A new poll has found that Americans are more divided over whether President Trump should face prison time compared to Hunter Biden following their respective convictions in criminal trials. 

The survey of 1,088 U.S. adults conducted by the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research from June 20-24 revealed that 48% of adults believe Trump should head to prison after being found guilty in New York of 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, while 50% said he should not. 

Of those polled, nearly 8 of every 10 Democrats believe Trump should be placed behind bars, compared to only around 1 of every 10 Republicans. About half, 49%, of independents say he should, and 46% say he should not. 

Trump’s sentencing has been delayed from Thursday, three days before the Republican National Convention opens, to September at the earliest – when early voting in multiple states will already be underway. 

NEW YORK V. TRUMP: MERCHAN DELAYS SENTENCING HEARING UNTIL SEPTEMBER 

The poll also found that Americans are less divided over whether Hunter Biden should go to prison after being convicted of three felonies in federal court for lying about drug use when purchasing a gun. 

REPUBLICANS FURIOUS THAT HUNTER BIDEN REPORTEDLY IS SITTING IN ON WHITE HOUSE MEETINGS 

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds Americans are about evenly split on whether former President Trump should face prison time for his recent felony conviction, compared to Hunter Biden. (AP)

Six in 10 U.S. adults approve of Hunter Biden’s conviction, with much smaller political differences: About 6 in 10 Democrats approve, as do around 7 in 10 Republicans, according to The Associated Press. 

Hunter Biden was found guilty on all counts by a Delaware jury. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

About 6 in 10 U.S. adults also believe Hunter Biden should be sentenced to serve time in prison because of his conviction in this case, with Republicans slightly more likely than Democrats to agree that prison time is warranted. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Democrats are in quite a pickle.

Actually, they probably wish had pickled their 81-year-old standard bearer — President Biden — to preserve him until November. Biden set off a round of epic hand-wringing following his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump on June 27 and did little to quell concerns about his fitness in his subsequent interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

Republicans like me are somewhat amused by this newfound concern over Biden’s age, as it has been obvious for the years. But there was a curious lack of curiosity about it until the debate and the dreadful polls that followed showing Biden losing to Trump in a national landslide (the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and CNN all show Trump winning by at least six points).

There are now serious concerns about Biden’s capacity to function. Axios’ Alex Thompson reports one former White House aide saying that Biden is “staffed so closely that he’s lost all independence.” The New York Times says Biden’s “lapses appear to have grown more frequent, more pronounced and … more worrisome.”

Biden is not just a candidate, of course. He’s the current commander in chief ! And he has made clear that performing the duties of president (an overseas trip that ended nearly two weeks before the debate and a cold) made him too “exhausted” to debate Trump for 90 minutes. Biden is engaged in his job from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.each day, according to Axios, but is less reliable outside that time window.

Never mind the 3 a.m. call that Hillary Clinton once warned about. Americans are now hoping that the world’s bad actors don’t cause havoc in the late afternoon.

But Democrats aren’t responding to the alarm that the current president may be unable to execute his duties. If Biden had simply performed in a middling fashion against Trump and remained within striking distance in the post-debate polling, they’d be just fine sticking with a candidate who will be 86 at the end of his second term.

The Democratic freakout is all political. If you think Biden won’t be up to the job in January, you must believe he isn’t up to it today. So why aren’t there more calls for Biden to resign instead of just stand aside as a candidate? As of this writing, the Biden family appears dug in deeper than an Alabama tick. But Democrats are openly wondering: Would we be better off with Vice President Kamala Harris in November?

It’s a good question. Biden never trailed against Trump in 2020, but today he is consistently behind, suffers from a job approval in the high 30s, and faces an electorate that knows he cannot fulfill the duties of the office for four more years.

Let me stipulate that I don’t think Democrats can shift to anyone but Harris. She’s the first Black female vice president of the United States, and Democrats aren’t going to pass over her for another white male. Please. To skip her would be to admit she wasn’t qualified for her current job, the one Biden chose her for in 2020, and that’s simply not going to happen.

A Harris candidacy might have some appeal — she is far younger, which takes the fitness question off the table. She will get a blast of energy from a political media that hates Trump and has clearly moved on from Biden. And she might have the capacity to reenergize the minority voters who are souring on Biden in poll after poll.

But let’s not sugarcoat this — Harris is not a great politician. Her own approval rating is 37%, about where we find Biden. Her presidential campaign in 2020 was a complete flop, the high-water mark coming when she implied that Biden was a racist during a debate. And her weird speeches featuring the phrase “the significance of the passage of time” and “unburdened by what has been” have become the laughingstock of the internet.

