fivethirtyeight--2020-04-01--How Is Joe Biden Remaking The 2016 Primary Map?

The 2020 Democratic primary is on the backburner .
Many states have postponed their primaries because of the spread of the coronavirus , but there isn ’ t much question as to who will win the nomination .
For all intents and purposes , former Vice President Joe Biden is now the presumptive nominee .
He has amassed a more or less insurmountable lead in the pledged delegate count , 1,201 to Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ s 888 , according to ABC News .
And he ’ s done it by winning places Sanders won handily in 2016 and even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won four years ago .
So let ’ s take a deep dive into Biden ’ s map so far and look at where he ’ s outperformed Clinton and where he ’ s gained ground from Sanders .
We dug into county-level data for the 18 states that have already held primaries and compared their 2020 and 2016 results .
Bottom line : Biden held onto much of the turf that Clinton won in 2016 , but he also captured a lot of territory that Sanders carried four years ago .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ success can be explained by his dominance in areas with larger shares of white voters without a college degree .
Biden has also done better among college-educated white voters than Sanders has in 2020 and better in rural areas than Clinton did in 2016 .
Let ’ s start with the topline comparisons between the 2020 Democratic primary and the 2016 race between Sanders and Clinton .
In the map below , you ’ ll see counties color-coded by whether : • Clinton won them in 2016 and Biden in 2020 .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 .
• Sanders won them in 2016 and Biden in 2020 .
• Clinton won them in 2016 and Sanders in 2020 .
• A candidate other than Biden or Sanders won them in 2020 .
In fact , Biden finished first in 93 percent of the counties that Clinton won in 2016 .
On top of that , he won 83 percent of the counties that Sanders carried in 2016 , meaning that Sanders held onto very little of what he won last time around .
These gains were especially apparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head-to-head portion of the race , starting with the primaries on March 10 .
In the six states that voted on March 10 or later — Arizona , Florida , Illinois , Michigan , Mississippi and Missouri — Sanders won about half of all counties in those states in 2016 , but just three in 2020 .
Although Sanders did win some places that Clinton carried in 2016 , he gained relatively little ground outside of California and Texas , and Sanders ’ s additions in Texas weren ’ t enough to help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden and Clinton ’ s performance is most obvious in areas with sizable shares of white voters who don ’ t have a college degree .
And as you can see in the chart below , the larger the share of a county ’ s population that is white without a college degree , the better Biden tended to perform compared to Clinton , even when Biden ’ s vote share in that particular county was smaller than Clinton ’ s .
Exit polls also underscore this trend , especially if we look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had winnowed after the February contests .
In the 10 states that voted in March for which we have both 2016 and 2020 exit poll data , Sanders edged out Clinton among white voters without a college degree in 2016 , 54 percent to 44 percent .
But in 2020 , Biden beat Sanders , 40 percent to 33 percent in those same states .
Even though we don ’ t have complete exit poll data from Michigan , the result there may best capture just how much ground Biden made up with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared to Clinton ’ s performance with this group in 2016 .
Four years ago , Sanders won the state by about 1 point in a huge upset .
He carried 73 of 83 counties while winning 57 percent of white voters without a college degree , per the 2016 exit poll .
But in 2020 , Biden won every county in Michigan en route to beating Sanders by nearly 17 points .
The partial Michigan exit poll also found the former vice president won a majority of white voters without a college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just white voters without a college degree with whom Biden overperformed .
He also did well with college-educated white voters , although Clinton also did well with this group in 2016 , so Biden ’ s gains over Clinton are less pronounced .
In fact , Biden ’ s gains here may actually be better explained by Sanders ’ s comparatively poor performance among this demographic .
As the share of the college-educated white population in a county increased , the worse Sanders tended to perform compared to his 2016 vote share .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ County , Vermont , where Sanders ’ s hometown of Burlington is located .
Nearly half ( 47 percent ) of the county ’ s population is white and has a college degree , and although Sanders still easily won there , his vote share fell more than 30 points ( 85 percent in 2016 to 52 percent in 2020 ) .
Or if we consider states that voted once it became a two-horse race , take Boone County , Missouri , home to the University of Missouri , where a sizable portion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 39 percent ) .
There , Sanders dropped 16 points , from 61 percent in 2016 to 45 percent in 2020 .
The exit polls also point to Sanders ’ s loss in support among white college-educated voters .
In the 10 states that voted in March for which we had both 2016 and 2020 exit poll data , Sanders narrowly lost to Clinton among white voters with a college degree , 47 percent to 51 percent .
In 2020 , he trailed Biden 23 percent to 39 percent .
One last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s map : His strength in less populous areas relative to Clinton .
We categorized counties by whether they belonged to a metropolitan area with at least 500,000 people , and found that Biden had a larger margin over Sanders in more sparsely populated areas than Clinton did in 2016 .
Biden led Sanders in these areas , 46 percent to 28 percent — an 18-point lead .
Though Clinton also led Sanders in these areas in 2016 , 53 percent to 43 percent , her lead was much smaller — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind Clinton in counties within large metro areas : She edged Sanders 57 percent to 42 percent , while Biden led Sanders 42 percent to 31 percent .
But in contests on or after March 10 when the 2020 primary became more of a two-person race , Biden outpaced Clinton in a number of large metro counties in Illinois , Michigan and Missouri .
However , Biden still fell short of Clinton in Arizona and Florida , which might speak to his lower support among Latino voters .
( Biden ’ s vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton ’ s 2016 performance . )
On the whole , Biden has essentially matched Clinton ’ s strength in bigger metro areas while improving on her performance in less populous places .
His strength among white voters without a college degree helps explain much of his success , especially given that they ’ re more likely to live in rural areas .
Biden ’ s relatively strong performance among college-educated white voters also helped him build a winning coalition across the country .
Meanwhile , Sanders ’ s weaker showing among white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult for him to win as the candidate field narrowed in 2020 .
The end result ?
A race that ’ s just not as competitive as the 2016 Democratic primary .

