Today, Explained - Your midterms study guide

Episode Date: September 12, 2026

With the 2026 midterms fast approaching, we’re asking a simple question: What actually matters to voters right now? This show was edited by Kasia Broussalian, fact checked by Esther Gim, mixed by Shannon Mahoney, video edited by Christopher Snyder, and hosted by Astead Herndon. A polling station at Colebrook Academy and Elementary School in Colebrook, New Hampshire, on Election Day, November 5, 2024. Photo by Joseph Prezioso / AFP via Getty Images. You can also watch this episode on youtube.com/vox. Listen to Today, Explained ad-free by becoming a Vox Member: vox.com/members. New Vox members get $20 off their membership right now. If you enjoy our reporting and want to learn more, sign up for Astead’s weekly newsletter, Midterms, Actually. Just go to www.vox.com/midtermsactually to learn more, and get in-depth analysis about this year’s election right to your inbox. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We've already done a lot of reporting this year. We went to a data center in New Jersey. We talked to redistricting volunteers in Virginia. I argued with the 24-year-old about whether Trump was still cool or not, and we went to his UFC event in Washington, D.C. But with the midterms right around the corner, I wanted to focus this week on a more simple question. What matters most to voters when it comes to November?

So this week, we're going to do something a little different and answer your audience questions. And y'all had a lot. Who are the real swing voters? How data centers will be affecting the election. Where a PAC is having the most influence. Whether mail and voting is really being suppressed. I love these questions because your lines of inquiry

match up perfectly with the reporting we've done over the past year. So this week, we're going to answer some of your concerns and pull out the trends that we have seen throughout our time on the road. Five things you need to know about this year's midterm elections. The stakes, the candidates, the issues, we're cutting through all the noise. It's a midterm study guide. Let's dig in. Okay, so here's five things you need to know about the upcoming midterm elections. The first is that both parties have changed significantly since 2024. On the Republican side, the most important thing to know is that Donald Trump is deeply and increasingly unpopular. The

numbers are quite staggering. The latest NBC news survey shows Donald Trump at his lowest approval rating ever. And importantly, that number is driven by a change among Trump's own base. 41% of Republicans strongly approve of Trump's job performance. That's down 11 percentage points from the spring. And 62% of self-identified MAGA Republicans support the president. That's down from 71% in the spring. Even Trump's own allies are admitting the president may be in some trouble when it comes to the midterms. Here's a clip from my interview with C.J. Pearson, the MAGA influencer and mega Trump fan, who we talked to a few weeks ago.

We have to reorient the conversation that we're having as a party around these domestic issues. Or if not, we will lose disastrously in November. But the question is why is Donald Trump so unpopular? And the answer starts with the economy. People simply feel like Donald Trump hasn't followed through on his core campaign promise, lowering cost. And while that started with tariffs, it's only gotten worse when we think about rising gas prices or the ongoing war with Iran. We've heard about this a lot all over our travels, like when we were out in Pennsylvania. I voted for him with his promises to American people.

And I think he's let us down. The controlling of the prices. got it, has skyrocket. We also heard this when we talk to people at Trump's UFC event in Washington, D.C. Middle class, I want things that affect my life. I want to see change in my regular day-to-day. It's like, and I don't see that.

But the economy isn't the only reason that Trump is increasingly unpopular in his second term. I think the Epstein Fowls also has a lot to do with it. You know, Trump got in a lot of trouble for not releasing the Epstein Files in a timely and transparent fashion and we still hear about it on the campaign trail, particularly from some Republicans. And I think this issue had a big effect on people's perception of him.

He was no longer the rich guy fighting against the elite insiders. He was a member of the insider club, and people have perceived that. After, you know, the FC files and everything should have just, like, ramped up with how he's been acting. I feel like it was a lot more, you know, chill before that. But while Trump remains unpopular, that doesn't mean. that he's powerless. Because he's won big in Republican primaries this year, and that is driving the loyalty between him and the Republicans in Congress. Trump took out his political enemies, like Republican Thomas Massey or Texas Senator John Cornyn. And while Trump's approval rating has

diminished, he still remains in complete control of Republicans in Congress who have refused to break from him. The reason why is because the most loyal primary vote, voters are still mega-Trump fans. On the Democratic side, it's been an all-out civil war as the party tries to recover from the embarrassment of the 2024 presidential election. Now, most of these fights have pit the progressive left wing against the moderate establishment wing, but I think it's a mistake to reduce it just to ideology. Democrats are rethinking who they are and who they fight for, and it's a conversation that is starting now but won't include until the 28 presidential primary.

