Survey 160 Tracking Poll, April 2026

By Pedro Antenucci and Kevin Collins

Today, we are releasing the results from our ongoing Survey 160 tracking poll conducted between April 8 and April 13. In addition to our continued research on presidential approval and the congressional generic ballot, this poll introduces a new experiment to test how exposure to recent news stories involving specific political figures affects voters' baseline perceptions of party corruption.

Presidential Approval and Generic Congressional Ballot

In a mixed mode text-to-web and online panel survey of 1,539 registered voters nationwide (see full methodological details at the bottom of this blog post), we find that Donald Trump’s approval has changed only slightly since our last poll. 37% of respondents somewhat or strongly approve of the way Trump is handling his job as president (slightly down from 38% last poll), while 60% of respondents either somewhat or strongly disapprove (marginally up from 59% last poll).

Presidential Approval over Four Survey Waves

Our last Survey 160 tracking poll showed Democrats with a 10-point lead in the generic ballot for the US House – and that lead remains steady at 10 points in our latest poll. Overall, 47% of voters favor the Democratic candidate, 37% favor the Republican candidate, and 16% remain unsure or refused to answer.

Looking at the crosstabs, the partisan lines remain firmly drawn: 94% of Democrats support the Democratic candidate, while 87% of Republicans support the Republican candidate. Support among independent voters also remains largely stable. In March, 53% of independents preferred Democratic candidates, 21% preferred Republican candidates, and 25% were undecided. By April, that stood at 51% for Democratic candidates and 22% for Republican candidates, with the remaining 27% undecided.

Full question wording and crosstabs are available below.

Generic Congressional Ballot Preference over Four Survey Waves

Perception of Public Corruption

Turning to the topic of public corruption, we continued our experimental research to see how perceptions of the two major political parties are shaped by exposure to specific policy and news information.

In previous surveys, we tested the impact of a single news story on party perceptions. This month, we expanded this into a multi-story "dose-response" experiment to see how cumulative exposure to different corruption scandals affects baseline partisan views, including stories of corruption by Democratic elected officials.

In this study, respondents were randomly presented with three recent news events that media reports have called corrupt and asked to evaluate whether they viewed each event as very corrupt, somewhat corrupt, not very corrupt, or not at all corrupt. The three vignettes exposed to any particular respondent were drawn randomly from a pool of six real-world events:

  • Two Democratic vignettes: The indictments of Rep. Henry Cuellar and conviction of Sen. Bob Menendez on bribery charges.

  • Four Republican vignettes: Donald Trump’s pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, Trump's fundraising pitch to oil industry executives, alleged insider trading in oil futures prior to a Trump announcement on Iran, and Sen. Steve Daines' last-minute withdrawal to favor a handpicked successor.

The full text of these vignettes is in the questionnaire at the bottom of the blog post. To measure the impact of these stories, half of our respondents (the control group) were asked our standard tracking question—"Who do you think is more corrupt?"—before evaluating the news stories. The other half (the treatment group) were asked the party corruption question after reading and evaluating their three randomly assigned stories.

To preview the results, we found that

  • Exposing respondents to vignettes about corruption shaped who they thought was more corrupt, including among partisans

  • The effects varied by story of corruption, with some moving attitudes more strongly than others

  • The “dose-response” relationship, in terms of the share of stories that are about the GOP, is noisy at best, suggesting that which stories are included matter more than the volume

  • The effect of the story on in-party attitudes cannot easily be predicted from those partisans’ assessment of the seriousness of corruption in the vignette  

Effect of Individual Stories

First, we isolated the marginal effect of each specific story to see if certain scandals resonated more powerfully than others.

Marginal Effects of Individual Scandal Stories on Corruption Perceptions

To test this, we used a linear regression, limiting to the half of cases in which that story was presented to respondents (either before or after the question about corruption. That regression also controlled for which other stories were presented. We found that not all scandals have the same effect. The Oil Industry fundraising story had the strongest independent effect, shifting overall voters to view the Republican Party as more corrupt by 9.3 percentage points (p<0.05). The Steve Daines ballot maneuvering story also resonated, shifting that same metric by 8.6 points (p<0.05). Meanwhile, stories like the Binance Pardon produced virtually no statistically significant movement, shifting views on Republican corruption by less than a single point (0.8 pp), which is somewhat surprising given our earlier experiment on that same topic

Looking at the effect of the Democratic stories on Democratic voters, we see that Democrats are persuadable when confronted with specific evidence against their own side. Exposure to the Bob Menendez bribery story clearly had a positive effect on co-partisan blame, significantly increasing the perception among Democrats that the Democratic Party is more corrupt by 6.6 percentage points (p<0.05). The Henry Cuellar indictment story similarly pushed Democrats to view their own party as more corrupt by 4.7 percentage points, though this shift was not statistically significant in this sample. 

