Millions of Californians’ Jobs Could be Affected by Automation

The decisions made by California’s next governor will affect generations to come, Melanie Mason writes in The Los Angeles Times. A study by the Institute of Spatial Economic Analysis concludes that many occupations, including bookkeepers, accountants, and cashiers, may be vulnerable with the increase of automation. With about 63 percent of jobs subject to possible automation, workers in the southern California cities of Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ontario are particularly vulnerable. “We’re facing a major challenge. If we don’t do anything, then it will turn into an apocalypse,” said Johannes Moenius, an economics professor at the University of Redlands. Citing data from PRRI, Mason reports that policymakers will have to address the changing nature of work: gig economy workers in California are already more likely than non-gig economy workers to say that they or a household member have been paid less than the minimum wage (29 percent vs. 7 percent), experienced racial discrimination in the workplace (26 percent vs. 10 percent), and had other negative work experiences in the last year.

Donald Trump: “It Doesn’t Matter. We Won.”

In a 60 Minutes interview that aired on Sunday night, journalist Lesley Stahl told the president that it seemed that by mocking Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony, he was indicating that he did not believe her allegations of sexual assault against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. “I’m not going to get into it. Because we won. It doesn’t matter. We won,” he replied. According to PRRI data, Democrats overwhelmingly say that unreported or disbelieved experiences of sexual assault and harassment are a bigger problem than false accusations (78 percent vs. 16 percent). Republicans also agree with this assessment overall, but they are more divided (52 percent vs. 36 percent). Notably, 41 percent of Republican men believe that false accusations of sexual assault or harassment are a bigger problem than unreported or disbelieved experiences.

Digital Activists Aim to Boost Turnout by Mocking Young Voters

With the 2018 midterm elections just weeks away, some progressive activists are concerned about youth turnout. A recent PRRI/The Atlantic survey found that only about one in three (35 percent) young Americans (ages 18-29) are certain they will vote in this November. CBS Boston reports that a group of left-leaning digital activists, collectively called Acronym, are trying to address this dynamic. Using shame and humor as a weapon, the group has created a video featuring seniors mocking young voters. “Dear young people, don’t vote, don’t vote. Everything’s fine the way it is,” one elderly person says in the ad. “If the weather is nice, maybe you’ll go to one of those little marches. You might even share this video on Facebook. But you won’t vote, you young people never do. But [we] do,” taunts another.

“Sisterhood Doesn’t Override Partisanship” as Midterms Approach

The New York Times senior correspondent Susan Chira references a recent PRRI surveyin a news analysis, arguing that partisanship overshadows gender-based politics. Chira argues that women’s “race, political or religious affiliation” can have more nuanced political impacts than are often assumed by those who call for female solidarity across the political spectrum—particularly on issues related to sexual harassment and assault. According to Chira, the president’s critical response to the #MeToo movement “resonated with women protective of their sons or husbands” and with conservative women who reject the idea that “men are single-handedly to blame” for sexual harassment. “There is no universal female experience,” writes Chira, adding that conservative women’s support for Justice Kavanaugh demonstrated that “there is no universal female response to allegations of abuse.” This month, PRRI polling found that 25 percent of Republican women consider sexual harassment in the workplace a critical issue, compared to 51 percent of Democratic women. Forty-eight percent of Republican women, meanwhile, would consider voting for a candidate accused of sexual harassment, while only 14 percent of Democratic women say the same. “We don’t know how women will vote in November,” writes Chira. “But we do know they won’t vote as one — and there’s no reason to be shocked by that.”

PRRI Associate Research Director Looks at Economic Distress in The New York Times

PRRI Associate Research Director Robert Griffin, PhD, and George Washington University professor John Sides, PhD, co-authored a recent opinion piece for The New York Times, reporting what they found when they studied the relationships between economic anxiety, the white working class, and the 2016 election of Donald Trump. Griffin and Sides created a 100-point scale to measure economic distress, with one being the least distressed and 100 being the most distressed. The average American has a distress level of 29—and the average white working-class American also has a distress level of 29. Griffin and Sides write, “In reality, it is people of color who report the most distress — a fact that is not surprising but stands out clearly in the new data. Hispanic-Americans without a college degree averaged 37 on this index and African-Americans without a college degree averaged 32.” More information on their study can be found in the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group’s “2018 Views of the Electorate Research Survey.”

New Book Highlights the Future of the Evangelical-Republican Coalition

In The Evangelical Crackup?, a new book from Temple University Press, over two dozen academics and scholars reflect on how Donald Trump won the 2016 election without universal support from leaders of the evangelical movement. The book, co-authored by PRRI board member Paul A. Djupe, PhD, features contributions from PRRI CEO Robert P. Jones, PhD, PRRI Research Director Daniel Cox, PhD, and former PRRI Research Associate Juhem Navarro-Rivera, PhD. “Each chapter in this cogent volume includes analyses of the 2016 election to explain why—and why that is critical,” according to a summary from Temple University Press. “Chapters examine policy priorities, legal advocacy, and evangelical loyalty to the Republican Party; rhetoric, social networks, and evangelical elite influence; and the political implications of movements within evangelicalism, such as young evangelicals, Hispanics, and the Emergent Church movement.”