Here's how Michigan Senate candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, described the stakes to me in a recent interview. For a long time, the Democratic Party has rested on its laurels that we're not that we don't win because he's so bad. We win because he's so bad and we're so good. El-Sayette is a strong supporter of Medicare for All and abolishing ICE, two of the signature policies of the progressive left. But what's the signature policy of the moderate establishment wing?

That question's harder to answer. Because most moderates would rather talk about stopping Trump or what they don't like about the left. It's been a struggle to get them to talk about their own vision. Here's a clip from my interview with Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina. This country is teetering on the break. And those of us who know this history, and those of us who know the system, And those of us who had the energy to fight it, they better stay in this fight. My second big takeaway is about the United States relationship with Israel.

This has become a huge issue for voters, and we see it playing out all across the country. You know, it may have started in the Biden administration, but the issue has certainly become more visceral, particularly since the United States ignited a war with Iran at the urging of the Israeli government. Public opinion has soured drastically on Israel, and you can already see it affecting the midterms. Just recently, Vice President J.D. Vans faced significant criticism from Republicans for his refusal to disavowell Tucker Carlson, the podcaster and former TV host, who's become a vocal critic of the Israeli government and the Trump administration. Tucker is a friend of mine. Tucker is a friend despite the fact that we disagree on a number of things. And I'm not going to play the game where I throw friends under the bus because I have. political disagreements with him.

On the Democratic side, the Israel question may be best epitomized by the fight over Hassan Piker, the leftist Twitch streamer who has begun campaigning with progressive candidates all across the country. In our interview, Piker was clear. He wants to change the Democratic Party, make it more vocally anti-war, more vocally anti-Israel. He said there's no way the Democratic nominee in the next presidential primary can be pro-Israel. Any kind of like sympathetic approach to Israel in 2028 will be electoral poison. You won't be able to make it out of the Democratic primary, so it's not even a concern for me at all.

Progressive congressional candidates, like Darya Lisa Avila Chivalier, who defeated a Democratic incumbent in New York City, have also made a similar case. She articulated what amounts to a left-wing argument for America first, saying people want their tax dollars invested in communities at home, not fighting foreign. wars. We are constantly being told that they're not enough resources for us while watching a live stream genocide being committed. Our budgets are moral documents. But the rise of the anti-Israel left has not come without controversy. Third way, the centrist Democratic think tank in Washington has led a campaign to get Democrats to marginalize people like Piker, citing past controversial statements. Cohen, the group's president, compare Piker to people like Nick Fintest and Candice Owens. And according to him, Democratic.

Democrats are embracing an extremist. Democrats are going to beat Maga and expand the map in the House, the Senate, and the White House. The only way to do that is to offer an alternative to the extremism of Trumpism, not to mirror it. You guys also called in with a bunch of questions about Israel and APEC. Here are a few. This is Noah calling in for Brooklyn. And I'm curious about the upcoming election cycle where AAC is having the most influence, what's happening to all of that money that's pouring in different races or the candidates winning.

Hello, this is Devin from Salt Lake City, Utah. I believe this is probably just as impactful as the Citizens United decision. Thank you. There's no doubt that corporate dollars, and particularly money from APEC in the pro-Israel lobby, was a big issue, particularly in Democratic primaries this year. But when it comes to the general election, both parties will be flushed in corporate and the question of finances may matter a little bit less in a race that has national attention. That being said, there are a few races to watch when it comes to the Israel question specifically.

I'd point you to candidates like Angie Nixon in Florida, who has risen in that race partially because of her willingness to call out what she said was a Democratic Party to beholding to the pro-Israel lobby. I'd also point you to a couple progressive candidates running an important House districts like William Lawrence in Michigan or Manny Rutinal in Colorado. These are people who have embraced that kind of America First Messaging model by candidates like Darya Liza Avila Chevalier. But can it work in a district that's more purple and more central to the question of Democrats controlling the House in the next few years? In these races, we'll get a sense about whether the anti-Israel message works and more battle-grimals. district, or is this something that has more resonance in liberal, deep blue areas?

