fivethirtyeight--2020-12-03--5 Ways Biden Might Differ From — Or Agree With — Trump On Technology

Most political obsessives trying to guess who President-elect Joe Biden might pick to be in his Cabinet are focused on the flashy positions : secretary of state , secretary of defense , attorney general .
Then there are us nerds , who are keen to find out who will be the new chair of the Federal Communications Commission .
President Trump loves to talk and tweet about his feelings on tech , though his agenda wasn ’ t exactly clear and consistent .
But tech policy is increasingly important in our everyday lives , especially as the pandemic has made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and internet connections .
Biden will have to navigate Trump ’ s legacy while charting his own course .
Here ’ s how Trump has influenced five key tech policy areas and what Biden might do about them .
One of Trump ’ s first acts as president was to appoint Ajit Pai chair of the FCC , and less than a year later , Pai completed a goal he had long pursued : repealing the commission ’ s net neutrality protections .
These rules were enacted by the FCC during Barack Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ service providers treat all types of communications equally , prohibiting them from blocking or throttling some services while prioritizing others .
But now telecom companies can do what they like .
Since the net neutrality rules were repealed , providers have taken a number of steps that would have violated the old rules .
AT & T , for example , doesn ’ t count streaming HBO Max toward its customers ’ data limits — AT & T owns the streaming platform after its merger with Time Warner — but it does count @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up data .
“ That ’ s clear self-preferencing , ” said Chris Lewis , the president of the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge and a net neutrality proponent .
“ This is problematic , and it ’ s one of the reasons we wanted to have net neutrality rules.
” Pai has announced he ’ s stepping down in January , just in time for Biden to appoint a new chair .
Depending who he picks and what kind of guidance comes out of the White House , it ’ s possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ net neutrality .
Biden has tapped Mignon Clyburn , a former FCC commissioner and a net neutrality advocate , for his transition team , and her name has been tossed around as a potential FCC chair as well .
But Biden might be better off trying a new approach , rather than simply resurrecting the old , rejected rules , according to Jesse Blumenthal , who leads tech and innovation policy for Stand Together , a group funded by the libertarian Koch family .
“ If you appoint a really activist FCC chair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rulemaking process , and then the second the rule is passed , they ’ ll get sued , ” Blumenthal said , which could lead to the rules getting thrown out again .
“ If you actually care about the underlying policy here , you would be going to Congress and updating the Telecom Act instead of this pingpong.
” Trump ’ s interest in tech antitrust rules — legislation that could keep big tech from becoming too big — has been scattershot , but Democrats and Republicans have both expressed concern about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tech companies .
In October , after a 16-month investigation , the House released a Democrat-led report on monopolies in tech that said digital powerhouses like Google , Facebook and Amazon wielded too much power and needed to be restructured .
A few weeks later , the Department of Justice and 11 Republican state attorneys general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google , claiming the search engine company used anticompetitive practices .
And the Federal Trade Commission is currently preparing a possible antitrust suit against Facebook .
Biden has expressed an interest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t specified exactly what that will look like .
Instead , he and his campaign have made broad statements about how big tech companies have “ abused their power ” and “ evaded any form of responsibility , ” as campaign spokesperson Matt Hill told The New York Times .
“ That ends with a President Biden , ” he said .
But exactly how the crackdown will occur and what form it will take depends on the resolution of a philosophical divide among Democrats , according to Derek Bambauer , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona .
“ The conventional wing is one where antitrust is a blunt instrument to be used only as a matter of last resort , and where you really need a strong , empirical showing of consumer harm , ” Bambauer said .
“ The other wing is what I call ‘ hipster antitrust.
’ ” To that group , he said , big is bad , regardless of what big does .
If Biden leans toward the former camp , action against big tech would likely take the form of investigations and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , while if he holds the more progressive view , he ’ d probably push for much more aggressive government intervention and the introduction of new regulations to limit big tech ’ s power .
Trump has cast suspicion on Chinese technology companies , in particular the threat they might pose to American users ’ privacy .
Trump ’ s recent attacks on the popular video app TikTok , which is owned by a Chinese company , were most notable .
They included a threat to ban the app in the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off its American assets to another company , citing concerns about the app leaking private data to the Chinese government .
