Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Poll finds bipartisan support for federal election protection efforts

Poll watcher

A recent survey found that a majority of voters support allowing partisan poll watchers equal observation access during the ballot-counting process.

Jeff Swensen/Getty Images

A vast majority of voters, across the political spectrum, would support Congress taking action to combat election subversion, new polling found.

The survey found strong bipartisan support for legislation to secure ballots, combat voter intimidation and protect election results from partisan interference. The poll, released Tuesday, was conducted by Republican pollster Chris Perkins of Ragnar Research Partners for Secure Democracy and Protect Democracy, a pair of nonpartisan nonprofits focused on election integrity.


Nearly nine in 10 voters indicated they would support unspecified federal legislation requiring states to preserve and secure ballots and other election records, the poll found. An overwhelming majority (84 percent) also backed a national law that ensures every eligible citizen's right to have their ballot counted.

Additionally, the survey found strong bipartisan support for legislation funding election infrastructure (81 percent), establishing uniform ballot storage (80 percent) and allowing partisan poll watchers equal access to ballot monitoring (80 percent).

There was also broad support for potential measures aimed at preventing the intimidation of election workers and protecting the vote-counting process. More than three-quarters of voters would like to see guidelines issued to election administrators on how to respond to and mitigate election intimidation.

And 77 percent would give the Department of Justice authority to send observers to prevent interference during the ballot-counting process. Last week, the Justice Department did take steps to safeguard the electoral process by launching a task force to combat threats against election workers.

"A threat to any election official, worker or volunteer is a threat to democracy," said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, who will lead the task force. "We will promptly and vigorously prosecute offenders to protect the rights of American voters, to punish those who engage in this criminal behavior, and to send the unmistakable message that such conduct will not be tolerated."

The survey found most voters (78 percent) were also concerned about the increase in threats of violence and intimidation against poll workers. Roughly seven in 10 voters also expressed worry about the ability to recruit election workers due to these threats.

"There is clear bipartisan support for laws that protect election officials and the election results from partisan interference and intimidation," said Perkins, the lead pollster for Ragnar Research Partners. "Americans across the political spectrum support legislation that ensures the results of a free and fair election are upheld and improves the security of our election systems."

"Congress must listen to the American people and take action to prevent further partisan interference in our elections and protect our election officials so that every American can exercise their freedom to vote and have confidence that their vote will count," said Sarah Walker, executive director of Secure Democracy.

Commissioned by Secure Democracy and Protect Democracy, Ragnar Research Partners surveyed 2,000 likely voters — with an even share of self-identified Democrats, Republicans and independents — via landlines and cellphones between July 6-13. The margin of error was 2 percentage points.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less