Aug 25, 2026 | Current Events, Elections, National
Editor’s note: Michael W. Traugott is professor emeritus of communication and media and of political science at the University of Michigan and is currently completing his term as interim director of the Center for Political Studies at the Institute for Social Research. A past president of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, he is co-author of The Voter’s Guide to Election Polls, out last year in its sixth edition.
A recent incident of the insertion of fake data into the coverage of the Wisconsin Senate primary, the Nevada gubernatorial race, and the Los Angeles Mayoral primary highlights a weakness in coverage of our campaigns and the outsized role of polls.
The data were supplied by an entity called Meridian Strategies, which has now disappeared from the internet after indicating that its sourcing of fake data was part of a “short-term social experiment examining how purported polling information could enter and spread through the political information ecosystem without independent verification.” Further sleuthing by The Guardian identified a single individual behind the scheme. The news media were clearly wrong to describe the source as a polling organization, a company, or a pollster.
This is not the first time that fake data have appeared in a political campaign. In the 2000 presidential campaign, the Daily Kos website featured poll results from a firm by the name of Research 2000 that were completely made up. In this case, the people at Research 2000 prepared a complete press release for each “poll” that included topline results, a methodology section, and a sample questionnaire. The problem was that no interviews were conducted, and the results were fabricated.
Why do some news organizations fall for fake polls?
Communication researchers who study campaign coverage are well aware of the tendency for news media to engage in horserace coverage where the emphasis is who’s ahead or behind and how the dynamics of the race are changing over time. Polls that measure candidate preferences play right into this “game dynamic” focus; they place a premium on reporting the latest results and how things have changed since the previous measurement, especially as Election Day approaches.
Polls can contribute to an understanding of the forces at work in the electorate that explain support for candidates based on their issue positions or the success of their appeals to specific groups. But too often the media only report the results of the “trial heat” question such as “”If the presidential election were held today, would you vote for Candidate A or Candidate B?”
There is also a difference in the in-house resources a reporter might have in different types of news organizations. Large circulation newspapers with a national focus often have their own polling expert, but local news outlets don’t have such access. Print and web outlets are more likely to have in-house expertise than local television stations.
How to Evaluate New Poll Results
There are some guidelines that journalists and the public can consult and organizations they can ask for guidance. The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) has several resources on responsible reporting on polls, as does the Poynter Institute. Journalists can also turn to local universities where there are public opinion and survey methodology experts for consultation and advice on the validity of new poll results.
The key elements are:
- a transparent description of the poll’s methodology
- who sponsored the research
- the population studied
- the sample design and size
- whether the data were weighted and how
- the mode of interviewing
- the dates of the field work, and
- a copy of the questionnaire.
For news readers: Check who conducted a poll, who paid for it, whom they interviewed, when, and how — reputable pollsters disclose all of this. Then remember that every poll carries a margin of error that is wider for subgroups like “young voters” or “independent voters,” than for the full sample of all voters, and that a poll is a snapshot rather than a forecast. Similar trends that appear across many, good polls are more trustworthy than any single, surprising number.
Additional information can be found at the site of the AAPOR Transparency Initiative.
This post was written by Michael Traugott of the Center for Political Studies and prepared for publication by Center for Political Studies communications manager Tevah Platt.
Jul 30, 2026 | Current Events, International
Bold Challenges Initiative team celebrates milestone as villages gain access to clean water
After two years of collaborative effort, a team of University of Michigan researchers is celebrating a major milestone in rural Tanzania: Clean, safe water now flows to Esilalei and Oltukai villages and surrounding hamlets in Monduli District, serving pastoralist families who formerly traveled long distances in search of water.
The project is expected to benefit more than 10,000 people, local health clinics, a primary school, and countless livestock, using solar power to pump and distribute water to Maasai communities. It’s a model of sustainable technology meeting the urgent global need to address water scarcity.