The 2020 Democratic primary is on the backburner. Many states have postponed their primaries because of the spread of the coronavirus, but there isn’t much question as to who will win the nomination.
For all intents and purposes, former Vice President Joe Biden is now the presumptive nominee. He has amassed a more or less insurmountable lead in the pledged delegate count, 1,201 to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s 888, according to ABC News. And he’s done it by winning places Sanders won handily in 2016 and even overperforming Hillary Clinton in some areas she won four years ago.
So let’s take a deep dive into Biden’s map so far and look at where he’s outperformed Clinton and where he’s gained ground from Sanders. We dug into county-level data for the 18 states that have already held primaries and compared their 2020 and 2016 results.
Bottom line: Biden held onto much of the turf that Clinton won in 2016, but he also captured a lot of territory that Sanders carried four years ago. We found that much of Biden’s success can be explained by his dominance in areas with larger shares of white voters without a college degree. Biden has also done better among college-educated white voters than Sanders has in 2020 and better in rural areas than Clinton did in 2016.
Let’s start with the topline comparisons between the 2020 Democratic primary and the 2016 race between Sanders and Clinton. In the map below, you’ll see counties color-coded by whether:
Clinton won them in 2016 and Biden in 2020. Sanders carried them in both 2016 and 2020. Sanders won them in 2016 and Biden in 2020. Clinton won them in 2016 and Sanders in 2020. A candidate other than Biden or Sanders won them in 2020.
In fact, Biden finished first in 93 percent of the counties that Clinton won in 2016. On top of that, he won 83 percent of the counties that Sanders carried in 2016, meaning that Sanders held onto very little of what he won last time around. These gains were especially apparent once Biden and Sanders moved into the head-to-head portion of the race, starting with the primaries on March 10. In the six states that voted on March 10 or later — Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Mississippi and Missouri — Sanders won about half of all counties in those states in 2016, but just three in 2020. Although Sanders did win some places that Clinton carried in 2016, he gained relatively little ground outside of California and Texas, and Sanders’s additions in Texas weren’t enough to help him win there.
The difference between Biden and Clinton’s performance is most obvious in areas with sizable shares of white voters who don’t have a college degree. And as you can see in the chart below, the larger the share of a county’s population that is white without a college degree, the better Biden tended to perform compared to Clinton, even when Biden’s vote share in that particular county was smaller than Clinton’s.
Exit polls also underscore this trend, especially if we look at the race once the candidate field had winnowed after the February contests. In the 10 states that voted in March for which we have both 2016 and 2020 exit poll data, Sanders edged out Clinton among white voters without a college degree in 2016, 54 percent to 44 percent. But in 2020, Biden beat Sanders, 40 percent to 33 percent in those same states.
Even though we don’t have complete exit poll data from Michigan, the result there may best capture just how much ground Biden made up with white voters without a college degree, compared to Clinton’s performance with this group in 2016. Four years ago, Sanders won the state by about 1 point in a huge upset. He carried 73 of 83 counties while winning 57 percent of white voters without a college degree, per the 2016 exit poll. But in 2020, Biden won every county in Michigan en route to beating Sanders by nearly 17 points. The partial Michigan exit poll also found the former vice president won a majority of white voters without a college degree.
But it wasn’t just white voters without a college degree with whom Biden overperformed. He also did well with college-educated white voters, although Clinton also did well with this group in 2016, so Biden’s gains over Clinton are less pronounced. In fact, Biden’s gains here may actually be better explained by Sanders’s comparatively poor performance among this demographic. As the share of the college-educated white population in a county increased, the worse Sanders tended to perform compared to his 2016 vote share.
Take Sanders’s performance in Chittenden County, Vermont, where Sanders’s hometown of Burlington is located. Nearly half (47 percent) of the county’s population is white and has a college degree, and although Sanders still easily won there, his vote share fell more than 30 points (85 percent in 2016 to 52 percent in 2020). Or if we consider states that voted once it became a two-horse race, take Boone County, Missouri, home to the University of Missouri, where a sizable portion of the population is college-educated and white (39 percent). There, Sanders dropped 16 points, from 61 percent in 2016 to 45 percent in 2020.
The exit polls also point to Sanders’s loss in support among white college-educated voters. In the 10 states that voted in March for which we had both 2016 and 2020 exit poll data, Sanders narrowly lost to Clinton among white voters with a college degree, 47 percent to 51 percent. In 2020, he trailed Biden 23 percent to 39 percent.
One last area we want to point to on Biden’s map: His strength in less populous areas relative to Clinton. We categorized counties by whether they belonged to a metropolitan area with at least 500,000 people, and found that Biden had a larger margin over Sanders in more sparsely populated areas than Clinton did in 2016. Biden led Sanders in these areas, 46 percent to 28 percent — an 18-point lead. Though Clinton also led Sanders in these areas in 2016, 53 percent to 43 percent, her lead was much smaller — 10 points.
Biden was a bit behind Clinton in counties within large metro areas: She edged Sanders 57 percent to 42 percent, while Biden led Sanders 42 percent to 31 percent. But in contests on or after March 10 when the 2020 primary became more of a two-person race, Biden outpaced Clinton in a number of large metro counties in Illinois, Michigan and Missouri. However, Biden still fell short of Clinton in Arizona and Florida, which might speak to his lower support among Latino voters. (Biden’s vote share in Mississippi was nearly even with Clinton’s 2016 performance.)
On the whole, Biden has essentially matched Clinton’s strength in bigger metro areas while improving on her performance in less populous places. His strength among white voters without a college degree helps explain much of his success, especially given that they’re more likely to live in rural areas. Biden’s relatively strong performance among college-educated white voters also helped him build a winning coalition across the country. Meanwhile, Sanders’s weaker showing among white voters regardless of education levels made it difficult for him to win as the candidate field narrowed in 2020. The end result? A race that’s just not as competitive as the 2016 Democratic primary.
Likhitha Butchireddygari contributed research.
FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast: Why Trump’s Approval Rating Has Increased


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-01--What Explains The Bump In Trump’s Approval Ratings?

On Friday , President Trump ’ s approval rating hit 45.8 percent — the highest since January 25 , 2017 , according to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval tracker .
The timing suggests that the increase in his popularity is related to his handling of the coronavirus pandemic , which most Americans think he is managing well .
Trump may be experiencing what political scientists call the “ rally-around-the-flag ” effect , when national leaders temporarily get more popular amid international crises .
Usually , you hear about people rallying around the flag after terrorist attacks or outbreaks of war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that it too poses an imminent threat to American safety .
“ When a country is faced with a common threat that touches everybody , there is a tendency to unify and to look toward the leader , ” Shoon Murray , a political scientist who has studied the rally-around-the-flag effect , told FiveThirtyEight .
“ The sense of emergency is now so high and widespread that it ’ s possible people could rally around the president if he was perceived as taking steps in a nonpartisan way to mitigate the crisis.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern precedent for this pandemic , but a natural disaster might be the closest thing — both are naturally occurring “ acts of God ” that do not discriminate in the havoc they wreak — and there is evidence that natural disasters can produce the kind of national unity that leads to a rally-around-the-flag effect .
A working paper by Margaret Boittin , Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Stephen Utych found that the Nepalese government became more popular in the wake of that country ’ s 2015 earthquakes .
But natural disasters don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the context of hurricanes in the U.S. , we ’ ve seen that the government ’ s response to disasters can drive public opinion either up or down .
For instance , governors who were perceived as handling relief efforts in their states well , like then-Florida Gov .
Jeb Bush in 2004 , saw their approval ratings skyrocket .
But others , like then-Louisiana Gov .
Kathleen Blanco , who was criticized for her slow response to Hurricane Katrina , emerged from the disasters with their reputations in tatters .
Essentially , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , extremely important issue on which to grade their leaders ’ performance .
Despite Trump ’ s solid approval numbers on his handling of the coronavirus pandemic , Americans aren ’ t as enthusiastic about it as residents of some other countries are about their leaders ’ responses .
That could explain why Trump ’ s overall approval rating hasn ’ t risen nearly as much as some other world leaders ’ .
According to Morning Consult , Trump ’ s net approval rating rose 5 percentage points from March 11 ( the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus crisis a pandemic ) to March 24 , ranking sixth among the nine major world leaders Morning Consult polled .
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson , Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau all experienced increases of more than 20 points in their net approval ratings .
Other American politicians are seeing huge increases in their popularity as well .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , who has been addressing one of the nation ’ s worst COVID-19 outbreaks with regular , nationally televised briefings of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surge in support , according to Siena College polling .
In February , only 44 percent of registered New York voters viewed Cuomo favorably , while 50 percent viewed him unfavorably .
But last week , 71 percent ( ! )
said they had a favorable opinion of Cuomo , and just 23 percent said their opinion was unfavorable .
One possible explanation for Trump ’ s relatively small popularity boost is that he ’ s been criticized for not taking the pandemic seriously , especially in the early going — which could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approval ratings on the coronavirus specifically .
Another ( related ) explanation is our old friend partisan polarization .
Throughout his presidency , Trump ’ s approval rating has proven extremely difficult to dislodge from its usual 39-to-44-percent range ; put simply , Americans know Donald Trump , and they ’ ve made up their minds about him .
And because he already enjoys virtually the maximum possible support among Republicans , he would have to make headway among Democrats and independents to further increase his approval rating .
But Democrats ’ antipathy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genuine , persuadable independent voters make up only a small share of the population .
“ My guess is that Trump could get a limited rally if he were to act truly presidential and nonpartisan , ” Murray concluded .
“ It seems unlikely , though , that he will get the large rally that accompanied the start of the Gulf War or the attacks on 9/11.
” Maybe a bigger question is whether Trump can sustain this higher approval rating , especially as critiques of how he ’ s handling the crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election heats up .
Political science research gives us some clues to predicting how long such a bump might last .
One study found that heightened national unity triggers the rally-around-the-flag effect , but how long the president ’ s dissenters stay quiet dictates its duration .
Assuming that Democrats continue to criticize Trump ’ s coronavirus response , this suggests Trump will fall back to earth relatively soon .
If the metaphor of the U.S. being at war with the coronavirus is an apt one , a higher number of deaths from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rating down as well .
A long line of political science research shows that high numbers of American casualties make a war , and the president waging it , less popular .
On the flip side , other studies argue that a wartime president ’ s approval rating will remain high as long as the war is seen as successful .
At this point , though , the long-term effects of the pandemic on Trump ’ s political prospects are far from clear .
As long as Trump is seen as responding effectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will reap the political benefits .
But if Americans come to see him as bungling the crisis — if they blame him for high death tolls or widespread unemployment , for instance — Trump could wind up even less popular than he was before .