The third thing that sticks out to me is that everything is about affordability now. The word has become ubiquitous in political world ever since New York City mayor, Zora Mamdani, made it his signature campaign issue in 2025. These days, it's in everybody's campaign ads. Earlier this year, I talked to Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair, Greg Khazar, about the affordability agenda that his caucus laid out. And more importantly, I talked to him about what that word actually means. Here's what he said. He said, your rent is going up. Let's blame it on some Venezuelan immigrants. But it was not wokeness that raised your rent. It was a Wall Street hedge fund.

The fourth takeaway and a big one from our year of reporting is all about AI. People are concerned about affordability and the economy, but that concern is explicitly tied to mass anxiety about the future of work, especially in the age of artificial intelligence. AI has changed everything, and the voters know it, and they're upset with the political system

that has not proactively protected them against the changing society. Listen to what we heard at a town hall in New Jersey when it comes to data centers. So... I did sell my house. I told you.

People come in. I have a lot of. A woman who came back twice had cash and realized it was near the data center of her children and mom, she says, I just can't do this. And this fear is especially true among the youngest voters. When we dug into all things Gen Z with researcher Rachel Jamfaza, she said that concerns about affordability and jobs cannot be separated from concerns about AI. It's all connected. When you're talking about the biggest issues and what's affecting young people's lives, AI is at the center of that. And a lot of you had questions about AI, data centers, and its potential impact in the midterms.

Here are a few. I'm calling because you asked about what we're most interested in for the November election. And something I'm particularly interested in is how data centers will be affecting the election. I'm Kim from Chicago. I'm 35. And my biggest questions about the economy going to midterms are AI and jobs. When it comes to AI and data centers, there are so many races to watch. This may be the most talked about issue of this midterm elections.

But I think there's a couple races that are worth calling out specifically. First, of course, the Senate race in Michigan. Progressive Democrat Abdul-El-Sayyad has stopped short of calling for a moratorium on data centers throughout the year. But just in the last week, he's just changed his tone. He said that this is a breakglass moment for AI development and that development needs to be paused right now to get a sense of its potential impact. That also comes as his Republican opponent, Mike Rogers, has himself called for a one-year moratorium on data centers.

Both candidates are really fighting to show themselves as the AI regulator in that race, which I think speaks to the public opinion shift on the issue. The second race worth watching is down in Texas. Texas originally welcomed AI and data centers, but Governor Greg Abbott has since made a little bit of a U-turn. In the last couple weeks, he says that data centers dug their own grave with the public, which again signals how sentiment has shifted on this issue, not just among Democrats, but among Republicans and with independents. But the fifth thing you need to know this midterms is all about election security. And I got to say, this was the topic that we got more questions about than any other. People are clearly concerned about the validity of our democratic system, the role of the Supreme Court, and, concerned about things like mail and ballots.

So we're going to answer all your questions coming up next. Support for this show comes from MintMobil. Summer's not over yet, and neither is MintMobile's summer sale. You can lower your monthly phone bill by signing up for one of their premium wireless plans for only $15 a month. All of MittMobil's plans come with high-speed 5G data plus unlimited talk and text. We have a colleague here at Vox who's made the switch to MintMobile, and he swears by it. He says that Mint lets him save a bunch of money every month,

and he's never run into any issue where his coverage might be limited. To get your new wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month, go to mintmobile.com slash astead. That's mintmobile.com slash A-T-E-A-D. Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com slash astead. That's it. There's no catch. Up front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, and $180. for 12 months, plan required. $15 per month equivalent.

Taxes and fees extra, initial plan term only. Greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy, includes up to 20 gigabyte hotspot. Capable device required, availability, speed, and coverage varies. See mintmobile.com for more. Hi, I'm Bella Freud. Each week on fashion neurosis, I invite guests from the world of fashion, art, film, music, sport, and literature

to lie on my couch and explore the connection between identity and fashion. This week on fashion neurosis, I welcome Anthony Vaccarello. Let's text was kind of fetish for me. It's true that, yeah, I'm starting to have fun at Salon when I understand that you can twist things that seems classic. It took me a while to understand the code of San Loren. and that San Loren was mostly playing with code with the good taste and bad taste. And that latex collection was very like a deliverance to me to be able to explore things that was not able to do it before.

