Extraordinary threat to American democracy
Extraordinary benefit to American democracy
Historically this should not matter, but all that has changed. It us part of executive power run amok.
Sadly, since at least the 1950s, this is not that rare
Bad business...civilian control of the military is critical for all concerned.
just complete and utter bullshit aided and abetted by politicians and the media
elections--and Supreme Court appointments--have consequences, y'all
Trump being Trump and part of the new normal
his delusional fantasies become "normal." Not that Politicians haven't and don't do this sorta shit.
Y'all are stalwart, but sometimes it wears a little thin and I am grasping for how you think you are measuring what you are measuring. I also think you need a little mor eattention to state/society stuff, but I would, wouldn;t I (as a political sociologist). Appreciate y'all.
The coarsening of speech in US elections, including the use of antidemocratic and hostile, aggressive language towards one's opponents is again a sign of the erosion of democratic norms.
This is a Russian disinformation campaign.  For a candidate not to disavow it suggests support if not collusion with Russia.
It is startling to see the gross incompetence of our elected leaders, and to see that the media and public opinion are unwilling to call out that incompetence.  When incompetence is called out it seems to be done so in a partisan manner.
We are slowly seeing the erosion of democratic accountability and the rule of law.  If a president can pardon his 'cronies' then there IS no rule of law.
Mostly abnormal now, but not unprecedented. Calls back to previous state mobilization of private violence to promote white supremacy in the late 19th/early 20th century.
Better not to have ex-military in this role.
Aligns with ongoing US foreign policy even though many disagree
Unfortunately not surprising and part and parcel of elite Republican suppression of dissent concerning Trump.
It goes against decades of past practice. This should have been an easy and uncontroversial smackdown.
Politically important routine exercise of executive authority.
Election deniers as SOS is quite dangerous for democracy.
They are fellow citizens, not adversaries
Surrogates are necessary in national election.
Not that important who leads House parties.
It is not only to help Ukraine but also to play a role in NATO
Normally I am OK with the idea of making it easier to fire civil servants but the motivation matters. And Trump's motivation is that people exist to praise and obey him. Plus, it reeks of that autistic creep Curtis Yarvin.
Indicative of Trump's rejection of the peaceful transfer of power. Trump uber alles.
1. As a rhetorical move, it indicates that Trump's base is detached from common communication fora and only allows reality to be determined by Trump.  2. The purpose of the platform is (or was) to evade even rudimentary requirements on Twitter or Facebook to make statements that are plausible and not inflammatory. It exists largely as a tool to help his movement overcome the costs that make forming viable paramilitary organizations possible.  3. It allows Trump to continue his track record of eroding and outright destroying basic democratic norms, thereby making democracy inert.
It is indicative that Trump is stupid and believes that if he doesn't win he is allowed to destroy the system until people just surrender and give him what he wants.
Go back in time 30 years and imagine the U.S. sending a constituent member of the USSR weapons needed to kill Russian soldiers.   It is proper to send the arms since Putin isn't going to stop at Ukraine, but it is abnormal.
It indicates that Trump sees the GOP as his business and not as a mechanism for political expression. Not that DeSantis sees it any differently from Trump.  I need a drink.
It indicates that majorities in these states reject misinformation and still believe that their consent is necessary to be governed.
It is evidence of the proposition known as Wilhoit's Law:  Modern conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect
It debunks the myth that Trump perpetrated the January 6 violence.
Protesters and journalists in 2020 were most likely to be Trump deranged individuals such as Black Lives Matter, Antifa and other anarchists, and various ecozealots.
Federal employees perform important roles.  However, their work must be performance based and not be contrary to the policymaking objectives of the presidential administration in power at that time.
Senate Democrats were being virtue signalling crybabies due to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death during the Trump Administration and Trump's superlative nomination of Justice Barrett who's jurisprudential quality is far higher than Ginsburg's.
This is not ideal, but a president should be able to deploy cabinet members as election surrogates to promote the policymaking accomplishments of their administration.
This was reflected by the acute emergency situation stemming from the pandemic in 2020.  However, it would have been better if the emergency use authorization had been delayed due to some adverse impacts of these vaccines.
He should have attended but also expressed concern over the adverse consequences which Biden Administration policies have had on the American public and on the world.
Many government officials have received military waivers to serve in civilian policymaking positions.
Trump's repression by the former Twitter was an egregious violation of his 1st Amendment rights.  He was perfectly right to switch to another communications platform.  Fortunately, Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter rectified this situation.
It was and remains critically important to support Ukraine against totalitarian aggression by Russia.  We need to do a better job of providing Ukraine with the tools it needs to totally defeat Russian aggression.
It's normal for presidential administrations to change the policies of previous administrations.  However, talks with China on climate are destined to fail.
Demonstrated that China is a hostile power intent on gathering intelligence information on the U.S. and exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities.  What was bizarre about this was that China already has Beidou satellites which are far more capable of gathering such intelligence.
created a moral hazard with broad implications and set up further increases in cost of higer ed.
I do not recall this, but if it happened as described, I would understand it within the context of Trump's established authoritarian tendencies, which makes it difficult to discount this as a mere joke.
I do not recall this, but if it happened as described, I would understand this in the context of efforts to demonize the press e.g. Trump's declaration that the press is "the enemy of the people"
This is normal in the context of US politics over the past 40 years
It's not normal to have candidates for secy of state denying election results, but a normal response for a healthy liberal democracy is to see such candidates lose elections.
a clear and textbook authoritarian warning sign, and not an isolated comment
Thanks for doing this--dangerous and uncertain time for US democracy
It is a symptom of a problem - not the problem itself
Weaponization of the justice department for political ends breaks important democratic norms.
I don't understand the concept of "normal" vs. "abnormal."  Does it mean "common" vs. "uncommon"?  Does it mean "not bad" or "bad"???
The question about age limits is ambiguous - I might support a constitutional amendment to limit candidates, but I would not support a law, since the constitution does not enable Congress to establish statutory limits on who can/can't be president.
organization theory, social science methodologies
Some faculty are emeritA... It's not helpful to continue to classify us by misleading, old "subfields"  Useful tracking of impressions
I should note that I think it's normal that candidates who did or believe something controversial lost the election—I do not think denying election results is normal!
As usual, it seems biased against conservatives. I hope the administrators of this survey can maintain a nonpartisan position.
Treating citizen protesters as though they are military combatants "adversaries" is what would be expected from more totalitarian regimes
The Senate GOP had gone against its own rules in essence -at least the ones they put in place to deny Nominee Garland a hearing in the last year of Obama's term saying it was precedent but then in an exceeding hypocritical move (nothing new for the current GOP) confirmed Barrett in the last few months of Trump's nomination.
Normal for a narcissist/megalomaniac like Trump (and possibly a few other billionaires) abnormal for the vast majority of other individuals in the US.
typical off the pro-Israel relationship of the US with Israel for decades
His constant baseless attacks on political institutions and people has had violent effects and distorted/perverted these institutions somewhat
It was a joke, like Harris saying she wanted to commit violence against trump
It was a fringe group elevated for publicity
No questions about Biden skewed the survey
Trump's statements are no longer taken seriously even by his supporters.
Trump's removal from mainstream social media --e.g., Twitter-- provided him with a medium for speaking directly to his supporters that the mainstream media could and probably had to follow and report.
Made it possible for Trump to continue insisting that the election was stolen.
happens with other drugs and health emergencies, shows that bureaucracy is working
fragmentation of news and breaking of shared reality
threat to democracy from a fucking idiot
signifies the far right and anti-truthers taking over the republican party
while presidents are allowed to pardon, trump would be pardoning people who carried out his orders (would be like Hitler trying to pardon Goebbels)
adversaries regularly spy on one another
Part of a process of incremental norm violation.
Normal for Trump -- although not traditional norms.  Incremental norm violation.
Boycott didn't make much difference, but the nomination and protest were both abnormal.
Constructive step in an emergency situation.
Not attending violates a long-standing norm related to the transfer of power.  It has no direct consequence, but has symbolic significance.
I'm not well informed about the precedents here.  But I don't think the decision was very consequential.
Withdrawal from the accord was abnormal, rejoining was predictable.  I don't have much hope that the Paris agreements will actually affect the environment, but its much better to have the US in than out.
Again, part of a process of incremental norm violation.
January 6 was unique.  So, both the conviction of rioters and a pardon for them would be abnormal.  A pardon of people duly convicted of trying to overthrow an election would be highly important.
I am not well informed about the norms or judicial history on this issue, but I do assume that the litigation of presidential decrees is mostly normal.  I disagree with the substance of the decision and believe that it can do substantial damage.
The US and China share concerns about climate change, which creates incentives for a meeting.  But given strained relations between the two countries, face-to-face meetings are likely to be rare.  Meetings would be an important step, but far from decisive.
Electorate rejects extremist candidates. A good sign.
Demonstrates that Trump is playing to an extreme element of society. Those statements are "calls to arms" or dog whistles for extreme groups.
Criminal acts tied to Trump presidency in most cases.
Some of these people were convicted of murder and assault.
Uniformed military command remained committed to Constitutional and democratic principles.
No immediate tangible effect but important symbolically and normatively.
Important signal sent to anti democratic forces.
A normalish event signifying the erosion of democratic norms among Republican voters.
Continued bipartisan trend of expanding boundaries of rule by Executive Order
Much more important implications geopolitically than democratically, but the latter was relevant.
Liz Cheney's comments were not abnormal. I'd like to think that the Republican opposition to her that followed is not normal.
My choice of abnormal is about the behavior of those secretaries of state. I hope that their mostly losing their elections is no abnormality.
Just more childlike behavior from idiot child Trump
One step away from dictatorship when the military sees the free press as the enemy
Not that big of a deal as most administrators/public servants will not abuse this slight change in the rules.  If Trump had made it MUCH easier, then problems would happen.
The further politicization of judge appointments is concerning
Just more childlike behavior from a child pretending to be a man
It would undermine our democracy greatly to allow these violent criminals back on the streets via Presidential pardon.  In essence, the presidential pardon is a broken mechanism by which the rule of law is abandoned.
Act like idiots; get punished by the voters.  This is how democracy should run
Committee level stunts are fairly normal but should not be in a functioning democracy
The militarization of US politics and total deference to the military is problematic- if this was a one-off, it wouldn't be abnormal or overly important. But it's borderline because of the over reliance on military members as the only public servants worth counting on culturally.
Given the lack of evidence for fraud, it should be normal for people to repudiate conspiracy theorists
A wannabe dictator telling his militia to be ready?!?  That's one step away from fascism
Childlike behavior from a complete child masquerading as a man
just Trump trying to make money off of his cult.  Let the fleecing continue!
Shows how Republican Party is dominated by Trump
A bold and wise foreign policy.  Russia is a threat to stability across Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Europe.
The president is authorized by the US Constitution to appoint members of the US Supreme Court when there is a vacancy.
This is another example of the politicization of the military.
Who cares?  Did Biden/Harris disavow antifa, blm, etc.?
This is another example of the politicization of the US military.
Israel, like every other state, has a right to defend itself.
The SC has ruled that there is no constitutional right to kill babies.
The Supreme Court is correctly limiting the power of the administrative state.
This is a good example of the Biden administration's complete disregard for the rule of law.
They are both competing for the nomination, even before the election season starts.
It's part of an overall trend of Cabinet members getting more involved with electoral politics - not great, but an acceleration rather than new ground being broken.
Could be a run-of-the-mill political joke, but in this case part of a larger pattern of extreme and antidemocratic rhetoric.
Further consolidates information bubbles for supporters and non-supporters alike. Supporters will follow this medium and non-supporters will not.
Clear indicator of radical shift in the Republican Party.
It's expected and healthy for extreme candidates to lose.
Presidential immunity prevents Trump from going after Biden for acts while Biden was president, but Trump could go after Biden for the discredited Ukraine issues.
Other presidents were not allowed to do so.
Both have a constitutional right to protest and/or report. Calling them "adversaries" is adverse to the constitution itself.
Civil service is a necessary "non-political" part of government function. His stated motive was to place "loyal" workers in their seats, putting politics firmly at the center of public administration.
Most if not all judicial candidates are controversial.
The work of diplomacy is the President's job. Coming to consensus, even with "the enemy," is necessary for the good of the world.
This move does create a bad precedent, but I believe Democrats would have done the same thing if the roles were reversed.
Cops and soldiers tend to think in very binary ways. Nothing new.
Presidents are not supposed to traffic in and benefit from paranoid conspiracy theories. By refusing to disavow this dangerous conspiracy, Trump allowed it to grow.
Executive branch bureaucrats provide important expertise and perform important functions through many administrations of both parties. If a president can fire federal employees en masse and then install acolytes, then we are going back to the old Spoils System of the 19th century, which was a disaster.
It was a foregone conclusion that Coney Barrett would be confirmed. The Democrats looked petulant boycotting the vote. Ultimately, it didn't matter at all.
Abnormal historically. Sets a bad precedent.
Abnormal historically but not normal for Tump. Semi-important because it could set a bad precedent.
11th-hour pardons happen frequently. These pardons were expected.
Expected move. Important for the US to regain its position as a leader in international cooperation and norm promotion.
When a member of Congress (representing a safe state) defects from their party and attacks a popular president, it is predictable that the MoC will lose their reelection.
This was executive overreach even though it was an action taken in service of a noble goal. This is mostly important because it means that Congress will need to take action on climate issues, which is troubling.
This is what major powers should do. We share common cause on this issue.
Questions were sometimes hard to parse, and open to multiple readings.  "Abnormal" conveys two ideas: rarity and contrary to norms.  These are correlated, but far from the same thing.  As to whether something is an effective campaign tactic, it is nearly impossible to know.  And these items beg the question, "compared to what?"
