson not to attend.
American foreign policy, Russia and Eurasia
While I think is incorrect to say that this reflects unprecedented problems in the US (they are deep historical roots in all the problems we see today), it is still abnormal and dangerous
Though the second impeachment is crucial to protect democracy in the long run, it is still abnormal
It was the duty of the military to do this - still if they hadn't done so the situation would have been different, and it reflects the value and strength of democratic pillars in the US despite all the problems
While stopping the President's dangerous statement was essential, the unilateral decisions of companies that now control enormous amounts of information is a new phenomenon, and a double edged sword
Violence - Illicit markets - State Capacity - Latin America
That they assert that the military has no role is a statement of normalcy, but that they had to make such a statement is not normal -- and important in that it reflects the strength of US institutions.
Sadly, I think it's more normal than we would like to admit, for a president to use their political power in personnel decisions at this level. But this is important because of the reason -- that it sought to overturn the results of a legitimately-held election.
All presidents use the power of the pardon, and some have used it in fairly sketchy ways (e.g., Bill Clinton), but Trump's pardons often crossed ethical lines in the kinds of people he pardoned and their personal connections to him. This is important because of the way it undermines ideas about fairness, justice, and the rule of law, but on the scale of the issues facing the country right now it isn't all that important.
What's most abnormal about this is that the attorneys general filing the request were not from the states mentioned. As such, it is a deeply troubling act that seeks to overturn the results of a legitimately-held election.
The riot was extremely abnormal. That cabinet secretaries resigned as a result of the president's incitement seems fairly normal. However, it's not a big deal since they were almost at the end of their terms, and Trump had already done so many other unethical, damaging things that it hardly seems like a bold move.
Seventeen is a lot, but all presidents sign at least a handful of executive orders on their first day. But it was important because it showed that Biden was not going to mess around, but would take bold action right away.
The insurrection was highly abnormal, but it seems normal that military leaders would condemn it. What's significant about it, if anything, is that they did this despite the presence of large numbers of veterans in the crowd and the extent of extreme right-wing views in the military.
Trump violated oath of office and committed sedition
Clear cut impeachable offense. Intolerable in a democracy.
This was more than the usual amount but that says more about what Biden inherits than the content of the orders he signed.
Outgoing presidents always issue pardons -- but never so blatantly for friends and cronies.
Same comment as with military leaders condemning the riot.
Normal / abnormal was hard to assess on this one: it'a horribly abnormal that they had to do so, but given that they did, it was essential -- hence normal? -- that they did.
It was a little hard to answer the "state of US democracy" questions -- my answer depended on which referent I had in mind.  Thinking in terms of what went down in the closing months of the Trump administration? = we're in a world of trouble.  But in terms of three weeks of adults in charge again, under the Biden administration? = things are looking much better.
This is important because it demonstrates the capitulation of the GOP to an increasingly vocal extremist wing beholden to misinformation and loyal to an individual.
Signing the stimulus bill (despite his attempts to torpedo it at the 11th hour) represents relatively normal behavior for a President. The stimulus money was certainly important to most recipients, though I'm less convinced that it was important in the context of strengthening or weakening our democratic institutions.
The willingness of the (then) sitting president to attempt to personally intervene in the election to secure his own victory is unprecedented and profoundly antidemocratic.
The increasing reliance of presidents on executive orders is extremely troubling. Many of President Trump's policies were themselves executive orders, and thus President Biden's reversal of them via a similar fiat makes some sense. But it demonstrates a breakdown in the ability of American lawmakers to work toward a common goal.
I had not heard of this, but if this is true, then it represents a severe breakdown in confidence in institutions.
I'm torn on this. The Capitol Riot was itself extremely abnormal in the context of established democracies. The condemnation strikes me as being relatively "normal," as it is exactly what I would hope such leaders would do.
The fact that Mike Lindell became one of President Trump's close advisors demonstrates the absolute dearth of qualified policy experts willing to work with the White House as well as the President's increasing reliance on toadies and conspiracy-mongers. This is particularly abnormal because it reveals the inability of Trump's cabinet and Chief of Staff to serve as gatekeepers.
I've picked "abnormal" because the historical record (short as it may be) of most social media organizations has demonstrated a strange willingness to tolerate misinformation coming from heads of state. It was important because it signals a new, developing norm. Of course, it is likely that social media companies are acting defensively and cynically rather than in any true pro-social manner.
This refects negatively on the level of trust in the electoral process, the level of trust in government, and the legitimacy of the government.  It signifies an urgent need for electoral review/reform.
All Presidential appointees are supposed to resign when there is a change of administration.  In the case of the 2020 election, some took the opportunity of the election turmoil to grandstand. To the extent it was a show of disloyalty to the administration/President who gave them their taxpayer-funded jobs, it reflected poorly on their character.
It is concerning that the high level of trust in government and respect for official positions has dwindled in recent decades.