Dose-Response Relationship

Because the three stories were drawn randomly from a pool weighted toward Republican events, respondents naturally received different "dosages" of partisan news. Some saw one Republican story and two Democratic stories, while others saw up to three Republican stories and zero Democratic stories. Given the distribution of story types, there were 20 possible combinations of stories: four with only Republican vignettes, twelve with one Democratic vignette and two Republican vignettes, and four with two Democratic vignettes and one Republican vignette.

Before getting into the dose-response or heterogeneity, it is useful to look at the overall effect of any treatment versus the control group. Overall, comparing all respondents who received any treatment combination to the all-control group, we saw that exposing respondents to this mix of vignettes shifted the baseline. It increased the perception that Republicans are more corrupt by 5.3 percentage points (p<0.1) and decreased the perception that Democrats are more corrupt by 4.4 percentage points, though this shift was not statistically significant.

Next, we looked at the predicted probabilities of how voters viewed party corruption based on the "dose" of Republican stories they received compared to the control group.

Turning to the dose-response relationship, the data shows that a mixed, high dosage of GOP stories successfully moved the needle. Receiving 2 GOP stories (and 1 Democratic story) shifted voters away from viewing the Democratic Party as more corrupt (a drop of 7.1 percentage points, p<0.05) and increased the likelihood of viewing the Republican Party as more corrupt by 6.7 points (p<0.1).

Disaggregating by party identification, we see heterogeneity similar to what we have seen in previous experiments on this topic. For Democrats, seeing a mixed dosage of 1 GOP and 2 Democratic stories decreased the likelihood they would identify the Republican party as more corrupt by 13.3 percentage points compared to the control group. Conversely, among Republicans, exposure to 2 GOP stories and 1 Democratic story shifted them away from viewing Democrats as more corrupt—17.6 percentage point drop (p<0.05)—and pushed them toward the "both are equally corrupt" option by 11.6 points.

Predicting Effects from Assessment of Corruption in a Vignette

Finally, we wanted to test a specific methodological question: Can a simple assessment of the level of corruption predict the effect on the attitudes of partisans towards their own party?

The scatterplot above maps how frequently co-partisans rated an act as "Very" or "Somewhat" corrupt (the X-axis) against that story's marginal effect on shifting out-party corruption perceptions (the Y-axis). We selected the effect on assessment of out-party corruption as an outcome, because in some cases the effect is to increase the perception that one’s own party is more corrupt, and in other cases it is to move towards “both parties are equally corrupt.” If simple assessments of how corrupt a story is were good predictors of effects on attitudes, then we would expect a slope from the upper left to the lower right, with more negative effects on the perception of out-party corruption. 

But in fact we found the opposite, suggesting that it is not sufficient to ask voters about the level of corruption in a story of behavior of their co-partisans in power. We actually saw greater movement, on average, from stories that were viewed by co-partisans (of the politician described) as less corrupt. Part of this relationship is driven by smaller effects among Democrats who were more likely to rate the actions in the stories about Democrats as highly corrupt, but in either case, the relationship is noisy. So it seems that we need experiments to tell us about the causal effects of each vignette. 