Find fashion neurosis on YouTube or wherever you get your podcast. What's up everybody? It's Cam Hayward, Steelers captain and host of Not Just Football. We just sat down with Aaron Rogers, four-time MVP, Super Bowl champion, future Hall of Famer, for one of the most open and honest conversations we've ever had on the show. There was so much to get into, we had to split in the two parts. Part one is out right now, and trust me, you don't want to miss it. Aaron gives us his real story behind coming back for one final season. We also talk about how he was ready to retire once Mike T stepped down,

and how reuniting with McCarthy changed everything. We get into playing with Mike T for one more year. this year squad, the old team narrative, who stood out this summer and what it's like to be in the quarterback. Aaron also opens up about what he still has left to accomplish this season and what it looks like when he hangs it up with it. And that's only part one. Part two drops this Thursday. That's when we go beyond football, the media, the conspiracy theories, what people still get wrong about Aaron Roger, his legacy, Super Bowl ring, the goat, the bait, and the overrated and underrated where things really get off limits.

Part one is out right now. Part two drops this Thursday, September 10th. Watch Notches Football with Cam Hayward on YouTube, or listen to Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. So by far, the number one question that we got from y'all was all about election integrity. People are clearly concerned about the rules of our democratic process. The redistricting wars, the role the Supreme Court might play in this elections. And of course, Donald Trump's threats to declare a national emergency ahead of November.

So to help me out, I call the Vox Political Editor Benji Sarlane. Benji has been helping us shape our political coverage throughout the year, and he's been tracking these issues very closely. Thanks, Benji, for joining us. Thanks so much, Astad. Okay, so I want to get to our audience questions, and we're going to start with the state of play when it comes to redistricting. Now, earlier this summer, we heard how the GOP was basically trying to hijack

the political process to exert pressure on state lawmakers, to draw more safe conservative districts, to give them an advantage in the midterms. And then the Democrats responded with their own redistricting moves in places like California and they tried to do so in Virginia. Here's some of what we heard from Cook Political Reports, Amy Walter, over the summer. The primary process has become as corrupted as it was back then. Most people who get elected to Congress are going to be elected. seats that are pretty safely red or safely blue.

The primaries matter more than anything. You can create all the reforms you want, but if people feel like the system is broken, they're not going to participate. And we heard even more about this issue when we traveled to Virginia's first congressional district. The maps are a problem, and they're always going to be a problem when, you know, just there's going to be backroom deals making maps that strategically disadvantaged one party over the other.

People start to feel like, what does it matter? Like I tried and we're doing all these things, and we even voted. And we set, you know, used our voice and it still didn't work. Benji, where did this all land? Do Republicans actually have a structural advantage when it comes to redistricting as we get to November? So this is a very confusing process. It's different from state to state. The court is involved.

And in fact, they're still involved right up to this week. Missouri has been trying to eliminate a Democratic seat. It got stopped by a Supreme Court decision, then possibly approved by a different court decision. just minutes later. Yeah. But the Virginia redistricting move that would have favored Democrats was tossed out for procedural reasons. And Republicans are probably going to have an advantage in, let's say, 10 to 12 additional

seats by some estimates. Now, what does that mean? Yeah. It means there are fewer competitive seats overall. And Democrats, depending on your estimate, may need to win the national popular vote by three, four, five points to win a House majority. But Democrats are still favored. by many election forecasters to win the House. So why is that?

One, Democrats are leading by quite a bit of national polls. It's about six and a half points, according to Nate Silver's latest polling average. Second, Republicans have a very narrow majority. So Democrats don't actually need to net a ton of new seats to win a majority. Third, if Democrats really start hitting the higher end of that polling, even some gerrymandered seats might fall because the way gerrymanders work is that they spread their vote margins across more seats, which makes them easier to win, but also raises the chance of an upset in some of them. So in Texas in particular, there are some Republican concerns that they might not be able to hold on to every seat they plan to gain. Now, this shouldn't make you any less upset about it.