This impeachment - like the first - is contrary to the US Constitution. It is important because it makes impeachment almost wholly political in nature. The second impeachment is particularly worrisome to the extent that it could extend this extra-judicial process to private citizens.  Impeachment is for Presidents.
The extent to which Presidents are using Executive Orders is completely out of hand.
A majority of the elected GOP has moved into full-on authoritarianism
These pardons have chilling implications for the rule of law
The scary thing isn't so much Trump's attempts to illegally overturn the election, it's the silence of the GOP about his attempts
I am a bit unsure as to what you are asking specifically. Do I think it is abnormal for these secretaries to resign? I would expect them to (ie it would be normal) since the event that led to it was entirely abnormal.
Comparative Law and Politics, Middle Eastern Studies and Public Policy
Nationalism and National Identities (United Kingdom)
"Deplatform" is a loaded term used by reactionaries to describe social media companies finally upholding their terms of service.
I believe I've made this comment in the past, but normal/abnormal remains unclear to me. You all mention Iran-Contra as abnormal, but Iran-Contra seems like an infrequent but wholly normal event for the U.S. Similar with a stimulus bill. They don't happen every year, but seem pretty normal for periods of economic downturn and/or crisis.
I missed this story when it came out (mid-January?), so I'm not sure how to rate it.
I really don't specialize in democracy in U.S. states, so that part of the survey I don't have input on.
The numbers at which members objected is what makes this so disturbing in cases where there was no evidence of systemic fraud. There may be a place for it if there were actually systemic fraud.
Trump's lack of attendance was preferable given the siege at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Had the events of the 6th not occurred, Trump's lack of attendance would have been more important.
It was abnormal in the sense that the leaders had to do this--It is what I would expect as a normal reaction to an invasion.
It's unprecedented, in fact, the direct result of the cancer of Trump and Trumpism.
If "normal" here means only that it is within the powers of the presidency, then it qualifies. Of course, such a stimulus bill was "abnormal" in the sense that it was in response to the abnormal impact on world society of the coronavirus pandemic so was scarcely a routine exercise of presidential power..
It's important to maintain the principle of civilian control of the military. When exceptions are made, they should be both rare and offer the opportunity for a thorough vetting of the individual (former military officer) for whom the exception is being asked.
It's important that they did, but is hedged by the fact that they were the only three cabinet secretaries to resign over this insurrection.
If true, it explains the utter capitulation of the Republican party to the malign influence of Trump. It is one of many indications that the Republican party as we have known it for 120 years has been mercilessly degraded and may no longer be fit to remain as one of the dominant two parties.
It is a belated move by those companies, which, as privately held organizations, hold undue influence over the democratic process today.
U.S. foreign policy, world order studies
Read the House Impeachment brief.  I agree with it.
Symbolic objections by Dems in 2000, 2004 and 2016 were merely symbolic and not a precedent to Trump's case. I go into this in detail in my paper, but no time here.
Appointment of US attorneys is a political appointment.  Trump's move to retaliate was very abnormal.
Other presidents have made sleazy pardons. But Trump's pardons are much worse.  I testified on this before the House Judiciary Committee.  I do not have time to provide details here.
I wrote a full paper about this.  I do not have time to explain it all here.  I think that this is unprecedented in the US&gt;
Bailing out at the last minute.  Something is better than nothing.
Highly unusual, but perhaps justified for a short period of time.  I do not think it should be permanent.
Abuse of power by the executive branch. Rampant dishonesty on the part of the president.
I know a handful object each time; however, the objections this time were part of a larger campaign to invalidate the election results.
Shows how insane our politics became under Trump, as well as how much power the executive has. A fair "check" by legislative over unpredictable executive.
No questions about the pandemic as it relates to executive power and contributes to Pro-Trump protests?
political behavior, race and ethnic politics
The expression of Conflict generally appears in five distinct stages.  The first stage, Latent conflict, often escapes detection, and the actors are generally unaware that the conflict even exists.  As soon as the actors become aware of their positional differences with other actors, the Conflict moves to the second stage, Perceived conflict.  At this stage actors may introduce measures either to resolve, diminish or escalate the conflict, but the effects are not necessarily experienced by either side in the conflict.   When participants do experience political, social or psychological effects of the conflict, it has passed into the third stage, the Felt conflict, and may quickly pass into the fourth stage, Manifest conflict, when the conflict is open, directly observed, and measurable in physical, political or economic terms. The fifth stage, the Aftermath, only occurs as an outcome of the conflict, whether through resolution or dissolution.  Not only do conflicts appear in stages, but they also exhibit a structure, called the Shape of conflict.  This shape may be either Symmetric or Asymmetric.  In Symmetric conflicts, all of the actors possess equal or near-equal available resources or power.  They communicate their position through reciprocal measures, and commit or mobilize their available resources in proportion to their levels of commitment to influencing the outcome of the conflict. Additionally, the actors in a Symmetric conflict mutually acknowledge the same stage of the conflict, and employ equivalent strategies and tactics towards its resolution or dissolution.  Asymmetric conflicts, on the other hand, appear when the actors’ relative available resources or power differ significantly.  In asymmetric conflicts, the actors communicate their positions through disproportionate measures, commit or mobilize those resources in disproportionate levels, and either experience or acknowledge different stages of the extant conflict, employing significantly differe
Enacting acts of Congress through formal execution is a principal component of presidential responsibility, described in Article 1 section 7 of the US Constitution.  Under this provision, signing legislation is an indication of the president's approval of the legislation.
