one i just showed you, in general we may need to resort to save the country. the third is about voter fraud and everyday americans needing to rise up even if requires violence. if the 2024 election is compromised by voter fraud, everyday americans we need to ensure the rightful leader takes office, even if it requires taking violent actions. here is the first question about armed poll watchers. about three in 10 republicans. these are people who are sympathetic or adherent to christian nationalism, it is a full one third of that group who favors armed poll watchers. democrats it is around one in 10. the second is when we saw. three and 10 republicans saying true american patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country. the last one is that everyday

americans may need to rise up. a little bit less on that question but the patterns are still clear. republicans about twice as likely as democrats to say this and if you affirm christian nationalism may be almost three times as likely. we should let this sink in. this is quite alarming. i have looked these numbers a lot and have to remind myself that this is a big deal. this is something quite new in the country. the other question we have is not exactly about violence, but it is about a coup. support for trump overthrowing the election if he is not confirmed as the winner, he should declare the results invalid and do whatever it takes to assume his rightful place as president. i will give you a couple of attitudinal measures along with demographic ones. among those who believe people

who are convicted for violence on january 6 are political hostages, and we have a question about that, three in 10 of them say if he is not declared the winner he should do whatever it takes to assume office. among those who believe the 2020 election was stolen, it is about one quarter. it is 62% of republicans who believe the election was stolen from president trump today. then this one is just republicans who have a favorable view of trump is nearly one quarter. they say if he is not confirmed should do whatever it takes. here are the christian nationals on the same number again. do whatever it takes. this is interesting. this does not say anything about legitimacy. it just says if he is not confirmed, this is what we should do. this is a nonpartisan poll show we did ask the same question about harris.

if harris is not confirmed the winner she should declare the results invalid and do whatever it takes. your democrats with a favorable view of harris, about one in 10. half as likely as republicans with a favorable view of trump. those who disagree about one in 10, those who reject christian nationalism a little less than one in 10, those who disagree that those convicted in january 6 there hostages, it is single digits. about half of the republican side. looking back at january 6 to give you the lay of the land, this first question is on the disagree side. people who disagree that trump broke the law to stay in power are almost all republicans. 82% of republicans disagree that trump broke the law compared to 9% of democrats. here is the number that the election was stolen from donald

trump, 62% of republicans believe the lie that the election was stolen. about half of republicans believe people who have been convicted by a court of law for their role in the january 6 the tax are patriots who are being held hostage by the government. down into single digits for the democrat side. that is all pretty dark and worrisome. i thought i would end with three things where there is still agreement on substantive issues. here is one. three quarters of the country agrees we should require supreme court justices to retire at a certain age or after a certain number of years instead of serving for life. you can see it is nine in 10 democrats and six in 10 republicans. that is about as strong as you will get in this current environment for agreement on a substantive issue like supreme court justice tenure. the other is laws that make it

illegal -- opposition that make it illegal to approve abortion pill for medical abortions. 68% of americans oppose restrictions. you will see even the majority of republicans oppose restrictions on the abortion pill. eight intent democrats but even a majority of republicans. finally ivf, if anything should be the third rail in reproductive health it is this. 85% of americans oppose laws that make it illegal for people to seek out in vitro fertilization or ivf to have a child. look at the partisan. i cannot think of anything else where i can say there is no statistically significant difference between republicans and democrats on these issues. that is quite remarkable. on that sunnier note i will wrap it up and headed over to the panel. -- and hand [applause]

it over to the panel. -- and hand it over to the panel. [applause] >> we now begin the panel discussion phase of this event. for those of you who have not seen my face for the previous 14 years, i am bill colston, a senior fellow in government studies at brookings. it is my pleasure from this all-star panel. if i were to do justice to the resumes of all of them we would not have any time left for a

panel discussion so i will not. i will simply introduce them. you've already met robbie jones. to his right but stage left or reverse, who knows, is melissa jackman, who is this -- is melissa deckman, ceo of the public religion research institute. to her right is a.b. stoddard, a veteran columnist and political analyst, now at the bulwark. we also welcome back joy reid, who is the host of the readout and a political analyst for msnbc. each panelist will have about five minutes and if you look to your left you will find catalina

