As the United States prepares for its midterm elections, concerns are mounting over ongoing efforts by the Trump administration to restrict voting by mail and reshape election rules. Adam Przeworski, professor emeritus of politics at New York University and an authoritative scholar on democracy, cautions that these measures reflect a broader challenge to democratic norms in the country.
Przeworski highlights that the Trump administration has pursued a range of actions—including dismantling agencies, reducing regulatory oversight, attacking political opponents, and deploying security forces—that raise questions about the resilience of U.S. democracy. “This very possibility was just inconceivable before 2020,” he said, stressing the unprecedented nature of the current political climate.
A central concern for Przeworski is the administration’s attempt to modify electoral rules at the last moment, particularly efforts to restrict mail-in voting. While he notes that changes to election procedures are common in democracies, such changes typically require broad consensus and clear, consistent rules. “The voters must see rules as given when they vote according to the rules,” he said, warning that abrupt and unilateral alterations risk undermining public trust and the legitimacy of election outcomes.
Przeworski also draws attention to the paradox of President Donald Trump’s support base. Despite widespread reports of declining approval ratings, Trump’s backing has remained relatively stable at around 38 percent for over a year. This resilience among his core supporters raises questions about the effectiveness of his party’s attempts to secure electoral advantage through redistricting, voter intimidation, or legal challenges.
“Will this be enough to win elections? I am inclined to answer in the negative, but I have been wrong before,” Przeworski commented, underscoring the uncertainty of the situation.
On a broader scale, Przeworski frames democracy in minimalist terms—as a system where electoral competition manages societal conflicts by enabling parties to govern and lose power peacefully. He points out that democracy’s enduring strength comes from the acceptance of electoral defeat. However, when trust in this process erodes, the system itself faces jeopardy.
Addressing social inequalities, Przeworski observes that democracy does not inherently reduce economic disparities. While it provides a mechanism for conflict resolution, significant inequality often persists within democratic societies, contrary to early expectations that universal suffrage would drive greater economic equality.
Regarding the global state of democracy, Przeworski rejects notions of a worldwide democratic crisis. He stresses that the rise of right-wing parties, such as Germany’s Alternative for Germany, does not necessarily signal democratic breakdown. Rather, as long as those parties remain committed to peaceful electoral competition and willing to cede power if defeated, democracy remains intact.
Nonetheless, Przeworski affirms that the United States faces a genuine challenge. “I do think there is a crisis of democracy in the United States,” he said, urging caution and humility in assessing the situation. He described elections as a “siren song of hope,” acknowledging their dual potential to inspire optimism for future change while also revealing deep fractures when incumbents resist the peaceful transfer of power.
Ultimately, the coming election cycle will test the capacity of U.S. democracy to withstand pressures that threaten its foundational principle—that parties must accept electoral defeat as part of a functioning democratic system.