Unfortunately, the abuse of the pardon power has been normalized over the last two centuries thanks to the absence of a check on the pardon power.  What makes this slate of pardons abnormal is not that they occurred at all, but that they demonstrate a shamelessly Polemarchean approach to the power of restraint.  True, previous presidents have abused the pardon power in similar manner, and indeed this behavior was anticipated, which is why Hamilton's proposal in 1787 included a Senate check on all pardons.  The manner in which these pardons occurred, however, appear to communicate less a matter of mercy or restraint, but an effort to weaponize the pardon power against one's enemies.
The conduct of elections is a power reserved to states, most of which have election codes which explicitly prohibit out-of-state interference in the election process.  Efforts by the President of the United States to persuade state officials to alter the results of their states' elections, even if they belong to the same political party, may constitute a criminal violation of said states' respective election codes and should be investigated in each of these states.
A primary Rule of Restraint for SCOTUS is to avoid deciding political questions.  The Federal Government is prohibited under the Constitution from the conduct of elections, a power reserved to states.  States cannot claim an injury by another state's election results.  State attorneys general have no standing to petition a Federal court to invalidate the results of another state's election.
While it is customary for the incumbent president to appear with the president-elect as a symbolic representation of the peaceful and orderly transition of executive power, it is not required.  However, barring extraordinary circumstances such as death, premature resignation, or grave illness,  the incumbent's absence calls the stability of the transition into serious question.
Authorizing the construction of a federal monument commemorating a significant milestone in the political development of the US Constitution is a standard role for the President of the United States, both as chief of state and chief administrator.  Authorization of the disbursement of funds for implementation requires executive action.
Social media companies are private sector entities and as such exercise discretion to refuse service to anyone whom they determine violates their terms of service.  The only abnormal feature of this events is that the violator in question was the President of the United States.
Foundations of Political Theory, Normative Political Theory, Formal Political Theory, Political Communication, Indigenous Studies
With each deployment of the Bright Line Watch survey, it becomes increasingly clear that the manifest conflict we now face presents a clear an present danger to the US Constitutional system, and that those of us charged with the study and instruction in this field must make a conscious effort to restore a clear understanding of the principles of American politics as well as the need to cultivate among our fellow citizens both the Cardinal Virtues (Prudence, Temperance, Fortitude, Justice) and Civic Virtues (Amor Patriae, Courage, Industry, Concord).  Concord is especially crucial, for without it no civic order can long endure.
This is the Senate and House's duty, and a Constitutional action.
Despite media reports, this is not the first time the Capitol has been stormed. It's also not different from violent riots that happened across the US in 2020 and in Portland in 2021. It's also no different than Portland rioters attacking police stations and a federal courthouse.
It was political grandstanding, which is not abnormal and no effect on anything really.
It's likely they were using the riot as an excuse to resign two weeks before they would have been out of office anyway.
This should be what all administration's work toward, but unfortunately have not.
This is especially troubling given his prior experience in a legislative body and his October comments about the use of EOs as something a dictator would do. He also doubled the number of EOs signed by the last four Presidents when they took office.
Public Policy, Public Administration, American Government
shows that certain elements of governing are functioning in accordance with standard democratic and legislative behaviors
Pardons are common, but these, aside from Kushner, are potential witnesses in any future criminal proceedings against Donald Trump.
elected officials asking third branch of government to interfere with outcomes of free and fair elections within individual states.
Signals significant decay in democratic norms, as well as willingness of representatives to vote in ways that reflect the truth of what transpired.
i don't know about the number, but its not unusual for new presidents to issue executive orders that overturn at least some of their predecessor's own executive orders (eg, global gag rule)
This wasn't that normal 30 years ago but I think it is now
This is the president attempting to change the outcome of an election. It's abnormal in the sense that this would not happen in a well-functioning democratic republic, but it was to be expected of Trump.
What is abnormal is that those former Sec. of Defense would find it necessary to say that the military has no proper role in US politics
the second impeachment is political theater to satisfy Democratic constituencies. It is theater because it is certain to fail and because Trump is out of office anyway.
Abnormal in the sense that this is not how things have been done historically. It is/was however normal for the Trump admin.