Thanks for not requiring answers to all questions, as many surveys do.
Promotes radical groups threatening democracy
This was important in a good way because I belive his presence would have tainted President Biden's inauguration.
Israel has a right to defend itself but does not have a right to use military force indiscriminately and disproportionally. It also does not have a right to attack another sovereign state, Lebanon, and kill civilians there.
I can't even believe Trump is not in jail himself after the January 6 riots. He is encouraging and validating actions like these riots if he does not get his way and get elected.
The U.S. nees to cooperate with other major world powers on an issue that is threatening the future or the entire globe.
Not typical behavior for a President who loses re-election.
this process is typically slower but this decision was made amidst the pandemic. context matters
new presidents use executive orders to reverse executive orders of previous presidents
portraying lawless (treasonous) behavior as pardonable behavior
two countries with serious air emission problems and global warming issue
Just another abnormal sign of Trump's derangement and his willingness to appearl to far right groups over emphasizing the rule of law and civility.
He was joking, one assumes. And he had no power to do it. Much like his arguments that he will pressure the DOJ and IRS and others to go after his political enemies should he win the election. He would be a greater fool than he is to try that, and it would severely damage the Republican Party to try it.
Let's face it. Trump is so abnormal that there is little exceptional about any of his decisions or pronouncements. Embracing conspiracies is what he does every day, so QAnon is important, but hardly surprising.
What to say. He is a fool, and his staff make a mistake. He became much more of a fool after that, including through the various lawsuits that he lost.
Supreme Court nominations and approval have become exceptionally partisan and contentious, and Democrats were right to fear the worst. The immunity decision was a slap in the face to accountability of the US president, but par for the course for this Court. It is also sad that the Court has lost much of the legitimacy that it needs to function well in the US system.
Extraordinary times (COVID) called for exceptional measures. In the end it worked very well--until conservatives lost faith in the CDC, FDA, and other health authorities. That foolish choice resulted in hundreds of thousands of needless deaths.
His decision not to attend was consistent with his efforts to overturn the election. At that point, he should have gone away permanently. But now he has a 50% chance of returning to the White House, and that would be a dreadful outcome in light of the way his presidency ended. It also makes the Republican Party clearly responsible for the whole debacle and whatever failures undermine US democracy in the near term. The party should have discouraged him from running again, or challenged him. That it failed to do so undermines what a two-party system in the US democracy should be doing.
Nothing terribly unusual about that. To my knowledge, there is no requirement that a Secretary of Defense be or not be a sitting officer. Better that the secretary not be to insure that the military is governed by civilian authorities.
Nearly all nations in the world signed onto the Paris Agreement. For one nation to withdraw is a massive insult to the rest of the world, particularly when that nation is the historical leader in greenhouse emissions. It should not have happened, but it was a signal to the world that the US under Trump didn't care a bit about climate change. Biden's rejoining was expected, but it also was abnormal since the US shouldn't have withdrawn in the first place.
Just another sign that the current Republican Party tolerates no dissent, and it determined to remain a minority and ideological party in terms of public support.
The US is treating Ukraine more or less like it is a member of the EU and NATO, though it is not. It recognizes Putin's aspirations and has to draw the line firmly enough to discourage Russia from its obvious aggression here and elsewhere around the world.
Glad to see you are still doing the surveys. This one was a bit long, which may affect your response rate.
The questions about effective campaign strategies were difficult to answer - especially regarding Trump - and I am not sure how useful the result will be. Unfortunately, inspiring racial hatred might be a very effective strategy, but I would be reluctant to state this.
Boycotting a vote is abnormal. And it is important because it's a Supreme Court nominee. But it's the actual vote for against that matters.  As an aside, the truly abnormal aspect of her nomination was that Republicans didn't allow a Senate vote for Merrick Garland, arguing that it was because it was an election year. Then 4 years later they allow a vote under precisely the same circumstances. Now THAT's abnormal. Government doesn't go on vacation just because it's an election year.
It's abnormal, and could foreshadow bad things if he was reelected. Still, it didn't work.
It's important and normal as long as the reason they did so was because the FDA really thought it was a cure, and not because Eli Lilly pulled political strings.
It's childish, and I think most people know it. But it could be a terrible precedent later down the road.
It's important, but it's not expected. We will be out of the agreement the minute any Republican president is elected. Such is the nature of executive policy making in the face of a cowardly Congress.
It's not abnormal for those in parties to be admonished for toeing the party line. But when it comes to Trump, everything is abnormal.
This happens all the time. But, again, Trump.
There's shaky legal ground to forgive certain types of debt. In the long run, though, it puts money in people's pockets which can fuel economic growth. People have forgotten we have a sitting president anyway. He could do whatever he wanted to right now and no one would pay it any attention.
We supply lots of military aid to an ally that is attacked by a political enemy and a threat to us and our other neighbors. There's nothing new under the Sun.
It's good to see our president begin discussions with an economic and political foe. It's what presidents are supposed to do.
So one potential party presidential nominee gets in a row with another potential party presidential nominee. So what?
Liars are voted out of office. The system works!
Abnormal merely because it's such a low N situation.
It's normal for Trump, but not for "normal" politicians -- i.e. basically everybody who isn't MAGA. It's important insofar as it shows yet again how delusional he is, but it isn't important in any deep substantive sense. A crazy asshole endorsing crazy shit because he thinks it benefits him.
important only insofar as it shows their disorganization.
This is important and expected from someone like Trump.  Still, this is a threat to public order and democracy generally.
I expect he will refuse to disavow QAnon, however, this could result in political violence if he loses the election.
This is important because it endangers our tradition of the peaceful transition of power which is one characteristic that sets us apart from other democracies.
This prevents regulatory agencies from overseeing the health and safety of our population.
Many countries ask for military aid so this is normal and, in this instance, it is important to thwart Putin's intentions to control Eastern Europe.
Something like this does not usually occur if it's publicly known, and we must be aware of an occurrence such as this.
War, Internatonal Security, US defense policy
This is the stand-up comedian version of Trump.  It's not as important because it's a vague statement and fits with Trump's ego.  The bigger dangers come from actual actions and efforts to undermine the election results.
This shows that the plan for subordinating the civil service to the President is not something the Heritage Foundation made up for project 2025.  In fact, this is one of the two big reforms that are made to establish illiberal democracies (along with purging the judiciary).
Pandemic emergencies are rare, but this seems like a rational action given the time.
Trump and Biden have both done this.  It's slightly abnormal, since in recent decades SecDef has been a political appointment.  If it continues to be a habit, it might be a concern over civil control over the military, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case.
Does anyone but reporters actually follow Truth Social? It's odd, but he'd do this on X/Twitter/etc. if he hadn't been banned.
The US typically has variation between party administrations.  It's useful for assuring international partners (who know this is the case), but it's likely we'd leave again if Trump (or any Republican) won.
It's very odd from a US candidate.  We've seen AMLO do this in 2006 (the People's President) and other cases in borderline democracies.  It's less important, since Trump had been promoting the idea of the 2020 election being stolen for some time before this and it happens at Trumps low point in popularity.
The court does swing ideologically and this court tends to be wary of executive action, so it's not that unusual.  It does matter since a polarized Congress means Executive action is about the only route to enacting policy.
This is a policy solution that does have a bit of pandering to the base, but that's not really unusual in the long view of US politics.
It's not completely normal, since war like this has been uncommon since 1945.  The response to assist a sovereign state under attack by a strategic rival is about as normal as state behavior gets.
Leaders of Great Powers should be meeting regularly even if they are geostrategic rivals.  This is normal diplomacy, and it's important that US leaders don't let major areas of needed cooperation get lost over areas of conflict.
The language implies a threat of political prosecution.  It's not a problem if it's a clear and normal investigation with serious concerns over criminal wrongdoing (see pretty much every French president here). Doing so for political revenge is a problem.
Any president would likely attempt the same. However, this is a situation where "normal" might be a threat to democracy.
public opinion, elections, voting behavior, Congress
Another effort to bend the informal rules for partisan-ideological advantage.
QAnon is a dangerous source of conspiracy thinking, pernicious for democratic institutions.
Another indication of erosion of elite commitment to civil management of conflict.
Is within the bounds of democratic norms so long as they do not use the powers of their office to campaign for Trump.
Important as response to the Covid pandemic, but not important from the standpoint of preservation of democratic institutions.
another indication of erosion of basic civility.
Unfortunate, but not in itself a departure from democratic norms.
Important for policy/ climate change control reasons, but not in itself a departure from democratic norms.
A minor policy act relative to gravity of current threats to democratic institutions.
The Ukraine war matters both for our security and our values. A clear and strong response was and remains important.
Leaders of major but rival states need to and normally do engage in high-level discussions of crucial policy issues.
A serious step in direction of dictatorship.
Sadly, pretty normal view, except for putting it in writing.
Not abnormal for someone to lose a leadership position for being out of step with a key party belief. What's not normal here is the belief.
Not sure how to answer because the existence of SoS who denied the results is abnormal but the fact that they lost is not.
I found some of the normal/abnormal questions hard because they combined multiple elements, some of which were normal and others not.
There appears to be a liberal bias in the questions asked, which don't tap into the concerns of many Republicans about the state of US democracy eg about the security of the ballot and tabulation process, whether many non-eligible individuals are allowed to vote, and whether it is appropriate for a candidate who won the primary elections to suddenly drop out of the contest. You may believe that these are inauthentic concerns but any balanced survey would treat these as subjective perceptions and beliefs which could damage the legitimacy of US elections.
It is more normal for a party out of power to go after the president. Presidents do not usually go after the people they have defeated.
Trump is a wannabe dictator and his minons are milking his ego for all it's worth. We are at a most dangerous crossroads in American democracy.
Congress was supposed to be the strongest branch & "promote the general welfare." Current system and case law bear little resemblance to its intent or systems worldwide.
Hard to rate things I've never heard about. Skipped one because of that (not missing conditionally at random).  Importance and normal scales had me wondering on every page: important for what? Normal relative to what? "Normal" just ended up as generic valence.
It is totally irresponsible for the president to support political activists who avocate or use violence in support of racist causes.
This was a stupid action that violates the democratic principles of a free press and the right to peaceful protest; fortunately, its effects were limited, but it shows a lack of understanding of basic democratic principles by military leadership.
It is strange for a president not to disavow proponents of conspiracy theories and non-democratic norms.
The civil service should be professionally qualified career civil servants whose careers are not dependent on the political whims of the president; the president already has enough (and occasionally too much) power over policy through the political appointees at the senior levels, where most major policy decisions are made.
Pardoning one's political friends who have been dully convicted of crimes solely on the basis of their political loyalty to the president certainly violates the intent if not the "letter" of the president's powers of pardon.
Other things being equal, I think this was a mistake by setting a precedent, but in this case Biden asked for and was granted a waiver, so he at least followed appropriate procedure for an unusual case recognizing a qualified Black military officer for the top role in the Pentagon.
Observing international agreements that the US signed is both legal and politically the right thing to do.
It is not unusual for political leaders to dismiss a party leader who criticizes other party leaders (especially the president), but it also shows lack of respect for dissent within US political institutions.
Although I disagree strongly with the Texas law, it is largely up to Texas voters to change a law that violates a woman's right to choose and the rights of abortion providers to assist women who seek an abortion, and not up to the Supreme Court.
Ukraine was invaded by Russia in clear violation of international law and numerous agreements and treaties signed by the Russian Federation after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Indeed, Moscow recognized Ukrainian sovereignty in 1945 when, at Stalin's insistence, the Ukrainian SSR was admitted as one of the 51 original member states of the United Nations! The forceful violation of the sovereignty of all internationally recognized States is the most fundamental principle of international law, and US military assistance to a victim of outright aggression is both legally and politically legitimate and necessary, without which the international order reverts to pure Hobbesian anarchy.
It is perfectly reasonable and appropriate to vote against office-holders who do  not uphold basic democratic standards, even though doing so is relatively rare, but in this case a sign that voters do want democratic processes to be observed.
The US has a right to shoot down unmanned vehicles in US airspace, even though it is unlikely that it provided Chinese intelligence any useful information that they could not obtain by other means.
International conflict management and resolution
harms norm of peaceful transition of power
totally politicizes  pardons and uses it to support criminal power in office & in campaign
further enhances the legitimacy of state level vigilante style justice much like fugitive slave laws.
Very important because it furthers the notion that the insurrection was a legitimate political act.
Trump's disdain for journalists and disregard for press freedom is one of his most autocratic tendencies.
Fighting the disinformation of conspiracy theories is quite crucial today.
For any other politician, this would be a dumb strategy, but Trump can get away with it and still have DeSantis groveling at his feet.
While it is encouraging that 8 of the 11 lost, it is disheartening that 3 of the 11 still won.
Trump is engaging in exactly the kind of judicial weaponization he has accused the Democrats of, except in this case, it is completely unjustified.
Yet even more proof that the former president neither understands nor values freedom of the press
Demonstrates how use of the military on U.S. soil against Americans is very close indeed,
I do not think the former president has any idea what it is.
Shows lack of respect for civil servants
No one was surprised, given all that had happened. Who cares, anyway.
Important if the United States wants a leadership role
To pardon those who disrupted the counting of ballots for the last presidency and to say that they are victims is outrageous.
Canceling student debt is always controversial.
Shows some understanding in the electorate of issues at stake
Spying is constant so this does not really matter.
I love this survey and am glad to be a part of it.
It's bad advance work, that's all.  this is a silly thing to include in this sort of survey.
In a normal world, this is fine. A president has presidential powers until their last day in office. In Trump's instance though, it showed the lie in the claim that waiting for the next president was a principle that justified denying Obama an appointment. Just proved that it was a bold move to steal a seat on the court.
Even joking about the peaceful transition of power after a loss is troubling.