On Friday, President Trump’s approval rating hit 45.8 percent — the highest since January 25, 2017, according to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker. The timing suggests that the increase in his popularity is related to his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which most Americans think he is managing well.
Trump may be experiencing what political scientists call the “rally-around-the-flag” effect, when national leaders temporarily get more popular amid international crises. Usually, you hear about people rallying around the flag after terrorist attacks or outbreaks of war, but the coronavirus pandemic could qualify in that it too poses an imminent threat to American safety. “When a country is faced with a common threat that touches everybody, there is a tendency to unify and to look toward the leader,” Shoon Murray, a political scientist who has studied the rally-around-the-flag effect, told FiveThirtyEight. “The sense of emergency is now so high and widespread that it’s possible people could rally around the president if he was perceived as taking steps in a nonpartisan way to mitigate the crisis.”
FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast: Why Trump’s Approval Rating Has Increased
There isn’t really a modern precedent for this pandemic, but a natural disaster might be the closest thing — both are naturally occurring “acts of God” that do not discriminate in the havoc they wreak — and there is evidence that natural disasters can produce the kind of national unity that leads to a rally-around-the-flag effect. A working paper by Margaret Boittin, Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Stephen Utych found that the Nepalese government became more popular in the wake of that country’s 2015 earthquakes.
But natural disasters don’t always produce rally-around-the-flag effects. In the context of hurricanes in the U.S., we’ve seen that the government’s response to disasters can drive public opinion either up or down. For instance, governors who were perceived as handling relief efforts in their states well, like then-Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in 2004, saw their approval ratings skyrocket. But others, like then-Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, who was criticized for her slow response to Hurricane Katrina, emerged from the disasters with their reputations in tatters. Essentially, a national emergency gives people a new, extremely important issue on which to grade their leaders’ performance.
Despite Trump’s solid approval numbers on his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, Americans aren’t as enthusiastic about it as residents of some other countries are about their leaders’ responses. That could explain why Trump’s overall approval rating hasn’t risen nearly as much as some other world leaders’. According to Morning Consult, Trump’s net approval rating rose 5 percentage points from March 11 (the day the World Health Organization officially declared the coronavirus crisis a pandemic) to March 24, ranking sixth among the nine major world leaders Morning Consult polled. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau all experienced increases of more than 20 points in their net approval ratings.
Other American politicians are seeing huge increases in their popularity as well. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has been addressing one of the nation’s worst COVID-19 outbreaks with regular, nationally televised briefings of his own, has experienced a huge surge in support, according to Siena College polling. In February, only 44 percent of registered New York voters viewed Cuomo favorably, while 50 percent viewed him unfavorably. But last week, 71 percent (!) said they had a favorable opinion of Cuomo, and just 23 percent said their opinion was unfavorable.
One possible explanation for Trump’s relatively small popularity boost is that he’s been criticized for not taking the pandemic seriously, especially in the early going — which could also be the reason for his good-but-still-below-average approval ratings on the coronavirus specifically. Another (related) explanation is our old friend partisan polarization. Throughout his presidency, Trump’s approval rating has proven extremely difficult to dislodge from its usual 39-to-44-percent range; put simply, Americans know Donald Trump, and they’ve made up their minds about him. And because he already enjoys virtually the maximum possible support among Republicans, he would have to make headway among Democrats and independents to further increase his approval rating. But Democrats’ antipathy toward Trump is well documented, and genuine, persuadable independent voters make up only a small share of the population. “My guess is that Trump could get a limited rally if he were to act truly presidential and nonpartisan,” Murray concluded. “It seems unlikely, though, that he will get the large rally that accompanied the start of the Gulf War or the attacks on 9/11.”
Maybe a bigger question is whether Trump can sustain this higher approval rating, especially as critiques of how he’s handling the crisis are likely to intensify as the general election heats up. Political science research gives us some clues to predicting how long such a bump might last. One study found that heightened national unity triggers the rally-around-the-flag effect, but how long the president’s dissenters stay quiet dictates its duration. Assuming that Democrats continue to criticize Trump’s coronavirus response, this suggests Trump will fall back to earth relatively soon.
If the metaphor of the U.S. being at war with the coronavirus is an apt one, a higher number of deaths from COVID-19 may bring Trump’s approval rating down as well. A long line of political science research shows that high numbers of American casualties make a war, and the president waging it, less popular. On the flip side, other studies argue that a wartime president’s approval rating will remain high as long as the war is seen as successful.
At this point, though, the long-term effects of the pandemic on Trump’s political prospects are far from clear. As long as Trump is seen as responding effectively to the threat of COVID-19, he will reap the political benefits. But if Americans come to see him as bungling the crisis — if they blame him for high death tolls or widespread unemployment, for instance — Trump could wind up even less popular than he was before.


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-01--The U.S. Has Held Elections During Times Of Crisis Before. Here’s What Happened.

Galen Druke speaks to elections analyst , Geoffrey Skelley , about how the United States has handled elections in times @ @ @ @ @ , from wars to weather disasters .

The U.S. Has Held Elections During Times Of Crisis Before. Here’s What Happened.
Galen Druke speaks to FiveThirtyEight elections analyst Geoffrey Skelley about how the United States has handled past elections in times of crisis, from wars to weather disasters.