Crosstabs

Topline Party ID Race Gender Education Age Group Region 2024 Vote
Overall Democrat Republican Independent Other Party White Black Hispanic AAPI/Other Man Woman Some other way College Non-college 18-29 30-44 45-64 65+ Northeast Midwest South West Harris Trump Other Didn't Vote
Do you think things in The United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction?
Right direction 33 6 72 22 12 38 21 22 25 37 29 22 34 32 12 30 38 38 32 34 34 29 4 71 8 13
Wrong direction 62 91 22 71 80 57 74 70 67 58 65 73 62 61 81 65 55 58 60 60 60 67 93 22 80 76
IDK/Refused 6 3 7 7 8 5 6 8 8 5 6 5 4 7 7 4 8 4 8 6 6 4 2 8 12 11
Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?
Strongly approve 25 3 58 15 10 30 12 16 20 26 24 27 24 26 6 19 30 33 24 26 26 24 2 56 5 10
Somewhat approve 12 1 25 11 8 14 5 11 15 14 11 1 13 12 9 12 14 11 12 13 13 10 1 26 9 9
Somewhat disapprove 8 7 5 12 10 6 9 17 10 9 7 NA 6 10 9 12 8 5 12 6 8 7 6 7 16 17
Strongly disapprove 52 88 9 60 67 49 71 55 51 49 55 67 56 50 72 55 46 50 50 53 50 56 91 9 58 56
IDK/Refused 2 2 2 2 5 2 4 2 4 2 3 5 1 3 4 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 2 13 8
Total approve 37 4 83 26 19 43 17 27 35 40 35 28 37 38 15 31 44 44 36 40 39 34 3 82 13 18
Total disapprove 60 95 14 72 77 55 79 71 61 58 62 67 62 59 81 67 53 54 63 59 58 63 97 16 74 74
If the 2026 election for US Congress were held today, would you support the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate on the ballot?
Democratic Candidate 47 94 5 51 38 43 69 50 40 43 50 57 52 44 54 52 43 44 51 46 46 48 90 6 38 30
Republican Candidate 37 2 87 22 20 43 17 30 32 41 34 23 37 38 17 33 42 43 32 39 39 37 2 82 10 24
IDK/Refused 16 4 8 27 42 14 15 20 29 16 15 20 11 18 29 14 14 13 17 15 15 16 8 13 52 46
[Cuellar] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 82 85 80 82 82 83 89 73 79 83 81 85 83 81 81 77 84 84 78 87 81 81 85 82 69 78
Somewhat corrupt 13 12 12 15 15 13 7 17 13 12 14 5 13 13 15 14 10 14 16 8 12 16 12 12 24 17
Not very corrupt 4 4 6 2 1 4 3 7 3 4 4 10 2 5 1 8 4 2 5 4 4 2 3 5 7 3
Not at all corrupt 1 0 2 1 2 1 1 2 6 1 1 NA 2 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 2 NA 0 2 1 2
[Menendez] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 87 89 89 84 83 90 79 82 86 88 87 62 89 86 86 82 86 94 86 92 84 88 90 85 92 82
Somewhat corrupt 10 8 7 13 15 8 18 10 8 8 11 32 10 10 10 14 10 6 11 6 13 8 8 10 8 16
Not very corrupt 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 7 1 3 1 6 1 3 1 4 3 0 2 2 2 4 2 4 NA NA
Not at all corrupt 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 NA 5 1 1 NA 1 1 3 NA 1 0 1 0 1 NA 0 1 NA 2
[Binance Pardon] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 58 88 20 68 75 53 77 69 61 54 62 73 62 56 71 59 57 54 57 58 54 66 94 18 68 63
Somewhat corrupt 19 8 28 17 21 22 8 14 14 22 17 NA 18 19 23 22 18 15 17 23 18 18 5 32 19 26
Not very corrupt 12 2 27 9 1 15 3 7 12 12 12 9 11 13 4 10 12 17 10 13 16 6 2 28 4 2
Not at all corrupt 10 1 25 6 3 11 11 10 14 12 9 18 10 11 2 8 12 14 16 6 11 10 0 22 8 8
[Oil Industry Campaign Donations] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 54 86 13 62 63 51 73 51 51 50 57 85 56 52 61 57 47 56 52 60 47 59 90 11 73 61
Somewhat corrupt 16 12 21 15 14 14 12 28 14 17 15 NA 16 16 23 19 15 12 14 13 18 17 9 24 17 14
Not very corrupt 15 1 29 17 6 19 4 5 20 16 14 12 14 16 8 12 16 19 17 14 19 8 1 32 4 12
Not at all corrupt 15 1 38 6 17 16 11 16 14 17 14 3 14 16 9 12 22 13 17 13 16 16 0 33 6 12
[Insider Trading] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 63 87 36 68 68 60 80 68 54 57 68 76 63 63 68 69 56 65 65 59 62 68 88 32 71 68
Somewhat corrupt 19 11 22 23 18 20 10 16 34 22 16 NA 18 19 20 22 20 14 18 19 18 21 11 28 11 19
Not very corrupt 10 2 21 6 5 12 3 4 6 9 10 24 10 10 6 6 11 13 9 11 11 6 1 20 3 12
Not at all corrupt 9 0 21 3 10 8 7 10 6 12 6 NA 9 8 6 3 14 8 8 11 10 5 NA 20 16 0
[Daines] Do you see these events as …
