Politics with Paul

The US Senate often finds itself in the middle of controversy and as the subject of scorn. But does this mean we should eliminate it completely? Is it outdated ... or still a necessary part of American government? In today's episode of Politics with Paul, we tackle this question. While it's not a popular view, at its core are some of the most essential questions about how our government should work. The episode also covers why we need to know why the US Senate was created, the question of whether it is an extreme position, and potential changes to the US Senate including a lower threshold to override filibusters or slight changes to the number of Senators per state.

Apathy about politics is always a looming threat to democracy - one that even the Founding Fathers warned about. But why do we see so much apathy? And what can we do about it? On today's episode, survey research expert Travis Taylor discusses his insights and findings on the problem of political apathy and how we can start fixing it. Drawing on his new book, "Democracy InAction: How Citizen Apathy Threatens America and What We Can Do About It," tune in to hear his advice on the sources of political detachment, where civic involvement can improve (which goes beyond voting), and how the solution starts with simple changes.

How did we come to have such disturbingly low trust in so many American political institutions? And how do we restore that faith? Today's Politics with Paul guest, Sherman Tylawsky of the George Washington Institute, discusses these questions and more. Tune in to hear his insights on why it is important to have some faith (but not blind and unthinking faith) in the basic organizations, rules, and systems of American politics; why this lack of trust is a threat to democracy; and how fixing the problem is attainable.

In this episode of Politics with Paul, Paul Rader chats with Nathan Smolensky about tackling political polarization. Nathan delves into the allure of division and how incentives shape political behavior. They discuss why polarized people often don't recognize their own divisiveness, balancing short-term wins with long-term goals, and crafting unique moral incentives. The media's role in fostering polarization and the potential influence of independent candidates are also explored. The episode wraps up with ways to engage non-polarized voters and a fun debate on pronouncing "coupon."

The reliability of polling responses is a crucial aspect of understanding public opinion. yet we must be careful reading too much into their results or stretching what the data says is an easy mistake to make. In this episode of Politics with Paul, we delve into the sincerity of polling responses and what makes a poll respondent trustworthy. The respondents in polls can be biased and incentivized to give opinions that aren't their completely true feelings. Even if they are fully sincere, however, public sentiment only has limited power. This episode also covers these ways that public sentiment can be biased, cases where respondents in polls may not be entirely forthright, the disconnect between public opinion and the willingness to take action, and why these factors can hamper or even prevent solutions to political problems.

The concept of states' rights has been a pivotal aspect of American political discourse since the nation's founding. In this episode of Politics with Paul, we delve into the complexities of states' rights, exploring their pros and cons and how they are balanced by the Constitution. We also discuss historical controversies and developments like the Nullification Crisis, slavery and civil rights, the Incorporation Doctrine, and the evolution of federalism, as well as contemporary states' rights debates.

The biggest issue that loses campaigns is the inability to properly self-assess. Today's episode of Politics with Paul teaches how to address that problem. When campaigning, you have to be fully honest not just about what your candidate does well or what can go right, but your candidate's weak points and what can cripple their campaign. These are done through SWOT analyses - strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Yet many campaigns do not effectively address their blind spots. Today, we cover why campaigns falter in self-assessment and SWOT analyses, how to fill out a SWOT, and practical applications.

Where do we draw the line for mental and physical fitness for our government officials? We all want political leaders who are up to the task of carrying out their offices' duties. Yet we sharply differ on who is capable and how we should ensure that competency. Today's episode of Politics with Paul is about all things mental and physical fitness for elected officials: whether we might see more stringent requirements for it, the trickiness in implementing such requirements, how old is too old, the trickiness in defining "too unfit for office," and more.

Does civics education in America need a rework in its content? On today's episode of Politics with Paul, Douglas Addison - the founder and president of the Center for Free, Fair, and Accountable Democracy - sits down to discuss the CFFAD's work in improving civics education in America. Among our discussion points are representative democracy, public opinion trends, and declining trust in democratic institutions amid rising authoritarianism, political manipulation, whether to standardize civics education, the impact of partisanship, and overlooked areas in civic education. A fun question about US presidential hairstyles wraps up the discussion.