Yet strangely , when the deadline for the TikTok sale came around , Trump was no longer pursuing it .
But this was only the latest example of Trump ’ s ongoing tech war with China .
Throughout his tenure , he has tried to limit U.S. spending on Chinese technology , including by banning domestic telecom companies from using equipment from Huawei and ZTE , two massive Chinese telecommunications firms , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 billion for companies to replace their existing Chinese-manufactured equipment .
He has also banned U.S. investment in companies that are owned or controlled by Chinese military , and he moved to block the connection of a high-capacity U.S.-China undersea internet cable .
“ I think this was a proxy for larger international political issues the Trump administration has with China and an opportunity for the Trump administration to flex , ” said Christopher Ali , a media studies professor at the University of Virginia .
“ But these are serious and important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communication platforms .
Is this a conversation we need to have ?
Perhaps .
But this can ’ t be a conversation only about TikTok.
” Threatening to ban an app whose main function is to document teens performing choreographed dance routines may seem frivolous , but many people , including Biden , share the overarching concerns about China and tech users ’ privacy .
But Biden ’ s approach will likely be different than Trump ’ s , focusing on strengthening domestic tech industries while building a diplomatic consensus with allies in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influence .
I am not the only one who ’ s been pulling my hair out over the attention Section 230 has attracted from politicians in recent years , since they so often seem to have no idea what it is .
It ’ s best to read the law yourself , but in short , Section 230 is a few lines in the Communications Decency Act that prevent website owners from being held responsible for what other people post on their sites .
As Bambauer put it , it ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about him on Twitter , “ I can sue that person , but I can ’ t sue Twitter.
” Section 230 is a funky little rule that encourages sites to both moderate what is posted and avoid being overly censorious .
Before the law was passed , courts had found sites that did some moderation liable for the third-party content they chose to leave up .
Since Section 230 protects sites from this liability , they ’ re free to moderate without worrying about what they let stand .
But it also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason : If a website were liable for the posts of its users , it stands to reason that the site might be a lot more strict about what content it allows .
Trump has claimed the law enables tech companies to censor conservative voices online and has sought to repeal Section 230 in various ways .
In the spring , for example , he signed an executive order that weakened the law , while Republicans have introduced legislation to repeal or rework it .
On Thanksgiving , Trump tweeted that Section 230 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a defense spending bill reportedly might be used as a vehicle for passing language to repeal Section 230 .
Biden too has called for a repeal of Section 230 .
His complaint is not that companies do too much moderation , though , but that they don ’ t do enough , citing social media ’ s limited response to disinformation as the main problem .
But according to Lewis , “ A full repeal of Section 230 would be a huge blow to free expression online .
If President-elect Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then repealing Section 230 will not accomplish that or , at worst , it will increase moderation to the point that it is oppressive.
” Lewis said Section 230 could be reformed without harming free expression , such as by more clearly defining some of the law ’ s vague or ambiguous language , but without any actual details or plans from the Biden transition team , it ’ s hard to say if that ’ s what is being pursued .
“ It is the foundational law enabling the development of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of economic growth , innovation , freedom of expression and global leadership , ” said Tiffany Moore , the senior vice president of political and industry affairs for the Consumer Technology Association .
“ Both sides have their concerns about Section 230 , but we need a thoughtful , substantive conversation about Section 230 , and ultimately that resides in Congress.
” This year ’ s pandemic threw the country ’ s digital divide into sharp relief .
With so many people staying home and relying on the internet to work , attend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order food and stay in contact with loved ones , it became obvious how vital internet access is .
Yet millions of Americans lack access to the internet , or at least lack access to high-speed internet .
The FCC estimates 21 million Americans can ’ t get broadband internet where they live , but these figures are based on self-reported numbers from ISPs , and the agency itself has deemed them inaccurate enough to hold off on doling out funding until the figures can be verified .
Trump ’ s FCC has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — such as through the Connect America Fund , which was started during the Obama era and provides subsidies to companies willing to build internet infrastructure in underserved areas .
But advocates working to reduce the digital divide say the FCC hasn ’ t made much progress under Trump .
“ The requirements placed upon big telco to do these connections were so subpar that really it allowed them to do what they were going to do anyway and pocket all these billions of dollars , ” Ali said .
Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other barrier in the digital divide : cost .
Many Americans who live in areas with access to high speed internet can ’ t afford it .
A goal to “ expand broadband access to every American ” was included in Biden ’ s campaign platform , though exactly what the plan is has yet to be revealed .
But continuing to stay the course is unlikely to solve the problem , according to Lewis , and the pandemic has made it harder to ignore .
“ Urban , rural people are being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it is essential for their lives , ” Lewis said .
“ We can ’ t just throw money at the problem .
There needs to be oversight , authority and an agency to deal with the causes of digital divide that don ’ t have to do with money .
”

Most political obsessives trying to guess who President-elect Joe Biden might pick to be in his Cabinet are focused on the flashy positions: secretary of state, secretary of defense, attorney general. Then there are us nerds, who are keen to find out who will be the new chair of the Federal Communications Commission.
President Trump loves to talk and tweet about his feelings on tech, though his agenda wasn’t exactly clear and consistent. But tech policy is increasingly important in our everyday lives, especially as the pandemic has made us rely more heavily on our devices and internet connections.
Why did down-ballot Democrats have such a mediocre showing?
Biden will have to navigate Trump’s legacy while charting his own course. Here’s how Trump has influenced five key tech policy areas and what Biden might do about them.
Net neutrality
One of Trump’s first acts as president was to appoint Ajit Pai chair of the FCC, and less than a year later, Pai completed a goal he had long pursued: repealing the commission’s net neutrality protections. These rules were enacted by the FCC during Barack Obama’s presidency and dictated that internet service providers treat all types of communications equally, prohibiting them from blocking or throttling some services while prioritizing others. But now telecom companies can do what they like.
Since the net neutrality rules were repealed, providers have taken a number of steps that would have violated the old rules. AT&T, for example, doesn’t count streaming HBO Max toward its customers’ data limits — AT&T owns the streaming platform after its merger with Time Warner — but it does count other, competing streaming services that eat up data.
[Related: What We’ve Learned About The Biden Administration From His Staffing Choices So Far]
“That’s clear self-preferencing,” said Chris Lewis, the president of the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge and a net neutrality proponent. “This is problematic, and it’s one of the reasons we wanted to have net neutrality rules.”
Pai has announced he’s stepping down in January, just in time for Biden to appoint a new chair. Depending who he picks and what kind of guidance comes out of the White House, it’s possible for a new Democrat-majority FCC to resurrect net neutrality. Biden has tapped Mignon Clyburn, a former FCC commissioner and a net neutrality advocate, for his transition team, and her name has been tossed around as a potential FCC chair as well.
But Biden might be better off trying a new approach, rather than simply resurrecting the old, rejected rules, according to Jesse Blumenthal, who leads tech and innovation policy for Stand Together, a group funded by the libertarian Koch family.
“If you appoint a really activist FCC chair, they will immediately start the regulatory rulemaking process, and then the second the rule is passed, they’ll get sued,” Blumenthal said, which could lead to the rules getting thrown out again. “If you actually care about the underlying policy here, you would be going to Congress and updating the Telecom Act instead of this pingpong.”
Antitrust laws
Trump’s interest in tech antitrust rules — legislation that could keep big tech from becoming too big — has been scattershot, but Democrats and Republicans have both expressed concern about the concentration of power in a few tech companies. In October, after a 16-month investigation, the House released a Democrat-led report on monopolies in tech that said digital powerhouses like Google, Facebook and Amazon wielded too much power and needed to be restructured. A few weeks later, the Department of Justice and 11 Republican state attorneys general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, claiming the search engine company used anticompetitive practices. And the Federal Trade Commission is currently preparing a possible antitrust suit against Facebook.
Biden has expressed an interest in dealing with big tech, but hasn’t specified exactly what that will look like. Instead, he and his campaign have made broad statements about how big tech companies have “abused their power” and “evaded any form of responsibility,” as campaign spokesperson Matt Hill told The New York Times. “That ends with a President Biden,” he said.
[Related: How Trump Changed America]
But exactly how the crackdown will occur and what form it will take depends on the resolution of a philosophical divide among Democrats, according to Derek Bambauer, an internet law professor at the University of Arizona.