I find the terms normal/abnormal confusing. I interpreted normal either as "fits historical patterns" or "it's how it should be done in a democracy." But, there were questions where certain actions by Trump were normal (in the sense that it "fits the established patterns of his administration) but "abnormal in the sense that "this is not how democracies ought to function"  One other thing. There is no evidence that the BLM demonstrations were violent. Quite the contrary. For example, very few demonstrators have in fact been convicted of anything and, in most cases where the complaints were against the police the courts have ruled against the police. Also, there were hardly any instances of BLM demonstrators parading with weapons of any sort, let alone firearms.
The issue itself might be important. And veto overrides are rare. But it's constitutional government as normal.
This is putting party before country. Undemocratic.
This is party before country. Undemocratic.
This is putting partisanship above democracy. It's borderline unacceptable that these state attorneys general even ASKED the Court.
This is putting country before party. This is following through on one's oath to the Constitution.
This was market forces more than anything. There was going to be too much public backlash if social media companies did nothing.
The Election of 2020 was ugly. We can point to Trump and the handful of congressional Republicans as actors with bad faith. But the institutions worked. Trial courts, federal courts, the US Supreme Court, the Vice President, the House, the Senate, the electoral college--they all did exactly what the Constitution says they should have done. That constitutional democracy and the rule of law prevailed probably shows the resilience rather than the flaws of American democracy.
When will results be available? I marked Georgia as a low performing state but I meant Alabama.  I couldn't go back to fix it.
This is a blatant misuse of presidential power to subvert democratic processes. It is extremely troubling. We would be no different the would-be democratic backsliders our governments criticize.
This is mostly unimportant in relation to the question of short-term democratic stability.
Issuing presidential pardons is not unusual. However the blanket use of pardons to protect corrupt close collaborators who have run afoul of the law is not normal and sets a dangerous precedent for future cronyism in high office.
While permitted (one can petition for the exception) it is rarely, if ever, done. The norm is that it is not done. Two factors make it important. One is to ensure a loyal to democracy active duty commander heads a crucial government department linking armed forces to civilian government. Loyalty to democracy is important in time of concerns over the democratic loyalty of the armed forces. Active duty commander is important because it means the Army Secretary is fully engaged with the military institutions, is up to speed on what it takes to command them, and commands loyalty within the armed forces. That we need someone like that is a sign of an unstable situation. Then there is the racial equality issue as well.
It is symbolically important in the sense of keeping his lie that elections was stolen alive for future political use. It is abnormal in the sense that very few presidents have done so and no modern-era president has done so.
It goes to show the degree to which democratic norms and trust have been undermined.
On the assumption that this is a wealthy donor it is semi-important because it could embolden some on like Trump. He would tend to overestimate the importance of such support - thinking it an example of widespread support - and hence legitimating his ambition. It is abnormal in the sense that a private person, and wealthy businessman to boot, should feel free to utter something like that to the President of the USA!
I am surprised you didn't ask about our preferences on the Electoral College. In my opinion much of what we have gone through would have been avoided if we had direct elections for president. Or if we had a proportional system of distribution of electoral college votes. We are the only advanced capitalist democracy with such an antiquated, manifestly anti-democratic system.
Normal for the rise of the far right in the Republican party over the past many years, not just in the Trump era.
This seems to be what newly inaugurated presidents do...
This is critical given the high percentage of vets/former vets involved, but it most certainly should not have been necessary
The fact that they felt compelled to make such an obvious statement is very disturbing. Even more so after January 6th.
A complete departure from the view of non-interference in the application of justice.
This is a typical response-outcome. However, the road to the outcome was sufficiently disturbing for me to point it out.
This is an extraordinary response, especially from someone who purportedly believes in the Constitution and "states' rights'
I am sure that there are a few who fell into this category. However, the fact that they can be cowed by these morons is the most disturbing part. How can someone "represent" in that context?
This is a level of insanity I never thought I would see in American politics.
This was one of the most concerning aspects of democratic erosion in the US, elites have power to limit conspiracies about election fraud and make the public more likely to accept free and fair results. When they chose to honor a candidate's baseless claims instead of institutions it seriously eroded democratic foundations in the US
Another very concerning indication of an attempt to autocrize the US democracy
It's abnormal that it had to be done twice, but the fact that it was able to occur is a good indication of democratic institutions.
Democratic governance should limit rule by executive order as much as possible
That the words Martial Law were even mentioned and the President didn't immediately and publicly denounce it are indicative that an autocrat held the highest office and the US.
Successful Congressional overrides are less common than previously, but they are a normal part of the US political process.
The situation was unprecedented.  The former defense secretaries' statement was appropriate and appreciated.
Trump's pardons of his personal associates exceed past experience for outgoing presidents.
In the circumstances, perhaps Trump's absence was appropriate.
Many of Trump's actions after losing reelection go beyond previous practice.
Defense secretaries should not be in a position to have to even say that the US military has no role in an election dispute.