With this being the 100th episode of the podcast and falling around the 250th anniversary of American independence, today's discussion is about one of the most critical questions of all: What exactly is being an American about? I'm not talking about the legal implications or pop culture. This is about the essence of the American spirit, and the basic promise of the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. This is about what American values are, free from partisan and ideological rhetoric. This is a call to civic renewal and to be good stewards of America to our fellow citizens and the people of the world. We can love our country and its foundational ideals while honestly appraising its flaws and the times it has come up short of fulfilling those ideals. Join me in this conversation   and tell me what being an American means to you.

The Federalist Papers remain a cornerstone of American political thought, but what lessons do they hold for us today? This episode delves into key essays, starting with Federalist Paper No. 10's exploration of factions and the implications of pluralism. Federalist Paper No. 39's discussion on federal and state power traces the evolution from dual to cooperative federalism. Federalist Paper No. 51 highlights checks and balances. No. 70 examines presidential power and the argues for an energetic executive. Federalist No. 78 addresses the judiciary's independence. And No. 84 argues against...a bill of rights?

250 years is a lot of time for change. So what has transformed the most in American politics in that time? Many aspects have gotten better over 250 years. Some have gotten worse. And some are just as flawed as they were before. Regardless, this episode of Politics with Paul is about some of the most seismic, overarching changes that you might not know about -- from election formats to campaigning strategy to civil service reform -- and what may be in store for the next 250 years.

Redistricting is fraught with partisanship and underhanded tactics...but can it be 100% fixed? Making fair districts and preventing gerrymandering is an extraordinarily difficult goal for a lot of reasons we don't realize...or want to admit. Today's episode explores the issues with rules that currently govern the redistricting process today, how we as citizens make it easier to gerrymander, several proposals for how to make redistricting fairer, and whether it is truly possible to make the redistricting process impartial.

Redistricting in America is a broken process - but before we can fix it, we must understand its inner workings and how we got here. In this first episode of a two-parter, I explore the background of redistricting, including its history, how its impacted today, and what currently goes into making new districts. Current attempts to redistrict have clearly partisan motives, but is that much different than the past? What needs to be considered when making new districts today? And what can redistricting of the past teach us going forward?

It’s a common sentiment: the country is going down the drain. But is it true? Our perceptions of whether the country is “on the decline” or “entering a golden age” are shaped by a variety of factors and biases. We need to have an honest conversation about these problems, but how do we do that? Today’s episode explores the debate about whether America is truly in decline, the importance of honestly discussing the flaws and strengths of the country, and the importance of (reasonable) optimism.

On the cusp of America's 250th anniversary, would the nation's Founding Fathers be proud or disappointed in what America's become? I believe the answer isn't so simple. Today's episode of Politics with Paul explores this question, discussing the biases that influences our answers, misconceptions about the Founding Fathers and how those misunderstandings impact our political thinking today, how politics during the Founding Fathers' time wasn't so different to now...and what it all means for America's 250th birthday.

Lobbying has a lot of issues…but you probably don't hate it as much as you think you do. The term "lobbyist" often conjures up depictions of shadowy figures making corrupt deals with elected officials to manipulate public policy for the powerful few. It is true that more than a few are corrupt, unethical, or self-interested - and even lobbyists that don't fit this bill sometimes whitewash the profession. At the same time, however, the public often misunderstands what lobbying entails. Today's episode of Politics with Paul pulls back some of the curtain surrounding lobbying, explaining more about the actual role of the lobbyist and discussing how lobbyists, politicians, and the public all can do better in more accurately portraying the industry.

Do we want authentic candidates in elections as much as we say we do? "Authenticity" is a favored buzzword by a politician's supporters to showcase why their candidate is the best, and by commentators who over-simplify the reason an election resulted the way it did. But can we actualyl say what "authenticity" is? Here's something crucial about how we judge politicians - our perception of their authenticity is deeply subjective and often influenced by biases we don't even realize we hold. But can we more objectively define authenticity? Today's episode of Politics with Paul centers on the various explanations of what authenticity is, how our perceptions of it can be biased, and what it means (and should mean) for our politics.

Midterm elections are often discussed for how much the sitting president's party suffers losses, but commentary often doesn't showcase why that is. Today's episode dives into the world of midterms, why they often play out differently than presidential election years, what factors are used to predict their results, and what it all means for 2026 elections. Can Republicans buck the historical trend, or will they become another data point in it?