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-02--Why The Progressive Left Fits So Uncomfortably Within The Democratic Party

With dozens of candidates trading endless jabs over policies like Medicare for All and systems like capitalism and socialism , this primary season has highlighted a growing divide within the Democratic Party about where it ’ s headed , both in this election and future ones .
But now that former Vice President Joe Biden seemingly has a lock on the nomination , he may soon be making overtures to other candidates ’ supporters as he looks ahead to the general election .
So what are the fault lines splitting Democratic voters ?
And is the Democratic Party as splintered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I analyzed data from a survey fielded in November 2019 by two liberal organizations , YouGov Blue and Data for Progress , that asked 2,900 likely Democratic primary voters how favorably they felt about 13 politicians and organizations on a five-point scale .
( Full disclosure : I am a fellow at Data for Progress . )
Respondents were asked to weigh in on labor unions , Wall Street , the Democratic National Committee , the # MeToo movement , the Black Lives Matter movement , Ivy League universities , Facebook , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi , centrist Sen. Joe Manchin , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Socialists of America and former President Barack Obama .
This question let me aggregate respondents ’ favorability ratings to understand how someone who gives high ratings to Schumer might rate , say , Ocasio-Cortez .
And by running a statistical analysis known as principal component analysis , I was able to identify the types of organizations and individuals that respondents tend to have similar opinions about .
For example , if someone rated Schumer positively , they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and positive feelings about labor unions were correlated with positive feelings about the DSA .
By linking people according to their shared feelings , I saw two clear poles emerge within the Democratic Party : the “ establishment ” and the “ progressive left.
” A third group also emerged , and while it ’ s not as clearly defined as the other two , it has some overlap with the establishment and tends to be more fond Wall Street , so I ’ m calling that “ neoliberals.
” ” The establishment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rated the DNC , Schumer , Pelosi and Obama highly , and as you can see , those who rated these establishment figures highly tended to be less enthused about the groups and individuals associated with the progressive left .
The progressive left gives high ratings to the DSA , Ocasio-Cortez , labor unions , Black Lives Matter and the # MeToo movement .
As you can see in the charts below , this feeling more favorably toward these activist groups meant respondents were less likely to feel warmly about the establishment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorably toward Manchin and Wall Street .
In particular , the data suggests a tight connection between Ocasio-Cortez and the DSA , which may not be surprising considering her membership in the organization , but her rise to national prominence and the fact that progressive respondents tend to feel positively about both her and the organization speaks to the DSA ’ s increasingly high-profile role in the party .
There was a third group , though .
The neoliberal group wasn ’ t as clearly defined as the other two groups , although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overlap with the establishment wing of the party .
It is a bit more of a hodgepodge , though , in terms of what types of groups and individuals were rated highly ( for example , the connection between rating Wall Street , the Ivy League and Manchin all highly is not necessarily clear ) , although it ’ s possible that the people in this group are part of a more affluent wing of the party .
This group was also less likely to give favorable ratings to individuals and groups associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly is this progressive left that is polarizing to both the establishment and the neoliberal wings of the party ?
Well , we know this wing of the party feels warmly toward ideologies like democratic socialism and supports political insurgents like Ocasio-Cortez , so they may find themselves at odds with party leadership .
But we can also use our survey data to look at how respondents answered a variety of socioeconomic , demographic and attitudinal questions .
Given the warm feelings this group has toward democratic socialism and the rising importance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on analyzing characteristics of respondents who describe themselves as socialists .
For starters , they were more likely to be male than female and more likely to be white than nonwhite .
( Though identifying as Hispanic or Latinx also made it somewhat more likely that a person would say they ’ re a socialist . )
In general , younger respondents were more likely to adopt the socialist label , as were those who endorsed left-leaning outlooks , like the idea that it ’ s unjust for a society to have billionaires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Many also said they had experienced sexual harassment , with 63 percent of women and 33 percent of men saying it had happened to them .
Party loyalists were also less likely to identify as socialists , which could be a problem for Democrats if Biden is indeed the nominee — he will not be able to take this group ’ s support for granted and may have to make a special effort to win their votes in the general election .
There are also a few interesting places where I didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideas .
For example , although some of Sen. Bernie Sanders ’ s supporters have a history of attacking women online and on the campaign trail , holding sexist attitudes didn ’ t make an individual more likely to identify as socialist in this survey , suggesting that the group that ’ s lashing out may be a minority of voters who hold views similar to the Vermont senator ’ s .
At the same time , despite progressive leaders like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez calling for a Green New Deal , there wasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clean energy or a federal green jobs guarantee were more likely to see themselves as socialists than those who did not support these Green New Deal policies .
But this lack of coherent policy preferences isn ’ t actually that surprising ; there ’ s a large body of political science research that suggests that broad identities and labels are much more meaningful to individuals than specific policy preferences .
And labels like progressive left and democratic socialist are the product of a very conscious movement that ’ s been years in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a political movement either .
The DSA , for instance , has been instrumental in shaping what it means to be a “ democratic socialist ” in the U.S. , but it isn ’ t actually a political party .
So even though individuals like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are often thought of as the vanguards of progressive left politics , it ’ s important to remember that think tanks like the People ’ s Policy Project and Data for Progress , media outlets such as Current Affairs and Jacobin , and the popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a role in shaping what it means to be part of the progressive left .
Much like the Tea Party forged a transformation in the Republican Party , this new socialist wing of the Democratic Party is pushing for its own revolution .
But it ’ s not clear how strong the progressive left ’ s current configuration is .
Movements like # MeToo and Black Lives Matter are well-liked within the progressive wing of the party , but leftist activists and politicians haven ’ t always prioritized issues of race , gender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this survey , people who held racial biases weren ’ t really any more or less likely to identify as socialist .
It ’ s possible , then , that the progressive left risks creating a less diverse movement , particularly as it ’ s already weighted toward white , male supporters .
And that could be a problem if the group wants to win races in a party whose coalition is largely built on women and nonwhite voters .
For the Democratic Party as a whole , this growing divide between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left is perhaps one of the most important challenges it will have to face — not only going into this upcoming presidential election , but also in elections to come .
And already , we ’ ve seen that when the party establishment refuses to budge — as , for example , when it continued to back Rep. Dan Lipinski in Illinois despite his opposition to major Democratic planks like abortion access and the Affordable Care Act — organizations such as Justice Democrats are willing to primary “ their own ” ( challenger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This all suggests that if the establishment won ’ t willingly make space for ideas like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal , then a growing progressive left may attempt to make that space for itself .