We cannot tolerate advocacy for the violent overthrow of America.  Kudos to the Capitol Police who recognized that evacuation of our political leadership, elected officials and their staff were far more critical than saving windows and doors.
His behavior is as small as his intellect.
I only hold it as being borderline normal because I assume Trump made money on the sale of weapons to Morocco.  Is anyone going to see how much money Trump made on side-bets for the sale of arms to countries?
Treason should be treated as a wrongful act.
It is the saddest comment in our society that our military leaders have to condemn violence against our own nation.
I wish I could rule the world and could make better contributions to society and democratic principles.
It's not "normal" because "normally" they would not need to make this explicit. But it's "normal" in the sense that it's something all former defense secretaries would be expected to agree upon.
Okay, I see the pattern here. So this is "abnormal" meaning this particular event is abnormal because it's never happened before, nor would we have imagined it happening. Thus I guess my previous answer should also be "abnormal"
I think they resigned so they would not have to vote on the 25th Amendments' procedure for taking away the president's powers.
abnormal since it has never happened before, but certainly an action that was appropriate for the House to take.
Again, very unusual because they were reacting to a very unusual event.  It was good for them to do so.
most research is scholarship of teaching and learning - teach congress, pres, elections, women and politics, equality & Inequality, public opinion & Political behavior
Thanks for doing research that may help us keep and improve our democracy.
It could have killed democracy & still might.
Elaine Chao stood behind Trump after Charlottesville & NOW she decides to quit???
Understanding that Biden had to undo what previous executive orders had done, the use of this power is being abused consistently from one administration to the next.
The media companies--Twitter especially--enabled this behavior for 5 years before stopping it.  Why? It got people to use Twitter.
Eastern Europe but I teach mostly US these days
It was not an "insurrection" (i.e., an uprising), after all. "Riot" seems like a better term.
Certification has been a ceremonial vote w/o much consequence.
This is what legal procedures are about.
Very bad optics for a self-professed healer of the polarized nation. Bad precedent as well.
In this case, tradition matters - but only symbolically; nothing consequential.
Perks of being in public life always come with a price tag, everywhere.
Since its inception, the US has had its generous share of wackos.
Freedom of speech gives us the right to express what some may believe as false and some as true.
shameful - elections that sat them ought not be questioned when they also sat an opposition president.
It is semi-important because this kind of legislative check on executive power is so rare these days.
It was an instance of government trying to address a national problem, which is essential work, but happens rarely.
Elections are supposed to determine who holds office, this is pretty central aspect of democracy.
In a Parliamentary system this would be normal.  In a Presidential system this is pretty abnormal. But it is normal in the sense that officials decided to state principled resistance to the amdinistration.  It was somewhat meaningless in that it happened at such a late moment in the Trump regime.
It shows ill will, but also, it wasn't all bad because Trump's presence could have provided a security risk.
it is hard to see what the consequence is... so it is hard to evaluate
The era of the Imperial Presidency needs to come to an end
Separation of powers is important. But, there is no separation of interests, including military-industrial-commercial interest.
It has only further undermined the already semi defunct US democracy.
Democratic rules and procedures mostly support 'the status quo', meaning anything goes and justified when demanded. So, what is unusual can appear as usual/normal
He was not the only one to do so. Political leaders susceptibility to external influences/control is a major problem in the US democracy
International political economy, international law, Middle East, US foreign policy
some questions on the components of democracy can be asked: socioeconomic concerns like poverty, job insecurity, health security, wealth/income inequality.
The second impeachment had to happen for the sake of American democracy
Sad to see that the military issue a political statement, but also very important that they did
Total disregard of democratic principles
Not ideal, but in this case it was utterly necessary
Unprecedented in modern history, and hopefully an aberration that will not be repeated.
A president signing a stimulus bill in response to a national health and economic crisis is normal.  Trump signing the bill, sadly, is an unexpected and welcome surprise.  It was likely signed so that he could get credit for giving away money.
Frankly, it was a relief that Trump did not attend, given the last weeks of his time in office and the events of Jan. 6th.
each predominantly Muslim country that establishes normal ties with Israel is a step forward in accepting Israel's legitimacy as a nation-state.
Only Trump could achieve this dubious distinction...
Over-use of executive orders by presidents is becoming a norm.  As such, presidents from opposite parties are reversing the E.O.s of their predecessors.
The first scale does not fit this question.  It is expected that the military would condemn the violence at the Capitol, but the events being condemned are unique in U.S. history.
elections, public policy, urban politics and policy
good questions and issues listed.  Great monitoring instrument to track the progress and backsliding of democracy and governing institutions in the U.S.
Hard to answer this question. I'm not sure if I'm evaluating the social media companies behavior as abnormal or the circumstances that drove them to this choice. I went with the latter here. Also hard to evaluate importance. Important in the specifics or for what they suggest more generally, i.e. a need to muzzle an increasingly unhinged, traitorous executive? I went with the latter here too.