A sitting president essentially endorsing a fringe and dangerous conspiracy is extremely troubling in a democracy.
Pardons are meant to correct miscarriages of justice, not cause them.
The fact that it was done over her truth-telling, not some other policy disagreement or some such is alarming. Party members are essentially being forced to repeat the big lie or be ousted.
Dismissing criminals because they are loyal to him and his attempt to deny the voters their rightful outcome is reprehensible.
Dismissing the capacity of a political rival is normal, but Trump does it in an extreme and personal way - not statesmanlike.
It only seems abnormal because the Republicans in the Senate blocked Obama's final SC nomination over a year before the election..
Much of what Trump does is abnormal.  QAnon is pure propaganda and conspiracy mongering.
The power to pardon is unchecked.  Using it to help friends is not appropriate, but that is Trump.
Other people who are banned don't have the resources that Trump does.
Parties are entitled to expect a party-line and discipline.  It's odd because this party-line is based on a lie.
Congress has delegated too much law and policy-making authority to bureaucratic agencies, but the SC has deferred until recently. A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935)
Spying is normal. The balloon is abnormal.  It exposed a gap in our own surveillance.
Trump's rhetoric has mainstreamed open racism, xenophobia, etc. The extreme fringe white supremacists are openly recruiting and acting.
Mitch McConnell is a good strategist but lacks integrity. Trump was considering candidates within hours of RBG's death after republicans stalled 8 months after Scalia's. Win at any cost.
It's a planned purge of anyone who might follow the law rather than him,
It's brilliant and insightful to how oblivious to detail and reality Trumps inner circle has become
likely in protest of the entire nomination a few weeks before an election rather than based on the hearings
I kind of expect this, and Trump especially blurred the lines between individual and national interests.
Easier to get people to riot when you can promise to make any charges against them disappear.
they're planning how to force the election into congress by intentionally sabotaging the elections
the balloon itself, no, but shooting it down, yes
Again, President Trump used this extremist group as a weapon by showing his influence over the group. His real message was to his political opponents.
President Reagan made similar jokes. However, Pres. Trump makes such comments in a threatening manner.
The heritage of the US military is to be neutral on domestic matters, and as such, stressed civilian rule over the military. There have been times during the Cold War when military and civilian members of the armed forces were warned about agents from communist nations who were agitators or propagandists. Even then, it was restricted to communist ideas. Today, domestic terrorists have replaced communists as threats to the American Republic.
This is a move back to the spoils system.
Presidents of both parties have made similar controversial pardons in the past.
The Republican Party once had several ideological wings, and as such, had particular politicians who would go against the mainstream of the party on some policy and political issues. Such "mavericks" were common. Now, the party has a cult-like informal policy of ousting such party members.
This is evidence of the ideological shift in the Republican Party from a moderate to Conservative Party (at least since 1964) to a populist, authoritarian party.
This would validate overthrowing the US Constitution.
During the Cold War, flights over nations were common.
Religion and politics, US National Security, & Public Administration
See my comment on the previous item about popular impressions of Biden's legitimacy --  Nonsense such as this statement of Trump's captures the essence of whether we should take him literally or seriously. Literally, no -- no executive order could have done what Trump was banging on about -- but seriously, yes, in terms of the orderly handover of power --
Methinks Trump was channeling Rodrigo Duterte at that particular moment --
Speaking of the hopeless bloviations of a sad old man...  Rudy's long descent into irrelevance and futility is a somewhat important story in itself, given the strong popular support he once had (but not, I should note, from me). But he is just a sad footnote to a bygone era by now...
The whole significance of the inauguration is as a symbolic expression of the orderly transition of power, and the absence of Orange Jesus just helped strengthen the opinions of many of his backers that Biden was not a legitimate president and that Trump had somehow been cheated --
Even at the time, most people outside the hardcore MAGA crowd saw those statements as the hopeless bloviations of a deluded old geezer. And, it didn't happen, because there was nothing behind the statements but hot air --
People's views of Cheney, to the extent that they hold any at all, are likely to be extensions of their views of Trump. The Cheney ouster is important in terms of elites' sentiments within the Republican Party, but won't shift many presidential votes --
The move, to the extent that we take it seriously at this point (and we likely should do) signals a deep disregard for the rule of law, and gives strong hints as to how His Trumpitude would treat his backers once in office again --
This is reminiscent of the longtime pattern in Mexico, where one president leaves power, and the new president launches an investigation of the old one and is shocked! shocked! to find corruption has taken place. Usually there had been corruption, yes, but the endless repetition of this dance seriously undermines the credibility of the Mexican chief executive and his/her administration --
It's a great series and I hope the surveys will continue -- it would be really good to see a paper or two in which responses are tracked or summarized over the past several years -- ?
Return of patronage, centralization of power in one person
Spectacle that demeans electoral process, undermines respect for elections by formerly respected public figure
Total transformation of party to personality cult
Subject to change with election of Republican
Authoritarian and hostile to longstanding independence of justice dept
Political behavior and electoral politics
state politics, political inequality, civic education
He has done a lot to normalize political violence. This does not lead anywhere good.
This would allow the construction of a politicized bureaucracy effectively under the president's sole control, with seriously negative consequences for the rule of law, for policy, and for equal accessibility of state agencies by the public.
It was of great benefit to public health in a time of emergency.
Abandoning longstanding rituals of the peaceful transfer of power is probably a bad thing.
It undermines the rule of law and encourages the use of political violence by promising impunity.
He lashes out at everyone eventually. For a normal person, this would matter, but at this point it's just more noise in the constant din of his poor conduct.
Promises to use the power of the state against one's political opponent are a feature of authoritarian governments.
This would be the first step of creating a truly partisan bureaucracy and civil service.
Calls from the President for armed insurrection and political violence against opponents is a profoundly important assault on basic tenets of democracy.
Attacks on the free press, and encouragement of violence on the part of security forces deployed to manage protests, violates a basic tenet of democratic rule
A President even implicitly endorsing a violent political cult violates the basic tenets of democratic rule
This reflects Democrats' appropriate protest of the packing of the Supreme Court enabled by a norms-violating Republican bloc in the Senate, but the decision to boycott the event itself is primarily symbolic.
A striking violation of decorum, but amidst even more remarkable violations of democratic norms, only semi-important
A President rewarding his supporters for criminal behavior is extraordinary damaging to the rule of law.
An example of "policy normalcy" on a matter that impacts the future of the imperiled planet.
It is normal for the US government to support state terror against colonized people, regrettably. And it is important when the President promises to continue to do so.
Conversion of the GOP into a right wing cult has been evident for some time, and resulting actions have become borderline normal, but the banishent of Cheney is important because it represents incontrovertible evidence of that transformation, and may on the margins motivate a small but impactful segment of the traditional GOP electorate to follow Cheney's lead and endorse Harris as the firewall against a Hungarian-style authoritarian transition in the US.
Applauding and providing impunity for insurrectionists is fundamentally counter to basic democratic norms and is nothing short of a call for violent extremists to undermine democratic rule.
Semi-important because a) it is important that they cooperate but b) they are unlikely to reach impactful agreements
"normal" in that  this kind of behavior has become common. But NOT normal if by that one means something like "abides by the principles of democracy and  the rule of law."
To   my mind, the term  "normal' is overly ambivalent.  It can  mean "this  is the way things are done." It can mean "this is  correct or accords with values and principles of  democracy and rule  of  law."
Again, this one is open to contradictory interpretations. Accidentally holding a press conference at a landscaping business is unimportant, but the content of his press conference (refusing to respect the results of an election) was extremely important.
This one is difficult to evaluate. The Supreme Court striking down a regulation is a normal act, but the extremely corrupt influence on several of the current members of the court that led to this decision is obviously not normal. Or if this is now considered "normal" in court politics, it shouldn't be!
Thank you for updating/changing the line regarding Trump's conviction on *falsification of business records* rather than "for paying hush money." If that was in response to my comment last time, I'm glad I could help, and I appreciate that the survey writers took the time to improve the wording on that item.
It was exceptional and a highly important step in fighting the disease.
Normal for Trump, abnormal for any other president.
Unfortunately, the US has little leverage and little leeway to keep Netanyahu within bounds of international law.
Court has, unfortunately, become too heavily partisan.
Demonstration that he is guilty of most if not all the things he accuses others of.
Multiple: political thought, security studies, public policy, South Asia
Not a good question.  COVID was abnormal, so the response was not abnormal given the magnitude of the problem.
Normality would depend on SCOTUS reasoning.  Normal or not, it interferes with problem-solving.
It was in his constitutional authority to do that. I wonder which president would forgo such an opportunity? But in this case, given that the Republican Party refused Obama's pick of Garland because it was "too close " to an election, it is hard not to see this as an (another) effort of a minority part to control outcomes that a majority or would oppose. If constitutional democracy is understood in part as majority rule and also as involving regular, predictable procedures, then this is problematic and important.--but maybe not so abnormal
Members of the Senate should vote for or against. Not voting challenges the process, but what exactly was the problem with the process? Trump was within his legal/constitutional right to appoint who ever he wants and Senators support or not.  Maybe RBG should have stepped down earlier, but that is not the point. On the other hand Gorsuch's nomination involved a bit of a scam by the Senate under Obama, so that would haver at least been understandable.
Trump is not the first president to pardon personal friends and protectors (Clinton) but it is an abuse of the power of the pardon and undermines the rule of law in a variety of ways.
An example of  the ability of a single person and political operator to shape the news and flow of information. Again part of a growing personalization of power and further segments the media scape so that many of Trump's devoted followers get their information only from deeply biased sources.  Other social media may also be problematic for democracy but is not part of a personalization of power.
Returns the US to legal commitments it made earlier administrations.
It is unusual but not unheard of for an incumbent to lose in a primary. The only thing really unusual and important here is the power of Trump (a single individual, rather than a political party). It reflects the personalization of political power, at least in the Republican Party.
What to say? It undermines democracy by effectively promising to reward people for their vote, it undermines the rule of law nullifying the outcomes of criminal procedures, it reflects Trump's refusal to accept the outcome of the 2020 election, thereby undermining the outcomes/legitimacy of elections in the US, etc.
Reflects the effort to paralyze the regulatory agencies (in this case EPA) so that monied private interests can exercise power without regard for  legitimate public interests--clean air, clean water, sustainable land practices, facing up to the Climate emergency facing the world.
It is not abnormal for China to spy on the US and vice versa. It is abnormal for the "spy-vehicle" to be so low that it can be seen by ordinary people on the ground and for it to become such a big news story. The shooting down of the ballon is abnormal but probably unavoidable.
Candidates/officials should not threaten each other, especially if it is a credible threat. In a viable democracy it is required that losers and their supporters accept the outcome of an election (unless there is some reason to believe there really is a problem (fraud). In the US election fraud is very, very rare (historically and still today).
Inappropriate joke, but not earthshattering.
I don't care for that terminology, but it is not necessarily dangerous and could represent a misuse of words.
This should be done only with congressional consent, but the use of executive orders often goes beyond legitimate presidential authority.
This is not a good thing for one party to do when it loses on an important policy matter or, in this case, a nomination.
This should be part of the smooth transition of power. Trump is incapable of being gracious in a situation like this.
This represents unpleasant (not not atypical) intraparty disagreement.
This was an important decision, but it fits with SCOTUS interpretations of bureaucratic overreach and the need for Congress to act in these situations.
It would not be surprising that the U.S. supports Ukraine in this instance, and this is an important foreign policy decision.
Politicians will often attack their opponents.
Presidents should not engage in this kind of retribution against their political opponents. Period.
Political behavior, legislative politics, public policy
Violates norm of peaceful transition of government in the US.
The President can give such pardons, as unsavory as they seem to be.
Unusual for a mainstream Republican to be "primaried" in this manner.
This is an action of a vengeful authoritarian dictator.
Giving recognition and implicit sanction to an extreme movement.
Coupled with prior refusal of Republicans to consider the Obama nominee to fill a seat, it was an unsettling partisan ploy.
It bespeaks a dangerous politicization of the military.
Trump was and remains a dangerous and unhinged man.
It was symbolically significant as a protest of Republicans playing fast and loose with judicial nominations.
What was abnormal was Trump’s withdrawal from the accord.
Nothing much came from this, but further evidence of what a dangerous man Trump is.
It bespeaks a significant shift in Republican Party politics.
It elevated a prominent and credible critic of Trump and his outrageousness.
There is nothing normal about Trump’s take on politics and governing.  He is a sick and dangerous man.
It seems unlikely to amount to much, but it is outrageous on its face.
Very abnormal and very important. It demonstrates Trump's lack of respect for democracy--even as a joke.
This is disturbing--although it may reflect deeply-set attitudes in the defense establishment.
It reflects Trump's efforts to undermine the civil service and reflects his authoritarian tendencies.
This is normal, for the most part. What was abnormal was the US withdrawing from the agreement.
It reflects Trump's inability to accept defeat, his lack of understanding about how the political system works, and more generally his unfitness for office.
It's a normal sort of action by the Court, but important with respect to the lives of pregnant Texans.
This reflects Trump's lack of respect for the rule of law, and serves to embolden people who engage in political violence in support of him.
The fact that Trump's actions after his defeat in 2020 led to a criminal investigation was extremely unusual, but it reflected the nature of his actions and an attempt to hold him accountable. In this case, however, Trump is again threatening political norms that call for treating one's opponents with respect.
Political regimes and regime transitions
Comparative Politics and Political Economy of OECD nations
presidents don't need to disavow every idiot
ENtirely consistent with most of US history, less so in the modern era.
He's telling us his plan and allowing us to make decision.  Souinds like democracy to me.
Is it announcing the plan, or using executive powers?  First is normal, second less so.