With dozens of candidates trading endless jabs over policies like Medicare for All and systems like capitalism and socialism, this primary season has highlighted a growing divide within the Democratic Party about where it’s headed, both in this election and future ones.
But now that former Vice President Joe Biden seemingly has a lock on the nomination, he may soon be making overtures to other candidates’ supporters as he looks ahead to the general election. So what are the fault lines splitting Democratic voters? And is the Democratic Party as splintered as we think?
To answer this, I analyzed data from a survey fielded in the summer of 2019 by two liberal organizations, YouGov Blue and Data for Progress, that asked 2,900 likely Democratic primary voters how favorably they felt about 13 politicians and organizations on a five-point scale. (Full disclosure: I am a fellow at Data for Progress.) Respondents were asked to weigh in on labor unions, Wall Street, the Democratic National Committee, the #MeToo movement, the Black Lives Matter movement, Ivy League universities, Facebook, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, centrist Sen. Joe Manchin, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Socialists of America and former President Barack Obama.
This question let me aggregate respondents’ favorability ratings to understand how someone who gives high ratings to Schumer might rate, say, Ocasio-Cortez. And by running a statistical analysis known as principal component analysis, I was able to identify the types of organizations and individuals that respondents tend to have similar opinions about. For example, if someone rated Schumer positively, they were also likely to rate Pelosi positively, and positive feelings about labor unions were correlated with positive feelings about the DSA. By linking people according to their shared feelings, I saw two clear poles emerge within the Democratic Party: the “establishment” and the “progressive left.” A third group also emerged, and while it’s not as clearly defined as the other two, it has some overlap with the establishment and tends to be more fond Wall Street, so I’m calling that “neoliberals.”
The establishment includes those likely Democratic primary voters who rated the DNC, Schumer, Pelosi and Obama highly, and as you can see, those who rated these establishment figures highly tended to be less enthused about the groups and individuals associated with the progressive left.
The progressive left gives high ratings to the DSA, Ocasio-Cortez, labor unions, Black Lives Matter and the #MeToo movement. As you can see in the charts below, this feeling more favorably toward these activist groups meant respondents were less likely to feel warmly about the establishment, and were even more unlikely to feel favorably toward Manchin and Wall Street. In particular, the data suggests a tight connection between Ocasio-Cortez and the DSA, which may not be surprising considering her membership in the organization, but her rise to national prominence and the fact that progressive respondents tend to feel positively about both her and the organization speaks to the DSA’s increasingly high-profile role in the party.
There was a third group, though. The neoliberal group wasn’t as clearly defined as the other two groups, although as I mentioned earlier, there is overlap with the establishment wing of the party. It is a bit more of a hodgepodge, though, in terms of what types of groups and individuals were rated highly (for example, the connection between rating Wall Street, the Ivy League and Manchin all highly is not necessarily clear), although it’s possible that the people in this group are part of a more affluent wing of the party. This group was also less likely to give favorable ratings to individuals and groups associated with the progressive left.
So who exactly is this progressive left that is polarizing to both the establishment and the neoliberal wings of the party?
Well, we know this wing of the party feels warmly toward ideologies like democratic socialism and supports political insurgents like Ocasio-Cortez, so they may find themselves at odds with party leadership.
But we can also use our survey data to look at how respondents answered a variety of socioeconomic, demographic and attitudinal questions. Given the warm feelings this group has toward democratic socialism and the rising importance of group identities in politics, I focused on analyzing characteristics of respondents who describe themselves as socialists. For starters, they were more likely to be male than female and more likely to be white than nonwhite. (Though identifying as Hispanic or Latinx also made it somewhat more likely that a person would say they’re a socialist.) In general, younger respondents were more likely to adopt the socialist label, as were those who endorsed left-leaning outlooks, like the idea that it’s unjust for a society to have billionaires while others are living in poverty. Many also said they had experienced sexual harassment, with 63 percent of women and 33 percent of men saying it had happened to them.
Party loyalists were also less likely to identify as socialists, which could be a problem for Democrats if Biden is indeed the nominee — he will not be able to take this group’s support for granted and may have to make a special effort to win their votes in the general election.
There are also a few interesting places where I didn’t find much connection between groups or ideas. For example, although some of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s supporters have a history of attacking women online and on the campaign trail, holding sexist attitudes didn’t make an individual more likely to identify as socialist in this survey, suggesting that the group that’s lashing out may be a minority of voters who hold views similar to the Vermont senator’s.
At the same time, despite progressive leaders like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez calling for a Green New Deal, there wasn’t evidence that individuals committed to clean energy or a federal green jobs guarantee were more likely to see themselves as socialists than those who did not support these Green New Deal policies. But this lack of coherent policy preferences isn’t actually that surprising; there’s a large body of political science research that suggests that broad identities and labels are much more meaningful to individuals than specific policy preferences.
And labels like progressive left and democratic socialist are the product of a very conscious movement that’s been years in the making. It’s not entirely a political movement either. The DSA, for instance, has been instrumental in shaping what it means to be a “democratic socialist” in the U.S., but it isn’t actually a political party. So even though individuals like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are often thought of as the vanguards of progressive left politics, it’s important to remember that think tanks like the People’s Policy Project and Data for Progress, media outlets such as Current Affairs and Jacobin, and the popular podcast Chapo Trap House have also played a role in shaping what it means to be part of the progressive left. Much like the Tea Party forged a transformation in the Republican Party, this new socialist wing of the Democratic Party is pushing for its own revolution.
But it’s not clear how strong the progressive left’s current configuration is. Movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter are well-liked within the progressive wing of the party, but leftist activists and politicians haven’t always prioritized issues of race, gender or sexuality. And in fact, in this survey, people who held racial biases weren’t really any more or less likely to identify as socialist. It’s possible, then, that the progressive left risks creating a less diverse movement, particularly as it’s already weighted toward white, male supporters. And that could be a problem if the group wants to win races in a party whose coalition is largely built on women and nonwhite voters.
For the Democratic Party as a whole, this growing divide between the establishment and neoliberals versus the progressive left is perhaps one of the most important challenges it will have to face — not only going into this upcoming presidential election, but also in elections to come. And already, we’ve seen that when the party establishment refuses to budge — as, for example, when it continued to back Rep. Dan Lipinski in Illinois despite his opposition to major Democratic planks like abortion access and the Affordable Care Act — organizations such as Justice Democrats are willing to primary “their own” (challenger Marie Newman beat the eight-term representative). This all suggests that if the establishment won’t willingly make space for ideas like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, then a growing progressive left may attempt to make that space for itself.
CORRECTION (April 2, 2020, 11:10 a.m.): An earlier version of this article misstated the field dates of the YouGov Blue/Data for Progress survey. It was in the field in June and July of 2019, not November.
FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast: US has held elections during times of crisis before


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-02--Politics Podcast: Why Forecasting COVID-19 Is Harder Than Forecasting Elections

At FiveThirtyEight , we spend a lot of time modeling outcomes of elections and sporting events .
But , as you might have guessed , modeling the course of a novel pandemic is very different .
There are so many variables and such little historical data to work with .
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , senior science writer Maggie Koerth and quantitative editor Laura Bronner explain how much we don ’ t know about the COVID-19 virus .
They also discuss how epidemiologists are trying to overcome those challenges to lessen the uncertainty about the toll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listen to the episode by clicking the “ play ” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes .
Have a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get in touch by email , on Twitter @ @ @ @ @

At FiveThirtyEight, we spend a lot of time modeling outcomes of elections and sporting events. But, as you might have guessed, modeling the course of a novel pandemic is very different. There are so many variables and such little historical data to work with. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, senior science writer Maggie Koerth and quantitative editor Laura Bronner explain how much we don’t know about the COVID-19 virus. They also discuss how epidemiologists are trying to overcome those challenges to lessen the uncertainty about the toll the pandemic might take.
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-02--Congress Has Resisted Remote Voting, But Some State Legislatures Are Making It Work