Very corrupt 44 60 24 46 51 42 53 43 41 43 45 30 43 44 43 43 46 42 41 43 48 38 60 24 60 41
Somewhat corrupt 35 36 31 40 34 34 35 42 30 37 33 38 39 32 47 42 30 28 32 38 31 42 36 33 35 38
Not very corrupt 12 3 21 10 11 13 8 8 15 12 11 18 10 13 10 9 11 15 15 11 13 6 4 20 NA 14
Not at all corrupt 10 1 25 5 4 11 4 8 14 8 11 14 9 11 NA 6 13 15 12 8 8 14 0 22 5 7
Who do you think is more corrupt?
Democratic Party 25 4 58 15 9 29 16 17 20 28 23 12 24 26 14 18 30 31 22 24 26 28 3 55 2 9
Republican Party 33 73 5 28 26 32 45 31 28 30 36 36 38 30 26 36 32 36 34 36 31 34 66 4 21 15
Both are equally corrupt 37 19 33 52 57 35 30 47 46 39 34 44 35 38 56 42 33 29 38 36 38 35 28 37 68 64
Neither 1 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 0 2 1 1
IDK/Refused 3 3 2 4 7 3 7 3 6 2 5 5 2 4 4 3 3 3 2 4 4 3 2 2 8 11
Do you describe yourself as a man, a woman, or in some other way?
Man 48 37 49 55 50 44 52 56 61 100 NA NA 48 47 58 53 48 38 46 51 44 50 41 55 57 45
Woman 51 62 50 43 46 54 47 43 37 NA 100 NA 51 51 38 46 52 61 53 47 55 48 58 45 40 54
Some other way 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 3 NA NA 100 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 4 1
Which of the following best describes your race and ethnic background?
African-American or Black 11 20 5 8 10 NA 100 NA NA 12 10 11 9 12 6 12 14 8 11 8 16 6 16 5 3 14
Asian-American, South-Asian, or Pacific Islander 1 1 0 1 1 NA NA NA 30 1 1 NA 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 NA 2
Hispanic or Latino 17 20 12 17 18 NA NA 100 NA 20 14 18 12 20 34 20 18 6 14 7 16 28 18 13 16 27
Native American 0 0 0 1 0 NA NA NA 14 1 0 NA 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
White or Caucasian 70 57 81 70 69 100 NA NA NA 65 74 65 76 66 56 66 65 84 72 83 66 62 64 80 78 53
More than one of the above 1 1 1 2 1 NA NA NA 42 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
Other 0 0 0 1 1 NA NA NA 14 0 0 3 0 0 NA 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1
What is the last year of education or degree you've finished?
1st through 11th grade 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 NA 2 4 1 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 4 4
High School degree or GED 20 21 21 18 21 20 22 20 18 18 21 13 NA 33 26 21 19 18 20 24 21 15 17 19 9 37
Technical or vocational school 6 4 6 8 6 6 3 7 7 7 6 4 NA 10 5 7 6 6 11 9 5 2 6 6 14 6
Some college but no degree 22 23 21 22 26 20 32 26 16 25 19 29 NA 37 27 18 25 22 21 23 22 24 22 23 13 23
Associate's (2 year) degree 11 12 11 9 12 10 11 15 15 8 13 18 NA 18 12 9 11 12 9 9 12 13 11 11 9 10
Bachelor's (4 year) degree 24 22 28 25 14 26 21 18 22 27 22 12 61 NA 22 28 23 22 22 19 24 30 24 27 31 12
Graduate or professional degree 16 18 12 16 17 17 10 10 20 13 18 19 39 NA 5 16 16 18 16 16 16 13 20 12 20 9
In the 2024 election for US President, for whom did you vote?
Kamala Harris 45 92 4 47 35 41 67 47 35 38 50 60 50 41 49 46 42 45 45 46 43 47 100 NA NA NA
Donald Trump 41 2 91 31 22 47 19 33 37 48 36 22 40 42 24 38 46 47 38 43 44 38 NA 100 NA NA
Chase Oliver 1 0 0 3 1 1 NA 3 1 1 1 3 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 NA NA 33 NA
Jill Stein 2 1 NA 4 8 3 1 0 3 3 2 7 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 NA NA 67 NA
Did not vote for President 9 4 4 14 29 7 13 14 22 9 10 NA 5 12 19 12 8 5 13 6 10 8 NA NA NA 88
Was not eligible to vote for President 1 1 0 1 5 1 0 2 2 1 1 9 0 2 6 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 NA NA NA 12
And today, when it comes to politics, do you think of yourself as more of a...
Democrat 29 100 NA NA NA 24 55 35 26 23 35 26 30 29 34 27 30 28 35 26 28 30 60 1 8 15
Independent 28 NA NA 100 NA 29 21 30 46 33 24 31 30 28 27 32 27 27 27 32 28 27 30 22 63 40
Republican 33 NA 100 NA NA 38 16 25 16 34 32 17 33 32 17 29 34 40 28 30 37 31 3 72 3 14
Something else 7 NA NA NA 70 8 6 4 8 8 5 21 6 7 13 9 6 4 5 9 6 9 6 4 23 16