It's "mostly normal" in that 14 of 116 Justices were appointed & confirmed in a presidential election year, including one controversial and one notable case: Wilson appointed Louis Brandeis in 1916, the first Jewish justice (very controversial, blatant antisemitism, difficult confirmation); and Hoover appointed Benjamin Cardoza in 1932 (a cross-party appointment & the so called Jewish seat was occupied). It's extremely important in that this provided the 6th conservative vote to overturn Roe v Wade. This meant that Chief Justice Roberts was no longer the median vote, and he could not forge a more moderate decision that restricted but did not overturn the precedent.
This is a gross abuse of the pardon power. Courts can't hear it; impeachment is the only remedy. Republicans would never act.
Absolutists support strong nd swift punishment.  A prolonged judicial process where attorneys play around with the facts and rules?  Not so much.
People in the military take an oath to protect nd defend the Constitution.  Protestors and journalists are mostly citizens.  If this is true, whoever came up with this should be disciplined if in the military.  If a contractor, never use them again.
DJT has narcissistic personality disorder with pathological features.  It is partly heritable.  He is a story teller who will just say whatever pops into his head and ear candy to his admirers.  Alford and Hibbing set out the concept of absolutists.  They tend to be people who like a strong leader, along with other political orientations commonly called authoritarian.  They are easy prey for the fascist playbook.
The civil service is comprised of hard working, public spirited professionals who show up for work and do their jobs, almost always competently.  There are already too many political appointees, and many are wholly incompetent.  Turn back the clock to the spoils era?  Really?
Is Don Matthews turning over in his grave?
The FDA's job is to protect human health and a pandemic may require immediate if somewhat risky action.
A new alpha male replaces a defeated one.  Chimpanzee Politics is informative on this point.  Sulk away.  Don't be seen to be submissive to your rival who has just bested you.
I am not sure of the history of this rule.  Perhaps it exists to prevent retired generals serving as Defense Secretary to steer contracts to favored contractors. s.
Well, the grifter certainly knows how to scam people.  He's a skilled con man.  Give him credit where credit is due.
It demonstrated the long standing special relationship between Israel and the United States.  AIPAC has been a very effective lobby.  The United States holds Israel to a high standard but seldom sanctions Israel if it takes actions that are ot in this country's interest.
The Neocons have long been in charge of U.S. foreign policy.  There have been several regime change operations that have failed at great cost.  John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs blame the threat of NATO expansion into Ukraine for the war.  I'm no expert, so do not know if they are right.  Regardless, the U.S. public is kept in the dark about alternative narratives about this war.  No debate in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee either.  All aboard!
This is a violation of a  norm of democratic politics.  It is what authoritarian rulers do.  It spells the end of democracy.
There are interesting questions on this survey.
A president has the right to nominate judges throughout their presidency
U.S. citizens should never be regarded as "adversaries"
a rogue supreme court following an obtuse constitutional theory
one needs a regulatory state operating on the basis of science
During a nationally-televised debate prior to a highly-contested election, the sitting president called on a militia as if he was giving them direct orders. Comparisons to Hitler are rarely helpful in modern politics, but the parallels to the Brownshirts in the SA are hard to ignore.
I don't know the specifics, but if it was a joke it's not a big deal. If it was signaling something other than a joke, that's different.
It demonstrates the president's willingness to blindly support whoever says nice things about him.
I only said "mostly unimportant" because the fact that it was so embarrassing probably helped take the wind out of the sails of the movement to overturn the 2020 election.
It was unusual for a person in leadership to fall from grace so quickly entirely because she would not bow to her party's leader. The fact that she's the daughter of a former VP and conservative in her own right also suggests that personal loyalty to Trump is more important than ideology, values, or policy in the GOP.... but then again I could have told you that using many other examples so it wasn't entirely surprising.
This struck down the Chevron Doctrine, right? That's important because Congress has been unable to effectively legislate for most of my adult life and the regulatory process is the only way I see feasible change made on a variety of issues.
This will be a major test of executive power to accomplish debt relief without congressional cooperation.
It was clumsy by the Chinese. But nations do clumsy things all the time.
The important difference between the prosecution of Trump and Trump's proposed prosecution of Biden is that the latter appears to be entirely without evidence or established process.
It's semi-importance lies in the fact that the Trump campaign and his associates- spanning from 2015 to 2020- were disorganized on a level rarely seen in national politics.
It is abnormal that these people denied the election results. It is borderline-normal that they were rejected at the ballot box.
I love taking the surveys and using them for teaching material
I don't know what the practice of the DoD is in this area
Having secretaries of state deny the results of an election is abnormal, but it's so unusual that  I'm not sure how important that is.
To be expected, although somewhat norm breaking.
This is a fairly standard practice that means more for party solidarity than its impact on electoral politics.
Rejoining was critical to supporting global cooperation on climate.
This statement represents a long standing US policy and is consistent with international law.
Party politics triumphing over good governance.
A sad commentary on the Republican voters of Wyoming.
Should this occur it would seriously weaken the commitment to the rule of law, a very serious development for a democratic society.
Dismissing the expertise of the EPA set a concerning precedent.
It is critical to support Ukraine over Putin's neo-imperialist policy.
Kudos to the voting public in these 8 ststes.
I live in Wyoming. Ms. Cheney was fiercely right-wing; her only sin was to stand up to Trump. To see her get ousted for that was revealing about how in thrall to an erratic man with authoritarian instincts that party's base now is.
It is abnormal to have so many secretaries of state deny election results< which is why I ranked this as 'mostly abnormal.'
It would have been completely normal, if Republicans had not asserted the opposite norm just four years earlier. So the question kind of is, which was the abnormal event? I think it was more the first one than the second one.
This was meant as a rebuke to Republican hypocrisy for doing the same to Garland but proceeding with Coney Barrett, and tit for tat retaliation is a common political strategy.
As long as they observed limitations on campaigning using government resources, i think this is pretty normal.
The decision implicitly "blessed" a radical departure from settled law, and condoned a transparent scheme to avoid settled law, so it was wrong; but the fact of allowing a lower court decision to stand is not itself an issue.
Clear violation of separation of powers and the president even said that he knew it was beyond his power and dared the court to stop him. Nancy Pelosi said it was for Congress to do this. But lots of electoral incentive to do it!
We spy on them, they spy on us, nothing new.
Like QAnon, anything about the Proud Boys is abnormal.  They're the modern iteration of American Fascist movements.  Trump will support anyone who loves him.  He's still vague enough on here to maintain plausible deniability on what he means.  Trump isn't really a Fascist himself (Mussolini would have told them to go forth and do violence to anyone who stands in the way), but he does love it when they love him.
This would be normal if we were in Brazil in the 1970s or Russia today.  It's not normal in a democracy.  It doesn't appear to have stuck, so it seems that the Trump administration's efforts to use the military domestically is coming up against two centuries of institutional inertia and a culture that seeks to avoid a domestic political role.  As long as that holds it won't be an issue, but I do see the Trump administration picking away at this if he returns.  There may also be a new wave of junior officers that are much more open to this kind of idea in the coming years that do pose a risk.
Everything about QAnon is abnormal.   It's important since Trump is willing to break norms or basic understandings of reality to get support.  I don't know that he actually buys any of it (and there's evidence he finds most of his followers to be fools or "basement dwellers") but he does love anyone who loves him without question.  This kind of cultish loyalty is dangerous.
It was an emergency situation, so expedited approvals aren't that strange.
Until recently, we've had few recently retired generals as Secretary of Defense.  Two in 8 years doesn't really make a trend, but it could be a problem if this continues to happen and we see an erosion of civil control of the military.
This is normal for a big internet personality (he couldn't afford to buy Twitter like Musk could) to do.  He didn't say anything he wouldn't have elsewhere.  I don't think anyone but journalists following Trump really use Truth Social anyway.
This falls within long-established patterns of US foreign policy and international law on state sovereignty.
This was one of those strange fantasy moments for Trump.  It's been done elsewhere with Mexico's 2006-2012 "People's President," but it's not something that's normal in an established democracy.  This was also at Trump's political low point, so it's largely buried under a lot of other things he's done.
This is becoming mostly normal.  The Republican party has been purging itself of the old guard since 2016 (maybe even 2010 with the Tea Party movement).  Parties do get to control their leadership, but it is telling that a major faction is being removed without really any place to go.
It's become normal for primary voters to punish anyone who rejects Trumpism.  It's important because it illustrates the tendency of primary elections to empower a radical faction to dictate the future of a party.
This is relatively normal policy aimed at gaining support from a known base voter group.
Political prosecution for revenge is a dangerous precedent to set.  While prosecuting ex-leaders and even sitting officials (where allowed) is normal and not a problem, this statement indicates blatant politicization.  Particularly since it is often associated with Biden's policies or the actions of his son (who is being prosecuted separately already).  I don't know how that would work after the Supreme Court excluded official acts, but legal consistency isn't one of Trump's strong points.
10 years ago it would have been a shockingly callous expression by a political candidate, but Trump's rhetoric over the years has made this seem mundane and in line with his attitude about violence and his disdain for non-supportive media.
Context matters - was this training course intended to confront a potential repeat of January 6th (not too awful) or intended as the foundation for dealing with all types of protests going forward (abnormal)?
He's delusional and using the issue to rally his cult followers. He cannot concede that he is a loser and neither can they. It's important because he fails to miss the opportunity to undermine the democratic system and by doing so promotes violence.
As the leader of whatever the GOP used to be, he can push his agenda...politics is personal these days, so...
Project 2025 goals...dangerous people who are anti-democratic.
Important from a climate-change perspective, but not out of the realm of the politics of "small, privileged groups" operating in a democratic society.
Only important if trump wins. Sounds very autocratic.
It does not exist and Trump is perpetuating lies. Not a surprise though since this is his SOP
Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell stopped President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland saying it was too close to elections.  Yet, this appointment was even closer to elections. It is a sleazy move and a double standard.
These people are criminals and threaten democracy.  They should be in prison.
People should be held accountable for political violence, especially in trying to stop the democratic process and attacking American institutions.
Ukraine was invaded by Russia for a second time, and though the US and other NATO allies do not want to be involved in a conflict with Russia, supporting Ukraine is an effort to confront Russian aggression in an oblique way.
Trump lashes out at everyone he perceives as a competitor.
These actions threaten the integrity of our elections and make people distrust the democratic process. Reasons for not certifying election results were based on obvious lies.  These people should have a trial and then go to prison; and never hold any office ever again
Campaigns and Elections, Political Parties, Interest Groups
harms the rule of law and legitimates political corruption
Court blatantly supports privatized vigilante justice analogous to the Fugitive Slave Acts
delegitimizes elections across the nation making a functioning democracy significantly more difficult
presidency, race politics, public policy
This seemed to be an incitement, or an invitation to violence (especially given later invitation to come to D.C. on Jan. 6, will be wild).
Presidents pardon all kinds of shady characters.  What makes it slightly less than normal is the context-- where others who committed minor offenses did not get pardons, and the overall number of pardons was small.
There is a variety of social media outlets.  His lack of financial investment is the more troubling aspect of this-- it appears as a gift or a bribe.  The existence of his media outlet likely limits his reach to his true believers.  Such persons probably already self select their media exposure.
Leaving such agreements to the whim of the executive (including exiting a negotiated agreement) seems to violate the principle of Senate involvement in the process.  It creates instability in U.S. foreign policy, and makes it subject to the personal whims of leaders rather than a process with accountability.
It exposes a threat to a peaceful transition of power that one party is tacitly supporting.
Before the Supreme Court ruled that women have no fundamental right to abortion, they permitted a state to sanction the exercise of that right.  This was putting the cart before the horse, given what the Court had previously decided in Roe.  If the Court intended to decide that women, indeed, lacked this right, they needed to make that decision first.  Else, women and clinics are being punished for engaging in behaviors that had otherwise already been ruled legal.
The U.S. had a defense agreement with Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine giving up their nuclear arsenal.  Thus, this was an obligation (which we haven't done an effective job of meeting).  Failing to adequately aid in Ukraine's defense merely encourages nuclear proliferation.  If this is undesirable, then our commitment to Ukraine is important.
freedom of the press is essential in a functioning democracy
normal as in "normal behavior for Trump"
impunity for acolytes is anti-democratic
Such an invitation to violence is very dangerous.
Because it was another "stolen seat" by the Republicans, the Democrats needed to make their point.
It challenges the peaceful transfer of power.
Important because of its ramifications.  Strange after the blocking of Garland appointment by Obama.
Undisciplined man with logorrhea expresses an unrealizable fantasy.
Replacing a civil service governed by law with a personalistic bureucracy
Against federal law but no way to punish short of impeachment, which would be blocked in the Senate
Broke with precedent on peaceful turnover of power
Pulling out was abnormal. This is a return to normalcy
There needs to be evidence of a crime to do this.
Implying political violence should be disqualifying for an American candidate for any political office.
It might have been more a case of an unfortunate choice of words regarding security concerns than an actual undemocratic act.
Refusing to disavow conspiracy theories of any sort undermine democracy.
The neutrality of serving members of the president's cabinet ought to be observed but using political figures in this way probably does not qualify as egregious behavior,
There is precedent for this action, though its observance is a significant symbol of the legitimate transfer of power.
Climate change should be a top global priority, despite economic repercussions.
Defending Israel's right to exist has been standard policy for both major parties since the creation of the State of Israel.
Upholding the rule of law is essential to the maintenance of an effective democracy.
Helping to defend democracies (especially, though not exclusively, in Europe) from invasion by a hostile and authoritarian state should be standard American policy.
The fact that any candidate made such claims and won in any state is deeply troubling.
I previously considered this to be mostly abnormal, but it has evolved to be a type of accepted wisdom that it will happen. It has been semi-normalized.
I see this as important for our ability to address climate change, but not important in terms of threats to democracy
Again, it would be nice if it weren't normal.