“The conventional wing is one where antitrust is a blunt instrument to be used only as a matter of last resort, and where you really need a strong, empirical showing of consumer harm,” Bambauer said. “The other wing is what I call ‘hipster antitrust.’” To that group, he said, big is bad, regardless of what big does.
If Biden leans toward the former camp, action against big tech would likely take the form of investigations and more scrutiny of certain acquisitions, Bambauer said, while if he holds the more progressive view, he’d probably push for much more aggressive government intervention and the introduction of new regulations to limit big tech’s power.
China’s tech influence
Trump has cast suspicion on Chinese technology companies, in particular the threat they might pose to American users’ privacy.
Trump’s recent attacks on the popular video app TikTok, which is owned by a Chinese company, were most notable. They included a threat to ban the app in the U.S. if the company didn’t sell off its American assets to another company, citing concerns about the app leaking private data to the Chinese government. Yet strangely, when the deadline for the TikTok sale came around, Trump was no longer pursuing it.
But this was only the latest example of Trump’s ongoing tech war with China. Throughout his tenure, he has tried to limit U.S. spending on Chinese technology, including by banning domestic telecom companies from using equipment from Huawei and ZTE, two massive Chinese telecommunications firms, and by signing a law providing $1 billion for companies to replace their existing Chinese-manufactured equipment. He has also banned U.S. investment in companies that are owned or controlled by Chinese military, and he moved to block the connection of a high-capacity U.S.-China undersea internet cable.
“I think this was a proxy for larger international political issues the Trump administration has with China and an opportunity for the Trump administration to flex,” said Christopher Ali, a media studies professor at the University of Virginia. “But these are serious and important questions regarding the ownership of apps and communication platforms. Is this a conversation we need to have? Perhaps. But this can’t be a conversation only about TikTok.”
Threatening to ban an app whose main function is to document teens performing choreographed dance routines may seem frivolous, but many people, including Biden, share the overarching concerns about China and tech users’ privacy. But Biden’s approach will likely be different than Trump’s, focusing on strengthening domestic tech industries while building a diplomatic consensus with allies in Europe to help limit China’s influence.
‘Those suburban votes were key to putting Biden over the top’: Nate Silver
Section 230
I am not the only one who’s been pulling my hair out over the attention Section 230 has attracted from politicians in recent years, since they so often seem to have no idea what it is. It’s best to read the law yourself, but in short, Section 230 is a few lines in the Communications Decency Act that prevent website owners from being held responsible for what other people post on their sites. As Bambauer put it, it’s the reason that if someone says something defamatory about him on Twitter, “I can sue that person, but I can’t sue Twitter.”
Section 230 is a funky little rule that encourages sites to both moderate what is posted and avoid being overly censorious. Before the law was passed, courts had found sites that did some moderation liable for the third-party content they chose to leave up. Since Section 230 protects sites from this liability, they’re free to moderate without worrying about what they let stand. But it also protects users from overmoderation for the same reason: If a website were liable for the posts of its users, it stands to reason that the site might be a lot more strict about what content it allows.
Trump has claimed the law enables tech companies to censor conservative voices online and has sought to repeal Section 230 in various ways. In the spring, for example, he signed an executive order that weakened the law, while Republicans have introduced legislation to repeal or rework it. On Thanksgiving, Trump tweeted that Section 230 should be “immediately terminated,” and a defense spending bill reportedly might be used as a vehicle for passing language to repeal Section 230.
[Related: There Wasn’t That Much Split-Ticket Voting In 2020]
Biden too has called for a repeal of Section 230. His complaint is not that companies do too much moderation, though, but that they don’t do enough, citing social media’s limited response to disinformation as the main problem. But according to Lewis, “A full repeal of Section 230 would be a huge blow to free expression online. If President-elect Biden’s goal is to increase moderation, then repealing Section 230 will not accomplish that or, at worst, it will increase moderation to the point that it is oppressive.”
Lewis said Section 230 could be reformed without harming free expression, such as by more clearly defining some of the law’s vague or ambiguous language, but without any actual details or plans from the Biden transition team, it’s hard to say if that’s what is being pursued.