Unsure 3 NA NA NA 30 2 2 6 5 2 3 5 2 4 9 3 2 2 5 3 2 3 1 1 4 15
Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or a not very strong Democrat?
Not very strong Democrat 28 28 NA NA NA 27 26 30 54 29 27 25 26 29 39 33 30 15 30 29 26 28 24 100 19 67
Strong Democrat 72 72 NA NA NA 73 74 70 46 71 73 75 74 71 61 67 70 85 70 71 74 72 76 NA 81 33
Would you call yourself a strong Republican or a not very strong Republican?
Not very strong Republican 22 NA 22 NA NA 22 16 27 20 21 23 NA 33 15 22 29 14 25 16 25 20 27 76 18 18 43
Strong Republican 78 NA 78 NA NA 78 84 73 80 79 77 100 67 85 78 71 86 75 84 75 80 73 24 82 82 57
Do you generally think of yourself as closer to...
The Democratic Party 37 NA NA 37 NA 38 44 31 20 34 39 62 45 31 39 37 34 38 36 39 36 37 63 3 28 27
The Republican Party 25 NA NA 25 NA 28 4 21 24 30 19 18 25 24 15 23 30 24 21 29 22 27 2 68 9 13
Neither 36 NA NA 36 NA 32 48 46 52 34 40 16 27 43 40 39 34 35 44 29 39 35 32 27 63 56
Unsure 2 NA NA 2 NA 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 5 1 2 3 NA 3 3 2 3 2 NA 4
How often do you pay attention to what's going on in government and politics? All the time, most of the time, about half the time, once in a while, or never
All the time 42 48 40 35 48 42 38 42 32 43 41 39 47 38 28 37 44 48 36 41 42 45 50 39 37 18
Most of the time 34 32 37 37 23 35 36 29 44 36 34 24 38 32 32 42 30 34 38 36 32 35 33 38 27 27
About half the time 16 13 14 21 14 14 18 21 16 16 15 27 12 18 29 14 16 12 17 14 16 16 13 15 26 28
Once in a while 7 4 9 6 14 8 4 8 7 6 8 10 3 10 9 6 9 5 8 8 8 4 2 8 11 24
Never 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 0 1 0 2 NA 0 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 NA 2 0 NA 4
In the past 12 months, how often did you discuss political, societal, or local issues with friends or family?
Basically every day 33 34 30 30 45 35 30 26 26 32 33 42 39 29 25 31 34 36 28 37 30 36 38 31 33 17
A few times a week 37 41 37 39 22 37 36 37 46 42 33 24 38 36 37 42 37 33 37 34 39 37 40 37 31 27
A few times a month 15 13 16 18 11 14 17 19 14 12 17 24 14 15 26 15 11 16 15 17 14 14 14 15 15 20
Once a month 4 3 4 4 3 3 2 8 2 4 4 8 3 4 3 5 5 2 5 3 2 6 2 5 5 6
Less than once a month 5 2 6 5 10 5 6 4 9 5 6 NA 4 6 2 4 7 5 5 5 6 4 1 6 5 19
Not at all 6 6 7 5 9 6 9 6 4 5 8 1 2 9 7 4 6 8 10 5 7 4 5 6 10 11
How important is politics to your personal identity?
Extremely important 17 20 17 13 17 16 24 16 16 18 16 20 21 14 13 18 16 17 12 16 20 16 20 17 16 3
Very important 22 27 21 18 18 22 20 20 13 22 22 22 23 21 19 25 18 24 26 18 20 24 26 20 12 11
Somewhat important 29 31 27 32 17 28 27 30 38 29 28 19 27 30 30 28 27 31 26 31 27 30 31 29 18 20
Not too important 18 13 21 18 19 19 12 16 17 17 18 21 18 17 16 17 22 14 17 19 17 18 12 22 15 24
Not at all important 12 6 13 17 18 12 9 15 11 13 12 3 10 14 14 10 15 11 18 11 13 10 7 12 30 33
IDK/Refused 3 3 1 2 10 2 7 3 5 2 4 14 1 4 7 2 2 3 1 5 3 2 3 1 8 8
Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?
Yes 33 53 11 36 44 35 23 37 23 25 40 75 44 27 52 39 28 28 36 33 29 38 56 11 40 25
No 54 37 78 48 38 53 64 50 57 62 47 15 45 59 35 50 59 57 54 53 58 47 33 77 43 52
IDK/Refused 13 10 11 17 18 13 13 14 20 13 13 10 11 14 14 10 13 15 10 14 13 15 12 12 17 23
Age from voter file.
18-29 11 13 6 10 24 9 6 22 17 13 8 32 7 13 11 NA NA NA 10 11 9 14 12 6 7 26
30-44 27 25 24 31 32 26 30 32 26 30 24 22 30 25 NA 27 NA NA 28 27 25 30 28 25 35 32
45-64 34 35 36 32 28 32 44 36 37 34 34 23 33 34 NA NA 34 NA 42 33 36 25 32 37 29 29
65+ 28 27 34 27 15 34 20 10 20 23 34 22 29 28 NA NA NA 28 20 30 30 30 28 32 28 14
Region from voter file.
Northeast 17 20 15 16 16 18 16 15 17 16 17 13 16 17 16 18 21 12 17 NA NA NA 17 15 17 22
Midwest 23 20 21 26 27 27 17 10 19 24 21 28 20 24 22 22 22 24 NA 23 NA NA 23 24 24 17
South 38 36 43 37 28 35 54 37 36 35 40 36 39 37 31 35 40 40 NA NA 38 NA 36 40 28 39
West 23 24 22 21 28 20 13 39 28 24 22 23 25 21 30 25 17 24 NA NA NA 23 24 21 31 23

