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.

The freedom of speech is at the core of American civic life, but it has also been constantly tested and refined over the course of the nation's history. Today, we delve into what is and isn't free speech, how the government has tested its boundaries, how the US Supreme Court has ruled on certain free speech cases, why it is so important we promote free speech in our daily lives (not just in relation to the government), and more.

If we're going to turn back the tide of political violence, it's going to take all of us. Fortunately, there are simple steps any of us can take to start pushing against the acceptance and use of violence to achieve political goals. Today's episode of Politics with Paul covers some of the reasons why people feel justified in using or supporting political violence. If we are going to fix this problem, we need to know why it occurs in the first place. At the end, I give actionable ways that we can fix the political climate and highlight some of the groups working to build bridges. Join the movement for a non-toxic political climate.

Ideological labels are common appeals in political campaigns and battles. For various reasons, however, the actual meaning of conservative, liberal, and moderate have been intentionally and unintentionally obfuscated. Today's episode explores the most basic meanings of conservative, liberal, and moderate; how elites and voters variously define the terms and why; the difference between party and ideology; how you should view ideological labels; and more.

The vast majority of today’s political discourse focuses on extremes and polarized voices. But is moderation the solution? More specifically, is "radical moderation" the kind of moderation we should be striving for? On today's episode, Professor Lauren Hall joins the show to discuss her concept of radical moderation. She talks about what radical moderation is and isn't, how to apply its principles, how it addresses polarization, and more.

NOTE: I do not endorse or oppose any guest's political views or groups they support. In today's episode, activist and author Luis-Enrique Marquez sits down to discuss his involvement in political protests. What's it like to be on the front lines of a protest? What are the biggest challenges in forming protests? How do protesters feel about their media coverage? How do protesters engage with opposition and critics? Luis-Enrique gives his takes on these questions and much more. At the end, he also discusses his book, and what he feels liberals, conservatives, and moderates alike can take away from it.