Sisty Massawe, Brian Min, Kelly Askew and Aline Cotel in Oltukai Village, October 11, 2024
The initiative was led by University of Michigan researchers Brian Min, associate professor of political science; Kelly Askew, Niara Sudarkasa Collegiate Professor of Anthropology and Afroamerican and African Studies; Aline Cotel, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor and associate professor of civil and environmental engineering, and Sisty Basil Massawe, executive director of the ELICO Foundation in Tanzania and a former fellow of the University of Michigan African Presidential Scholars (UMAPS) program. Min and Askew are affiliates of the Center for Political Studies at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research.
From Solar Panels to Water ATMs
Water ATM dispensing water in Kanjiro hamlet, Esilalei Village, July 17, 2026
Through support from the University of Michigan and its Bold Challenges Initiative, ELICO Foundation installed a solar-powered pumping system in Esilalei Village, expanded the water distribution network, and introduced a prepaid water management system—delivered through “Water ATMs,” automated machines to dispense water from a natural spring about 12 miles away to ensure reliable and sustainable delivery.
“The solar-powered infrastructure eliminates dependence on fossil fuels or unreliable grid electricity to meet the realities of remote pastoral communities,” said Askew.
The team then focused on extending clean water services to Oltukai Village by connecting it to the Minjingu water supply system of the neighboring Babati District.
On July 26, the day the researchers returned from their field visits, the pipeline they helped construct with local partners ELICO Foundation and the district rural water authority (RUWASA) reached Oltukai Village.
Interdisciplinary Collaboration
The project exemplifies the Bold Challenges Initiative’s mission to support interdisciplinary teams pursuing solutions to real-world problems with potential for large-scale impact. Solutions implemented in local communities can be tested and later applied on a global scale. Selected for the 2024 Boost cohort under the title “Solar PV Water Pumping for Domestic and Livestock Uses in Last Mile Pastoral Societies in Tanzania,” the team bridges political science, anthropology, and engineering with deep local knowledge and partnerships.
The researchers bring a wide range of expertise to the community-driven initiative. Min’s research uses satellite imagery and computational methods to track energy access and reliability across the developing world: Work that has revealed the true scale of global energy poverty and the equity gaps that persist in underserved regions. Askew has conducted research in Tanzania for more than three decades, with expertise spanning land rights, rural energy access, cultural production, and Indigenous political movements. Cotel brings engineering expertise in water systems and a commitment to creating pathways for women in science and engineering.
The project is an example of the University of Michigan’s leadership in energy, climate action, sustainability, and environmental equity, bringing solutions to communities disproportionately affected.
For Maasai pastoralist families, the consequences of inadequate access to clean water include conflict over scarce resources, decimated livestock herds, forced displacement, and public health risks.
Digging the trench and preparing material for the water pipeline to Oltukai Village, July 18, 2026
The team celebrated the arrival of clean water to the Masaai communities at the end of July and will be installing ‘Water ATMs’ over the coming month to expand water access in Oltukai Village, with locations that include a health clinic and a cattle trough.
Left to right: Kelly Askew, Brian Min, Aline Cotel, Sisty Massawe, Monduli District Water Engineer Neville Msaki, John Maxwell (ReCon Corp, Michigan), July 17, 2026
This post was written by Tevah Platt, communications manager for the Center for Political Studies. Photography by Esau Ng’umbi of the ELICO Foundation.
May 4, 2026 | 2025 Analysis, Current Events, expert analysis, National, Race
When we think about how political beliefs are formed, conventional wisdom points to parents as the primary teachers—passing down party loyalties, civic values, and political knowledge to their children from an early age. But what happens when parents themselves are navigating an unfamiliar political landscape?
In his forthcoming book Information Brokers: Political Socialization in Latino Immigrant Families (University of Chicago Press, July 2026), political scientist Roberto F. Carlos upends traditional assumptions by investigating a reversal of roles that unfolds in many Latino immigrant households: It is the children who teach the parents about American politics.
