POLITICAL SCIENCE: Half of America sits in democratic limbo - that, is problematic because if the public isn't willing to hold its leaders accountable, then there's nothing to stop them from behaving in ways that undermine democracy.

"Not actively opposing undemocratic practices is different than actively supporting democracy," Hall said.

1. Neutrality, the researchers noted, is especially concerning because it can be associated with authoritarianism, tolerance of norm violations, extremism, distrust and obscuring antidemocratic views.
2. Another, equally critical point, Hall said, is that this neutrality exists at similar rates on both sides of the aisle, among Republicans and Democrats, as well as nonpartisans.

Intro: According to a recent study from the University of Notre Dame, voters who are comfortable living in the middle — neither agreeing nor disagreeing when asked about substantive issues relevant to upholding democracy — might be the largest group to blame for democratic decline in the United States.

These "democratic neutrals" are what the study's co-authors consider some of the most dangerous voters in the current political environment.

Half of America sits in democratic limbo—and that silent middle may decide what breaks next 

 

If you were to ask democracy scholars what they consider the greatest threat to American democracy, you might assume it is voters who support undemocratic practices or policies. But the real answer may surprise you: These ...

by Matthew Hall, University of Notre Dame

edited by Gaby Clark, reviewed by Robert Egan

Researchers asked participants about their attitudes toward undemocratic practices. The questions included whether they agreed, disagreed or felt neutral when asked about their support for four examples of undemocratic practices: reducing outparty polling stations, ignoring outparty court decisions, remaining loyal to the party over the Constitution, and censoring partisan media.

 

 

REFERENCE: 

• Article
• Open access
• Published: 23 March 2026

The overlooked threat of democratic neutrality in the USA

• Matthew E. K. Hall,
• B. Tyler Leigh &
• Brittany C. Solomon 

Nature Human Behaviour (2026) Cite this article

• 4990 Accesses

• 92 Altmetric

• Metrics details

Abstract

Despite increasing concerns about American democracy, recent studies find little public support for undemocratic practices. 

• However, these studies ignore democratic neutrality—that is, expressing neither agreement nor disagreement with undemocratic practices. 

Here, integrating research on uncertainty, indifference, ambivalence, conditionality and socially desirable responding, we argue that democratic neutrality poses an overlooked threat to democracy. 

 

Reanalysing prominent survey data (N = 45,095) and conducting two original surveys (N = 3,039; including a candidate-choice experiment), we document democratic neutrality as 

(a) prevalent (half of Americans express neutrality towards one or more undemocratic practices), 

(b) reflecting substantively meaningful attitudes (versus inattention), 

(c) correlated with theoretically related constructs, 

(d) distinct from opposition to undemocratic practices, and 

(e) as consequential as outright support for undemocratic practices in shaping preferences for anti-democratic candidates. 

 

Our findings challenge optimistic empirical accounts of Americans’ attitudes towards democracy. Democratic neutrality may help explain, and be targeted to ameliorate, democratic backsliding.

 

Roughly 50% of participants checked the neutral category for at least one question. 

 

"Regardless of why Americans express neutrality, those who do so are just as likely to vote for authoritarian politicians as the relatively small number of Americans (less than one in five) who explicitly support undemocratic practices," Hall said. 

 

== 

"The problem is the people sitting on the sidelines, not paying attention or prioritizing short-term issues over the long-term stability of this country," Hall said. "This will require a completely different approach with regard to persuasion strategy when you realize that's the group we—as proponents of American democracy—need to be focusing on. Promoting democracy is going to look a little different than we thought." 

 

What does that promotion look like then? Hall and his co-authors see the primaries for the approaching 2026 midterm elections as the next opportunity to encourage Americans to vote for candidates who will support and protect American democracy. Messaging will need to encourage voters to "vote against candidates who undermine American democracy—even (and especially) if they are candidates from their own party," emphasizing that staying neutral will no longer suffice.

"American politics have really been shaken in this last decade, particularly with regard to partisanship and polarization," Hall said.

"The elites have lost control of the throttle and the mass public is driving—and that's not necessarily a bad thing if the mass public values democracy. But if they don't value democracy, then we will spin out."

This research aligns with the University's Democracy Initiative, which aims to establish Notre Dame as a leader in the study of democracy both in the United States and worldwide, as a convenor for conversations about and actions to preserve democracy, and as a model for the formation of civically engaged citizens and public servants. The initiative also bridges research, education and policy work across multidisciplinary units.

Publication details 
Matthew E. K. Hall et al, The overlooked threat of democratic neutrality in the USA, Nature Human Behaviour (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s41562-026-02430-7

Journal information: Nature Human Behaviour

Provided by University of Notre Dame