Methodological Statement

Sampling 

We sampled potential respondents from the L2 voter file of registered voters. The population was divided into 36 non-overlapping strata based on race, age, participation in the 2024 general election, party alignment, and educational attainment model category. This stratification schema was used to define a target number of completes for each stratum, sampled inversely proportional to expected response rates based on past surveys, oversampling to allow for variation from these expected response rates. After defining stratification and targets, we then limited the sample to records with cell-phones. We supplemented this text-to-web survey with a sample of Rep Data panelists who had been matched to the voter file, to mitigate concerns over coverage of a cell-only sample and other mode-specific non-response biases. We then reconstructed which sampling strata these Rep Data panelists belonged to based on voter file data. 

Fielding

The text-to-web and live interviewer surveys were fielded from Thursday, April 9, 2026 through Sunday, April 12, 2026. The first day of fielding was a “soft launch” limiting the number of records. We then activated the DRASS sampling system to adjust for relative non-response across sampling strata. We also set quotas matching target numbers for the completed responses by strata, such that we did not initiate any new surveys to respondents from strata where the quotas had been met, but did not terminate respondents after their respective stratum-level quota had been met either.

We checked for duplicate records in the text sample and found none, resulting in a final total of 1044 completed interviews via text-to-web.

The panel-to-web surveys were from a list of registered voter targets from Rep Data, who matched their panelists to the L2 voter file, limiting the respondents to those who were affirmatively matched. These panelists were then interviewed from Wednesday, April 8, 2026 through Monday, April 13, 2026, with quotas in place matching the sample stratification targets. These responses were then matched back to the L2 file, appending the demographic necessary to reconstruct their sampling strata. We completed 495 interviews via panel-to-web fielding, for a combined mixed-mode sample of 1539 interviews. 