Not sure I know enough about state-level governments to evaluate how democratic they are. Also, I wasn't sure if the questions about democracy mean that we should think about '100' as an ideal democracy or as the best democracy we've seen so far.
Virtually every President has some questionable pardons. These were especially bad because some of their crimes were tied to their loyalty to Trump.
The move to appoint retired generals as DoD Secretary is undesirable for civil-military relations and I opposed this decision on those grounds. Unfortunately, it is becoming "normalized" thanks to both Biden and Trump (Mattis).
It was abnormal only to the extent that it seemed to be an overt attempt to improve Trump's election chances and to sell more arms.
I would have said important but I doubt even Trump took this very seriously.
The content of the executive orders is not abnormal. What makes them abnormal is that they were necessary in the first place.
This important statement reaffirmed, for the public and the Trump Administration, that the U.S. military is non-partisan and put pressure on the then Acting Secretary as well as military commanders to steer clear of politics. I believe it was one ingredient that helped ensure the transfer of power to the Biden Administration.
The U.S. Constitution dedicates substantial attention to limiting the power of the president. The pardon departs radically from those limits by allowing the president to subvert the rule of law. Although its use can correct the inevitable errors that any system of laws can produce, it can also be used, as President Trump did, to undermine the rule of law.
Whether we call it a coup or use a different term, President Trump tried to install an unelected citizen as president. Two illegal actions were at the center of this attempt -- inciting the attack on Congress and cajoling and threatening officials to commit massive electoral fraud in his favor.
That defense secretaries feel compelled to remind the president of the concept of civilian supremacy over the military is extremely important and most abnormal.
Legitimizing a false claim of fraud in a constitutional procedure raises concerns about a major party's commitment to fundamental principles of democracy.
A president enjoys substantial powers in foreign policy, but to upend decades of balancing relations with various parties for a favor to a head of government who has been personally supportive of President Trump and to sacrifice the aspirations of the Sahrawi people is important, because it undermines trust in the US as an honest broker, and abnormal.
Responding to an abnormal presidency will require some unusual responses.
This shows how abnormal the Trump presidency was, and how abnormal our dependency on private actors is for presidential communication and for determining what is acceptable.
Please correct the spellings of Virginia and West Virginia.
This goes without saying and for them to "say it" was highly abnormal
The Republicans do not believe in elections
The act of resigning is an significant act of disapproval. The President's support of the attack on Congress should have been met with widespread resignations within his administration. For them not to resign would have been abnormal
Congress people should "fear' losing their jobs, not their lives.
It's normal that they resigned after a riot--but not that so many had to resign because of an abnormal riot.
It's normal to impeach a deeply flawed president, but abnormal that the same president had to be impeached twice.
It's unusual in historical terms, but not in this political environment.
Should have been basis for an additional article of impeachment.
Pardon power is not meant for self-dealing.
It has become normal in this century, but is not ideal.
Abnormal that it would be needed. Commentary on the enormity of Trump's behavior.
Risky power to use arbitrarily. In this case it was justified. There need to be discussions about proper exercise of such powers.
Multiple fields: South Asia, Administrative Ethics, Political Thought
Parliamentary politics, elections and electoral systems
This is sort of an odd question in terms of which part(s) is/are abnormal.  Not abnormal a principled official to resign in response to the particular actions/speech of the president but the president's behavior and reaction surrounding this event seem abnormal as does the event itself.
Again, sort of an odd question.  Not abnormal for military leaders to condemn a violent invasion of the Capitol, but abnormal that they found a need to publicly take a position at least somewhat at odds with the president.
Essentially a despot wannabe in the White House actually acting on those instincts.
I did not mark "Normal" and "Unimportant" only because Trump's motives, essentially political revenge against the tech companies, was outside of acceptable norms.
The undercutting of something as basic as an election by so many Republican Attorneys General indicates that the norms necessary for maintaining democracy are breaking down in this country.
"Normal" in the sense that resignations should be expected under such circumstances.
"Normal" in the sense that one would expect them to condemn such an incursion.
As shown in my responses, I support, to varying degrees, all of the recommendations offered for improving/strengthening our democracy.  However, many of them raise constitutional questions/would require amendments, which diminishes their potential utility.
Will happen again--this is a "Trump hating" survey or an evaluation of the state of US democracy?
These people were not in the main "insurrectionists" rather disgruntled citizens. The Winter Palace is another story. Question is poorly phrased.
Electional irregularities are the norm in our country. This should always be exposed.
Republicans rarely clashed with President Trump, but I'm not that convinced we need anywhere near the military budget we have.
They should have resigned the minute he didn't accept the election resutls.
The Trump base is violent and truly dangerous.
Had to be done, but there was never any chance Republicans in the senate would convict him no matter what he did. They are way to afraid of his base, which is kind of a cult mob.