navarro who will hold up a one minute card when you have one minute left and a stop card. in order to get in all of the panel and the very high volume of internet questions i will be a tough cough -- a tough cop. you can see i have some pork from the american people in that. -- i have support from the american people in that. [laughter] i would ask you if you have not done so already to please silence your cell phones or pagers. with that melissa, over to you. melissa: good morning. first off, i want to welcome

everyone here on behalf of prri and extend thank you to the brookings institution. this is the 15th annual american values survey and has been our longest standing partnership in the most fun. catalina, thank you for keeping the trains running. i want to acknowledge the incredible work of our staff. we have 10 full-time employees at prri. i'm am amazed by the good work the staff has done this fall in turning around the survey. please take a look at the survey. follow us on social media as well. i would like to speak about the role of gender in this election. i am a political scientist who has studied gender in politics for more than 20 years. i too am seasoned. i've never really run across an election in memory where gender

themes have played such a prominent role this year. take the rnc convention. i found it notable that when trump was introduced to accept his party's nomination goes dana white, he is the head of the ultimate fighting championship and this is what he said before he introduced trump. he said this man is the toughest and most resilient human being i have ever met in my life. i would also say the selection of jd vance represents a different gender plank that speaks to more traditionalist patriarchal views of america. we are all very familiar with his comments made to tucker carlson when running for senate about the threat posed by a childless cat ladies to america. he singled out childless democratic leaders such as kamala harris by name, saying how does it make any sense we have turned our country over to people who do not have a direct

stake in it? he has also floated the idea of having parents have more voting rights than non-parents. this worldview he is talking about is one where making children makes you more invested in the nation and that is more politically deserving. it is a very pro-nato list view of america -- is very pro-natalist u of america which may have serious policy implications for a potential second trump administration, especially what you can read in project 2025, which is the heritage foundation blueprint for a second trump administration. project 2025 calls for banning abortion nationally, banning the morning-after pill, but also advancing an idea of personhood for fetuses which would threaten access to ivf, which we just saw is the one thing uniting the nation, apparently, that most

americans strongly support access to ivf. what does it tell us about how gender will play out? the gender gaps in american politics has been with us a long time, typically speaking since 1996 american women have tended to back democratic presidents and men have tended to back republican candidates. in 2020, men broke for trump 53% compared to 45% for biden while biden's advantage for women was 55% to 44%. according to him so's, they gave -- according to ipsos, they gave us more recent data. men are breaking for trump 51% to 47% and harris has an advantage among women voters 54 percent to 41%. what is more important is not just on the sex of the voter but knowing their attitudes about gender. that is far more important.

one of my favorite questions from the prri archives is we typically ask americans each year, do you think society has become too feminine. when we first asked that in 2011 42% of americans agreed that america is too feminine. where are we today? we have gone through the #metoo movement, there is a rise in young feminists making big strides in american politics. it is 42% of americans think we are soft and thin and -- and feminine. we've not seen much difference. if you look at the gender break about half of american men agree with that but 38% per of american women. among partisans, only 20% of democratic men agree that america has become too soft, while two thirds of republican women agree america has become too soft and feminine. with gop men it is 80% to agree.

the abs, if we look at that measure among registered voters in a two way race, we find 80% of americans who agree society has become soft and feminine tend to vote to donald trump compared to 77% of americans who disagree society has become soft and feminine and are attending to vote for kamala harris. what does this tell us about other voters we are hearing about? there are slots of concern about democrats that -- there is lots of concern among democrats that trump is making inroads among men and latino men and black men. if you look at the measure isolated to those groups, only 42% of young men aged 18 to 49 agree society has become too soft and just 34% of black men. 42% of hispanic men agree. i do not think that doubling

down on those masculine themes we are hearing all the time from the trump ticket will necessarily bring young man or black men were latino men to vote for trump. i think it has the potential to animate lots of anger among young women. i have written a book called the politics of gen z and i have taken a deeper dive into the divide we are seeing among young women, and i document how gen z women are the most progressive in american society today and therefore more likely to identify as feminist compared to their mothers and grandmothers and gender equality has become a huge thing among young women. the talk we hear from trump will animate the younger women to turn out in higher numbers this election cycle. i think the strongman language is about trying to motivate the base of donald trump and jd vance. talking about childless cat ladies and the need of having a great protector as donald trump

