
What US adults think about Pope Leo XIV, according to a new AP-NORC poll
About two-thirds of American Catholics have a 'very' or 'somewhat' favorable view of Pope Leo, according to the new survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, while about 3 in 10 don't know enough to have an opinion. Very few Catholics — less than 1 in 10 — view him unfavorably.
Among Americans overall, plenty of people are still making up their minds about Pope Leo. But among those who do have an opinion, feelings about the first U.S.-born pope are overwhelmingly positive. The survey found that 44% of U.S. adults have a 'somewhat' or 'very' favorable view of Pope Leo XIV. A similar percentage say they don't know enough to have an opinion, and only about 1 in 10 see him unfavorably.
As he promises to work for unity in a polarized church, Americans with very different views about the future of the church are feeling optimistic about his pontificate. Terry Barber, a 50-year-old Catholic from Sacramento, California, hopes Leo will seek a 'more progressive and modern church' that is more accepting of all.
'I'm optimistic. Certainly, the first pope from the United States is significant,' said Barber, who identifies as a Democrat. 'Since he worked under the previous pope, I'm sure he has similar ideas, but certainly some that are original, of his own. I'm looking forward to seeing what, if any changes, come about under his leadership.'
Bipartisan appeal
About half of Democrats have a favorable view of the new pope, as do about 4 in 10 Republicans and independents. Republicans are a little more likely than Democrats to be reserving judgment. About half of Republicans say they don't know enough to have an opinion about the pope, compared to about 4 in 10 Democrats.
Republicans, notably, are no more likely than Democrats to have an unfavorable opinion of the pope. About 1 in 10 in each group view Pope Leo unfavorably.
Victoria Becude, 38, a Catholic and Republican from Florida, said she's excited about the first U.S.-born pope and hopes he can steer the country back to Catholic doctrine and make Americans proud.
'I'm rooting for him,' she said. 'I hope that America can get back to faith, and I hope he can do that.'
Being a political liberal or conservative, of course, isn't the same thing as identifying as a liberal or conservative Catholic. But the poll found no discernible partisan gap among Catholics on Pope Leo, and Catholics across the ideological spectrum have expressed hope that Leo will be able to heal some of the divisions that emerged during the pontificate of his predecessor, Pope Francis.
Pope Leo recently criticized the surge of nationalist political movements in the world as he prayed for reconciliation and dialogue — a message in line with his pledges to make the Catholic Church a symbol of peace.
Before becoming pope, Cardinal Robert Prevost presided over one of the most revolutionary reforms of Pope Francis' pontificate by having women serve on the Vatican board that vets nominations for bishops. He also has said decisively that women cannot be ordained as priests.
Donald Hallstone, 72, a Catholic who lives in Oregon, said he expects that Leo will continue to promote women in governance positions 'at a time when there's a shortage of priests' and other leaders in the church.
'It'd be great to see women in those roles,' he said. 'Women were not excluded in the first centuries.'
On the other hand, some right-wing U.S. Catholics hope Leo will focus on Catholic doctrinal opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion.
Becude, the Republican, said she's against same-sex relationships because she believes that unions should be between a man and a woman, something that Pope Leo has reiterated. Even though she describes herself as 'very conservative,' though, she's in favor of reproductive rights even when church teaching opposes abortion.
'I don't believe that they should stop women from having abortions,' she said. 'We should have our own rights because you don't know the circumstances behind the reason why a woman would want the abortion in the first place.'
Few have negative views — yet
There's plenty of room for views to shift as Leo's agenda as pope becomes clear.
Not all Americans have formed an opinion of the new pope yet; particularly, members of other religious groups are more likely to be still making up their minds. About half of born-again Protestants, mainline Protestants, and adults with no religious affiliation don't know enough to have an opinion about the pope, although relatively few — about 1 in 10 — in each group have an unfavorable view of him.
Older Americans — who are more likely to identify as Catholics — are also more likely than younger Americans to be fans of Leo's. About half of Americans ages 60 and older have a favorable view of Pope Leo, compared to about 4 in 10 Americans under 30.
But even so, only about 1 in 10 U.S. adults under 30 have an unfavorable view of the pope right now.