It would be nice if it wasn't normal, and the US called out the government of Israel for its violations of international law, but sadly, that would be abnormal.
Such hardball tactics are damaging to democracy, especially in light of McConnell's arguments as to why Garland should not get a hearing.
Mostly abnormal owing to the scope of the EO and how it was implemented.
Worrisome to have political leaders in charge of social media platforms.
Abnormal because she lost her seat for standing up for democracy.
Highlights the tendency for presidents to keep pushing the boundaries of presidential power, but reigned in by the courts.
The style of lashing out was problematic.
Abnormal that any such actor would be nominated. Important that most were defeated, but problematic not all were.
Reporters who place themselves in harm's way intentionally cannot demand special treatment.
Reveals the perceptions of the Pentagon given journalists' self-serving claims to being watchdogs, when reality is more journalists adopt hostile deportment in a bid for self-advancement.
Revealed ability to act more quickly in crisis.
Sends a terrible signal to foreign adversaries about fundamental American unity.
Ordinary politics reflecting the ideology of the party in power.  It is unimportant as the pact has no binding authorities.
Revealed distaste for Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, foreshadowing the Dobbs case.
Would be a direct violation of the Constitution's grant of the power of the purse to congress.
Unusual for an intra-party dispute to be so publicly vitriolic, but of no lasting importance.
Reflects accountability at the polls, as representative government is intended to work.
presidency, political culture, social movements
In 2021 it was normal and unremarkable. Repeating it during the 2024 war in Gaza was less normal and dangerous.
The nomination is important, not as much as the timing.
Very little about the 2020 election was normal!
Candidates losing their races is normal.
Presidents should respect free speech rights and a free press.
Presidents should not be identified with a far right conspiracy group if our democracy is to survive.
This action indicated support for a woman's right to choose.  It was prophetic.
We rejoined our allies in addressing climate change.
This was another impediment for women experiencing problem pregnancies.
As Hurricane Helene has shown, there are reasons to attack climate change and warming.
Election battles will involve disagreements.
Would have liked more specific quesitons on authoritarianism.
Unrealistic claim; possibly a joke. Definitely evidence that Trump does not understand the Constitution and what executive power does and does not entail.
In principle, such an order might be appropriate if the reason is non-political, but here, it's a political strategy to purge the civil service and promotes the GOP plan to destroy the administrative state.
Sign of hyperpartisanship; I'd prefer voting to boycotting.
Absolutely necessary to end the pandemic. A worthy exception to normal FDA procedures.
Signaled to Trump's supporters his insistance that Biden did not win and encouraged them also to adhere to false claim that Trump won and that Biden is not the legitimate US president.
Biden followed the legal process as he should. Sometimes, given an array of possible appointees, this choice can be justified.
Global problems require global solutions. US must lead and support efforts to address climate change.
Ten years ago, this would have been abnormal, but for the GOP of the 2020's, this is normal, similar to "retiring" Speakers who displease the hardline faction. It's a new normal.
Another indicator of the power of Trump over the GOP.
Reinforces Trump's fake news that he won the election and therefore the rioters were patriots serving democracy; we all witnessed a coup in progress with our own eyes.
This is a major reversal of long-standing practice and rejects the idea that in technical policy areas, technical experts are needed to write, implement and enforce federal rules and regulations. The major economic impact "doctrine" whereby Congress would reclaim authority, in the current political context of divided government with hyperpartisanship, means that Congress would not be able to pass such regulatory reviews and thereby put a stop to effective federal regulation.
An indicator that the GOP is a Trump cult where his supporters are emboldened by his campaign style of lashing out at any threat to his position.  Encourages his supporters also to lash out.
Reveals Trump's anti-democratic nature. Jokes are projections of what he'd like todo, if he could.
This is part of Trump's embrace of violence in politics to further his anti-democratic ambitions.
QAnon is a destructive force in American politics and should be marginalized.
Trump has no respect for democratic norms.
Public health is vital concern that only the federal government can address.
Trump has no respect for democratic traditions, especially the peaceful transfer of power. John Adams also skipped it, by the way, another president with little or respect for democracy.
Climate wreckage is as serious a problem as are threats to democracy.
It's unfortunately normal. One people militarily occupying another people cannot rightfully be said to be defending themselves when that people breaks out of its prison.
Students should not have to assume massive debt to receive a college education and further their careers. In fact, college should be free.
Russia is trying to rebuild its lost (communist) empire and does not regard Ukraine as a sovereign nation or people. This is INTOLERABLE.
All eleven should have lost. They are anti-democratic and should not be allowed to hold office.
The questions about Trump and normality are tricky. There are things that are normal for Trump but not, supposedly, for American politics.
Coming on the refusal of the GOP Senators to hear Garland's nomination because it was too close to the inauguration, this is more of an issue for the Senate than POTUS.  But it demonstrated how partisan the body has become that what, for one president was unacceptable is fine for another to do.
Refusal to disavow a conspiracy-minded entity with extremist ties?  Yes, abnormal.  Mostly important because it acts to encourage such groups and to legitimize them.
Outgoing Presidents attend, even when having lost the election (See George H.W. Bush) or handing the power to the other party (See Clinton).  The lack of respect for the democratic process is evident.  The weakening of trust in democracy is a threat.
Presidents pardon.  The difference here is that these actors were all part of his inner circle.
We've always supported Israel's right to defend itself.
A presidential candidate who is already setting the stage to claim electoral inconsistencies is not common and is highly likely to undermine voters' trust in the system, notably his voters.
Incumbents usually don't lose.  The importance is the signaling that, within the GOP, MAGA is dominant.
Normal for world leaders to agree to talk on issues, though tensions between US and China had been rising.  Mostly important because it signals some intention to lower those tensions, but we'll have to see whether the cooperation leads anywhere, especially with other issues like the South China Sea (not so far).
My guess is that it's somewhat abnormal for so many incumbents to lose.  It's important because it (hopefully) lessens the tendencies for Secretaries of State to follow their own partisan beliefs rather than the evidence of how voters voted.
Creates at least the image that law enforcement is but a tool of leaders to pursue rule by law (rather than rule of law).
The answer here depends on whether this is typical Trump bluster or he’ll actually follow through. Four years ago, I would have said Normal because I would expect this to be Trump shooting off his mouth. Since he’s been prosecuted in the last four years, however, I think there’s a much higher chance he acts on it in response. I also think that we’re in the process of establishing a precedent in which we see prosecutions after party changes.
Regardless of Trump’s actual intentions at the moment of this utterance and the possibility that he misspoke (verbal precision is not his strength and he did look momentarily confused as he said this), he has a well documented affinity for far-right extremists and white supremacists, repeatedly expressed in both words and deeds. He also has a track record of encouraging political violence by his followers. Certainly the Proud Boys themselves understood this statement as a call to arms and acted accordingly, taking a leading role in the Insurrection.
Critical journalism and public protest are essential democratic activities protected under the First Amendment. Suppressing them with military force amounts to authoritarian rule.
This strikes me as mostly normal in the sense that functioning government needs to respond to extraordinary crises with some flexibility, and it did. Covid was an extraordinary threat to public health and welfare that claimed well over a million American lives, so in that sense the situation was abnormal while this response within the realm of what should be expected from functioning government.
The act itself was unusual and of little direct consequence. But it was yet another indicator of the former President’s contempt for democratic principles and the rule of law. That underlying authoritarianism is extremely important.
These are clear manifestations of the former President’s corruption and contempt for the law. He wants his agents to be able to act on his behalf with the same legal impunity he seeks for himself. More than the actual pardons themselves, this underlying drive for impunity undermines the rule of law that is fundamental to a republic and is a profound danger.
Aside from the fact that this is an instance of the massive and consistent stream of misinformation flowing from the former President, the idea that he could be reinstated in the face of electoral loss is a direct threat to democracy.
A prominent conservative politician is vilified as a “RINO” by her own party and turned out of office in favor of a little known MAGA stooge. This is yet another instance of the transformation of the GOP into a vehicle for the authoritarian Trump cult of personality.
The Court is systematically undermining the ability of the state to regulate the activities of private enterprise. In doing this the Court is pursuing a partisan strategy that harkens back to opposition to Reconstruction by the southern white elite and to the New Deal by business conservatives. The Court’s agenda resonates with strategies laid out in the Powell Memo of 1971, and now with Project 2025. The Court is acting as a partisan agent in ways that will have historic consequences, not the least of which is further empowering private business as a politically dominant actor and enshrining private profit as the greatest public good.
I don’t know how to respond to this. Normal for Trump. In itself not especially consequential but indicative of his extremely mean-spirited mode of politics.
The prevalence of election denial in the GOP despite lack of evidence that major election fraud actually occurred is abnormal and dangerous. The fact that a majority of these people lost their elections is moderately encouraging. That some of them won, and that the Big Lie continues to be Republican dogma and a litmus test for their candidates is a serious problem.
Political Economy and Right Wing Populism
Most leaders choose to disavow unpopular or fringe supporters to avoid alienating moderates (e.g. Obama re: Rev. Jeremiah Wright in 2008), but Trump tends not to do this.
Many in the Trumpist faction of the Republican Party are not extremely competent. This limits their damage to US democracy while in power, even though they espouse troubling ideas.
Parties often punish members that step out of line on high profile matters. However, this is different than most policy differences.
As in previous surveys, I answered the initial "rate the quality of democracy in the US" question by consulting the V-Dem v14 Liberal Democracy Index.  Wouldn't it make sense to put this question after the specific questions, so you get an answer informed by one's thinking about the specifics, rather than just a more or less knee-jerk response? I guess for the time series you have to keep doing it the way you started.
This survey was way too long and you did not mention in your email that it would take 15 minutes to do. I will not be answering your surveys again, since I feel that this was a bit disingenious.
Rich guy con men can own their own social media.
It was a balloon and the US followed it across the country..much to do about nothing.
Trump is a con man and there is no legal reason to go after Biden. Don't nomalize Trump or use false equivalencies which this survey might.
It is interesting but at times, the survey normalizes Trump's behavior or wants the behavior to be normalized. Why no questions about January 6, 2021?
Civilians should remain at the top of the bureaucracy.
This was rather lengthy and some of the question were difficult to interpret.
Abnormal because of the three, not the eight
The president of any party must respect the right of the press to do their job.  A free press is essential to a free government.  Firing bullets, rubber or real, is a direct attack on democracy and the press.
This is another example of Trump trying to destroy the protections for government workers and threatening to replace them en masse with employees of his choice.  We would have a government of Trump loyalists and not a government of workers sworn to be neutral in the performance of their job.
The transition of government from one party to another is an essential element of American democracy.  To first try to illegally stop the election of the candidate who won by 7 million votes and won the electoral vote as well, and then he refuses to be present at the inauguration of the winner demonstrates poor sportsmanship.  It it like the child at a baseball game is on the team that loses and he takes his ball and goes home.
The question, in part, depends on how and why the policy went into effect, as well as why the president felt so strongly about seeking a waiver instead of finding an alternative candidate.
Different administrations have the right to alter public policy, assuming it is not done to threaten democracy.  This country has had many examples of new administrations altering public policy.
Countries have the right to “defend themselves” when attacked.  Whether it was Poland in WW II or the Ukraine or Israel today, any country must have the tight of self defense when attacked.
Here was a person who was elected to a high position of leadership in a party and then ousted for attacking the ex-president for using illegal tactics in an effort to retain power.  I can imagine where party members might disagree with Cheney’s actions, but it is hard to imagine almost complete uniformity in ousting Cheney.
Constituents have every right to vote for the candidate if their choice, but that decision should be based on sound reasoning.  Overwhelmingly supporter a candidate in the past election and then overwhelmingly voting against that candidate in the next election is a sign of serious issues  that have caused such a massive switch in the voters perception of the candidates quality.  Expressing her personal opinion about a presidential candidate should not be a disqualifying event.  It is, in my view, a profile in courage.
A president who loses his reelection campaign and then uses every attempt, both legal and illegal to protest the election result in an effort to retain office is one of the greatest threats to democracy imaginable.  Then to pardon the individuals who he encouraged to engage in illegal acts is criminal.  And, Trump, is a criminal in so many ways.
The US has traditionally backed its allies in various ways, including sending money and military equipment.
Candidates have the right to challenge their opponents.  It depends on what is meant by “lashed out.”  Verbal attacks on opponents is hardly a new phenomenon, although some candidates can engage in attacks that are blatantly unfair.
Governments do not usually engage in behavior to spy on other nations.  Every government is able to collect information about hostile nations,but not in a manner that potentially is perceived to be “an act of war.”
An attack on the press and political violence are normalized
Military respect for the US constitution is a core check on the military
Trump has continued to degrade respect for the law
It weakens the culture of respect for law.
Personalism has shaded into self absorption
Maintaining policy and alliances is very important in foreign affairs
The Supreme Court for most of its existence has favored business interests and been against government restraints on big business
Pump priming for ordinary people would return the country to a more solid financial base.
Te two leading polluters are in a position to lessen global pollution
Ordinary people are awake to the threat of right-wing anarchism
Reveals the tendency of a person to imagine government belongs to him.
dangerous to have a past president and major candidate to fuel conspiracy theories. people are confused enough
symbolic but important to show the peaceful transfer of power
No room for dissent or truth in Republican party if it goes against Trump
Important in showing the dominance of Trump in the Republican party. No guardrails.
democracies don't put their opponents in prison unless they violate the law
The idea was normal; the implementation was bad.
I mean it was important for addressing the pandemic, but it was unimportant from the perspective of lasting change to the federal government.
This is representative of the lack of respect for a system where parties lose election and agree to compete again under the same institutions in the next instance.
Sour grapes. See, e.g., George McGovern.
Holders of obscure offices should not get out over their skis.