Ballot measures are the most direct way for voters to impact the political process…but they can be difficult and tedious to comprehend. Here's a guide to help you better understand them. As a critical part of the election cycle, ballot measures cover a massive variety of topics: redistricting, voting systems, campaign contribution laws, government official salaries, healthcare, taxes, and many more. Today's episode of Politics with Paul will teach you how to research these measures, how to make them easier to read, the components to a ballot measure, and some of the political games played with them that you need to watch out for.

What if a Congressional party nomination could become more localized and geared toward all small donors? Primary elections tend to heavily favor the most well-funded and extreme candidates. Many Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike often feel the nominating process is unfair and unrepresentative as a result. But could a new third party's "People's Primary" be the answer to these criticisms? Today's guest on Politics with Paul is Tom Joseph, founder of America's Main Street Party. The AMSP uses the "People's Primary" to select its nominee, using local committees, small donors, and an app to allow citizens to choose the party's nominee. Listen in as Tom discusses the strategy behind this method, why the current candidate nomination process is flawed, and whether this system could expand in use in the future.

Could we see the end of political parties in America in the future? While political parties have existed in this country since the 1790s, they have also often been the target of intense criticism. Despite how much they are lamented and how many voters identify as independents, however, the Democratic and Republican Parties hold the vast majority of elected offices that have partisan elections. But today's guest, Metin Pekin, argues that not only is it necessary to dissolve the party system-- he says it is practical and achievable. Metin is the author of "Breaking Democracy's Chains: Freeing and Fortifying Democracy Against Hidden Capture." Hear his thoughts on how to create a party-less future in American politics, why he believes any number of political parties is a problem, and his responses to criticisms of the idea of no parties.

What makes a government representative of the people - and is that what we see in America? Everybody wants a government that not only works for them but also reflects its constituents. There is also a lot of agreement that government falls short of doing so. Yet how people envision that representativeness isn't always the same, and there are a lot of obstacles that hinder government's ability to be representative. Today's episode explores this concept of representation in government. How often should representatives do exactly what the voters want? What kinds of representativeness do different people find important? What are some roadblocks to representation that we need to address. Tune in for the answers to these questions and more.

Do we know what civility in conversation actually looks like? Healthy and grounded discussion is in short supply, especially in politics. Political discussions are often filled with toxic rhetoric and behavior, leading to many instances of verbal and physical violence. But while we know what toxicity looks like, there are some misunderstandings and mistaken beliefs about what civility looks like.  So how do we become more civil? Today's guest, Dr. Michael Lee, dives into this question and more. Dr. Lee is the executive director of the Civility Initiative at the College of Charleston and the host of the "When We Disagree" Podcast. Check out his insights, spanning over multiple decades, on what we get wrong about civility, how to better engage in healthy discussion, and how to make civil dialogue more engaging and fun.

Republicans and Democrats just can't get along…or can they? Almost all the talk about interparty relations is about how much they bicker, fight, and attack each other. And it's true, there is a lot that divides us. However, there is a surprising amount that both parties actually agree on - they just don't realize it. But it's easy to say that we actually have a lot of common ground - how about some examples? Today's episode will show you why we focus so much on differences between the parties, why we underestimate the level of similarities, some of the contexts through which we can study and showcase commonalities, and why acknowledging these commonalities is key for making progress on our country's most pressing problems.

In political discussions, blame often gets thrown around. People get accused of "both sides-ing" an issue when they don't take a strong stance. Or accusations of wrongdoing are responded to with, "Yeah, but what about you?!" The vast majority of disputes in politics involve at least one of these rhetorical devices. Oftentimes, these tactics are destructive and unhelpful, making discourse worse. But are there times where blaming, accusing someone of "both sides-ing," or whataboutism are justified? Today's episode explores our penchant for engaging in these tactics, why they regularly happen, why the line for when these are acceptable is hard to draw, and what we should ask ourselves before we use these tactics. Quality discussions, and finding solutions to our most pressing problems, greatly depend on properly addressing these things.

