Skip links

2020 President

Sabato's Crystal Ball

Center for Politics/Ipsos poll: Just Half of Americans Believe Elections Are Fair and Open

  Editor’s Note: This is the first of two issues of the Crystal Ball this week. We will also have an issue Thursday, July 19.   Only about half of American adults believe elections are fair and open, and large majorities of Americans express skepticism about big money in politics and favor disclosure of donations. However, as the Senate considers President Trump’s nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the public offers mixed signals about judicial intervention that could either tighten or loosen the law concerning money in politics. These are some of the takeaways from a national poll conducted by Ipsos in conjunction with the University of Virginia Center for Politics. By a 51%-43% margin, those surveyed agreed with the statement that “American elections are fair and open.” However, there was a partisan gap, as 68% of Republicans but just 43% of Democrats agreed with the statement. Couched opinions — those who just “somewhat” agreed or disagreed with the statement — were more common than strong opinions from Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Table 1: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “American elections are fair and open” Americans largely agreed with several other statements dealing with

UVA Center for Politics

Registering By Party: Where the Democrats and Republicans Are Ahead

KEY POINT FROM THIS ARTICLE — Altogether, there are 31 states (plus the District of Columbia) with party registration; in the others, such as Virginia, voters register without reference to party. In 19 states and the District, there are more registered Democrats than Republicans. In 12 states, there are more registered Republicans than Democrats. In aggregate, 40% of all voters in party registration states are Democrats, 29% are Republicans, and 28% are independents. Nationally, the Democratic advantage in the party registration states approaches 12 million. Poring over party registration This is not the best of times for the Democratic Party. No White House; no Senate; no House of Representatives; and a clear minority of governorships and state legislatures in their possession. Yet the Democrats approach this fall’s midterm elections with an advantage in one key aspect of the political process — their strength in states where voters register by party. Altogether, there are 31 states (plus the District of Columbia) with party registration; in the others, such as Virginia, voters register without reference to party. Among the party registration states are some of the nation’s most populous: California, New York, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Arizona, and Massachusetts. The

Rhodes Cook

The uncertain political ramifications of Justice Kennedy’s exit

Editor’s Note: The Crystal Ball will be off for the Fourth of July. We’ll be back on Thursday, July 12. An already turbulent national political environment was rocked by another major development Wednesday afternoon: Justice Anthony Kennedy, the closest thing there is to a swing vote on the Supreme Court, decided to retire. President Donald Trump, who already got to appoint conservative Neil Gorsuch to the court after Senate Republicans decided not to consider then-President Barack Obama’s replacement for the deceased Antonin Scalia in early 2016, is now poised to pick a second justice, and one who likely will push the court further to the right. This comes on the heels of several key, 5-4 decisions released at the end of this year’s Supreme Court term that broke against the court’s liberal bloc. From a jurisprudential standpoint, this is a nightmare for the left. Trump seems likely to pick a Gorsuch-style conservative for the seat, and Republicans have been building a judicial farm team for years after the disappointments they suffered in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush years, when GOP high court selections sometimes did not turn out to be as conservative as many on the right would

Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley

Mad As Hell: How Anger Diminishes Trust in Government

KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — Over the past 60 years, trust in government has declined precipitously. Whereas high levels of trust in the national government were typical during the Eisenhower Administration, by 2016 only a fifth of Americans said they trusted the government “always” or “most of the time.” — Using a survey experiment and utilizing a technique known as “emotional recall,” I find that individuals asked to write about a time they were very angry or to write about a time they were very angry about politics were more likely to agree that the national government is unresponsive to the concerns and interests of the public. Merely asking individuals to recall a time they had thought about politics had no effect on lowering trust in government. These results indicate that anger does play a causal role in lowering citizens’ trust in the government. — A regression analysis of respondents’ use of angry words as well as positive and negative emotional words revealed that those who were primed to exhibit higher levels of apolitical anger offered the most negative views of the national government. That is, apolitical issues, rather than political issues, elicited the most anger. This suggests that

Steven Webster

California Dreamin’: Carving the Golden State into Thirds

KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — The “Cal 3” initiative is the latest in a long line of proposals to divide California into multiple states. This plan aims to carve up the Golden State into three new states. — While the proposal has little chance of success, hypothetically the fragmentation of California would have notable political consequences for the Electoral College and the U.S. Senate. Splitting California into thirds would put about one-third of the state’s electoral votes in play for the GOP, while the additional Senate seats might benefit the Democrats. Carving up California How many Californias should there be? In 2013, venture capitalist Tim Draper proposed a measure to create six different states out of the nation’s most-populous state. After the “Six Californias” plan failed to make the ballot, Draper has returned with a new proposal. His latest cartographic contortion aims to break the Golden State into three not-so creatively named states: California, Northern California, and Southern California. Unlike Draper’s previous initiative, his “Cal 3” plan may have enough signatures to make the November ballot, offering Californians an opportunity to vote to fracture their state. Four years ago, I wrote a fun what-if article for the Crystal Ball