Weighting

We first created base weights by rake weighting the text-to-web sample back to stratification benchmarks using fields associated with the respondents in the voter file. We then use these weights to estimate the frequency of survey taking, creating bins. Then we rake weight the panel-to-web responses using both the distribution of strata and this binned estimate of survey response frequency to create base weights for the panel-to-web survey. Finally, with these base weights as starting values, we pool the data together and rake the combined sample to the strata distribution, survey response frequency, census region, race, educational attainment, gender using self-reports, and party affiliation using self-reports. Weighting targets for census region, race, educational attainment, gender, and party affiliation are derived from the Pew NPORS survey conducted January 2025. Weights were trimmed at the 5th and 95th percentiles.

After accounting for the Kish 1+L approximation of the design effect from weighting, the margin of error is 1.62 percentage points. 

Other Disclosures

This survey of registered voters in the United States was paid for by Survey 160 as part of our ongoing methodological research initiatives. All estimates of public opinion have sources of error beyond that which is captured by the margin of error, including non-ignorable (post weighting) non-response error, frame and coverage error, measurement error and processing error.

Survey Instrument

Right Direction / Wrong Direction

Q1: Right/Wrong Direction

First, do you think things in the United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction?

  • Right direction
  • Wrong direction
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure
  • Refused

Attention Barometer

Q2: Attention Barometer

In a few words, what news story caught your attention this week? News can be anything you follow, whether local TV, websites, podcasts, or social media, on any topic like sports, entertainment, or politics. We just want to know what caught your attention. If you can't think of anything specific, that's okay, just say so. Please reply in your own words.

[Open end]

Presidential Job Approval & Favorability

Q3: Presidential Job Approval (Donald Trump)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

  • Strongly approve
  • Somewhat approve
  • Somewhat disapprove
  • Strongly disapprove
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure
  • Refused

Q4: Generic Ballot

If the 2026 election for US Congress were held today, would you support the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate on the ballot?

  • The Democratic Candidate
  • The Republican Candidate
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure
  • Refused

Experiment Module: Corruption Evaluations

Q5: Open-Ended Corruption

Now to a different topic, we are interested in how you view political corruption. In a few words, can you give an example of something you see as corrupt in government?

[Open end; half of respondents randomly limited to 160 characters]

Q6 Instructions: Next we are going to ask you about three recent events that some people have called corrupt. For each, we want you to tell us whether you see these events as very corrupt, somewhat corrupt, not very corrupt, or not at all corrupt. [3 of 6 vignettes randomly selected and ordered]

Q6a: Cuellar

In May 2024, longtime Texas Democratic Congressman Henry Cuellar and his wife Imelda were indicted on charges of accepting approximately $600,000 in bribes from an Azerbaijani state-owned energy company and a Mexican bank. Prosecutors alleged the bribe payments were laundered through sham consulting contracts and shell companies, and that Cuellar used his congressional position to advance the interests of these foreign entities. Two of his political associates pleaded guilty.
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q6b: Menendez

In 2023, Democratic New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez and his wife were charged with accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes—including gold bars and envelopes of cash—from three New Jersey businessmen. Prosecutors alleged that in exchange, Menendez used his role as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to benefit the governments of Egypt and Qatar. He was convicted on 16 counts in July 2024 and sentenced to 11 years in prison in January 2025.
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q6c: Binance Pardon

Republican President Donald Trump recently pardoned Changpeng Zhao, the founder of the cryptocurrency platform Binance who had pled guilty in 2024 for violating US money laundering laws. The week after the pardon was issued, Binance announced it would begin allowing trading of two cryptocurrency coins that are issued by a company co-founded by Trump and his sons. Earlier this year, Binance accepted a $2 billion investment from a United Arab Emirates investment fund in one of those Trump-company crypto-currency coins. When asked about the pardon, the White House spokesperson said "The President has exercised his constitutional power to pardon Mr. CZ, who was prosecuted during the Biden administration's war on cryptocurrency."
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q6d: Oil Industry Campaign Donations

In April 2024, then-former Republican President Donald Trump asked oil industry executives last month to donate $1 billion to aid his presidential campaign. Giving $1 billion would be a "deal," Trump said, because of the taxation and regulation they would avoid thanks to him, according to the reporting in the Washington Post. At a separate fundraiser featuring donors from the oil and gas industry, Trump promised to lower barriers to mergers if re-elected. Two executives who reportedly attended Trump oil industry fundraisers this spring later made significant contributions to Trump-aligned political committees—something they had not done in previous presidential cycles.
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q6e: Insider Trading