Mercedes Drink, 31, is from the pope's hometown of Chicago. She still hopes that women will become ordained under his pontificate.
'It's cool; I like him because he brings something different,' said Drink, who lives in Minnesota and identifies as being part of the 'religious nones' — atheists, agnostics, or nothing in particular.
'As a young woman, I hope that he can bring change … considering who he is, he brings something new to the table. I hope he opens the world's eyes to modernizing the church, bringing more people in, having more diversity.'
___
Henao reported from Princeton, N.J.
___
Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
___
The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scottish Sun
19 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
How Man Utd plan to fund £2billion new stadium with ‘sinister' tactic from the US
MANCHESTER UNITED are reportedly planning to fund their new £2billion stadium with a 'sinister' tactic from the US. The Red Devils announced plans for a mega 100,000-seater arena in March after deciding to replace Old Trafford. 3 Man Utd are planning to fund their new £2billion stadium with a 'sinister' US tactic Credit: Getty 3 The Red Devils announced plans for a 100,00-seater arena in March Credit: Reuters The new stadium will be the biggest in the country. And a local regeneration project is expected to create thousands of jobs and new homes. United believe once the £2bn stadium and surrounding areas are complete, it will generate £7bn annually into the economy. United's plans are expected to cost upwards of £4.2bn in total. READ MORE IN FOOTBALL GARN IN A MINUTE Garnacho SNUBS Champions League giants and demands Chelsea move or nothing But according to the Guardian, United are planning on taking a leaf from the US in terms of funding. In order to build their stadium, United must move a rail freight hub which currently sits on land needed for the project. And it's claimed they want the UK government to pay the estimated costs, which could reach £300million – but has previously been estimated at as much as £1bn. In the past, West Ham's London Stadium and Manchester City's Etihad Stadium were built with public money. BEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERS However, their homes were initially created for one-off sporting events, with the London Stadium serving the London Olympics in 2012, and the Etihad built for the Commonwealth Games in 2002. Politicians including Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham had previously declared that no public funds would be used to build United's new stadium. Sir Jim Ratcliffe explains his plans for the new Man Utd Stadium 3 TRANSFER NEWS LIVE - KEEP UP WITH ALL THE LATEST FROM A BUSY SUMMER WINDOW But as this cost would only be for clearing land needed for the arena, it would not fall under the technical billing of the 100,000-seater ground itself. This follows a 'sinister' trend across the pond in the US, where public funds are often handed to sport teams for new stadiums. In 2016, the Las Vegas Raiders were handed £555m when they were still a California-based franchise. Three years ago, the Buffalo Bills received £629m of public funding, while the Washington Commanders are currently in the process of landing £740m - which works out at $1bn. The money is handed out with the promise of returning major numbers to the economy. But Pat Garofalo, of the American Economic Liberties Project, told The Guardian: 'That's the story they tell to get the public money, but it's the big lie. 'We (in the US) export a lot of problematic things, and I really hope that we don't export that big lie.' The Guardian adds that Manchester United declined to comment.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk makes major U-Turn after promising to upend US politics with third party… and goes all in on Trump's successor
Elon Musk backtracked on his promise to remake US politics with his 'America Party' and instead plans to use his immense wealth to help JD Vance become the next president. The billionaire Tesla founder intends to shift his focus back to his companies after a tumultuous stint working with President Trump and has become wary of upsetting Republicans, according to The Wall Street Journal. Musk has decided to join other tech titans and rally behind the person they believe is the likely successor to Trump: Vice President JD Vance, who has made moves recently suggesting he will run in 2028. The former DOGE head spent nearly $300million helping to elect Trump in 2024, but the duo has a spectacular fallout earlier this year with Musk eventually writing on X that 'Trump is in the Epstein files.' With Trump term-limited as president, Musk is considering putting his massive wealth behind Vance in 2028. He would join other tech honchos who have doled out money to Vance such as Palantir CEO Peter Thiel, former PayPal COO David Sacks, Roku CEO Anthony Wood and entrepreneur Palmer Luckey. Recent polls show Vance as a clear front runner for the 2028 Republican nomination. Musk has been speaking to Vance in recent weeks, the Journal said, and believes launching the America Party for the 2026 midterms might jeopardize their relationship. Also, many suggest the work has not begun on the basics like getting his America Party on the ballot or organizing with potential supporters. 