American Political Thought and Religion and Politics
It was abnormal in the sense that is was unprecedented.
People like the Proud Boys used to be considered beyond the pale, but Trump is trying to use them as his own brownshirts.
Attacks on journalists by Trump and the Republican Party are common, as is their advocacy of violence against peaceful protests, so it isn't really surprising this happens but it is deeply troubling.
We need politicians to be part of the reality-based community.
It is part of his attempt to weaponize government itself after his political foes, and if successful will allow him or a successor to overthrow elections and corrupt US policy for personal or partisan purposes.
The way the Senate under Mitch McConnell rammed through ACB's confirmation to the US Supreme Court was a disgrace. The only things the Democrats could do was protest it, so while it was abnormal to do this it was important that they do it.
I don't recall it happening before, so if so it was rare. Having Cabinet officials serve as campaign surrogates is probably a violation of the law which prevents government officials from political activities when performing their duties.
It tells us lots about Trump's character, as well as the threat he poses to our democracy.
While we should have never left the Paris Agreement, and the US is not exactly the most responsible global citizen when it comes to things like that, it is still important that we be part of this.
What makes it abnormal is both the invasion and the strong US response. While the invasion itself is a threat to the current world order, the US response is helping to maintain it.
Without cooperation between the US and China, effective action against climate change is almost impossible. Fortunately it is normal to talk about things like this.
China spies on us all the time, and tries to use balloons periodically. Not a big deal.
Just one more indication that Trump wants to be a tyrant.
Political behavior, global south, democracy
Indirect encouragement of militia activity.
Further encouragement of militia activity and conspiracy group.
Exactly what should happen in a pandemic.
Not unusual to see pardons of close political allies (or relatives, as Kushner was, kind of) by outgoing presidents.
Civilian control of US military well established
Reflects Trump's control of GOP.  But past presidents have had strong control over their parties as well.  Unusual that a member of the party's Congressional leadership would so publicly criticize the former president and leader of the party.
Might just be campaign rhetoric, but I think he would do it.  We will see.  Would be important if he did.  Further encouragement of militia activity.
The shooting down is abnormal.  The fact of spying from the sky is normal.  Does not seem to have had lasting consequences.
Would establish a bipartisan precedent of successor presidents trying to prosecute their predecessors.  Both Democratic and Republican incumbents would have done that.
Legislative Studies and Women & Politics
Typical, but dangerously petulant, behavior by a man who refused to accept the election results.
No process for the pardons applied to cronies.
Part of an effort to undermine legitimate executive authority by an ideologically driven Court majority
Underlines MAGA efforts to de-legitimize election results when they lose.
"Normal" is a vague term between "being widely practiced" and "acceptable". Was slavery "normal" in pre-1850 USA?
Latin American Politics and political behavior
response to her being rushed through at the last minute
It's important in a democracy for an outgoing leader to indicate support for the transition in power and the legitimacy of the election.
Interesting survey. I appreciate the design. When and where will we be informed of results?
It shows how the party is dominated by blind followership
Democratization, Political Economy, Latin America
It is important because of the insinuation of a subversion of democratic process.
Holding a press conference is normal. It's what was said and how it was conducted that was so unusual.
They boycotted the vote because of how the GOP has been abnormal. Merrick Garland couldn't get a hearing because he was nominated 236 days before an election, but she could get confirmed after Ginsburg died 46 days before the election? The sheer hypocrisy of what the Republican party did is galling. They have effectively turned their Senate advantage into a lock on the Supreme Court for generations.
Not a threat to democracy; not the normal process, but we're talking about a disease that was completely abnormal.
The pardon power has been abused by both sides for far too long, so this is sadly normal.
It's yet more expansion of executive power.
For the purposes of democracy in the United States, this is unimportant.
Only reason I rated it as important as I did is because the underlying policy is very important to humanity. But, this is quite normal and has no real implications for democracy.
The only way back from the abyss is for sanity to return to the GOP.
Internation Organization, International Human Rights
Violent far right groups speak in code that outsiders may not understand. He should have been taken literally by the public and the press.
In retrospect Trump was signaling that he was capturing the SCOTUS, a countermajoritarian institution.
We have a presidential candidate trading in fringe groups.
It was a symbolic move, but not clear anyone remembers.
It's now clear the countermajoritiarian stacked SCOTUS will be used to dismantle all New Deal and liberal policy.
Good move, unclear how it affects the election although certainly helpful to individuals.
It is sad to see a presidential candidate support a far-right militia. That could have serious consequences should he be elected again.
Making your own citizens "enemies" is a problem, certainly.
Cheney gets media attention, so perhaps more important that the average Congressperson.
A rather audible dog whistle communicating with a white supremacist group.
This is not unexpected from Trump.  We already know that he is anti-free press, which makes his action only semi-important.
This is truly horrible and shows how much Trump either believes this bizarre conspiracy or is willing to manipulate the American public by using it.
It is not unusual for American leaders to want to control the civil service.  This is so important in a Trump administration because it is Trump's intention is civil servants who are not loyal to him.  Trump will erode the structural resistance to authoritarian (but elected) presidents.
Pete Buttigieg is serving as surrogate for Harris.
How civilian should the secretary be?  How do we balance needs for expertise and  civilian ethos.
It is important in the sense that Trump is still able to communicate and use his platform powerfully to deepen cleavages in American society.  Given problems with the platform, it is less important than it could have been and most reinforces already existing cleavages.
Although treaty obligations tend to be more durable despite changes of the Executive, it's not unheard of to have shifts in major foreign policy commitments.  If the current situation is only a short term return to the accord, then American membership or lack thereof will be less important. that it would be with a long term commitment.
The emperor has no clothes, but the vast majority of Republicans refuse to admit that he is naked.
Coal-fired power plants are important contributors to global climate change, and failing to take action on climate change will have deleterious effects on the planet.
Countries spy on each other.  Vigilance is important but insufficient to stop it.
The public health emergency justified cutting some regulatory red tape.  It carried risks but ranks as one of Trump's better decisions as President.
Biden stated the obvious.  It would have been more important if he had done otherwise.
Personality cults bother me, whether they are about FDR, JFK, the Bushes, or Trump.
The voters are sovereign.  It is their decision, but it is unhealthy that voters of either party become a personality cult.  It won't be good for the Republican party in the long run.
An encouraging step in curbing regulatory over-reach.
Encouraging sign of good sense by voters.
Unfortunately. Trump is not wrong in seeing that as equivalent to the "lawfare" used against him.
Presidents have the prerogative to nominate people to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court.
There is little respect for civil liberties in this statement.
This policy position is within the realm of possible policy outcomes.
This result indicates voters disagreed with election deniers from 2020, indicating the voters believed the vote in 2020 was free and fair.
Espionage is among the most ancient of actions by nation-states. The brazenness of this activity is unusual, though.
This action strongly suggests revenge is the motivation, not justice.
This is consistent with Trump’s distain for the Constitution and democracy.
It shows the lack of intelligence by Trump supporters, and of people he would put in positions of authority if he returned to the White House.
All of these pardons were based on the merits of the individual cases. What Trump does show is that he will allow support corrupt acts that either bring him money or has the prospect increasing his power.
This decision, and the more recent one on the Chevron doctrine will make it extremely difficult for regulatory agencies to do their job in an efficient manner. This has a severe impact on the health and safety of all Americans.
It should not be a shock that nations find ways to spy on each other.
It's not the setting but what he said there that matters most.
I appreciate the opportunity to respond on these vital public policy issues. Thank you! A well designed survey. Blessings, Colossians 3:14,  And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
This is important to overturn civil service rules that have been used since 1880s.
Trump isn't the key player here, McConnell is. Trump jumped on the nomination as any president would. McConnell demonstrated his lack of moral principles by applying different rules to Barrett's nomination than to Garland's four years earlier.
Further evidence that Trump has no interest in democracy and hopes to disassemble it in America.
I don't know what was going on. On the face of it, that sounds absurd, abnormal, and important. But I need more information.
This implies that journalists are activists. They are not. There is a difference between reporting and activism, whether or not the anti-truth "alternative facts" arm of the right wants to acknowledge it.
This is all part of the GOP strategy of denying that truth exists. Dangerous.
Highly inappropriate, but I don't know that it's abnormal or illegal.
It's abnormal because most politicians don't have the money to do this. It's somewhat important because it guaranteed Trump an echo chamber for his delusional ranting.
The GOP had already lost any veneer of integrity long before this happened. It is unsurprising that they behaved without integrity toward Cheney, who did what she thought was right. That said, parties should get to decide for themselves who does and doesn't belong among their ranks. So: This act confirmed my belief that the GOP is led by craven sell-outs. It's also within the purview of a political party.
The January 6 insurrection was a plan to halt and overturn the results of a democratic election. It was encouraged by the president, who didn't want to leave office. That's not how democracy works. Trump is saying he doesn't want America to be a democracy. That's about as serious as these things get.
The president shouldn't unilaterally make decisions that have such an impact on the budget in areas that aren't his to decide. (This is $10,000 per borrower, right? That's a lot of money.)
Trump is threatening to use a public office to destroy an enemy without having any evidence. He's just saying that someone who disagrees with him needs to be punished for disagreeing, and it should be a very strong punishment.
Norms are essential; I think this is symbolic of the transfer of power.
Different opinions should be allowed in each party. We also need more Republicans to speak up when their leader is engaging in behavior that is not acceptable without being punished or ostracized.
I think this is within the normal boundaries of policy proposals, but I think it would be a very expensive endeavor. I would want Congress to work with the President on something of this scale, in an ideal world.
Nothing unusual about a rich person starting a new media platform.
This would be entirely normal if it wasn't for the bizarre nature of the Texas law.
Effect and intention exaggerated by Trump opposition, but still an alarming disregard for peaceful politics.
A sign of calamitous incompetence displayed by members of a hollow political party.
An alarming rejection of basic US political norms around the legitimate transfer of power.
Displays the party's lack of self-awareness over its anti-democratic slide.
Displays some limits on what Americans will tolerate regarding dominance tactics.
The actual threat of this balloon was minimal, but the perceived threat among the public was so high that it became a political incident.
Trump may mean this rhetorically or hyperbolically, but he is creating the conditions for abusing the legal system for political ends.
It was a joke, not in good taste, but not meant seriously
suggests that freedom of the press can be hindered by violence w/o Mr. Trump finding that unusual or problematic
A 2020 document means it was drafted under the Trump administration. Sounds like Trump loyalists changed the language in the training manual to make protesters sound like adversaries, which is counter to notions of free speech
QAnon is a fringe group, small wonder Trump wouldn't disavow them. But I'm not sure it's very important given that most people don't subscribe to QAnon's positions or rumors.
pretty much a SOP for whoever is incumbent
Position taking again, to court an important constituency of the Democratic Party. Could be significant, if for example it resulted in military support for Israel from the US
Trump doesn't believe he can lose an election, and casts aspersions on any election he doesn't win. This directly undercuts the American electoral process in ways that are dangerous to democracy.
this decision undercut Roe v. Wade in the run up to the SCOTUS overturing Roe in 2022. It was a clear signal that the Court was ready to overturn this long-standing precedent
signals a big shift in regulatory roles that makes it harder to defend the environment
depends what one thinks of NATO alliance obligations! If the US wants to protect sovereign powers from invasion, this decision is important and valid
Not likely to result in significant changes on climate change, so an example of position taking that won't have much impact
I don't know very much about these state elections/primaries, but the trend sounds like it's toward the GOP turning its back on the fairness of US electoral processes
it's kind of long--what do you aim to do with the results?
Responding to these questions is hard bc it fills me with rage.
This is the first I'm hearing of this. Thanks for brightening my day, Bright Line Watch.
I associate this move with Project 2025, which aims to fire career civil servants on the nefarious grounds that they pursue political agendas.
The USSC is all about procedure. Why not just vote no?
Presidential pardons are normal. Pardoning influential election deniers is not.
Cheney's defeat shows the power of Trumpism to voters. Gag.
It smacks of clientelism and yet doesn't seem to have been as effective as a bag of potatoes and a new mattress, more typical clientelist goodies.
Election denial is important, and the defeat of SS election deniers is a good sign for the strength of democratic elections.
Opponents must be protected by law. This is core to how democracy works.
If you have the money, why not?  This is a nothingburger.
The problem is that Biden did not believe it.  He is, in technical terms, a "liar."  As soon as Israel starts actually defending itself, Biden demands that Israel stop, because he is captured by Hamas partisans in his own party.  A right to defend itself means returning fire and defeating the enemy, not putting a hold on arms shipments to stop Israel from going into Rafah, where Hamas actually is, demanding a ceasefire, and so forth.  If Biden meant it, this would be completely mundane and obvious.
Incumbents don't lose primaries, and this scared the pants off of every remaining dissenter in the GOP.
Grossly unconstitutional, illegal, and the left needs to start paying attention to these kinds of actions if it wants any claim to challenging Trump's illegality.  Thank you for actually asking questions about such matters.  I hope to see more as I click through, because the Democrats are going as insane as Trump these days.  Trump's criminality is not permission for Democratic legal violations.  I am disgusted by such actions.
When I say, "Normal," this is strangely normal, in context.  When insanity takes over, sanity becomes anomalous.
Let's be more blunt:  Biden is weak, the Democrats are weak, every country in the world knows it, and this kind of action is testing the boundaries.  Be clear.
The left-wing bias has become a problem here.  Consider, for example, that Biden has completely abandoned the US citizens being held hostage by a designated terrorist organization, Hamas, because his own party has decided that Hamas is a bunch of scrappy freedom fighters, rather than an Islamofascist group whose 1988 Covenant clearly states its purpose-- killing the Jews.  This is insane, on an historic scale.  I get that we're all supposed to say that Trump is the worst person ever and talk about nothing else, and if you look at my answers, I am giving him no quarter.  However, the left and academia have lost all perspective.  The President of the United States of America has ignored US citizens held hostage by a group whose own charter states that its purpose is exterminating the Jews, and this survey is ignoring it?  I'm losing patience with academia's blinders.  There is a point at which "but TRUMP!!!!" can no longer excuse turning a blind eye to such matters.