While leadership in both houses of Congress remain largely opposed to voting remotely in the wake of the coronavirus crisis , some state legislatures have already moved to adopt a remote setup to avoid the dangers of possibly spreading the virus by meeting in person .
One of the first states to do this was Pennsylvania , where many members of the state Senate and House of Representatives have already cast ballots from afar .
So to get a better sense of how the process worked , possible kinks in the system and how it compared to a typical legislative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives : Democratic state Rep. Melissa Shusterman , a first-term member from suburban Philadelphia who is also a deputy whip , and Republican state Rep. Tarah Toohil , who has represented part of northeastern Pennsylvania since 2011 .
Shusterman worked from home during last week ’ s legislative session while Toohil worked out of her district office in Hazleton , giving them insight into how remote voting can affect the legislative process .
The move to offer remote voting in the Pennsylvania legislature grew out of a concern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to gather on the House floor .
“ We tend to be kind of all over each other in session , there ’ s 200 of us — that ’ s not even including support staff in one room — and we sit very close together , ” said Shusterman .
So on March 16 , the House voted unanimously to change the rules to allow for remote voting .
( The Senate changed its rules with a vote on March 18 . )
And although voting remotely is optional in Pennsylvania — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the floor — at least 114 representatives had opted to work remotely by March 25 , with some working from home while others worked from their offices in Harrisburg .
Toohil said many members decided not to attend because they were at high risk for the virus — some are immunocompromised , and many are over the age of 65 .
Personally , though , she said she decided to vote remotely because “ what if I ’ m an asymptomatic carrier ?
I would have no way of knowing , and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room of 203 voting members … not even counting the number of staff.
” The sudden shift to remote work has meant the legislature has had to work rapidly to set up a virtual system to not only cast votes but also hold caucus meetings — which has created some annoyances as legislators adapt to the new system .
For example , in one of the Republicans ’ earliest virtual caucus meetings , they didn ’ t yet have videoconferencing set up .
“ I had to get into a queue and signal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it just makes it a little bit harder when you ’ re not able to have this face-to-face communication , ” Toohil said .
That aspect has improved now that they are using the teleconferencing software Zoom , Toohil said , but that has brought its own issues — “ I actually ordered a new computer because I can ’ t do the Zoom meeting on my old archaic laptop !
” Shusterman told us that , all things considered , it ’ s come together pretty well , although there were definitely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via videoconference .
“ There were humorous moments of trying to get certain people to turn off their microphone or , ‘ Hey , we can hear that ’ or ‘ Maybe you want to change the video , you ’ re a little too close to the camera , ’ ” laughed Shusterman .
But she said the process still felt similar to the typical in-person caucus experience .
“ It still flowed in a very informative and timely manner so we could go back and vote , ” said Shusterman .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too , to help ensure the process went as smoothly as possible .
“ Many of us whips had a phone line going with all the people we were whipping that if they needed further clarification on either a bill or the order — ‘ What are we voting on today ?
’ — or just any question like ‘ I can ’ t hear , ’ ” Shusterman said .
As a deputy whip for the Democrats , Shusterman was closely involved in the first remote votes , too .
Normally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whips use pen and paper on the floor to keep track of members ’ votes and members vote via an electronic voting device in the chamber .
But now they are having to adapt that system to the new reality .
Toohil said she is still recording her vote on paper , but she now has to scan it and send a PDF to the GOP whip , who then tallies the votes .
“ It ’ s definitely not a system that you would want to have to use , ” she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using an online tool to tally where people stand , was a lot more sanguine about the new process .
“ People were so engaged that they ’ re also responding to me via text , via email , ” said Shusterman .
She hoped to use the online tool for tracking votes even after remote voting is no longer necessary .
At this point , though , the House has only voted remotely on legislation that had strong bipartisan support .
“ I feel like leadership on both sides of the aisle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re voting on things that we ’ ve probably been working on in different capacities for a long time , ” observed Shusterman .
So while things have gotten off to a promising start , it remains to be seen how well remote voting will work when addressing more contentious legislation .
Toohil was not optimistic : “ If it is controversial , it ’ s going to be much more problematic ” to vote remotely , she said — “ especially with amendments , as the bills change .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process .
It ’ s going to be very hard to see , ‘ OK , wait , which amendment are we on now ?
’ ” Because her party is in the minority , we asked Shusterman if she was worried about the Republican House majority trying to take advantage of the circumstances to push through controversial legislation , but she told us she wasn ’ t that concerned .
“ I think this is bringing people together .
Yes , there are always outliers .
But on the whole , people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sharing how they deal with their constituents , with different issues — the flow of information is very , very good.
” One concern about widespread adoption of remote voting is that legislators might be encouraged to use it in non-crisis situations , which could reduce face-to-face interactions and affect the personal relationships that are important for getting things done , both within a party and across the aisle .
But Toohil and Shusterman both told us they were doubtful that there would be much interest in using remote voting beyond a crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideal .
I think maybe years from now it ’ s something that would be looked at , but I can ’ t see how [ remote voting could replace in-person voting ] .
Voting is so interactive , ” said Toohil .
Shusterman agreed : “ We ’ re voted into office to be legislators — we ’ re also public servants — but our oath is to go in and vote on legislation.
” She added that it ’ s often vital to be at the state capitol to attend information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help legislators learn more about important topics .
For now , legislators in Pennsylvania and a handful of other states are trying out remote voting , and in Pennsylvania , at least , despite some hurdles , it ’ s allowed legislative business to continue , and with a spirit of cooperation to boot .
“ That really gives me hope that in 2020 we ’ re going to have a better year as legislators , we ’ re going to be able to cross that aisle more and more because we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Shusterman .

While leadership in both houses of Congress remain largely opposed to voting remotely in the wake of the coronavirus crisis, some state legislatures have already moved to adopt a remote setup to avoid the dangers of possibly spreading the virus by meeting in person.
One of the first states to do this was Pennsylvania, where many members of the state Senate and House of Representatives have already cast ballots from afar. So to get a better sense of how the process worked, possible kinks in the system and how it compared to a typical legislative session, we spoke with two members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives: Democratic state Rep. Melissa Shusterman, a first-term member from suburban Philadelphia who is also a deputy whip, and Republican state Rep. Tarah Toohil, who has represented part of northeastern Pennsylvania since 2011. Shusterman worked from home during last week’s legislative session while Toohil worked out of her district office in Hazleton, giving them insight into how remote voting can affect the legislative process.
The move to offer remote voting in the Pennsylvania legislature grew out of a concern about what would happen if members continued to gather on the House floor. “We tend to be kind of all over each other in session, there’s 200 of us — that’s not even including support staff in one room — and we sit very close together,” said Shusterman. So on March 16, the House voted unanimously to change the rules to allow for remote voting. (The Senate changed its rules with a vote on March 18.)
And although voting remotely is optional in Pennsylvania — some members have continued to vote on the floor — at least 114 representatives had opted to work remotely by March 25, with some working from home while others worked from their offices in Harrisburg. Toohil said many members decided not to attend because they were at high risk for the virus — some are immunocompromised, and many are over the age of 65. Personally, though, she said she decided to vote remotely because “what if I’m an asymptomatic carrier? I would have no way of knowing, and I would then be bringing that into a room of 203 voting members … not even counting the number of staff.”
The sudden shift to remote work has meant the legislature has had to work rapidly to set up a virtual system to not only cast votes but also hold caucus meetings — which has created some annoyances as legislators adapt to the new system. For example, in one of the Republicans’ earliest virtual caucus meetings, they didn’t yet have videoconferencing set up. “I had to get into a queue and signal that I wanted to speak, so it just makes it a little bit harder when you’re not able to have this face-to-face communication,” Toohil said. That aspect has improved now that they are using the teleconferencing software Zoom, Toohil said, but that has brought its own issues — “I actually ordered a new computer because I can’t do the Zoom meeting on my old archaic laptop!”
Shusterman told us that, all things considered, it’s come together pretty well, although there were definitely some chuckles as members tried to work via videoconference. “There were humorous moments of trying to get certain people to turn off their microphone or, ‘Hey, we can hear that’ or ‘Maybe you want to change the video, you’re a little too close to the camera,’” laughed Shusterman. But she said the process still felt similar to the typical in-person caucus experience. “It still flowed in a very informative and timely manner so we could go back and vote,” said Shusterman.
There were troubleshooting measures put in place, too, to help ensure the process went as smoothly as possible. “Many of us whips had a phone line going with all the people we were whipping that if they needed further clarification on either a bill or the order — ‘What are we voting on today?’ — or just any question like ‘I can’t hear,’” Shusterman said.
As a deputy whip for the Democrats, Shusterman was closely involved in the first remote votes, too. Normally when the House is in session, whips use pen and paper on the floor to keep track of members’ votes and members vote via an electronic voting device in the chamber. But now they are having to adapt that system to the new reality. Toohil said she is still recording her vote on paper, but she now has to scan it and send a PDF to the GOP whip, who then tallies the votes. “It’s definitely not a system that you would want to have to use,” she said. But Shusterman, who is using an online tool to tally where people stand, was a lot more sanguine about the new process. “People were so engaged that they’re also responding to me via text, via email,” said Shusterman. She hoped to use the online tool for tracking votes even after remote voting is no longer necessary.
At this point, though, the House has only voted remotely on legislation that had strong bipartisan support. “I feel like leadership on both sides of the aisle are working together to make sure we’re voting on things that we’ve probably been working on in different capacities for a long time,” observed Shusterman. So while things have gotten off to a promising start, it remains to be seen how well remote voting will work when addressing more contentious legislation. Toohil was not optimistic: “If it is controversial, it’s going to be much more problematic” to vote remotely, she said — “especially with amendments, as the bills change. It’s going to be a very lengthy process. It’s going to be very hard to see, ‘OK, wait, which amendment are we on now?’”
Because her party is in the minority, we asked Shusterman if she was worried about the Republican House majority trying to take advantage of the circumstances to push through controversial legislation, but she told us she wasn’t that concerned. “I think this is bringing people together. Yes, there are always outliers. But on the whole, people are working together, sharing resources, sharing how they deal with their constituents, with different issues — the flow of information is very, very good.”
One concern about widespread adoption of remote voting is that legislators might be encouraged to use it in non-crisis situations, which could reduce face-to-face interactions and affect the personal relationships that are important for getting things done, both within a party and across the aisle. But Toohil and Shusterman both told us they were doubtful that there would be much interest in using remote voting beyond a crisis. “It’s definitely not ideal. I think maybe years from now it’s something that would be looked at, but I can’t see how [remote voting could replace in-person voting]. Voting is so interactive,” said Toohil. Shusterman agreed: “We’re voted into office to be legislators — we’re also public servants — but our oath is to go in and vote on legislation.” She added that it’s often vital to be at the state capitol to attend information sessions on issues and meet in person to help legislators learn more about important topics.
For now, legislators in Pennsylvania and a handful of other states are trying out remote voting, and in Pennsylvania, at least, despite some hurdles, it’s allowed legislative business to continue, and with a spirit of cooperation to boot. “That really gives me hope that in 2020 we’re going to have a better year as legislators, we’re going to be able to cross that aisle more and more because we’re all in this together,” said Shusterman.