It's politicians choosing their own voters now after every election instead of just 10 years to try to pull up the ladder behind them. It goes against the spirit of our democratic system and accountability and representation. but if you're worried the election is canceled, that is not the case. This is a highly competitive race. Your vote does matter. You mentioned the Supreme Court in that answer, and that really leads us to a couple audience questions we got on that front. You know, it seems as if the fear that the Supreme Court could have a big impact on

election security is really visceral for some of our audience. Take a listen to a couple of these questions. I want to learn more about whether mail and voting is really being. suppressed. I have read about an executive order that outlines all these changes that states are unable to comply to, but yet it's law, but maybe it's going to get blocked. I really have an existential fear that in the end the Supreme Court might rule that it's okay to suppress vote by mail and the U.S. Postal Service will just not deliver our ballot. And it just feels like this very scary possibility. So how valid do you think the concern is that the Supreme Court might hand

and Republicans further advantage. So let's start with the basics here. Nobody can just presume any decision is guaranteed by the Supreme Court. It's a very conservative one. They've zig sometimes when people thought they were going to zag. However, what Trump is trying to do is still seen as at least a relative long shot in the courts. Explain that. For a few reasons.

So Trump has tried this executive order, among other attempts to influence elections. And the Supreme Court is ultimately expected to weigh in. Now, one, we have separation of powers. Generally, federal government, especially the executive branch, is not supposed to be changing election law by executive order. The courts have not looked favorably on prior attempts to mess with elections. A fundamentally state and local driven apparatus is our election. Yes. Yes.

And bear in mind, Trump, when he was president, tried to do everything possible to overturn the 2020 election. in multiple states. Those went nowhere in federal courts. Those went nowhere in the Supreme Court. So it is worth, you know, they have been willing to buck him in the past on this based on what is pretty well-established precedent. There is also a Supreme Court theory that this particular conservative Supreme Court has cultivated an advance called the major questions doctrine, which was used most famously to overturn some democratic priorities, like, you know, canceling student loans en masse. But it basically says, says, if there is a major change to policy, it should be Congress that is specifically weighing in on it and not some kind of loophole through existing law that, you know, the White House uses to try to force it through. So in this case, Congress has not passed some giant mail-in ballot reform bill. In fact, there have been lots of bills discussed that have not been passed related to elections in the last few years. So there's a decent chance even the conservatives might look at this and say, look, if Congress wants to change this, that's their business. But

we have a precedent that we have established and safeguarded that this law should, you know, clearly what Trump is trying to do should clearly not pass muster on. But I think people's concern is just the intimidation factor also. It feels as if sometimes this administration looks to succeed in policy, but they also just look to push a narrative out there. And we do see Trump using these executive orders to do what he's done consistently, which is just cast doubt on the integrity of the system. Exactly. And the good news is that while that propaganda could be very dangerous in its own right, and it was a massive factor in, you know, most especially the January 6th riot at the Capitol, that is to some degree separate from this legal question of will your votes actually be counted? Will you be able to get in your ballot on time? So it is important to at least separate things. I mean, one way people interpret this sometimes is Trump is pre-spinning a loss. You know, he actually talks often about how. presidents usually, you know, their party usually does poorly in the midterms. And I have no doubt

if it does go poorly, the day after the midterms will say, ah, you know, the Supreme Court and Congress should have gone along with all my election rules. But if I hear you correctly, you're saying the Donald Trump intimidation factor is in one hand, but you think the actual legal question is maybe less certain to fall in his favor as his intimidation kind of bully pulpit methods. Yes, and you should absolutely take the legal side seriously. We're taking it very seriously here. Our reporters are tracking it closely.

As I said, nothing's guaranteed. But it is still a very difficult path that so far he has had zero success in. Okay. Let's get to the kind of last point that gave folks real concern. And we've really referenced it already. The president has made constant threats to declare a national emergency ahead of the election or have military of some form, even ICE at the polling. locations, and, of course, there is the ever-present fear.

They'll run 2020 playbook again and seek to invalidate said results. Just listen to some of the concerns that we heard from our listeners. Every day I see something online where the headline is, how is Trump or how is the Republican party going to invalidate the results? I wonder if there is actual real fear and real possibility that election results. could be challenged, contested, and what that would really mean for all of us. This is my kind of overwhelming, all-consuming worry. I think it's well-founded, but I hope that it's not.

