A survey from the Napolitan Institute finds an alarming split: while most voters reject cheating to win, large majorities among politically active elites would do it—raising fresh concerns about how power struggles are eroding faith in self-government.
For millions of Americans, a close election is supposed to end with a simple choice: accept the result and move on. But a question lurking behind today’s political noise is sharper than any campaign ad—what if your side believed it could cheat its way to victory and still won anyway?
A new survey led by the Napolitan Institute, founded by Scott W. Rasmussen, puts numbers behind the fear that this mindset isn’t confined to fringe conspiracy thinking. Across the broader electorate, most Americans reject the idea of cheating to win. The gap appears when researchers look at a more influential slice of society—people Rasmussen’s team calls the “Elite One Percent. ” and an even smaller group inside it labeled “Politically Active Elites.”.
The survey found that just 7% of voters would want their side to cheat to win. That figure is small, but it also confirms the idea has an audience. Among the “Elite One Percent. ” defined as people with postgraduate degrees. incomes above $150. 000. and residence in densely populated urban areas. the share rises to 35%.
The jump becomes even more stark in the group Rasmussen describes as “Politically Active Elites”—members of that same elite class who engage with politics daily. In Rasmussen’s account of the polling results. 69% of those politically active elites would rather see their side cheat to win than accept the judgment of voters.
Rasmussen frames the finding as more than bad manners. He calls it an affront to core American ideals of self-government, political equality, and freedom—and argues it matters because elites play outsized roles in setting the nation’s political agenda.
He links that behavior to a broader shift in how certain leaders view democracy itself. Research commissioned by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, as described by Rasmussen, found Politically Active Elites are far more likely to believe Americans enjoy too much individual freedom.
The worry, in this telling, isn’t only that some people would cheat. It’s that they increasingly see themselves as entitled to rule even if it means sidelining voters—then retreat into a familiar excuse when confronted.
In Rasmussen’s description of how this spreads, the mindset doesn’t stay locked inside elite institutions. He argues it has migrated into partisan activists across the political spectrum, helping fuel the toxicity that defines modern American politics.
Nowhere, he says, does the pattern show up more clearly than in redistricting wars. In state after state. lawmakers redraw political maps to secure partisan advantage. not to better represent voters. according to Rasmussen’s account. Even so, only 23% of voters believe such power plays are appropriate.
That figure feeds into Rasmussen’s broader claim about the structure of today’s electorate. His polling, he says, shows a “10-10-80 nation”—roughly 10% on the left and 10% on the right locked in constant political warfare, while the remaining 80% sits in the middle.
In that framework, the “partisan warriors,” as he describes them, increasingly treat losing as an existential threat. That turns the pursuit of power into something more urgent than representative government. and it leaves the public pushed aside even though voters are supposed to choose representatives.
Rasmussen argues there’s a tension at the center of the dilemma: at some level. the 10 percenters know government is supposed to depend on consent of the governed. But instead of trusting voters to make what they consider the “right” choices. he says they game the system. sideline the public. and manipulate institutions to hold power.
Those accusations are paired with an appeal to something less dramatic—an insistence that most Americans still share the founding principles elites appear to disregard. Rasmussen says his “We the People” project. conducted in partnership with Jigsaw. a Google tech incubator. brought together five people from every congressional district in America for a nationwide civic conversation.
He reports that across 1.6 million words of conversation. participants consistently showed “deep respect” for the nation’s founding ideals of freedom. equality. and self-governance. He says the project found the broad American middle shares far more common ground than today’s political culture suggests.
The dialogue produced a “Declaration of American Ideals,” Rasmussen says, recently presented to the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia. He adds that the declaration is set for public display throughout 2026.
According to Rasmussen, each principle in the declaration earned support from representatives in at least two-thirds of the nation’s congressional districts—an attempt to show the ideas aren’t limited to partisan strongholds but reflect a cross-section of the country.
He closes with a blunt contrast: the American people. in his view. still believe in the nation’s founding ideals even when many leaders do not. He characterizes the 80 percenters—the middle of voters—as raising families. building communities. and doing the everyday work that keeps the country moving. while understanding that progress doesn’t begin with Washington’s power struggles.
The implication of Rasmussen’s reporting is that the “elitist revolt” against self-government will eventually fail—not because political conflict will magically stop, but because the majority still recognizes what elections are for.
Napolitan Institute Scott W. Rasmussen democracy elections cheating to win politically active elites redistricting consent of the governed Jigsaw Google Committee to Unleash Prosperity