When children influence political engagement
“Young children, particularly in immigrant households, often help their parents navigate life in the United States by acting as key sources of information,” writes Carlos, who rigorously provides evidence that this responsibility grants children influence over their parents’ political engagement, “with children shaping their immigrant parents’ political perspectives and decisions.”
These dynamics may be key to understanding political engagement and disengagement among Latinos, the largest ethnic minority group in the United States. Two-thirds of this population are either immigrants or the children of immigrants.
Carlos’s previous research examined the “prolonged partisan socialization process” experienced by second-generation Americans; in his 2018 article “Late to the Party,” he demonstrated that children of immigrants often grow up without the parental partisan transmission that mainstream theories take for granted. Because many immigrant parents arrive in the United States without deep familiarity with the American party system—hindered by language barriers, economic pressures, fear of deportation, and lingering ties to the politics of their home countries—they are frequently unable to map their values onto U.S. political parties early enough to pass a partisan identity along to their children. Information Brokers asks what happens to children who lack parental political guidance, but also what happens when those children become the guides themselves.
‘Information brokers’
The book’s central argument is that children of Latino immigrants function as “information brokers”—active agents who translate, interpret, and mediate the American political world for their parents. As immigrant parents navigate unfamiliar institutions, they often turn to their U.S.-educated children for help with everything from understanding government paperwork to making sense of elections and civic engagement. This brokering role places unique responsibilities on young people, granting them an unusual degree of influence over major household decisions, including political ones. When children advocate, explain, or intervene on behalf of their parents, Carlos argues, they are engaging in politically consequential behavior that shapes the attitudes and actions of both generations.
Carlos’s research draws on six original surveys and multiple survey experiments; he also gives a descriptive account of two young Latina women brokering information in response to the imminent passage of the Texas Senate Bill 4, which targeted undocumented immigrants for deportation in 2017. Their experiences illustrate how “information, obligation, and agency, often working in tandem, can serve as catalysts for immigrant households’ participation in the political sphere.” Often, the children of immigrants step up to fill an important informational void, out of necessity.
Political Implications
Countering a narrative that portrays lower rates of partisan identification and voter turnout as signs of apathy or disengagement, Carlos’s research suggests these patterns reflect a socialization process that unfolds differently—and often more slowly—in immigrant communities. Children who broker political information for their families are not disengaged; they are learning politics through direct, high-stakes experience. This could be a valuable insight for activities, politicians, and party strategists who can direct their attention to mobilizing the second generation, says Carlos. “I believe this book provides a significant cause for optimism when it comes to engaging the Latino community.”
This book also says something about today’s political climate as it relates to immigration and the way it is enforced. As Carlos recently noted in the Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA) town hall roundtable on rising authoritarianism in the U.S., children– especially those with mixed-status families– are forced to learn politics because they are helping their parents manage risk. They learn how state power works because they are the ones explaining it, translating it, and sometimes trying to protect their families from it. “That is political socialization under conditions of enforcement,” said Carlos. “It is not civics as we usually imagine it. It is not learning about voting or Congress or the three branches of government in a classroom. It is learning that the state can enter your family’s life through a traffic stop, a workplace raid, a court notice, a school absence, or a rumor that ICE is nearby. It is learning that politics is not distant. It is not abstract. It is protection or vulnerability.”
Carlos provides two striking statistics citing Vox journalist Christian Paz: One out of five people living in the United States is Latino, and every 30 seconds, a member of the Latino community becomes eligible to vote. As the 2026 midterm elections loom, Carlos’s new book provides a fresh perspective on a powerful voting bloc whose engagement could play a decisive role in election outcomes.
Roberto Carlos is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan, and an affiliate of the Center for Political Studies at the Institute for Social Research. His research lies at the intersection of race, ethnicity, and politics, focusing on Latinx political behavior, immigration, and political socialization.
This post was developed by Tevah Platt, who manages communications for the Center for Political Studies.
Apr 13, 2026 | 2025 Analysis, Current Events, Elections, expert analysis, International
Victor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary for sixteen years (2010-26), has conceded the election to Peter Magyar and his opposition Tisza party. This is an enormous defeat for the right-wing populist leader and his right-wing populist Fidesz party and a landslide victory for the democratic opposition.