Okay, so how real do we think people should take the threat of Trump declaring a national emergency ahead of the midterm election? So some of this gets into some of the issues we discussed, which is overturning results, seizing ballots, things like that, very difficult. Now, it should be noted because people are mentioning some specific Trumpy threats involving, say, a state of emergency or, you know, the kind of things we saw in Los Angeles or Minneapolis with ice raids where you just have lots of federal agents just all over the place or the National Guard in Washington, D.C. in other places. Now, there are legal barriers to sending federal agents to polling sites too. The law prohibits federal troops or armed agents at polling sites unless they're responding to some of. immediate national security threat. So far, there is no plan to deploy the National Guard or

ICE at polling places. It's come up in the news. Trump officials and DHS have been asked about it. And once again, the courts would be the ultimate bulwark against. Now, does that mean you should take everyone's word here? No. Yeah. Yeah. There's always the possibility. There's always the possibility, especially in something time limited like an election, that Trump ignores the law. But it's not easy. And also remember, the backlash to such a. move could also be greater than the intended effect. You know, a lot of Republicans to this day blame Trump's election denial after 2020 for costing them those two Georgia Senate seats the Democrats now hold in a runoff because it encouraged

black voters in particular who are very used to threats of disenfranchisement to turn out like crazy in the runoff. And it also potentially depressed Trump's own supporters because they decided that their votes didn't count. But I wanted to ask, like, we've started this by talking about Dr. Trump's deep unpopularity, his increasing unpopularity even among his own base. So that kind of leads me to another question. I mean, Trump has contested every election loss he's been a part of, but he's not on the ballot this November. He's not on the ballot

theoretically in 2028. So if he does what people are afraid of in terms of declaring a national emergency or trying to bring military personnel to polling places, what do we think the likelihood that the GOP follows him down that path. I mean, are we talking about a party that will follow his election denial to its logical end? So far, elections have been a red line where Republicans, for the most part, have not gone along with these kinds of things. Bear in mind also that if you do something illegal, you can be prosecuted.

And in many cases, it's state law that applies, which Trump cannot pardon you for. I would also add that election deniers like hard. hardcore election nires, people who really got involved in politics around Trump's election conspiracies, have not won a lot of elections. Famously in 2022, even when Democrats were having a rough, you know, midterm cycle in many ways, those candidates caused them race after race in governors' races and Secretary of State races and Senate races. Now, some of those folks are on the ballot this time. That could change potentially.

You might have in future elections folks who are more aggressively devoted to them. But for the most part, he has not been able to drag the party along on this. Okay. So if I can sum up what I feel like I heard from you, we are acknowledging that the concern or the fear that we're hearing from people around election integrity is certainly valid because of what Donald Trump has said, because of his own history of election denial, and because of the ongoing role the courts have in deciding things around this like a mail-in-ballets, executive order, or even some of these redistricting wars.

However, there seems to be a little bit of a logistical problem with the question of like seizing ballots or interfering on election day, partially because of the state and federal separation of powers when it comes to election administration. Yeah, I mean, one way to think of it with a lot of these situations with Trump is that let's say you are in a house and there is a mass serial killer trying to get in through your window. and then he tries to use your doorknob and try to shake the doorknob. And then he tries to get in through the chimney. And the whole time you're saying, well, it's a good thing that I reinforce the windows and that the door is like reinforced steel and that I block the chimney and that I have a ring camera and that I know to let the police in. But you still would be pretty unnerved by this serial killer trying every which way

to get into your house, right? I might move, you know. Yes. So I don't want to understate the threat. obviously if Trump could snap his fingers and overturned elections he could. And we know this because he tried to do it explicitly many, many times. But it is not easy for him to do. Thank you, Bidji, for rounding out our study guide.

I think this is important because it really was the number one question people have for us, beyond candidates, beyond issues. It's really a concern about the system itself. And so I feel like this type of check-in will go a long way. We appreciate your time. We'll see you soon. See you soon instead. America actually will be in your feeds every Saturday with an interesting interview in politics or culture.

You can also watch these episodes on the Vox YouTube channel. Just go to YouTube.com slash Vox or click the link in the show notes. The best way to support this show is by becoming a Vox member. Members get a bonus segment on Patreon every week and they make our work possible. Go to Vox.com slash members to join. That's Vox.com slash members to join. This show was edited by Kasha Brasolian, fact-checked by Esther Gim and mixed by Shannon Mahoney. Christopher Snyder is our video editor and Kuh Nui is our senior art director.

Our executive producer is Christina Vallis and our theme music is by Breakmaster Cylinder. Additional support for Miranda, David Tadashore, and Nisha Chittal. I'm Ashton, and this is America Actually.