has been saying lately is geared more at trying to get his base to turn out for this election cycle. we will know pretty soon whether or not it is effective. thank you. william: thank you so much. a.b.: i have two 23-year-olds and a 21-year-old and because social media is intentionally using algorithms to separate them and make girls more conservative -- and make boys more conservative and girls more liberal so i'm worried about having grandchildren. i want to -- melissa just said it is not as sticky as we fear. pew had a finding a few months ago that four in 10 young men believe that advancement for women has come at their expense, which is concerning. and trump and the bro zone and the ministry or try to amplify that for them that they're getting left out and cut out.

women -- there will be a boomerang effect for trump condescending to women that he needs to be there protector. i was fascinated by the findings in the survey. i find the same things alarming that robbie outlined about violence. my main take away is that tribalism is a hell of a drug and so is fox news, newsmax. if you dive into the numbers and find what people's opinions are and where they are getting their media, there is a direct and wretched correlation. when i look at where we are in this election, i write for the bulwark and we hope to be donald trump and we hope harris is seen as a change agent in the electorate and not as an incumbent. what we found in these numbers

is the pessimism in the electorate is bad news for harris. the wrong track numbers and economic stress numbers are concerning. 66% believe the economy has changed for the worse in the last four years. that is not true and is not in the numbers. that is a shocking finding. inflation and price hikes, those are new, so for people experiencing new prices for the first time in their lifetime, that is creating so much anxiety that we saw inflation highest among all voters and abortion lowest in terms of the top several issues. that is concerning for harris in terms of what will energize people. immigration was less salient as a litmus test issue, i was surprised to find it more of an issue for independents than it was in 2020. the country is so dramatically

shifting right on immigration and it shows in the survey. the path to citizenship down. support for dreamers down 10 points since 2018. in six years. the support for the wall 10 points up in eight years. the 57% number showing the influx of immigrants into communities is burdening local committees and their social services. 57% overall is a high number. immigration has grown more salient than abortion, even though it is lower in litmus test numbers it has grown in salience more than abortion since 2020, post dobbs. i find that stunning. america's reputation has changed for the worst in the last four years. 65%. america's reputation around the

world, this is a stunning statistic. 65% of independents concurred with that, which i found really depressing. they are skeptical of party, they are less tribal than republicans and democrats. for them to view our situation -- you could take the afghanistan withdrawal and separate that out. i found that stunning. 53% agreeing that trump broke the law to stay in power. that is a low number to me. 54% of independents. seven points down in one year. it reflects an acquiescence on the part of the electorate as a whole to trump's corruption and criminality and authoritarianism that is very concerning and concerns me going into the election. 49% agree there is real danger of trump being a dictator.

49%. nearly one third of all republicans say patriots may have to resort to violence. i was going to use robbie's positive ending on ivf. [applause] [laughter] i have two children as a result of ivf and this number 85% made me very happy. and also the scotus numbers, the fact that 73% of the country understands how our three branches of government work and that there should be some age or term limits on the supreme court justices service. i thought that was very encouraging as well. i look forward to the discussion and thank you for having me. joy: i want to echo the thanks

to bill and melissa, robbie, my favorite pulling guy, my buddy e.j., catalina, a.b. i think i'm a little seasoned. my kids are similar in age. i do not feel too old. when i went through the survey i went right to four things. the first is the question of political violence. i do believe this election is a litmus test for american tolerance for fascism. the elements of fascism are rooted in this nationalistic drive for more babies for the state, for women to be subordinate to men, for a strongman driven nation, and a deep state-based religiosity. all of that is in these numbers. the question of whether people