Parliamentary Supermajority for the Opposition Provides Lever to Rebuild Democracy
By winning more than 135 seats in the 199-seat legislative body, Magyar’s Tisza party has not just secured a majority but a supermajority in the Hungarian parliament. Orbán’s Fidesz party has held a parliamentary supermajority for four consecutive terms, which he has used to rewrite the constitution to consolidate his own power and to undermine democracy and the rule of law in Hungary.
Many of the tactics he used are part of the authoritarian playbook that is by now all too familiar—eliminating checks and balances on executive authority, taking control over media outlets, and reengineering the electoral system to disadvantage the opposition. Regaining control will enable the opposition to amend the constitution, reverse many of these changes, and rebuild institutions that promote democracy and the rule of law.
Yet, the landslide victory is not only a triumph for Hungary’s democratic opposition and the country’s future trajectory; it is also a major win for Europe, the European Union (EU), Ukraine, and the US.
Hope for a Strong and United Europe
The defeat of Orbán and his nationalist agenda signals to Europe, and to Europeans, that the rise of right-wing populism is not irreversible. Although not yet the dominant trend across the continent, far-right parties such as Orbán’s Fidesz have been gaining ground in Europe since the 2000s and appeared to be building momentum. Moreover, Orbán himself has become an iconic figure among them, exemplifying the success of illiberal democracy. The sweeping electoral victory of the liberal opposition in Hungary has countered this trend and diminished Orbán’s appeal as a model for Europe’s future. Instead, he is a cautionary tale.
Second, Orban’s defeat signals that Hungarians have not rejected either Europe or European values, including liberal democracy. As many European leaders stated following the election results, there is renewed hope for a strong and united Europe.
The primary beneficiary of this reunion—at least in the short run—is Ukraine. Among the many ways in which Orbán has undermined the EU is his refusal to support either further assistance to Ukraine or stricter sanctions against Russia following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. As part of his electoral campaign, Magyar pledged to rebuild Hungary’s relationship with the EU. He made good on this promise following his victory by agreeing to unblock critical aid in the form of a 90-billion-euro ($103-billion) loan to Ukraine.
Takeaways for the US
The cautionary tale of Orbán’s defeat also suggests a prescriptive one for the United States. Both the large turnout and the substantial margins made the Tisza party’s electoral win too decisive for even Orbán to contest. But neither the size of the turnout nor the landslide victory happened overnight. Albeit weakened by Orban’s policies, Hungarian civil society continued to mobilize undaunted, and Hungarian citizens increasingly took to the streets to show Orban, his loyalists, and most importantly, their fellow citizens that they would not tolerate an autocratic takeover.
The road ahead will be difficult. Orbán not only succeeded in dismantling democratic institutions and the rule of law. He also used his unchecked authority to institute a system of crony capitalism, rewarding loyalists with control over key economic sectors and lucrative development contracts, and destroying Hungary’s economy in the process. In fact, the protests that amalgamated in the opposition’s massive victory focused on anti-corruption and pocket-book issues. So too did Magyar’s electoral campaign, signifying that this is a winning electoral strategy. The new government will have to both rebuild and restore confidence in democratic institutions and the rule of law while actively combating the corrupt practices that have fueled inflation and slowed economic recovery.
This post was written by Pauline Jones, Research Professor and Director of the University of Michigan Center for Political Studies. Pauline Jones is a Professor of Political Science and the Edie N. Goldenberg Endowed Director for the Michigan in Washington Program. She is an expert on politics in the former Soviet Union (including Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Russia) and on assessing the impact of mass protest in authoritarian regimes. She regularly teaches PoliSci140: Introduction to Comparative Politics and recently shared her insights on US democratic decline in global perspective. Dr. Jones is currently a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (CASBS) at Stanford University.