Trump was joking and the EO would not have happened, so on the face of it, this is abnormal and unimportant. What makes it abnormal and IMPORTANT is Trump's disregard for the limits of his authority. He is a fascist.
This is not highly important in the grand scheme of things but any political leader who encourages police violence against the media is fomenting fascism.
When I indicate this is "borderline normal" I am NOT expressing support for this Pentagon policy. I view it as an authoritarian move, reflecting an anti-democratic position on First Amendment rights. But it is "normal" in the sense that I expect the military branches of government have always prioritized their own version of "national security" over constitutional values in their training. So it's nothing new, but it is abhorrent to a democracy.
If a national leader with fascist tendencies calls everything he disagrees with "fake news", that is a direct order to his adherents to dismiss facts and only believe what he tells them to believe. Koolaid, anyone?
If our Congressional leaders have lost faith in the democratic process we are in deep shit.
The US's alliance with Israel is a central part of US foreign policy so is "important". Biden asserting Israel's right to defend itself is a "normal" statement to make in support of US foreign policy.
The stakes are higher now, but this happens all the time.
This is certainly "important" to my daughter, who would benefit from this public policy! But it's not important to our democracy in the grand scheme of things.
I am not liking your questions because they have multiple parts (US aid to Ukraine, Russian invasion of Ukraine...).  It is normal to send military aid to an ally. It is not normal for Russia to be invading another country. But in either case, given that the aggressor is a nuclear power, it is important to the US.
This is both abnormal and important if the people who deny elections are stacking the deck in preparation for 2024.
Using the apparatus of government to retaliate against political rivals is neither normal nor unimportant.
It's hard to answer the "normal"/"important" questions because they have multiple parts where I might view one part of the scenario as "normal"/"important" but might view another part of the scenario as "abnormal"/"unimportant". An example is the "US aid to Ukraine after Russian invasion" question. It's normal to send aid to an ally. It's abnormal for Russia to invade another country. So how am I to answer such a question?
It's only important because of the Republican refusal to do so in 2016. Showing their autocratic slide.
It shows the "acceptability" of autocratization increasing.
This is the beginning of the return to the spoils system and the dismantling of the "Administrative State," which the Supreme Court has continued in the 2020s.
This is a clear violation of the Hatch Act, showing their refutation of rule of law in the United States.
And what a disaster this was! It shows a decline in the respect for a civilian-led military.
Evidence of the autocratization of the Republican Party and Trump's cult of personality.
An, admittedly weak, piece of evidence showing that Americans are not committed to dismantling the democratic aspects of the US regime.
Foreign powers spy, as the US also spies.
European politics; race and ethnicity in developed democracies
Unimportant b/c it was delusional-- so no audits would be helpful & there's no process to allow that.
As long as US did the shooting over it's legal territory or waters, it's unimportant.
Presidency, Methods & Environmental Politics
The structure of the law could be used to undermine any civil liberty or right.
"borderline" because spending power (on this scale) belongs with Congress, notwithstanding other provisions of federal law.
Latin American politics but also US politics (democratization)
He’s always enjoyed the specter of violence and intimidation and he’s happy to excite right wing incel degenerates.
The Senate has been broken. Most norms are long dead. McConnell’s prevention of any process for Garland was far more egregious and important.
Getting vaccines to the population so quickly in the midst of a pandemic wasn’t normal but was certainly important.
Monetizing his candidacy or time in office is normal for him and his followers. This venture seems fairly troubled..,
Under democratic administrations, we’d expect support for climate initiatives. How long they last or how much it matters, is a question of the next election…
The U.S. now has an ideologically driven court that is comfortable overriding individual rights - especially women’s right.
The party is now a cult. She resisted the cult leader. She lost her seat. It’s unfortunate and shows how far the party has deteriorated
Outright cancellation of student debt, on top of fixing programs that were designed to provide forgiveness (e.g. public service loan forgiveness) for folks who met criteria - and the administration probably doesn’t get enough credit for - id important and impactful and deviated from business as usual in DC.
It’s normal for him. Important if he’s reelected.
president's having their own militia is highly abnormal and important; but kind of normal during trump years
i think I'm getting this. So abnormal--these are not jokes presidents make, and important because of the previous question (proud boys); but fully normal for trump
Pete B doing the same thing, alhtough more carefully
i find the trend toward using ex-officers in civilian gov't to be a bad one
in a democracy parties lose.  So this is dangerous
tough time with normal and may not understand. Normal as in the last 30 years, or since 2016?  These things are completely normal today given takeover of federal courts
normal now in trump's party, unheard of before.  I fear I may have misunderstood directions and didn't want to back out to reread
state politics and democracy public opinion
Telling a group known to advocate violence to "stand by" is an implicit threat of violence, which no responsible president, governor, or other elected official should make in a democracy - and such an act should be called out as such.
Insofar as it is recognized as a "joke" (as the wording of the question suggests), let's not split a gut over every last utterance.
Again, implying that 1) the reporter got what s/he deserved, and 2) media reports are a threat to law and order - a very anti-democratic sentiment.
It's not unusual for the military to have a negative opinion of reporters. But it is not good for democracy if the military which is supposed to defend democracy adopts an official hostile stance against the media.
This is a strategy decision - better to vote "no"? Or to protest the procedure by absenting oneself? Technically, end result is the same. Question really  is - was this a good strategy?
It was particularly petty, and makes the polarization worse. The president (or ex-president) should be above that kind of pathetic, childish behavior.
It's important for its public reception. But political factions are within their rights to change their leadership if that leader is out of line with mainline party sentiment. That this happened, well, it has happened before. What's important is that the mainstream of the party faction was defending a clearly indefensible political position.
One should be hesitant about second-guessing high court opinions without info about the grounds for the decision. Is it political? Or is it a legitimate technical/legal problem with the law itself, or with the lawsuits? Not enough info available in the short run.
Ultimately, that's politics. And in primaries, the more ideological (or extreme) voters are most likely to vote.
It would be an official recognition of the "legitimacy of treasonous and violent behavior.
Usually standard, and good, policy to maintain lines of negotiations, even with rival states. However, maintaining contacts is quite different than achieving results, and China and US are not close on climate issues.
Trump does not even pretend that it's anything but revenge when he promises stupid, petty and dangerous things like this.
Some people put way too much importance on what are clearly jokes.
Biden and what he says is pretty much irrelevant these days.
When one goes against the overwhelming majority of a party one should expect loss of any leadership positions in that party.
Teh appearance is Biden did this to garner votes/support in spite of the fact it was an unconstitutional act on his part.
Congratulations, this one seemed far less biased than some of them in the past.
Fascism is important.  Fascist national leaders are important.
I said this was abnormal, and it IS abnormal for the US military services.  But US law enforcement (the FBI, southern state and  local police, and some non-southern police as well) have a dismaying record of often using their policing power against folks they or their sponsors don't agree with or otherwise object to.  Really not good.
Unimportant but fun to watch.   I can't unsee the dribbling hair dye.
The US has no national security interests at stake in Ukraine, aside from avoiding escalation.  It is abnormal and important for the US to nevertheless take sides in this war, and to support the maximalist aims of the side it favors, Ukraine, at the risk of sparking escalation.
US foreign policy, national security, causes/prevention of war
Normal US response in support of it strategic interests and support for an important ally
Normal for Trump but of little significance for American politics
My reason for the maximum age limit for presidents is not so much about chronological age and associated possible "natural" decline in cognitive abilities, but more about Jefferson's notion of generational tyranny and the inability/unwillingness to adjust to broader cultural changes.  I would also apply this criterion for retirement age for Senators, Representatives and judges (especially SCOTUS)
Support for an armed militia movement by a national leader is absolutley abnormal.
A neutral protected professionnal civil service is critial to democracy.
Undermines norms of peaceful transfer of power
Undermines the peaceful transfer of power and belief in the integrity of the electoral system.
Indicates the transformation of the Republican Party from being an ideologically conservative party to being a personalistic party.
Probably beyond the power of his office but not surprisng that he tried it.
Abnormal that people who deny what is clearly reality are seen as main stream in a major political party
The Court's decision broadly limits the bureaucracy's ability to enforce laws.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate.
Presidents have said different things to different audiences forever, some of which weren't always very savory.  But social media changes the importance of this dynamic. So I view this particular instance as borderline normal, but more important today than it might have been in 1970.
again, mostly important in contrast to the cynical refusal to confirm a different Justice much earlier before the election four years prior
Depends a lot on the specifics of the topic of the training
Importance less in the boycott than in the rushing through of the nomination before the election (in stark and dramatically hypocritical contrast to the Garland nomination).
unimportant in the sense that primary elections are designed to enforce party loyalty... the real question is whether primary elections are a good idea!
The "Proud Boys" are essentially an extremist militia. For a sitting president to threaten the electoral process with the use of force against his opposition is a distinct and dire threat to democratic processes. This is what dictators do who want to stay in power when their mandate has been revoked. Trump's shocking statement in his debate with Biden in 2020 was strong evidence of a clear and present danger to the integrity of the American constitutional system -- one that we all saw with our own eyes but which has gone down the Orwellian memory hole for too many Americans.
Although I hadn't heard of this one, it fits with Trump's belief that you do not compete with your adversaries, but instead seek to destroy them not according to law but above it.
This is again an attack by Trump on the independence and freedom of the press which he has referred to in Stalinesque terms as "the enemy of the people". This is not an accident. Trump knows that the way to generate rage, which is the basis of his candidacy, is to attack the press. And his political campaign and governance, such as it is, is to generate rage at established and protected institutions. This contagion has now spread rapidly throughout the Republican Party
Both the press and demonstrators are protected by the first amendment to the Constitution. They are not the enemy; rather they are necessary ingredients of democratic processes. Of course, demonstrations that have violent intent or turn violent are subject to normal criminal procedures. But this is not a matter for the military that is required to abide by the Constitution and which is not expected to interfere in civil processes or the rights of the press and of free assembly.
This press conference its location and its principal at this point have become a running joke even beyond the running hair dye. But that doesn't mean it wasn't a serious element of Trump's 2020 campaign to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Giuliani and the event itself have become a sad joke. However, the principal who instigated this, Donald Trump (as well as all too much of the current Republican Party), continues to be a menace to American democratic processes and norms.
As a general statement this support is not particularly controversial since every state has a right to defend itself. This was of course well before the events of October 2023 and the subsequent retaliation (and beyond) by the Israeli armed forces in Gaza and now in Lebanon and plausibly Iran which have become considerably more controversial whether justified or not.
Of course, this was one of the many lies and false promises made by Donald Trump to undermine the legitimacy of elections. And yet, he is again the Republican nominee with a roughly 50% probability of regaining the White House.
Party leaders are expected to be loyal to their party. That being said, when the claims such as those Trump made are so outrageously false, having been denied across 60 court decisions, party loyalty has taken precedence over the rule of law and the norms of democracy. It demonstrated that the party has become as politically corrupt and dangerous to democratic norms as its titular head is.
Perhaps for this precedent-breaking Court that has essentially eliminated stare decisis as a guide this is normal. But the six week ban is essentially a complete ban. The original Dobbs case was about a 15 week ban. An essential judicial rule of thumb is to not go beyond the case in front of you which, of course, it did by killing off Roe v. Wade altogether. More evidence of a jurocracy at work.
Politicians who challenge their titular leadership may find themselves, as Cheney did, shunted aside. Such politicians are typically backbenchers so the consequences are not particularly great. But Liz Cheney was the 3rd ranking Republican member in the House. What she did took immense courage and integrity. What the party conference did was not unexpected but did reveal the continuing, if not even greater, influence of Trump and Trump supporters in the affairs of the party -- a level of influence that is now nearly completely dominant.
The current composition of the Supreme Court is clearly hostile to executive discretion involving federal regulations not explicitly stipulated in the legislative enactment. This decision was later augmented by the Court's demolition of its own (prior Court) Chevron Defense doctrine granting agency discretion. Inevitably, its demolition of administrative discretion elevates that of judicial discretion. The concern here is of an emerging (or more properly re-emerging) jurocracy.
This is a reflection of the autocratic disposition of Donald Trump and much of the Republican Party that has evolved (or more properly, devolved) and his and its cavalier attitudes toward the rule of law and democratic norms.
The court has become highly partisan and responsive to corporate interests
Attending would have implied that Biden's election was legitimate and made it harder for many Republicans to take a contrary position.
This is fucking nuts.  These are self-identified racists.  Proud Boys are (and should be recognized as) right wing extremists.
This is not normal political party behavior.  The American political system already has loosly organized national political parties.  To oust a Cheney, a former VP's daughter and standard bearer for the GOP, would have been unfathomable just a few years ago.
This action is an open disrespect for the idea that the people govern, not imperial leaders.
Trump's (and the Republican party's) embrace of patently false conspiracy theories prevents the party and its supporters from participating in the real world with demonstrable facts, and keeps them within their own world in which they shield themselves from criticism.
The civil service is one of the few institutional bulwarks against Trump's dictatorial plans in the executive branch.
The press conference was conducted to deny the results of the 2020 election.
It is part of a continued refusal to accept the results of the 2020 election, which is a violation of democratic traditions and norms of accepting defeat in a free and fair election.
The republican party's willingness to punish members of its party who call for respecting free and fair elections demonstrated the willingness of the republican party to support undemocratic means of holding power.
By declaring that he will pardon his supporters who engaged in criminal activities, Trump is incentivizing people to do the same in the future, and also creating a separate standard of justice for his political supporters.