'So my hope is that by the time of the midterms, he's kind of come back into the fold,' Vance told The Gateway Pundit in a recent interview. Billionaire CEO Mark Cuban, who endorsed Musk's attempt to start a third party, has said he's heard nothing about the plans for a third party, complaints echoed by others who've offered to work with Musk. 'It's almost an eerie silence,' Libertarian National Committee Chair Steven Nekhaila, whose party has tried to engage and even join forces with Musk, said. 'It doesn't seem like anything has been in action, neither at the state level or at the ground level.' Those close to Musk cancelled a July meeting with a group that helps organize third-party campaigns and were told Musk wanted to focus more on business. Musk's potential backing of Vance despite his feud with Trump is the latest suggestion the VP and former Ohio Senator will attempt to make himself the successor to Trump. In June, Vance made a secret trip to Rupert Murdoch 's Montana ranch, but it wasn't to ride horses or loll about tasting wine. The vice president spoke with the 94-year-old media mogul, his son Lachlan Murdoch and a group of other Fox News executives at the $280 million estate on June 11, to the talk up Trump agenda. The specifics of the meeting and Vance's conversation with the group was not disclosed - but it appeared to be brief. Murdoch and other top executives are known for hosting powerful politicians across the summer at their sprawling estates. After the Murdoch meeting, the vice president and his wife, Usha, then took a hike, Montana State Auditor James Brown, who helped plan the trip, told Montana Talks. Musk's fallout with Trump appears to have simmered down since their blow up, with Trump saying in July that he wants success for the ex-'First Buddy' and his companies. Trump had previously threatened to take away the billions in government contracts granted to Musk's various companies including SpaceX, The Boring Company, xAI and Neuralink. The duo had a very public fallout over Trump's one big beautiful bill, which resulted in each man making threats against the other. But the president now says he wants Musk to 'thrive.' 'Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon's companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government. This is not so!,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before! The better they do, the better the USA does, and that's good for all of us,' Trump wrote. Musk's fallout with Trump appears to have simmered down as the summer goes on, with Trump saying in July that he wants success for the ex-'First Buddy' and his companies Earlier in July Trump added an additional threat: turning DOGE - the agency Musk founded - against him. 'I don't know. We'll have to take a look,' the president told Daily Mail when asked about deporting Musk. 'We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon,' Trump added. The America Party's founding came after Musk created an online poll on July 4 asking his followers whether to establish the new party. The results came back 65.4 percent in favor, leading Musk to make the announcement. 'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!' Musk wrote. 'When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.


Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
The US could break Russia at any time, without nukes or boots on the ground
So, Donald Trump has recently said that the US military would be part of Ukrainian security in the event of a peace deal, offering 'very good protection'. Then, shortly after, he said there would be no US 'boots on the ground'. Is this just shilly-shallying? No, actually. The fact is that the USA is perfectly capable of crippling the Russian military, on its own, without the use of nuclear weapons and without the need for a single US boot to touch Ukrainian soil – probably without any large number of US aviators needing to enter Ukrainian airspace, even. There was some doubt about this reality before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Looking at lists of weapons and units, it seemed that Russia had everything that the US had. America had its iconic, devastating Tomahawk cruise missile, the weapon which took down the air defences of Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gadaffi, much improved since then – but Russia had its Kalibr, supposedly even more capable in some variants. The USA had AWACS radar aircraft that could scan hundreds of miles of sky and direct fifth-generation stealth fighters to dominate that airspace: but Russia seemingly had Beriev A-50 AWACS planes and stealth jets of its own. Putin even had his claimed six 'super weapons', unstoppable by any existing defences: the nominally hypersonic Zircon and Kinzhal missiles among them. But it has turned out that the Kalibr is no Tomahawk. Then, Russia only had nine Berievs nominally left in service at the start of the invasion. It has lost at least three to enemy action and there is doubt as to whether even one Beriev can now be kept airborne around the clock. Ukrainian drone strikes on Moscow and other Russian targets should not have been possible if there had been Berievs watching overhead. Perhaps it is just that the A-50, as with so much supposedly advanced Russian equipment, doesn't really work.