Part of Biden’s 2020 appeal was that he at least he faked the idea of being a genial, middle of the road dealmaker who could resist the extremes of both parties. With Harris, you get an unapologetic, card-carrying progressive who embraces whatever bubbles up from the liberal fever swamps.

It would be reasonable for Democrats to conclude that they’d be better off with anyone but Biden. All of the party’s voters who would pick a stuffed buffalo over Trump will come to a new nominee, and a fresh face would remove the Biden age baggage.

But Biden did beat Trump once (by roughly 44,000 votes in three states) and did win the Democratic nomination in 2024. To remove him now may seem like a knee-jerk reaction to a nation craving strong leadership. There’s some chance Biden could win again, albeit a dwindling one if you believe the data-crunching forecasters. And it would be sort of comical for the self-appointed party of democracy to strip the nomination from someone who won it fair and square in a series of primary contests.

My money is on Biden remaining the nominee. His wife is on the cover of Vogue in August and his son Hunter gets to hang out at Camp David and the White House while preparing for his felony tax evasion trial in September. Something tells me you’ll have to drag the Biden family out of the White House by the fingernails.

Scott Jennings is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and a senior CNN political commentator. @ScottJenningsKY

With ongoing speculation about whether President Biden will remain the Democratic 2024 presidential nominee after a disastrous debate performance last week, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker is one of the names being raised as a replacement.

But the ongoing crisis at the southern border remains a top issue for voters across the country, and there are signs of the extent to which Pritzker might take a different approach to the crisis than the current administration.

Illinois has been one of the states hit by the knock-on effects of the immigration crisis, where migrants have moved through the southern border into cities like Chicago by the tens of thousands. 

HOW WOULD A PRESIDENT WHITMER HANDLE IMMIGRATION, BORDER CRISIS? 

While Pritzker has been broadly supportive of most of President Biden’s efforts at the southern border, he has also been one of a number of Democrats who have been critical of the federal government’s handling of the crisis.

In October, Pritzker sent a letter to Biden stressing that he believes in the right “of every human, especially those facing persecution, to find refuge and live with dignity in this great country of ours.” However, he warned that the crisis is “overwhelming” the states and criticized the federal government.

“Unfortunately, the welcome and aid Illinois has been providing to these asylum seekers has not been matched with support by the federal government. Most critically, the federal government’s lack of intervention and coordination at the border has created an untenable situation for Illinois,” he said.

“There is much more that can and must be done on a federal level to address a national humanitarian crisis that is currently being shouldered by state and local governments without support,” he said.

Specifically, he requested a number of actions, such as the waiving of fees for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and “significant” increases in logistical coordination, including the federal government taking over coordination of routing buses of migrants across the country.

DO THESE POTENTIAL BIDEN REPLACEMENTS HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO BEAT TRUMP?

Migrants are processed by the U.S. Border Patrol near the Jacumba Hot Springs after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border on June 13, 2024, near San Diego, California.  (Qian Weizhong/VCG via Getty Images)

Pritzker also called for a “federal coordinator and task force” to be based at the border and solely to be dedicated to migrant resettlement. In addition, he called (as Biden’s administration has done) for more funding to states, local governments and non-governmental organizations and the expediting of work permits.

He also called on Biden to approve requests from Illinois to allow waivers for Medicaid and housing vouchers for migrants.

In January, he, along with a number of other governors, wrote to Biden calling again for more federal action while backing the administration’s supplemental funding request to Congress. It also backed claims by the administration that the immigration system is broken and in need of reform.

“Without serious reform informed by evidence-based solutions, the challenges facing states and localities will only grow,” the letter said.

Pritzker was also supportive of the Biden administration’s move last year to redesignate Venezuela for TPS, meaning that hundreds of thousands more were protected from deportation and given work permits.

ILLINOIS GOVERNOR SAYS DEMOCRATIC VOTERS ARE ‘THROWING AWAY’ THEIR VOTES BY SUPPORTING ANYONE BUT BIDEN

“Reducing wait times for employment approvals and expanding protection status for those coming from Venezuela will get people working and on a path to building a better future for themselves and their families,” he said.

Meanwhile, at home, Pritzker has kept that focus on funding by approving significant amounts of funding to help the state deal with the number of migrants it is seeing.

As he was pushing Biden for more funding last year, he also announced that the state was investing $160 million to address the crisis, including money for shelter and wraparound services.

This year, Pritzker announced another $160 million for assistance, while taking another shot at inaction from Congress.

“With thousands of asylum seekers continuing to come to Chicago in desperate need of support and with Congress continuing to refuse to act—it is clear the state, county and city will have to do more to keep people safe,” he said.

Get the latest updates on the ongoing border crisis from the Fox News Digital immigration hub.