“It is the foundational law enabling the development of the internet and it’s facilitated decades of economic growth, innovation, freedom of expression and global leadership,” said Tiffany Moore, the senior vice president of political and industry affairs for the Consumer Technology Association. “Both sides have their concerns about Section 230, but we need a thoughtful, substantive conversation about Section 230, and ultimately that resides in Congress.”
Digital divide
This year’s pandemic threw the country’s digital divide into sharp relief. With so many people staying home and relying on the internet to work, attend school, visit with their doctor, order food and stay in contact with loved ones, it became obvious how vital internet access is.
Yet millions of Americans lack access to the internet, or at least lack access to high-speed internet. The FCC estimates 21 million Americans can’t get broadband internet where they live, but these figures are based on self-reported numbers from ISPs, and the agency itself has deemed them inaccurate enough to hold off on doling out funding until the figures can be verified.
Trump’s FCC has made efforts to close the digital divide — such as through the Connect America Fund, which was started during the Obama era and provides subsidies to companies willing to build internet infrastructure in underserved areas. But advocates working to reduce the digital divide say the FCC hasn’t made much progress under Trump.
“The requirements placed upon big telco to do these connections were so subpar that really it allowed them to do what they were going to do anyway and pocket all these billions of dollars,” Ali said.
Trump’s administration has also been quiet on the other barrier in the digital divide: cost. Many Americans who live in areas with access to high speed internet can’t afford it.
A goal to “expand broadband access to every American” was included in Biden’s campaign platform, though exactly what the plan is has yet to be revealed. But continuing to stay the course is unlikely to solve the problem, according to Lewis, and the pandemic has made it harder to ignore.
“Urban, rural people are being left out from connectivity to broadband, and it is essential for their lives,” Lewis said. “We can’t just throw money at the problem. There needs to be oversight, authority and an agency to deal with the causes of digital divide that don’t have to do with money.”
Trump is setting a dangerous precedent for American democracy


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-04--Politics Podcast: How To Make Polls Better

In the wake of the 2020 election , there ’ s been plenty of discussion about the accuracy and usefulness of polling .
Nationally , the polling error was about 4 points , which is close to the average polling error dating back to 1972 .
But the polls were significantly off in the Midwest and in Florida , where we ’ ve repeatedly seen larger-than-average errors underestimating Republicans recently .
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , we hear from two A+ rated pollsters , J. Ann Selzer and Patrick Murray , about how they view the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done about them .
Selzer conducts the Iowa Poll for the Des Moines Register , which showed Trump leading Biden in the state by 7 points in late October .
It was an outlier compared with the average , which showed a dead heat , but — as with a number of her outlier polls in the past — it proved correct .
Murray , the founding director of Monmouth University ’ s Polling Institute , ran into many of the same challenges in the Midwest and Florida that other pollsters did .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 is recorded 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 @

In the wake of the 2020 election, there’s been plenty of discussion about the accuracy and usefulness of polling. Nationally, the polling error was about 4 percentage points, which is close to the average polling error we’ve been seeing since 1972. But the polls were significantly off in the Midwest and Florida, where larger-than-average errors have repeatedly underestimated Republicans recently. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, we hear from two A+ rated pollsters, J. Ann Selzer and Patrick Murray, about the challenges of polling and what can be done to meet those challenges.
Selzer conducts the Iowa Poll for the Des Moines Register, which showed President Trump leading Joe Biden in the state by 7 points in late October. It was an outlier compared with the average, which showed a dead heat, but — as with a number of her outlier polls — it proved correct. Murray, the founding director of Monmouth University’s Polling Institute, ran into many of the same challenges in the Midwest and Florida that other pollsters did.
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 is recorded 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--2020-12-04--Trump Was Never Very Popular, But How Will Americans View Him (And Biden) Now?

Welcome to Pollapalooza , our ( mostly ) weekly polling roundup .
On a very basic level , one big reason why President Trump lost reelection is that he wasn ’ t very popular .
As of Nov. 3 , his job approval rating was just 44.6 percent , and his disapproval rating was 52.6 percent , according to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval average .
That -8.1-point net approval rating was the third-lowest of any recent president on the day they stood for election to a second term .
( Jimmy Carter and George H.W .
Bush were the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Election Day with a lower net approval rating , or higher disapproval rating , than Trump ’ s . )
Notably , all three lost .