Nov 11, 2025 | 2025 Analysis, Current Events, Elections, expert analysis, National
Democrats had a big night last week, sweeping key elections and winning by unexpected margins up and down the ballot. Voters showed up in high numbers for an “off” election year and sided with Democrats in the elections’ four major contests: The mayor’s race in New York City, the governors’ races in Virginia and New Jersey, and the redistricting measure Prop 50 in California.
Tyler Simko is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan, and an affiliate of the Center for Political Studies at the Institute for Social Research. Simko specializes in U.S. state and local politics, political geography, and computational social science. He is applying this expertise as an elections analyst for CBS, and he shared with us about the experience of doing this work and the major takeaways from the 2025 elections.
Expert Q&A with CBS Elections Analyst Tyler Simko
The content has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
1. What were your top takeaways from the 2025 elections?
Two specific trends stick out to me.
First, this was a stronger performance for Democrats than many people expected.
The election outcomes were not especially surprising. For all four major races, the expected result going into election day happened—for example, most polls before election day saw Mamdani, Sherrill, Spanberger, and “yes” on Proposition 50 as the clear frontrunners.
However, the final margins in favor of Democrats were larger than many people expected. For example, most polls placed Mikie Sherrill as the favorite, but polling averages showed a lead of around 3-5 percentage points. The ultimate election was a blowout, with Sherrill ahead with a final margin around thirteen points. Abigail Spanberger won the governor’s race in Virginia by even more.
The second major takeaway for me was that early analysis suggests that some of the “red shift” we saw in 2024 among groups like Latinos may have reverted back toward Democrats.
For example, high-Latino communities in New Jersey saw huge reversals toward Sherrill from the way residents in those same places voted in 2024 for Harris.
Results like these suggest that some of the shifts we saw in 2024 may not be set in stone. Charles Stewart III, another election analyst on the team and a Professor at MIT, has suggested this might be evidence that 2024 was a “deviating election,” rather than a new normal, citing research originally developed at the University of Michigan in the 1960s.
2. Was there anything notable about turnout for this election?
Turnout was unusually high in nearly every race on Tuesday night. In some ways, this is surprising because 2025 is an “off” election year without presidential or congressional midterm elections.
However, this high turnout reflects just how salient politics is for many Americans right now.
For example, early voting and election day turnout in the NYC mayoral election eclipsed the last election in 2021. This continued the trend we saw in the primary, where early voting more than doubled turnout in the last primary that elected Eric Adams. Turnout in other races was high as well, like California’s Proposition 50 measure on redistricting.
Further, it’s especially interesting to see where turnout was higher compared to past elections.
Patterns in turnout changes can offer insight into where voters are particularly energized right now.
For example, I wrote for CBS that many Democratic-leaning areas in New Jersey saw huge surges in turnout (some nearly 40% higher than the last gubernatorial election in 2021). This suggests that Democrats are particularly politically motivated right now, a trend that party leaders will hope continues into next year’s midterm elections.
3. What do you do as an Election Analyst on the CBS News Data Desk?
For this past election night on November 4th, I worked in the CBS Office in New York City alongside a team of other analysts to predict and analyze the elections for NYC Mayor, NJ/VA Governor, and California’s Prop. 50 redistricting referendum.
On election night the Data Desk is focused on forecasting voter turnout and predicting election results. We analyze data like exit polls and election returns as they come in, and look for interesting patterns. As with any network, one of our primary roles is to “call” the election winners.
But beyond calling the races, we’re also actively monitoring other data beyond vote shares. For example, the NYC Board of Elections frequently updates their “check-in” turnout numbers throughout the day. We use these records to help improve our turnout forecasts, which help us identify patterns early in the night. For example, even before election night, strong early voting in New Jersey’s Democratic-leaning areas suggested it would be a good night for Mikie Sherrill.
Finally, a good deal of work happens both before and after the elections too. For example, some members of the team prepare products like the CBS Exit Polls in preparation for election day.