He must not have understood what it was.
You saw on January 6th exactly where such rhetoric takes us.
This was a direct challenge to the basic legitimacy of national democracy.
Sets a negative precedent for civil-military relations after Trump sought the same for his first SecDef.
Revealed that they saw the event as serious and did not want to be associated with it despite already associating with a wide range of similar but less violent behavior and rhetoric.
Short-sighted given the consequences for Western Sahara.
US military officials rightly and typically try to stay away from "politics," a least publicly. In this case, it sent a strong signal to the administration that they would not support abuses of power to sway or even steal the presidential election.
Unclear if this is relevant once he is no longer in office.
Americans need to be reminded that these are private companies, that the government regulates their behavior some and customers take care of the rest.
Political Psychology, Congress & the Presidency
It was not unusual to have members of the house, in the past, some Democratic Representatives, file and support objections to certification.  Only rarely were these objections supported by a Democratic Senator.  The fact that so many GOP legislators signed up for this shinanigan is not a good sign for the health of our democracy.
Even though the law was passed during a lame-duck Congress, this is allowed by our constitution and is thus a legitimate exercise of democracy.
Stone and Manfort's convictions were fairly inconsequential.
This is disturbing given the 60 court cases filed by Trump and his supporters that were thrown out of court.  If these court cases would have shown widespread fraud, the actions of these AGs would have been justified.  But, that didn't happen.
It is abnormal, and much was made of it.  While Trump's attendance is customary, it is also not required and most symbolic.  The actual transition of the power is what's important and it is what occurred.
No member of a legislature should have to fear for their lives based on their voting behavior in the legislature.  Fear like this is disturbing.
The use of executive orders usurps the democratic process where Congress passes bills that are either signed into law or vetoed and if vetoed, the legislature must override the veto.
I don't care about the rantings of an idiot who makes pillows.
I think this survey had some loaded questions and left out the other side of this debate.  In particular, the actions of some state AGs to relax election administration laws in the face of the pandemic.  These decisions were not trivial and provide the foundation of the other side of the argument.  When a state's outcome is decided by fewer than 20K votes, there is a distinct possibility that relaxing election administration laws played a role in the outcome of the election.  Acting as if these acts are insignificant opens this survey to the charge that it is biased.  This needs to be corrected in your next iteration.
Separation of military from politics is important, but this seems unlikely to be a problem unless it becomes the norm.
Blame avoidance not a recognition of failure.
It's not the normalization that's the problem, it's the U.S. recognition of Morocco's claim to the Western Sahara.
This happened in the Philippines too.  That country's score is 61/100, "partly free."
This was an attempt to overturn the results of a fair election. It was fomented by months of lies by the then-President of the United States.
If the President pardons people for keeping quiet in regard to telling the truth about his criminal conduct, justice is completely subverted.
Basic governmental checks can't work with threats of violence.
Normal, abnormal, important, unimportant. This one is ironic on so many levels. Women voters were among the first to turn against Trump.  Trump's history of accusations of sexual assault also make this one ironic.
If they had gone along with Trump, we would have lost our democracy. It was that close.
We need more regulation of social media by the government. I don't want Dorsey or Zuckerberg making these important decisions.
Abnormal, but given its limited effects, not as important as you'd think.
Clearly a political ploy, but it was mainly to generate the reaction (as it did) rather than as a serious move.  Points to the problems in media + poor civic education
Again, points to a problem in media coverage more than in political process
On the election day question - I support making Election Day a holiday but not on (to?) Veteran's Day.  If anything, we should move Veteran's Day, not Election Day.
The invasion was not normal by any means, but the condemnation by military leaders is a "normal" response to that event
Another impeachable offense that Trump won't be convicted of....
The whole process was a mess. Legislation has been mostly log-rolling and backscratching.
It's not great for Civil-Military norms, but GEN Austin is qualified and the President's choice.
It's just too bad he didn't leave sooner.
It's shocking how party identification - on the right - has become more important than fundamental commitments to rule of law, and the US constitution. The physical safety issue is just a tragic reflection of insane rightwing politics.
Trump's inane "drain the swamp" ends up with an attack on civil service protections. All of his moves should be rescinded.
But Very Positive. It's highly unusual that these leaders would take such an action, and they were reticent to do so, but it was necessary because of the actions of the Trump administration.
It was a serious disruption, but time will tell if it was as big a threat as it's been made out to be.
They refused to act--a testament to the president's weakness.
More concerning to see this among actors responsible for enforcing state election law.
Seems like a smart move; civil service protections are in tension with democratic accountability.
This was extremely selective--how many truly dictatorial regimes are still allowed to use Twitter and other social media platforms?
Reflects acute fiscal stress of the pandemic
Reflects personal interest-based policy-making of the Trump Administration
Reflects threat to our democratic norms.
Thank you for your commitment to democracy.