The ruling dramatically changed the balance of power between the judiciary and the executive branches.
Giving military aid to nations is pretty standard in US history.
It is important that public officials who are responsible for conducting elections be held accountable for making patently false accusations.
A central democratic norm is to not use the apparatus of law enforcment to harass or attack political opponents. Trump is violating this norm with the support of the Republican party.
Thanks for doing this survey! I appreciate the important work you are doing.
Political violence, environmental security, populism
The incumbent President was advocating violence by a paramilitary group of supporters
Well Giuliani is nuts, but the challenge to the election was a horrible precedent.
The entire Amy Coney Barrett appointment and confirmation violated norms
Cabinet secretaries serve the people not a candidate
A candidate refusing to lose is a blackmark on Democracy
This silent docket is a new and very disturbing element in Supreme Court decision making
The current candidate has no respect for the rule of law
The Court is dismantling the administrative state and that will have serious consequences for expertise and regulation
It was a campaign process that has little impact on those not students in debt
Criminal prosecutions of political enemies is the essence of a dictatorship
A conservative court will produce conservative rulings...
Unless there is significant evidence of wrongdoing this type of activity would be highly undemocratic and contrary to the US constitution.
Trump regularly used appeals to "law and order" to justify what many judged to be, by historical standards, an excessive use of force.
Normality is not an easy thing to assess under the circumstances--i.e., a once-in-a-hundred years pandemic.
In my view, it plainly symbolizes the rupture that Trump's MAGA politics represent with the historic norms of modern American democracy.
As a unique event, it's very hard to evaluate its significance, let alone its normality.
My best guess is that the GOP of Ronald Reagan will not be resurrected, even if Trump loses the 2024 election. The base of today's GOP is an entirely different population from that of the 1980s. Perhaps Liz Cheney and her like-minded former Republicans will prove instrumental in constructing a new right-of-center political party, but it will not be built on the foundations of Trump's MAGA party.
I would say it is symbolic Trump's reconfiguration of the GOP.
By any historical measure, Trump has regularly violated the norms of political discourse and comity.  Unfortunately, it has not seemed to cost him much in the way of public-political support. To an important extent, in fact, it has worked to solidify his hard right-wing base, while also redefining the norms of politics for GOP candidates.
Making such jokes is abnormal.  Its importance lies in the erosion of norms about how politics is played.
I believe, but I am not a court expert, that the court would typically block implementation of a case it intends to hear.
The importance will derive from whether there is any meaningful agreement.
Attacking a prospective rival is normal.  What is abnormal is Trump attacking the Georgia governor after having secured the nomination and needing Georgia's electoral votes.
IR Theory (i.e., IPE, security, IO, foreign policy)
As always, there were questions that did not have enough detail.  For example, the electoral effectiveness of the candidates engagin in various strategies.  Emphasizing policy differences might be effective or totally counterproductive, depending on the policy.  Harris will emphasize policy differences on abortion/reproductive rights but not discuss differences on immigration policy.    In the section on abnormality and importance, one might expect the two to be linked, but in many case, the importance is contingent.  For example, negotiating on one issue with a country where there are extant conflicts is totally normal, but the importance lies in whether anything is accomplished.
Politicians endorse all kinds of nutty things all the time. I mean we heard about the existence of a pee tape the entire time trump was president and people peddling that story knew it wasn’t true
It was bad advance work and a bad hair dye job but that’s all it was
It used to be an accepted norm that a party would respect the process even if it didn’t respect the outcome. This is further proof that is gone.
It’s sore loserism of the highest order. It sends the wrong signal to our allies and adversaries
The Executive is attempting to usurp the power of congress with this.
Avoiding a war with a rising China is in our interest
This is a massive security failure on two levels. First, it generated and transmitted sensitive information. Second, it showed that our air defenses can be beaten.
Words do have consequences, which is why Pres Trump gets so angry as Left references about him.
Directly contradicts the concept of the professionalism of bureaucracy
It's the position of the US governmnt..  The real question is our commitment to defend Israel, especially if they start a war
The statement condones political violence by an organized group of people and so is very antidemocratic.
The Group is a threat to American Democracy and Trump as President should have the sense to disavow such a group.
This is normal in American Politics for presidents to dispatch their cabinet ministers to appear on national TV to explain government policies to help their political party stay in office.
Abortion should remain legal and the decision should be left up to the woman and her physician as dictated by Row v. Wade (1973) and affirmed by Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992).
It is equivalent to pardoning a spy convicted of espionage, which is a grave threat to American democracy.
The decision change significantly how the administrative state will operate by largely transferring legal power of statutory interpretation from the executive branch to the judiciary branch. It also forces Congress to enact more exacting statutes.
Election deniers should not be in position to certify election results, which is a responsibility of the Secretary of State in most states.
It was an invasion of US air space without permission.
Under the Constitution, the President is not allowed to use government officials to exact a political vendetta.
Trump is the first truly Postmodern president. The concepts of true and false do not apply to his thinking in the least.
Elections, Political Behavior, Public Opinion
Saying it is “normal” is not saying that it is good.  The reality is that incumbents losing primary challenges when they disagree with their party, especially Republicans who turn against Trump, is very much a normal part of American politics today.  Again, that does not mean that it is a good thing, just that it is now normal.
Political Polarization and Public Opinion
Again, the QAnon Conspiracy theory is lie - and likely the product of Russian disinformation - but refusing to disavow it (and at times embracing it) helps to normalize what are empirically verifiable untruths.
Normal policy making in practice to address a significant challenge facing American society.
These people all committed serious crimes and were only pardoned because of their connections to Trump and his inner circle.  "Staggering act[s] of corruption."
It is a lie that is intended to delegitimize the electoral process in the eyes of the voters.  It has lasting implications.
Underlying the decision was a question about the federal government's authority.  Huge implications for the future.
It is a significant shift in policy and reflects an effort to address a very real challenge to the next generation.
Again, an example of the system working.  How significant for the future remains to be seen.
Horrifying because it is purely political.
I didn’t understand the questions about the associated Press. I didn’t understand the scenario or why it would be important if it were the Associated Press per se.   I didn’t understand the question about “faithless elector” at all.
The scenario concerns a refusal to peacefully transfer power.  "Joke" is the key word in the scenario.  Lots of things Trump says seriously but later calls a joke.  If I take "joke" in your scenario as the way Trump uses it, then this is abnormal and important.  I answered above interpreting  "joke" as really a joke, a jocular statement to be taken as a "bon mot" or satire, then it is still borderline abnormal to joke about refusing to transfer power and mostly important even to raise it that way.  I think people should be allowed space for satire. But I am afraid few of Trump's "jokes" are really jokes.
Normal for Trump.  Abnormal to because QAnon is so weird and abnormal.  Not entirely abnormal because other political figures have fostered fringe conspiracy beliefs (think of the Huey Long era, Father Coughlin). but most political leaders do try to avoid this, in general.  Important because so many people believe this stuff!
Another aspect of endorsing -- or rather not endorsing -- the peaceful transfer of power.  But not super important because I don't think that many regular people paid much attention to the slight.
There has been a strong tradition of civilian control of the military, and hence this is not entirely normal, to ask a retired general to serve. It is normal given that not entirely normal situation to then go by the book and request a formal waiver.  The mostly unimportant reflects the subsequent events in which the Defense Secretary has operated pretty much as any civilian in the job, ie his military background has been a non-issue. It WAS important that a waiver was requested, ie respecting the tradition of civilian control.
Political figures normally come up with all sorts of ways to communicate.  Some are even media owners (eg Berlusconi).  Mostly unimportant given the unpopularity of Truth Social and that the people using it were already strong Trump supporters anyway.
No prior election loser has kept insisting that he won nor fostered and nourished that belief in others, especially not to the degree that Trump has done.  I don't think many people paid attention specifically to the "audits," my answer has to do with the overall denial of the election result and the validity of the election.
Mostly normal because the Supreme Court did what it does -- sometimes grants stays, sometimes does not.  Important politically, because of the importance of abortion as an issue and the importance of these abortion laws medically (their negative impact on women's health).
People have been "primaried" for all sorts of reasons, and in and of itself if the people of her party in her state were unhappy with her critiques of Trump, the democratic process empowers them to pick someone else.  In this case, important not for that reason but because Cheney has been a powerful voice for democratic values vis-a-vis Trump and is missed from the House.
Presidents often try to buy off voting blocks.  Check out Ed Tufte's analysis of Nixon's actions.  Perhaps the most unusual part of this was the need to do this by executive action (rather than legislative) and the courts' aggressiveness in blocking student loan relief schemes.
Consider Lend/lease in WWII.  And many other 20th century examples of the US sending military aid to allies under threat (or if you prefer, to proxy states).  And many times troops go too, boots on the ground.  These actions are well within the normal range of what the US government -- even the executive acting alone -- has done.  Important because of the importance of what is going on in Ukraine and Russia's more general actions.
Elections worked, people defeated the deniers.  The other 3 states where they won are of huge concern!
Trump will probably follow through and do this.  More generally he has a Manichean view of the world and evidently no inhibitions about using the Presidency to pursue his perceived enemies.  I was going to say about using presidential powers, but he doesn't appear to care what are presidential powers nor any limits to them. If he does this, it is another huge attack on the idea of a peaceful transfer of power and on there being a loyal opposition (okay, that last is not a US phrase, but the US political system still depends on the concept).
I enjoyed this survey.  I especially liked the opportunity to explain my answers.  You will have a massive coding issue (please be cautious if you use AI) but I hope get a better understanding of your respondents' views.
The Rule of Law must prevail.  A rubber bullet striking a reporter, if the reporter was properly identified, is a sign of lawlessness, not law and order.
Given that QAnon is a baseless conspiracist movement, it should be easy to disavow.  However, since a significant number of the former President's support base either follows or generally believes at least part of QAnon's claims, it is not surprising that he refused to put distance between himself and their claims.
Unfortunately the abuse of Presidential Power to issue Pardons and Reprieves for Offenses committed against the United States has become normalized.  The potential for abuse is why Hamilton proposed the Senate have power to check the Pardon Power, but did not prevail.
This is the second administration in a row that has requested a waiver concerning appointment of a Defense Secretary.  Having a recently retired general serve as head of the Defense Department raises significant questions about the ability of the US to maintain civilian control of the military.
If one has the resources to establish a platform for one's messages after having been banned from other platforms, one will almost certainly do so.  Factions seek members, support, and an opportunity to grow, and will do whatever they believe will contribute to those ends.
Nearly everything about the former President is abnormal.  To promote the idea of reinstatement, while patently absurd, is to be expected from a president who refused to concede the results of the EC Ballots.
If the request to block identified the reasoning on constitutional grounds, then it is indeed abnormal for the Supreme Court to refuse to take the matter up and impose an injunction. However, it is not unprecedented for the Supreme Court to "punt" on such matters; consider _in re. Anastaplo (1950).
The move by the SCotUS to nullify EPA regulations will force the Congress to act more directly on regulating interstate commerce. The current division in the Congress will make this more difficult in the near future.
A publicized plan to cancel student debt is largely political theater. Under the Stafford Act, lenders are guaranteed reimbursement by the Federal government in case borrowers default on student loan repayment. To forgive up to $10000 in student loan debt per borrower does not change this reality, but only affects the credit rating of the borrowers.  Whether the lender is repaid by the borrower or by the Federal government makes little difference.
Meeting with the public ministers and consuls of other countries is a normal part of the president's duties.  Given that the USA and the PRC are currently the two largest economies in the world, it would be abnormal for them _not_ to meet to resume bilateral talks on economically significant issues such as the global climate.
The Chinese spy balloon incident reveals a major hole in US national security, left open and widened when the US stigmatized investigations in to unidentified aerial phenomena. That the US military shot down the balloon and Congress returned to the issue of UAPs reveals the gravity of the consequences of earlier stigmatization.  Surveillance balloons and Unmanned Aerial reconnaissance vehicles may take on unusual characteristics; therefore UAP must be investigated in a thorough and rigorous manner.
Again, the rule of law must prevail.  Appointments must not be used as a retaliatory measure.
Language of political preference, American Political Thought, indigenous political thought,
Sadly not uncommon and not new, but not good either
Erodes civilian control of the military but in a small way
It is unclear if the SCOTUS will allow for any challenge of Dobbs, and it seems to be behaving in a very partisan way with Roberts steering the court for the GOP.
Thus far efforts at political prosecution have been ineffective however this may change.
Nothing more than a media gotcha question.
How can a sitting president stand by and watch such an event unfold without taking immediate action?
Still not convinced this wasn't an error.
Covid is an abnormal situtation, so its hard to evaluate this quesiton as well.
The initial decleration was fully normal politics.
Removing a leader is relatively uncommon, and doing so for uncommon reasons
Beginning of the end of precedental law for abortion.
While overturning precedent can occur, this reflects a major change to administrative power.
Candidates losing on this ticket is normal, but the high level of denial is abnormal, so this question is not really answerable.
Several of the scenarios were very hard to answer as they were overally broad.  I think you need to narrow in on what you are asking, because normal behavior in abnormal situations and abnormal behavior in normal situtations would be characertized in the same way.
political action, protest, empire, democracy
You should ask the professors for their party identification. It would be interesting to see if there are partisan differences in expert judgments, and to compare them with the mass public
Thank you for continuing this important study
He has the right to make his views heard.
The Republican Party has become the party of Trump.
Vigilantism, although not unknown in the US, is rare.
Trump is losing credibility on these matters.
We expect our leaders to follow the law.
Ford pardoning Nixon was worst in my lifetime but others have made sketchy ones like Trump
A president who doesn't denounce a conspiracy theory group is just wild
Shows lack of support for constitutional practices but not as much as inciting an insurrection.