Geoffrey Skelley

History Suggests Double Trouble for Incumbent Trump

This is part one of a back-and-forth between Crystal Ball Managing Editor Kyle Kondik and veteran reporter and presidential historian Paul Brandus assessing President Donald Trump’s reelection odds in 2020. See the piece from Kondik here. — The Editors KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — President Trump’s weak approval rating is a bad sign for his reelection prospects in 2020. — His standing is reminiscent of previous presidents who have faced stiff opposition not just in a general election, but also in a primary. Less than a year and a half in, Trump is in deep trouble for 2020 President Donald Trump talks of winning reelection in 2020, and he filed papers to run again back on Inauguration Day. But history suggests the person taking the oath of office 33 months from now will be someone else. If the past is any guide — it often is, of course — it means not just trouble for Trump in 2020, but double trouble. It suggests the president, one of the weakest incumbents in decades, will attract a challenger from his own party. It also suggests that even if he holds off that challenger and wins the nomination, he will go down

Paul Brandus

Underestimate Trump’s Reelection Odds at Your Own Peril

This is part two of a back-and-forth between Crystal Ball Managing Editor Kyle Kondik and veteran reporter and presidential historian Paul Brandus assessing President Trump’s reelection odds in 2020. See the piece from Brandus here. — The Editors KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — So long as President Trump is on the ballot in 2020, history suggests he will benefit from incumbency. — While Trump’s approval rating is only in the low 40s, some election models suggest that he would still have 50-50 or better odds to win reelection if that’s his approval level in 2020. Trump’s reelection odds may be better than many realize One might have done better in predicting the 2016 presidential election, or at least in anticipating the very close eventual outcome, by basing a projection of the national popular vote on the findings of several political science models released prior to the election. These models, which were compiled by James Campbell of the University at Buffalo, SUNY and printed in both PS: Political Science and Politics and here at the Crystal Ball, generally pointed to a close election. These models mostly made their predictions several months in advance of the election and were based on

Kyle Kondik

Explaining Support for Trump in the White Working Class: Race vs. Economics

KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — Data from the Pew Research Center show that six months into Donald Trump’s presidency, the gap between whites with and without college degrees in opinions of the president was enormous. Non-college whites were far more likely to approve of Trump’s performance than white college graduates. — This gap appears to have little or nothing to do with differences between the economic circumstances of these two groups. While whites without college degrees did experience far more economic distress than those with college degrees, economic distress itself appeared to have little relationship with opinions of Trump. — The main explanation for the class divide in opinions of Trump among whites appeared to be differing views on race relations. White college graduates were much more likely than whites without college degrees to hold liberal views on the significance of racial discrimination, and opinions on the significance of racial discrimination were strongly related to opinions of Trump’s performance. Racial attitudes, not economics, appears to be the main factor producing strong support for Trump among members of the white working class. Trump and the white working class It has been almost 18 months since the 2018 presidential election, but

Alan I. Abramowitz

Public Rates Presidents: Kennedy, Reagan, Obama at Top, Nixon, Johnson, Trump at Bottom

As Americans prepare to celebrate Presidents’ Day, they rate John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan the best of recent chief executives, according to a new poll conducted by Ipsos in conjunction with the University of Virginia Center for Politics. The Center for Politics and Ipsos collaborated to survey Americans’ views of modern presidents and asked them to rate the dozen presidents who have served since the early 1950s. The strong showings by Kennedy and Reagan reaffirm a previous Reuters-Ipsos/Center for Politics* survey from May 2017 that found them both with similarly high marks. Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, the two most recent Democratic presidents, round out the top four, while the current president, Donald Trump, finds himself near the bottom of the ratings. Obama, Reagan, and Kennedy received the most support from respondents when asked which recent president they wish was serving in the White House right now. The online poll sampled 1,004 adults on Feb. 7-8, 2018. The precision of Ipsos online polls is measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll had a credibility interval of ±3.5 percentage points for all respondents surveyed. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being terrible and 10

UVA Center for Politics

Watch the 2017 American Democracy Conference

On Nov. 16, the University of Virginia Center for Politics hosts the 19th annual American Democracy Conference in Charlottesville, VA. The conference features leading journalists and political experts discussing the upcoming 2018 midterm election cycle, the first year of Donald Trump’s presidency, and early thoughts on the 2020 presidential election. The conference is taking place in Alumni Hall on the Grounds of the University of Virginia — 211 Emmet Street South in Charlottesville. Doors open at 8:30 a.m. and the event begins at 9:00 a.m. The conference is free and open to the public with advance registration, and the press is invited to attend. The conference is being livestreamed online at the following link: https://livestream.com/tavco/2017ADC. For more information on the conference, its panels, and its panelists, please visit http://www.centerforpolitics.org/adc.html.

UVA Center for Politics

Did Bernie Sanders Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency?

