Authoritarian Warning Survey polls democracy experts on threats to democracy from American political leaders in 2017. Respondents are academic scholars who study democratic decline, political institutions, American politics, or countries that have recently experienced democratic erosion. From May through October, we have received 333 responses from 1441 contacts (a response rate of 23.1%).* Initially, we ran and analyzed the survey once each month.

In our current version, we survey a randomly selected sub-sample of our respondent pool (~600 scholars) each weekday. Every day, we calculate a rolling average of these responses as a Democracy Threat Index. This is a live measure of democracy scholars' views on threats to American democracy. Our method weights responses by time and also continually analyzes the data for discrete breaks in threat levels that may indicate major events. You can read more detail about how we construct the Index here.

For comparison, we asked the same questions in June for five other countries: the United Kingdom, Canada, India, Poland, and Hungary. Separate respondents were chosen for each. All are experts on their respective country, with a rough balance of experts based in the country and living abroad. Across the five surveys, 71 experts responded (from 307 contacted, a response rate of 23.1%).

We acknowledge there are important concerns about ideological balance in academic surveys of this kind. See below for three aspects of our survey that help to mitigate this potential bias.**

Survey Questions

Drawing on common patterns of recent democratic erosion, we ask about six categories of threats to democracy:

  • Treatment of Media: Leaders' treatment of media, respect for free press, and transparency

  • Executive Constraints: Effective constraints of executive against abuses of power; leaders' respect for judiciary, legislature, and rule of law

  • Elections and Treatment of Opposition: Respect for free and fair elections and legitimacy of opposition

  • Civil Liberties: Respect for core freedoms (such as speech, assembly, religion, and privacy)

  • Civil Violence: Use of violence, intimidation, or paramilitary organizations for political ends

  • Rhetoric: Speech by political leaders indicating democratic erosion or weak normative attachment to democracy

For each category, respondents can choose among five responses:

  1. Within range of a normally functioning consolidated democracy

  2. Moderate violations atypical of a consolidated democracy, but that don't yet threaten breakdown

  3. Violations that signal significant erosion of democracy quality and warn of high potential for breakdown in future

  4. Critical violations that seriously threaten near-term survival

  5. Violations severe enough to make system non-democratic

For the Democracy Threat Index, these responses are re-scaled to 0-100. For the monthly results, we leave them as 1-5.


We also ask respondents about (1) the likelihood of democratic breakdown, (2) whether democratic quality and stability has improved or declined over the last 10 years (so the comparison is to a Republican president), and (3) what recent events or actions (if any) they consider most threatening to democracy.

Click here for the exact text of the survey.

Click here for the full survey results from May-October (anonymized).

October U.S. Results: (Average) (Median) (Range)

See here for a fuller analysis of the October results.


Treatment of Media (2.6) (2) (2-5)

  • One respondent pointed to "the president's rhetoric about 'fake news' and openly attacking the free press, including his call to investigate the press for perceived bias and even revoke their licenses, which would effectively censor oppositional and negative media coverage of the government."

  • Others pointed to the "continuing rhetorical degradation of the news media" and the "continued assault on the media from the executive branch."

Executive Constraints (2.3) (2) (1-4)

  • One respondent warned of "attempts by the executive to intimidate other branches of government and the media."


Elections and Treatment of Opposition (2.2) (2) (1-4)

  • One respondent pointed to "attempts to exclude racial and ethnic groups and youth from voting."

  • Another respondent warned of "voter suppression efforts moving from the state level to the national level with the Kobach commission."

Civil Liberties (2.2) (2) (1-4)

  • Several criticized the president's attacks on protestors and free media.

Civil Violence (1.7) (2) (1-3)

  • Numerous respondents pointed to the President's response to Charlottesville, one calling it a "legitimization of extremist violent movements."

  • One warned of the "tacit and explicit endorsement by the executive and some legislators of extremist groups using violence for political ends."


Rhetoric (2.9) (3) (1-5)

  • Another respondent cited the "president's consistently strong rhetorical attacks on constitutional safeguards."

  • Another warned of "continued hostility to opposition, media, and rule of law by the administration."

​We also asked about respondents' guesses on the likelihood that American democracy breaks down (by their definition) within the next four years.

  • The average estimate was 12.4%.

  • The median estimate was 5%.

  • Estimates ranged from 0 to 80%. Only 7 of 48 answered 0.

Lastly, we asked whether "the quality and stability of American democracy" had improved or declined over the last 10 years (chosen so the comparison point is also under a Republican president). Respondents answered on a five-point scale, from "much worse" to "much better."

  • 92% indicated decline for American democracy.

  • 35% indicated that American democracy was "much worse."

Results for Other Countries

For each country, we list the average rating across the six threat categories, the percentage of all responses indicating behavior outside the norm for consolidated democracies (2+), the average predicted likelihood of democratic breakdown, and the percentage saying democratic stability and quality has declined. The U.S. in July is shown for comparison.

Country: Avg. rating / % outside norm / % breakdown / % decline

United States:     2.32 / 82.7% / 12.4% / 91.7%

United Kingdom: 1.23 / 20.0% / 2.6% / 40.0%

Canada:                 1.21 / 20.6% / 0.4% / 5.9%

India:                      2.17 / 75.8% / 15.5% / 81.8%

Poland:                  2.28 / 75.6% / 23.5% / 84.6%

Hungary:              2.90 / 91.5% / 44.2% / 95.0%

Click here for our September survey results.

Click here for our August survey results.

Click here for our July survey results.

Click here for our June survey results.

Click here for our May survey results.

You can find coverage of our monthly survey in Washington Post's Monkey Cage blog here and in The Atlantic here.

* All survey results are anonymous. The survey was supported by IRB certification #051706 (29200) at George Washington University.


** First, we made an effort to include conservative academics in our sample. Several answers indicate conservative participation (e.g., one respondent claims that "the real threats to American democracy took place during the Obama administration"). Second, the five other countries serve as credible comparison points, as four of these countries have right-of-center governments and all have academics that tilt left. Thus, any ideological bias should be roughly held constant. Third, we employ reasonably concrete questions. Rather than ask about general approval of current politics, we ask respondents to compare to other consolidated democracies and evaluate whether events threaten democratic survival. As a positive sign, only four responses (1.4% of total) had the value 5 (the greatest threat) in October, indicating that respondents are not amplifying the threat for effect.

Authoritarian Warning Survey (August 2017) | Survey on American Democracy

October 2017