Highest number ever.  This was part of an attempt to delegitimize the legally elected president or to take power extraconstitutionally.
The president was trying to falsify certified election results.
Second time in two administrations that a waiver was requested for a retired general.  It is there to maintain civilian control over the armed forces. The general seems qualified, but still...
This is normal as divided government leads to more policy by executive order.  When there is administrative turnover, new administrations over such policy decisions by their predecessors.
While I would have slept better if they listened, he was still commander in chief.  This is not in the constitutional powers of the Speaker of the House.
Normal because platforms have no obligation to provide fora for everybody.  Freedom of speech in the US is protection against government censorship.
Latin American politics, democratization, gender and politics
a president inciting a mob to attack another branch is profoundly important.
This is completely unacceptable & should be criminalized.
The dynamics of his stalling were abnormal, but he ultimately signed the budget, which is normal.
Although a flaw in the system, the pardon power is used capriciously & unjustly by both parties, so it's sadly normal.
With possible exceptions for times of total war, DoD should be led by a civilian.
This impeachment was legitimate & shows the system is working.
Declaring martial law for political reasons, which was what Lindell advocated, is pure authoritarianism. He's a private citizen with no power to act on it, s I don't think advocating it should be criminalized, but it should be widely publicized so the population should know how contrary to American core values Lindell is.
Social Media kicks people off all the time for actions such as Trump's. What was more abnormal was it took them so long. If a democratic principle is equal treatment, they should have held Trump to the same standards as any user.
Every U.S. president does this, so it's not outside those bounds, but abnormal comparatively and normatively.
Abnormal -- it has never happened twice! But, also not "bad," per se.
Kind of an oddball question wrt evaluative criteria -- its not "normal" that military leaders would need to do this (bad) but is normal that they would reiterate that this is bad (good).
For the democracy reform items, I think you'll get more mileage if you ask people to rank them.
Not only abnormal but illegal---certainly a violation of state laws, e.g. Georgia.
This is not a good practice and should not continue in the future.  So I hope. It is borderline normal only because it was done twice before.
Politicizing civil service members is a very bad idea.
Abnormal because it took an insurrection to get them to apply their standards to the former president.
Politics and History -  American Political Development
This action seriously undermines democratic norms.  He should be criminally charged for attempting to change election results.
This signals the erosion of democracy in the US.  Moreover, it was an attack by one branch, the executive, on another, the legislature, and it appears that there will be no punishment for the executive.  James Madison is turning in his grave.
Again, this shows that the republican party is no longer willing to accept the results of elections.  This is a serious problem for the democratic process in the US.
This shows that the republican party is no longer willing to accept the results of elections.   When one party does this - a country is on the first step towards larger problems like civil war.
This, sadly, has become a normal part of the transition from one president to another.
US Defense and Foreign Policy.  War and Conflict.
If any of the court cases had progressed or ANY real proof of election irregularity been presented, that would've put a different face on the objections.  Since those dozens of cases went nowhere and no real or significant proof of "stealing the election" was ever the case, those objections were purely politically motivated.  Shame on those 147 "representatives of the people" who had taken an oath to uphold our Constitution!
There are good reasons that the power to pardon is broad, making it difficult to keep a President from abusing that power.
"Mostly" because of problems with modern process
This (by Trump) seems hypocritical to me since I believe he would limit women's votes only to HIS female supporters, if he could have.  I don't believe he is sincere in caring about the various struggles of any groups of our citizens, unless they were to directly impact him.
This and other actions by Trump showed his total lack of respect for our nation's institutions and traditions -- and even our "democracy" itself.
Presidents should do what they can to undo bad policy and, in Biden's case, to immediately combat the too-long, too-pervasive, too-deadly virus problem which had been mishandled from the beginning.
The invasion itself was abnormal, period.  I appreciated any/all voices of authority that condemned the invasion.
Thank you.   Since I support a free press and consider access to facts to be essential to our democracy, I am concerned about the "fake-media" and "alternative-facts" labels which have become so widely used/misused.  If your organization could collect ideas for combatting this scourge on our democracy, that would indeed be a worthwhile endeavor.
either important or so crazy as to be unimportant= who knows?
the politics of education, state politics, interest groups
Civilian control of military is important. That it has to go through formal processes and could be denied makes the request normal (compared to abnormal)
It's normal that high ranking officials resign in protest. It's abnormal that it's in result to a riot at the capitol.
Embarrassing as a matter of law, despicable as a matter of partisanship
not all of those EOs reversed Trump policies fwiw
abnormal because they shouldn't have to - the prompt is the unusual part
Abuse of power, effort to overturn the election by fraud.
Trump overturned decades of US foreign policy by recognizing Morocco's claim to Western Sahara.
The question about citizen access to information was ambiguous. I interpreted it as assessing the quality of information that citizens actually have (poor) rather than the availability of information afforded by our political system (quite good).