After months out of the limelight, Hillary Clinton edged back into view recently with two fits of activity. The first was an announcement that her voters should read Verrit, a website managed by a former Clinton digital strategist that purports to post verified facts for the 65.8 million people who voted for her. One of the site’s first such facts was that Bernie Sanders helped put Donald Trump in the White House. Later on, an excerpt from Clinton’s new book leaked, in which she blames Sanders for hobbling her in the general election, though she seems far more circumspect about why she lost in general. Still, this all begs the question, did Bernie Sanders really put Donald Trump in the White House? To answer that question, first we need to acknowledge the limitations of such an inquiry. Individual presidential elections have an n of 1; there’s no control group in which there’s an election in which Clinton glides through a primary unscathed. Accordingly, one cannot definitively say “but for one event, another outcome would have occurred.” Especially one that’s so hard to quantify. The Comey Effect can at least be measured to some degree because it occurred when the race

Robert Wheel

“This is the House that Jack Built” Premieres

On Wednesday evening, the University of Virginia Center for Politics and Community Idea Stations hosted the premiere of their new documentary, This is the House that Jack Built, at the Library of Virginia in Richmond. Check your local listings for the documentary, which will begin airing on public television in mid-October. Directed by Paul Tait Roberts and hosted by Center for Politics Director Larry J. Sabato, This is the House that Jack Built touches on familiar themes of JFK’s life and his ascent to the presidency, his mistakes, and his triumphs. But the film also explores new and little-known stories, some which surfaced after the Center for Politics’ Kennedy Half Century project in 2013, which included Sabato’s New York Times-bestselling book, an Emmy Award-winning documentary, and an Emmy Award-nominated Massive Open Online Course. These new stories include a CIA staffer and her discovery of a file on Lee Harvey Oswald that soon thereafter went missing; the sonic analysis of the infamous dictabelt recording from the day of Kennedy’s assassination; and the Warren Commission’s pressure on 19-year-old Buell Wesley Frazier, who drove Oswald to work on Nov. 22, 1963. This program also explores why JFK is still relevant and why he

UVA Center for Politics

The 2016 Election: An Earthquake or a Hurricane?

Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential election victory has been compared to an earthquake, a seismic event that toppled fledging dynasties in both major parties, ruptured political alliances, damaged the reputation of pundits, and left millions in shock or depressed. To this day, its after-effects, like tsunamis or landslides that can follow an earthquake, continue to affect domestic politics, not to mention America’s relations with allies and adversaries. Another natural phenomenon that is getting much attention these days provides another comparison, one that focuses not on what happened on Election Day, but on the months that preceded it, when then-candidate Donald Trump came seemingly out of nowhere to claim the GOP nomination and, against practically every forecast (for exceptions, see here) went on to win the general election. I mean a hurricane. Most of the severe cyclones that strike the United States, e.g., Irma, start as a small disturbance of the trade winds far away in the inter-tropical convergence zone near the equator. This could be likened to the pre-presidential primary season, a year or more before the election, when Democrats and Republicans begin to scrutinize a field of candidates in preparation to vote for the parties’ presidential nomination contests. Most tropical

Alfred G. Cuzán

New Poll: Some Americans Express Troubling Racial Attitudes Even as Majority Oppose White Supremacists

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in conjunction with the University of Virginia Center for Politics finds that while there is relatively little national endorsement of neo-Nazis and white supremacists, there are troubling levels of support for certain racially-charged ideas and attitudes frequently expressed by extremist groups. The survey also found backing for keeping Confederate monuments in place, the removal of which has become a hot-button issue in communities across the country. As is often the case, these survey results can be interpreted in two quite different ways. On the one hand, despite the events in Charlottesville and elsewhere, few people surveyed expressed direct support for hate groups. But on the other hand, it will be disturbing to many that a not insubstantial proportion of those polled demonstrated neutrality and indifference or, worse, expressed support for antiquated views on race. The large-sample poll (5,360 respondents for most questions) was conducted from Aug. 21 to Sept. 5 in the aftermath of a neo-Nazi rally and counter-protest on the Grounds of the University of Virginia and in downtown Charlottesville, Virginia on Aug. 11-12. Among the questions, respondents were asked if they agreed or disagreed with statements asking whether white people and/or racial minorities

UVA Center for Politics

The Politics of Disasters

Throughout the first 200-plus days of Donald Trump’s presidency, it’s been common for analysts to say he is struggling through sub-40% approval ratings despite not having to reckon with a major non-scandal crisis. Whether that was true before last weekend is debatable — do North Korea’s provocations count? — but it’s almost certainly not true now after Hurricane Harvey struck Houston and southeast Texas. The immediate physical and emotional impact of Harvey is clear: catastrophic flooding, billions of dollars in damage, thousands of displaced persons, and multiple deaths. Some areas of Texas received more than 50 inches of rain, a figure that is difficult to fathom. But what is uncertain is the political fallout — or lack thereof. Congress will likely face decisions regarding emergency funding appropriations, which could create political conflict. Trump attracted criticism for his tweeting during the storm, which included a random book plug, and for pardoning controversial former Maricopa County (Phoenix) Sheriff Joe Arpaio (R) just as the hurricane was hitting Texas. The pardon upset not only Democrats but also many Republicans, such as Arizona’s two senators and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. Additionally, Trump’s decision to go ahead with a ban on

Kyle Kondik and Geoffrey Skelley