Part of this boils down to the well-documented relationship between a president ’ s approval rating and his ability to win another election .
Hugely popular presidents like Lyndon B. Johnson , Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan cruised to a second term , while divisive but still net-popular ones like George W. Bush and Barack Obama won in squeakers .
In fact , the only recent president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ term with a positive net approval rating was Gerald Ford in 1976 .
( That said , he had a fairly weak approval rating — just 43.6 percent , lower than Trump ’ s on Election Day in 2020 .
A relatively high share of Americans had no opinion of him , which may have made it easier for his opponent , Carter , to win them over . )
That means the only president with a negative net approval rating to win a second term was Harry S. Truman in 1948 — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most shocking upsets of all time .
That said , a president ’ s approval rating is hardly the last word .
Elections , after all , are a choice between ( at least ) two candidates .
But in the case of 2020 , it looks like President-elect Biden was indeed more popular than Trump , at least according to Biden ’ s favorability ratings .
( Favorability ratings and approval ratings aren ’ t quite the same thing , but they are pretty close . )
And according to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week before Election Day , Biden had a 51.0 percent favorability rating and a 43.9 percent unfavorability rating , for a net favorability rating of +7.0 points .
Meanwhile , Trump ’ s average net favorability rating in those same polls ( -10.8 points , or 43.1 percent favorable vs. 53.9 percent unfavorable ) was slightly worse than his net approval rating .
Since elections essentially boil down to a popularity contest , the fact that Biden was better-liked than Trump on Election Day probably helped him win where Hillary Clinton ( who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) lost .
Biden may have had an easier time winning over voters with a low opinion of Trump simply because fewer of them had a low opinion of him — a problem that doomed Clinton .
What might happen to Trump ’ s and Biden ’ s popularity from here ?
Historically , new presidents have enjoyed a honeymoon phase where they become better-liked shortly after winning the election and taking office .
And according to a couple new polls , Biden ’ s may already have begun .
According to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , Biden ’ s favorable rating is now 55 percent — 6 points higher than it was in late October and the highest it has been in that survey since before he announced he was running for president .
And last week ’ s Morning Consult/Politico poll gave Biden a 57 percent favorable rating and a 41 percent unfavorable rating among registered voters — a vast improvement over his +6-point net favorability in their last pre-election survey together , in late October .
That said , not all pollsters are picking up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorability rating is just +2 points among registered voters in last week ’ s YouGov/The Economist poll , barely changed from their final pre-election survey .
And Harris/Harvard put his net favorability rating among registered voters at +6 points the week before Thanksgiving , basically the same as they found right before the election .
So we need more data before we can safely proclaim that Biden ’ s honeymoon is underway — especially since honeymoon periods may be increasingly elusive in this era of high partisanship .
As for Trump , presidents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office and people start viewing their tenures through rose-colored glasses .
It ’ s too soon to say whether that ’ s going to happen with Trump ; his approval rating has hovered steadily in the 44-45 percent range since Nov. 3 .
That said , 44-45 percent is among the highest approval rating he has achieved over the last four years — so a handful of people who didn ’ t approve of his job performance for most of his presidency do approve of it now .
It will be interesting to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if he runs again for president in 2024 .
• With the promise of a coronavirus vaccine finally on the horizon , a new SurveyMonkey/Fortune poll finds that 40 percent of U.S. adults want to get the vaccine as soon as it becomes available .
However , another 39 percent said they want to wait a while before getting it , and 19 percent said they never want to get the vaccine .
Republicans ( 30 percent ) and Black Americans ( 25 percent ) were especially likely say they would turn down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s latest coronavirus survey , conducted the two days before Thanksgiving , 62 percent of Americans said they were canceling their typical holiday travel plans , and 66 percent said they were doing more holiday shopping digitally this year .
• We at FiveThirtyEight were glued to the election results as they came in about a month ago , and it turns out we weren ’ t alone .
According to a recent Pew Research Center poll , 36 percent of Americans say they followed the results of the election “ almost constantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ checked in fairly often.
” Twenty-two percent said they “ checked in occasionally , ” while only 7 percent “ tuned out entirely.
” • A Nov. 17-19 survey by Harris X/The Hill found that 60 percent of registered voters support Biden canceling up to $ 50,000 of student debt per person — something that prominent Senate Democrats are reportedly pressuring him to do via executive order .