must resort to violence in order to ensure that the right person becomes the leader of this country. americans who trust conservative news outlets are the most likely to support political violence, 41%. followed by those who most trust fox news. i believe we have a media problem and some of our media is leading people towards fascism. the second number on that list was the question of america has become too soft and feminine. i think that is a fascist litmus test because it tests the question of whether men and women accept the idea of modality -- of modernity. if you look at countries that practice the most oppression of women, or even if you go back to previous fascist countries like south africa, if you look at society where women are suppressed, you have elements

that include political violence and include lack of abortion access. these things go together. the question of whether a society is too soft and feminine , it was alarming to me that a majority of hispanic protestants agreed. that is not shocking because it is a social thing. 25% of black protestants also agree. the places where you're seeing trump resonate among people of color, you can look to that. anecdotally i can tell you you hear a lot of complaints within some black religious folks and even black men and women were latino men and women about what they see as a feminization of society. i went to that. this question of whether or not immigrants are poisoning the blood of the country. this is one of the most terrifying things you heard a presidential candidate say because it is straight out of mein kampf. it shocked me to have 23% of

jewish respondents agree with that because that is straight out nazi talk. 19% of black folks agree with that. 60% of republicans are agreeing. that should scare everyone. the last one which i think might have been the most scary for me is the question of whether we should corral undocumented immigrants into armed camps. white evangelical protestants, 75% are the most likely to favor militarized encampments. the majority of white catholics, 61%. the catholic church is rooted in the care for the immigrant. i have not been catholic since i wasthe majority of white cathol, 61%. six, we became methodist which is when our church where you going watch football after, that i became a baptist. i've been all of them. i can tell you the catholic church is the most pro-immigrant church.

for you to have a majority of white catholics say there should be armed camps, white mainline non-evangelical protestants, 58%. 56% of mormons, a formerly persecuted group of american religionist agreeing there should be armed camps. 42% of black protestants. 33% of hispanic catholics. i wonder, we are booking this on the readout, the question of whether latinos who believe this think that your average border patrol official or national park member or police officer is going to be able to tell who is an undocumented immigrant and who is not. they will just see your color and hear your accent. i am always curious what makes them think they won't take marco rubio when they see him or they will not see the son of jd

vance. he has a brown child named vivek. how is he safe in this scenario? i don't know. christopher russo is married to an undocumented immigrant from thailand. does she think he believes the average cop will be able to discern this particular asian person is legit to be here? there are a lot of black people who cannot tell from a latino. i have relatives who you might think are hispanic but they are black. i have police in my family. they can barely deal with the social services aspect of their job, let alone being required to discern who is undocumented or not. more than half of americans who attend church weekly or more, 57% believing there should be armed camps. those who attend church a few times a year, 51% favor putting

illegal immigrants in encampments. that is the scariest thing in this survey because it shows american tolerance for fascism is growing. it is not getting better. the one piece of good news that will make americans feel less bad about themselves regarding the survey is this is a global phenomenon. this is not just happening here. if you look at the election in argentina, if you look in venezuela. the difference is americans have viewed ourselves as not capablef falling into fascism but in the 1930's we came about that close to supporting hitler's. this is not a country that's been immune to fascism ever. it is just with usually all of our anxiety has been hyper directed at black people. but right now melissa is correct we are in a moment where the fight is even more so over gender. and it is a question of whether america will be willing to

tolerate the leadership of a woman and asked -- and is that a woman of color, this will be the ultimate litmus test for whether america is capable of becoming a fascist country will find out on november 5 or if their lawsuits may be sometime in december or january. >> on that cheerful. [laughter] >> not bringing the joy. [laughter] >> ok. let me tell you what's can happen now in the next half hour. it will be divided into two segments. in the first of those two segments, i will address questions to the panel, sometimes to specific individuals, sometimes to the panel as a whole. and then we will turn to questions from the floor interspersed with questions that we have received online. and when it comes time for

questions, please introduce yourselves by name, by institutional affiliation if you choose and think it's relevant. and then state your question. there will be no time for speeches as that would be deeply unfair to the many questions but we are going to get more than i fear we have time to accommodate. so let me begin with a question for robbie that we in fact received online which is such a perfect question that i've decided to throw it this way. here is how the question reads. please clarify the difference between two groups. the first group, christians who believe that religion has a legitimate role in public life. the second group, the