Traders placed nearly half a billion dollars in bets on falling oil prices just 15 minutes before Republican President Trump's announcement of "productive" talks with Iran sent prices tumbling. On Monday, the unusually large bets in the oil future markets, worth roughly $580 million, came just minutes before Trump took to social media to declare that he was postponing his threatened strikes on Iran, an announcement that caused oil prices to fall and stock futures to jump. The trades seemed reminiscent of an anonymous bet on Polymarket in January that saw one lucky user win $436,000 by betting on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro's ouster just hours before he was captured by U.S. forces.
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q6f: Daines

On March 4, 2026, Montana Republican Sen. Steve Daines dropped his reelection bid with virtually no time to spare before the state's candidate filing deadline, but just enough for his handpicked successor to enter the race. Daines' decision to withdraw appeared to have been intended to dissuade anyone—except his chosen successor, Republican U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme—from joining the race. State campaign filing records show Alme registering his campaign eight minutes before the filing period ended. The incumbent Senator Daines then withdrew his own name five minutes later—exactly three minutes before the filing deadline.
  • Very corrupt
  • Somewhat corrupt
  • Not very corrupt
  • Not at all corrupt

Q7: Party Corruption

Who do you think is more corrupt?

  • The Democratic Party
  • The Republican Party
  • Both are equally corrupt
  • Neither
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure
  • Refused

Demographics

Q8: Gender

Do you describe yourself as a man, a woman, or in some other way?

  • Man
  • Woman
  • Some other way

Q9: Year of Birth

In what year were you born? Please respond with a four-digit year.

Q10: Race

Which of the following best describes your race and ethnic background?

  • African-American or Black
  • Asian-American, South-Asian, or Pacific Islander
  • Hispanic or Latino
  • Native American
  • White or Caucasian
  • More than one of the above
  • Other (please specify)

Q11: Education Level

What is the last year of education or degree you've finished?

  • 1st through 11th grade
  • High School degree or GED
  • Technical or vocational school
  • Some college but no degree
  • Associate's (2 year) degree
  • Bachelor's (4 year) degree
  • Graduate or professional degree

Partisanship

Q12: Vote Choice 2024

In the 2024 election for US President, for whom did you vote?

  • Democrat Kamala Harris
  • Republican Donald Trump
  • Libertarian Chase Oliver
  • Green Party candidate Jill Stein
  • Some other candidate (please specify)
  • Did not vote for President
  • Was not eligible to vote for President

Q13: Party ID

And today, when it comes to politics, do you think of yourself as more of a …

  • Democrat → Q14a
  • Republican → Q14b
  • Independent → Q14c
  • Something else
  • Unsure

Q14a: Strength – Democrat

Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or a not very strong Democrat?

  • Strong Democrat
  • Not very strong Democrat

Q14b: Strength – Republican

Would you call yourself a strong Republican or a not very strong Republican?

  • Strong Republican
  • Not very strong Republican

Q14c: Party ID Lean

Do you generally think of yourself as closer to …

  • The Democratic Party
  • The Republican Party
  • Neither
  • Unsure

Q15: Feminist

Do you consider yourself to be a feminist?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure

Political Interest / Attention

Q16: Political Attention

How often do you pay attention to what's going on in government and politics?

  • All the time
  • Most of the time
  • About half the time
  • Once in a while
  • Never

Q17: Political Talk

In the past 12 months, how often did you discuss political, societal, or local issues with friends or family?

  • Basically every day
  • A few times a week
  • A few times a month
  • Once a month
  • Less than once a month
  • Not at all

Q18: Importance of Politics to Identity

How important is politics to your personal identity?

  • Extremely important
  • Very important
  • Somewhat important
  • Not too important
  • Not at all important
  • Don't know / No Opinion / Not Sure

Q19–21: Embargoed

Q22: Other Polls

Sometimes, people answer multiple polls from different survey organizations. Besides this poll, how many polls have you answered in the last month? Please reply with a specific number, and if you cannot recall exactly, please just give your best guess.

Q23: Income

Finally, last year, that is in 2025, what was your total family income from all sources, before taxes?

  • Less than $30,000
  • $30,000 to less than $40,000
  • $40,000 to less than $50,000
  • $50,000 to less than $70,000
  • $70,000 to less than $100,000
  • $100,000 to less than $125,000
  • $125,000 to less than $150,000
  • $150,000 or more
Next
Next

Survey 160 Tracking Poll, March 2026