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-03--How Concerned Are Americans About The Coronavirus?

Since late January , when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported the first known case of COVID-19 in the U.S. , pollsters have been busy fielding surveys to measure just how concerned Americans are and what they think about the government ’ s response to the outbreak .
We at FiveThirtyEight are now collecting those polls to give you a better understanding of how Americans are reacting .
So if you ’ re concerned that you or someone you ’ re close to will be infected with the coronavirus , the data shows that you are not alone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chart above , the share of Americans who are either “ somewhat ” or “ very ” concerned about infection has risen steadily since the virus began rapidly spreading in the U.S. in March .
But economic concerns , at least at the moment , seem to be worrying more Americans , as the impact of the virus on the economy has been staggering so far .
In late March , millions of workers filed for unemployment each week — many times more than previous record highs — and as you can see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans who are “ very ” concerned about the economy grew dramatically in the second half of the month , as cities and states began to shut down nonessential businesses .

It is now been more than a year since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported the first known case of COVID-19 in the U.S. And a lot has changed since then. There is a vaccine rollout and a new president to lead America through the pandemic. And less than a month after he assumed office, many more Americans approve of President Biden’s handling of the pandemic than former President Donald Trump’s.
Do Americans approve of Biden’s response to the coronavirus crisis? A calculation of the share of all Americans who approve of the president’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak Biden Trump Download polls and trends
But as you can see below, how well Americans think the president is doing still falls along partisan lines. Democrats largely approve of Biden’s response; Republicans do not. Independents fall somewhere in between. Biden does seem to be starting with a rosier outlook among independents and members of the other party than Trump ever did, however.
Approval of Biden’s response varies widely by party A calculation of the share of Democrats, Republicans and independents who approve of the president’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak Biden Trump Download polls and trends


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-03--Are Democrats And Republicans Reacting Differently To Coronavirus? It Depends What You’re Asking The

Are Democrats And Republicans Reacting Differently To Coronavirus? It Depends What You’re Asking Them.

Welcome to Pollapalooza , our weekly polling roundup .
( You can find the latest data on how Americans feel about the novel coronavirus , President Trump ’ s response to it and more in our new coronavirus polling tracker . )
Polls suggest that partisanship is affecting Americans ’ views of some aspects of the novel coronavirus outbreak .
Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be skeptical of Trump ’ s handling of the virus outbreak , for example , and Democrats are more likely than Republicans to express high levels of concern about the virus and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news coverage that casts Americans ’ views on the coronavirus as just another example of the nation ’ s partisan divide may be overstating that case — there is plenty of agreement across party lines when it comes to COVID-19 , particularly when it comes to how people say they are behaving : • 96 percent of Republicans and 95 percent of Democrats said that they are washing their hands more frequently , according to a Selzer & Company survey conducted last weekend .
• 93 percent of Democrats and 89 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” at a crowded party , per a recent Pew Research Center poll .
And 83 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of Republicans said they would be uncomfortable eating out in a restaurant right now .
• 72 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Republicans said that they are satisfied with their state and local governments responses to the coronavirus , according to a new Daily Kos/Civiqs poll .
• 85 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Republicans oppose churches being exempted from regulations barring large gatherings amid the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the American Enterprise Institute .
• 85 percent of Republicans and 91 percent of Democrats support giving cash payments to people who make less than $ 100,000 amid the virus outbreak , according to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll .
Republicans and Democrats are also both strongly supportive of aid to small businesses ( 90 percent of Democrats , 93 percent of Republicans ) and somewhat wary of aid to large corporations ( 38 percent of Republicans and 54 percent of Democrats oppose it ) , Overall , self-identified Republicans are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks ago both to say that they view the virus as a serious problem and to be taking social distancing steps .
So the partisan divide on these issues that seemed more apparent in early and mid-March is diminishing as Republicans view the virus outbreak more similarly to Democrats and independents .
What explains that shift ?
It ’ s likely that both the rising severity of the crisis itself and the decision by President Trump and other prominent conservative voices to stop downplaying the seriousness of the pandemic have affected rank-and-file Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain .
By many measures , Democrats are still a bit more concerned about the virus outbreak than Republicans — even if Republicans are increasingly concerned too .
For example , 65 percent of Democrats are “ extremely concerned ” about a coronavirus outbreak in their area , compared to just 21 percent of Republicans , according to the Civiqs survey .
But that ’ s a gap in intensity — basically everyone ( 91 percent of Republicans , 99 percent of Democrats ) said that they were at least a “ a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their area .
This gap might speak to other political beliefs and values , namely that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to trust scientists and science-based arguments , and experts citing scientific evidence are expressing great alarm about the virus ) .
The gap might also be partly explained by lingering effects from the period when Fox News anchors and Trump were downplaying the virus outbreak in a way that prominent liberal leaders did not .
Secondly , questions that include “ Trump ” or the “ federal government ” unsurprisingly still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Republicans the positive one .
Views on the coronavirus and its impact may not be totally captured by partisanship , but they also aren ’ t totally separate from those underlying partisan divides .
Third , there are some questions about the virus that don ’ t necessarily sound partisan , but probably cue partisan responses from respondents .
For example , Civiqs asked if U.S. economic sanctions on Iran should remain in place , even as Iran has had a severe outbreak of the coronavirus .
Seventy-three percent of Republicans think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared to 20 percent of Democrats .
I suspect that this huge gap is not because voters have particularly well-defined views about the sanctions against Iran .
Rather , it ’ s likely that Democrats are adopting their party ’ s more conciliatory posture toward Iran and Republicans are adopting their party ’ s more confrontational approach .
• Former Vice President Joe Biden has 61 percent support among Democrats , compared to 36 percent for Sen. Bernie Sanders , according to a new Morning Consult poll .
• Biden leads Sanders 55 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ABC News/Washington Post survey .
• In a hypothetical general election matchup between Biden and Trump , the former vice president leads 46 percent to 42 percent , according to a new Morning Consult survey .
Biden leads 47-43 , per the latest Selzer & Co. poll , 46-40 in a new Reuters-Ipsos survey and 49-40 in a recent Fox News poll .
• Biden leads Trump by 3 percentage points ( 48 to 45 ) in Wisconsin , according to a new Marquette Law School poll .
• The Fox News survey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar with three different running mates .
A Biden ticket with Sen. Kamala Harris led Trump and Vice President Mike Pence 50 percent to 42 percent , Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar led 50-42 , and Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren led 52-42 .
• 63 percent of voters support Biden ’ s pledge to choose a female running mate , according to that Fox News poll .
Just 20 percent disapprove .
• 77 percent of Americans approve of the way that National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to the Fox poll .
Americans were similarly satisfied with local officials ( 75 percent ) and the state government ( 74 percent ) where they live , according to the survey .
The federal government ( 55 percent ) , Pence ( 55 percent ) and Trump ( 51 percent ) were viewed less favorably .
According to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval tracker , 45.7 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president , while 50 percent disapprove ( a net approval rating of -4.3 points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 45.3 percent approved and 50.5 percent disapproved ( for a net approval rating of -5.2 points ) .
One month ago , Trump had an approval rating of 43.3 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.7 percent , for a net approval rating of -9 .
4 points .
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot , Democrats currently lead by 7.7 percentage points 48.9 percent to 41.2 percent ) .
A week ago , Democrats led Republicans by 7.5 points ( 48.7 percent to 41.2 percent ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ preferred Democrats by 6.7 points ( 47.9 percent to 41.2 percent ) .