Government often feels unaccountable and non-transparent - but it doesn't have to be that way. Imagine an app and platform that not only significantly cuts down on the difficulty and time-consumption of researching bills and how legislators vote on them. It also allows you, the voter, to tell legislators in real-time how you want them to vote, and therefore makes them more accountable to the people. Sound too good to be true? Well, that's what the Digital Democracy Project does, helmed by today's Politics with Paul guest, Ramon Perez. A military veteran, AI consultant, and political reformer, Ramon discusses how DDP, artificial intelligence, regular citizens, and other key projects can make government officials more accountable and transparent than ever before.

It's an election year - and that means a lot of fodder about election polls and the "horse race" aspect of polls. It's easy to get caught up in who is "winning" a race, but a lot of the discussion about polls is immersed in misunderstandings about how it works, vested interests in what polls get promoted, and surface-level analysis of public opinion. For as much as people obsess over polls, many of them also love to trash polls as unreliable and even deceptive. Today's episode of Politics in Paul cuts through a lot of that noise, seeking to make polling more accessible and understandable. Listen in to get the real story masked by some of polling's biggest misconceptions, the key ingredients to look for in polling, and why a healthy dose of skepticism (but not distrust) is warranted. Equip yourself to know what is useful polling info and fodder - and what isn't - in the leadup to the 2026 election.

We often think we or like-minded people have all the answers for how to fix politics. Yet we think the solutions are far easier, more obvious, and more foolproof than they actually are. It's a trap that any of us (some people more than others) can fall into. You should be skeptical if someone says, "It's simple, we need to do X." Still, we should encourage people to share their ideas for democracy. We just need to get people to think more critically about their ideas and others they agree with. Today's episode of Politics with Paul dives into this topic, showing the pitfalls of believing our proposed ideas for fixing democracy or policy issues are obvious and foolproof, how to avoid these mistakes in overconfidence, and how to better evaluate ideas to solve our political problems.

Perhaps the most important component to any campaign is mobilizing and motivating supporters and like-minded people to support your cause. Yet just because you have broad agreement doesn't mean it's simple and easy to galvanize these voters. You need to find out who these people are, craft the right message, the resources to reach them, and the right amount of nudging to come out to vote, among other things. What are the best ways to do that? Today's Politics with Paul guest, Bert Ralston, joined the podcast to share his decades-long insights into that question. Bert has had a long career in voter turnout programs, creating communications strategy, influencing public policy and opinion, authored works, and university lecturing to draw on and imparts much of that wisdom in today's episode. If you're looking to campaign for anything or anyone, check out his insights to level up your political communications game.

Our civic culture is in precarious state, and toxicity and hyperpolarization threaten to make it even more unhealthy. It's now more critical than ever to renew our commitment to our civic ideals and to each other as Americans. But that's considerably easier said than done. How do we do that? Today's guest, Daniel Yudkin, joins the podcast to showcase what may be the key to revitalizing our civic culture and getting back to more healthy engagement with our political system. As head of the Beacon Project, he and his organization have been developing the concept of "potentialism," which states that everyone has a gift to offer our civic culture, and a right and responsibility to develop and share that gift. Is potentialism the antidote to the poison of hyperpolarization?

While voter turnout overall is notoriously low in most American elections, youth voter turnout especially lags noticeably behind older voters, even when there is an uptick in participation. Sometimes, that has led to criticisms of youth citizens as "lazy," "uninformed," "unengaged," or "selfish." But is it really that simple? And do we have to just accept low voter turnout as an unchangeable fact? In today's episode of the Politics with Paul Podcast, election reformer and seasoned political campaigner Stephanie Houghton sits down to discuss the issues facing youth voter turnout and how we can go about solving them. She shares many of her insights including why youth voters seem so disengaged, how we can go about fixing those problems, how youth voters can also help themselves, and the simple yet powerful act of genuine engagement with them.

In the discussions about how to depolarize American politics, one critical element often gets lost: How do we convince people that they need to depolarize and to become part of the political bridge-building movement? The need for these things may seem self-evident to those of us working to depolarize the nation, but we have to truly WANT to come together. And that requires not only showing polarized people why they should depolarize but also some self-awareness from bridge-builders in their approach. Today's guest, Phelosha Collaros shares a wealth of insights into how to encourage more effective depolarization efforts, drawing on plenty of research towards more effective depolarization techniques and her own heritage. Her mother and grandparents experienced the Colombian Civil War, "La Violencia," and the conflict holds many valuable lessons for how to address the increasing toxicity in America. If you're trying to level up your game on healing divisions in this country, you don't want to miss this episode.