Similarly, after election day there is a ton of new data to analyze. For example, the morning after election day, Kabir Khanna (Director, Election Analytics & Technical Systems at CBS) and I wrote an article for CBS News demonstrating how high turnout in Democratic-leaning counties strongly favored Sherrill. We’ll continue conducting this kind of analysis in the coming weeks.
4. What are the goals of this work, and how do your expertise and skills meet the needs of delivering election results and analysis?
Predicting election results (before they happen) and analyzing returns (after they happen) require knowledge of both electoral systems and statistics. At the University of Michigan, I teach courses on American Politics and Political Methodology in the Political Science department and research topics in political institutions and computational social science, so this kind of work is right up my alley. You know, I used real data from election night for an interactive prediction activity in my graduate-level Machine Learning course this past week.
Calling election results is a classic prediction problem. You don’t have complete information before election night is over, but you would like to use statistical “signals” to make data-driven predictions about what is going to happen. Often, we use statistical models because we want to detect patterns over the course of election night that may not be clear from simply counting returns as they come in.
For example, imagine a hypothetical situation where votes for NYC Mayor from Staten Island all come in first, early on election night. A simple “counting” approach would predict Andrew Cuomo had a large lead in the mayoral election because he had strong support in Staten Island, while in reality Mamdani clearly won overall. Statistical models help account for these patterns like geographic segregation in candidate support. Training in both political science and statistics/data science helps.
5. What are the future implications of the 2025 election results?
I think this set of results has two important implications:
First, this strong Democratic win will change the political dynamics over the next year as we head into the midterms. In the meantime, these results also give national Democrats more leverage in ongoing debates like the government shutdown.
We also might see these results change political rhetoric over the next few months. For example, Mamdani’s campaign focused on affordability and we have already seen Trump adopting this language in recent interviews.
The second major signal comes from the strong passage of California’s Proposition 50. This result greenlights Democratic efforts to push back against the new Texas redistricting plan that made their existing gerrymander even more extreme.
Republicans currently have the lead in this redistricting “war” because they have aggressively gerrymandered maps in several states. But, Prop. 50 will likely embolden Democrats in states like Virginia to try gerrymandering their own favorable plans.
Some of my own research helps clarify the consequences of gerrymanders. My co-authors and I at the ALARM Project—a research group focused on political geography and public policy—have shown that gerrymandering makes congressional elections less competitive and less responsive to the will of voters. Our research also shows that these other states could learn from Michigan, as our independent redistricting commission helps ensure redistricting plans are more fair and less biased.
Tyler Simko is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan, and an affiliate of the Center for Political Studies at the Institute for Social Research. This post was developed by Tyler Simko and Tevah Platt, communications manager for the Center for Political Studies.
Oct 13, 2025 | 2025 Analysis, Current Events, International, Race
A new survey on the nature and distribution of American stereotypes about Jewish, Muslim, and Black Americans measures the nature, extent and distribution of stereotypes about each of the three groups.
The broad goals of the survey and analyses of the data are:
- to map the dimensional structure of prevailing stereotypes about each group
- to map the distribution of these stereotypes across important population categories
- to explore the relationships between stereotypes of different religious or ethnic groups,
- to test hypotheses about probable determinants of various stereotypes
The survey was designed and carried out by Mark Tessler and Francy Luna Diaz of the University of Michigan and Amnon Cavari, associate professor of Political Science at Reichman University in Israel.
A research brief including preliminary results from the survey reports findings on some of the negative stereotypes about each group that the survey examined. Results on additional questions, including positive stereotypes and questions about US foreign policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, will be forthcoming.
The brief focuses on the degree of agreement with two negative stereotypes about Jewish, Muslim, and Black Americans, respectively, which is not the same for the three groups; how responses pertaining to stereotypes are associated with differing levels of education, and how agreement with stereotypes across groups are correlated.
Read the Research Brief: Some Preliminary and Partial Findings on American Stereotypes about Jewish, Muslim, and Black Americans: Evidence from a 2024 US Survey
The Research Brief was published by the Center for Political Studies at the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