Perry Bacon Jr. (perry.bacon@fivethirtyeight.com)

Welcome to Pollapalooza, our weekly polling roundup. (You can find the latest data on how Americans feel about the novel coronavirus, President Trump’s response to it and more in our new coronavirus polling tracker.)
Poll(s) of the week
Polls suggest that partisanship is affecting Americans’ views of some aspects of the novel coronavirus outbreak. Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to be skeptical of Trump’s handling of the virus outbreak, for example, and Democrats are more likely than Republicans to express high levels of concern about the virus and its potential impact.
That said, news coverage that casts Americans’ views on the coronavirus as just another example of the nation’s partisan divide may be overstating that case — there is plenty of agreement across party lines when it comes to COVID-19, particularly when it comes to how people say they are behaving:
96 percent of Republicans and 95 percent of Democrats said that they are washing their hands more frequently, according to a Selzer & Company survey conducted last weekend.
93 percent of Democrats and 89 percent of Republicans said they would be “uncomfortable” at a crowded party, per a recent Pew Research Center poll. And 83 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of Republicans said they would be uncomfortable eating out in a restaurant right now.
72 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Republicans said that they are satisfied with their state and local governments responses to the coronavirus, according to a new Daily Kos/Civiqs poll.
85 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Republicans oppose churches being exempted from regulations barring large gatherings amid the virus outbreak, according to a survey conducted by the American Enterprise Institute.
85 percent of Republicans and 91 percent of Democrats support giving cash payments to people who make less than $100,000 amid the virus outbreak, according to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll. Republicans and Democrats are also both strongly supportive of aid to small businesses (90 percent of Democrats, 93 percent of Republicans) and somewhat wary of aid to large corporations (38 percent of Republicans and 54 percent of Democrats oppose it),
Overall, self-identified Republicans are much more likely now than a few weeks ago both to say that they view the virus as a serious problem and to be taking social distancing steps. So the partisan divide on these issues that seemed more apparent in early and mid-March is diminishing as Republicans view the virus outbreak more similarly to Democrats and independents.
What explains that shift? It’s likely that both the rising severity of the crisis itself and the decision by President Trump and other prominent conservative voices to stop downplaying the seriousness of the pandemic have affected rank-and-file Republicans.
Of course, some partisan divides remain. By many measures, Democrats are still a bit more concerned about the virus outbreak than Republicans — even if Republicans are increasingly concerned too. For example, 65 percent of Democrats are “extremely concerned” about a coronavirus outbreak in their area, compared to just 21 percent of Republicans, according to the Civiqs survey. But that’s a gap in intensity — basically everyone (91 percent of Republicans, 99 percent of Democrats) said that they were at least a “a little concerned” about an outbreak in their area. This gap might speak to other political beliefs and values, namely that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to trust scientists and science-based arguments, and experts citing scientific evidence are expressing great alarm about the virus). The gap might also be partly explained by lingering effects from the period when Fox News anchors and Trump were downplaying the virus outbreak in a way that prominent liberal leaders did not.
Secondly, questions that include “Trump” or the “federal government” unsurprisingly still result in Democrats taking the negative view and Republicans the positive one. Views on the coronavirus and its impact may not be totally captured by partisanship, but they also aren’t totally separate from those underlying partisan divides.
Third, there are some questions about the virus that don’t necessarily sound partisan, but probably cue partisan responses from respondents. For example, Civiqs asked if U.S. economic sanctions on Iran should remain in place, even as Iran has had a severe outbreak of the coronavirus. Seventy-three percent of Republicans think that the Iran sanctions should remain, compared to 20 percent of Democrats. I suspect that this huge gap is not because voters have particularly well-defined views about the sanctions against Iran. Rather, it’s likely that Democrats are adopting their party’s more conciliatory posture toward Iran and Republicans are adopting their party’s more confrontational approach.
Other polling bites
Former Vice President Joe Biden has 61 percent support among Democrats, compared to 36 percent for Sen. Bernie Sanders, according to a new Morning Consult poll.
Biden leads Sanders 55 percent to 39 percent in the latest ABC News/Washington Post survey.
In a hypothetical general election matchup between Biden and Trump, the former vice president leads 46 percent to 42 percent, according to a new Morning Consult survey. Biden leads 47-43, per the latest Selzer & Co. poll, 46-40 in a new Reuters-Ipsos survey and 49-40 in a recent Fox News poll.
Biden leads Trump by 3 percentage points (48 to 45) in Wisconsin, according to a new Marquette Law School poll.
The Fox News survey found that Biden’s support was similar with three different running mates. A Biden ticket with Sen. Kamala Harris led Trump and Vice President Mike Pence 50 percent to 42 percent, Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar led 50-42, and Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren led 52-42.
63 percent of voters support Biden’s pledge to choose a female running mate, according to that Fox News poll. Just 20 percent disapprove.
77 percent of Americans approve of the way that National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci is dealing with the virus outbreak, according to the Fox poll. Americans were similarly satisfied with local officials (75 percent) and the state government (74 percent) where they live, according to the survey. The federal government (55 percent), Pence (55 percent) and Trump (51 percent) were viewed less favorably.
Trump approval
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker, 45.7 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 50 percent disapprove (a net approval rating of -4.3 points). At this time last week, 45.3 percent approved and 50.5 percent disapproved (for a net approval rating of -5.2 points). One month ago, Trump had an approval rating of 43.3 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.7 percent, for a net approval rating of -9. 4 points.
Generic ballot
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot, Democrats currently lead by 7.7 percentage points 48.9 percent to 41.2 percent). A week ago, Democrats led Republicans by 7.5 points (48.7 percent to 41.2 percent). At this time last month, voters preferred Democrats by 6.7 points (47.9 percent to 41.2 percent).


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-02--The Pennsylvania Legislature Is Testing Out Remote Voting. Here’s How It Works.


fivethirtyeight--2020-04-03--How Americans View The Coronavirus Crisis And Trump’s Response