Civic engagement is a difficult endeavor that takes a lot of time, effort, and money. Yet an app called Sway seeks to make it much more accessible, giving any voting group the power to organize and engage constituents on a wide variety of elections and political issues. Could Sway change the game for citizen outreach? One of Sway's co-founders, Claire Shoreall, joined the Politics with Paul Podcast this episode to discuss the ambitious goals for the app. Listen in as Claire discusses the current impacts Sway has had, its plans for the future, and her insights on how to improve civic engagement. If you've been looking for ways to improve your outreach as a candidate, campaigner, consultant, activist, pundit, or concerned citizen, Sway may be one of the solutions you're looking for.

Uncontested elections - races that only have one candidate - are a considerable problem in American politics. These elections aren't just uncompetitive; there's no competition at all. The choice has already been made before voting. Despite the threats uncontested elections pose to democracy and civic health, however, this issue doesn't get nearly as much attention as it should. But the first step to solving a problem is knowing it exists. Today's episode of Politics with Paul showcases how often we see these uncontested elections, many of the factors that can lead to an uncontested election, reasons why they are a problem for democracy and civic health…and perhaps most importantly, what YOU can do practically to help push back against the frequency of uncontested elections.

Elections are complicated and difficult, which makes for plenty of mistakes made on the campaign trail from newbies and veterans alike. But it's not just the actual campaigns where mistakes and misunderstandings happen - it occurs with how elections are analyzed and covered, too. Campaigners, candidates, pollsters, media, academics, and citizens all have different perspectives and interests, leading to shortcomings and exacerbating the missteps about campaigning. In today's episode, Alex Patton sits down with me to discuss these mistakes that are made by campaigns and by those seeking to understand campaigns. Alex draws on his long career in political consulting and survey research to spotlight these common errors, including some that he made early on in his career. Whether you're new to the political game, seeking to enter it, or seasoned with experience, his insights will benefit anyone.

One of the most fundamental questions a political campaign must ask themselves is this: How much are you trying to persuade voters and how much are you trying to mobilize them? Some voters are never going to vote for your side, some voters are always going to vote for your side, some are up for grabs, and some are rarely (or never) going to participate at all. Knowing who is who, and how to appeal to them, is one of the keys to winning elections. There is no clear checklist that tells you how much your campaign must mobilize and how much it must mobilize. You can also have multiple people look at the same exact campaign and give you different answers about how to mobilize and/or persuade. However, today's episode covers many of the electoral factors to consider, how they impact your mobilization and persuasion strategies, and why it's important for you to know - even if you are not involved in politics for a living.

Have you ever wondered how to make sense of the text of legislation and laws but you didn't know where to begin, or you felt the task too intimidating or daunting? Then this episode is for you! It's a crash course to introduce you to how legislation is interpreted at the federal and state levels so that is more accessible and understandable. Understanding how laws are interpreted is incredibly important for civic knowledge and the ability of citizens to hold government and political commentators accountable. Today's episode shows how the debates about interpretation have evolved from the very beginnings of US Constitutional debates to the tools used to interpret federal and state statutes - including information pulled from my own webinar I give to civics and public affairs organizations on how to understand legislation for themselves and their clients.

Could a plan called "Voter Dollars" be the key to solving the issues with campaign finance laws in American politics? The exorbitant levels of spending in political campaigns have dismayed Americans across parties and ideologies, contributing to the disenchantment many voters (and would-be voters) feel about politics. Despite concern about politicians being bought by special interests, campaign finance reform has been particularly difficult to implement in America. However, today's guest, Dan McMillan of Make Voters the Donors, makes his case for why "Voter Dollars" is the answer we've all been looking for and how his organization plans to implement it.

Pluralism is a core part of American politics--or at least, it's supposed to be. Our civic life is meant to be a blend of varied backgrounds and viewpoints coming together to improve our political system. Yet far too often, we are siloed into echo chambers and see divisiveness and polarization reign in our discourse. So how do we get back to upholding pluralism in America? That's what Liz Vogel, co-executive director of New Pluralists, discusses on today's episode, including what pluralism looks like today, what challenges to pluralism we must overcome, and how we individually can promote pluralism.

Democracy in America is fragile, yet a lot of the rhetoric surrounding it is fraught with biases and appeals that are about winning elections and political battles rather than truly preserving democracy. There are also a lot of misunderstandings and debate about what democracy is and should be. To truly uphold and preserve democracy in this country, we must truly understand what it means and the challenges that face it. Today's episode of Politics with Paul explores what the core of American democracy is about, including whether we truly are a democracy, public perceptions of American democracy, and threats that we must wary of and address.

The power of the US presidency has expanded considerably over 235 years. But has it gone too far and broken our system of separation of powers? If so, how do we (and especially the US Supreme Court) rein it back in? Retired attorney Peter Cohen looks at these questions in his new book, "In the Supreme Court's Own Words: First Principles for Checking Presidential Power and Preserving the Republic." Our conversation includes discussion about how to make legal rulings more understandable, constitutional restraints that presidents of both parties have tested, whether the "activist judge" argument has caused problems in our political discourse, and how we change our opinion on expanded presidential power based on whether we support the president.

Imagine a one-stop shop for political research where every candidate is seen, every citizen is heard, and every journalist is free to speak. Is such a thing possible? Can we create a level playing field for candidates, citizens, and journalists all through one central hub? That is what today's guest, Travis Misurell, is building through the Future is Now Coalition (FiNC). Included in our discussion are the difference between power-first and people-first candidates, how FiNC seeks to fix the ballot information problem without overwhelming voters, and incentivizing a more unified sense of purpose and action.

How do various organizations benefit from polling? How can targeted communication and unbiased polling move conversations forward? Seasoned pollster Doug Kaplan discusses these questions and more, including whether political betting markets are a threat to pollsters, public misconceptions about polling, and what polling and market research in other countries can tell us about engaging American communities in civil political dialogue.

Although it sounds cliché, it is true that those who do not know history are condemned to repeat the mistakes of the past. But it is also important to look at the positive contributions to history, especially from classic political thinkers. Here to talk about those historical contributions is Crom Carmichael, co-founder of the Giants of Political Thought audio program series. Included in our discussion are the positive historical lessons and thinkers we can look to for guidance in the face of political challenges, why those lessons are still relevant today, and how to apply those lessons.

What are the biggest challenges for civics accessibility both for students in the classroom and adults that are past their school years? Where have previous civics initiatives gone wrong? What are some improvements in civics education that can be built upon? Civics4All founder (and former colleague of mine) Roneka Matheny discusses these questions and more with me on today's episode. We also talk about her new book "Civics for All: A Crash Course in US Government and Politics" and its goals, some lesser-known facts about the history of civics education, and ways that you can help civics organizations (including hers) in their work.

How big is the political middle of America? What traits make somebody part of this political middle? How can this political middle overcome the toxic political division of today? Shannon Watson, executive director of Majority in the Middle, gives her insights into these questions and more. She also discusses the biggest roadblocks to overcoming division, recent encouraging signs in building bridges across division, and practical ways anybody can overcome political division in their lives.

Being willing to reexamine, let alone change, our political beliefs can be a monumental task, but there is immense value in introspection. My guest today, Lisa Ekman, went through such a journey of questioning her beliefs. Listen in as Lisa shares insights as to why some people find it difficult to reevaluate their views, how that introspection impacted her relationships, critical thinking tips that anybody can use regardless of their political beliefs, and more.

Common ground in politics seems more and more like a fleeting dream, a relic of the past. But it is attainable--and there are actionable ways for all of us to get there. This week's Politics with Paul guest, Nathan C. Smolensky, discusses what these practical tips are. Nathan also talks about how to make constructive dialogue more conducive to winning elections, whether you can have a civil conversation with anyone, and why hostile reactions to political views (even if justified) don't help solve anything.

The US House of Representatives has remained at 435 members for over a century, despite significant population growth. Could adding more members fix Congress' issues with responsiveness and representativeness of the American people? In today's episode, we explore that question. Included is the vision of the Framers of the Constitution for the US House, a brief history of the size of the chamber, the biggest arguments made for and against increasing its membership, why it's tricky to expand it, and the ultimate goals of advocates for expanding the US House.