• A new poll from Research Co. has found that Americans disagree , 58 percent to 33 percent , with a proposal to lower the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they agree , 64 percent to 27 percent , with letting legal permanent residents ( i.e.
, green-card holders ) vote .
• While 2020 is a year that few people will remember fondly , Americans are at least optimistic that 2021 will be better .
According to a recent YouGov survey , 48 percent of adults think 2021 will be a better year for them personally than 2020 has been ; 28 percent think it will be about the same , and only 9 percent think it will be worse .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracker , 43.6 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president , while 52.8 percent disapprove ( a net approval rating of -9.2 points ) .
At this time last week , 44.1 percent approved and 52.6 percent disapproved ( a net approval rating of -8.5 points ) .
One month ago , Trump had an approval rating of 44.6 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.6 percent , for a net approval rating of -8.1 points .

Welcome to Pollapalooza, our (mostly ) weekly polling roundup.
Poll(s) of the week
On a very basic level, one big reason why President Trump lost reelection is that he wasn’t very popular. As of Nov. 3, his job approval rating was just 44.6 percent, and his disapproval rating was 52.6 percent, according to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval average. That -8.1-point net approval rating was the third-lowest of any recent president on the day they stood for election to a second term. (Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were the only two other presidents to go into Election Day with a lower net approval rating, or higher disapproval rating, than Trump’s.) Notably, all three lost.
Unpopular presidents usually lose elections Recent presidents’ average approval and disapproval ratings on Election Day of the year they ran for another term President Year Won Election? Approval Disapproval Net Lyndon B. Johnson* 1964 ✓ 74.0% 15.0% +59.0 Dwight D. Eisenhower 1956 ✓ 67.9 19.1 +48.8 Richard Nixon 1972 ✓ 61.3 28.6 +32.7 Ronald Reagan 1984 ✓ 57.9 33.0 +24.9 Bill Clinton 1996 ✓ 54.6 38.6 +16.0 Barack Obama 2012 ✓ 49.5 47.1 +2.4 Gerald Ford* 1976 43.6 41.3 +2.3 George W. Bush 2004 ✓ 48.4 47.5 +0.9 Harry S. Truman* 1948 ✓ 39.6 45.5 -5.9 Donald Trump 2020 44.6 52.6 -8.1 Jimmy Carter 1980 37.9 54.8 -16.9 George H.W. Bush 1992 32.6 55.5 -22.9 *Acceded to the presidency mid-term. Source: Polls
Part of this boils down to the well-documented relationship between a president’s approval rating and his ability to win another election. Hugely popular presidents like Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan cruised to a second term, while divisive but still net-popular ones like George W. Bush and Barack Obama won in squeakers. In fact, the only recent president to lose his bid for a second term with a positive net approval rating was Gerald Ford in 1976. (That said, he had a fairly weak approval rating — just 43.6 percent, lower than Trump’s on Election Day in 2020. A relatively high share of Americans had no opinion of him, which may have made it easier for his opponent, Carter, to win them over.) That means the only president with a negative net approval rating to win a second term was Harry S. Truman in 1948 — an election still upheld as one of the most shocking upsets of all time.
Trump is setting a dangerous precedent for American democracy
That said, a president’s approval rating is hardly the last word. Elections, after all, are a choice between (at least) two candidates. But in the case of 2020, it looks like President-elect Biden was indeed more popular than Trump, at least according to Biden’s favorability ratings. (Favorability ratings and approval ratings aren’t quite the same thing, but they are pretty close.) And according to an average of favorability polls conducted during the week before Election Day, Biden had a 51.0 percent favorability rating and a 43.9 percent unfavorability rating, for a net favorability rating of +7.0 points. Meanwhile, Trump’s average net favorability rating in those same polls (-10.8 points, or 43.1 percent favorable vs. 53.9 percent unfavorable) was slightly worse than his net approval rating.
Americans viewed Biden pretty favorably Polls of Joe Biden’s favorability and unfavorability ratings conducted up to a week before Election Day Dates Pollster Fav. Unfav. Net Nov. 2-3 McLaughlin & Associates 52% 45% +7 Oct. 31-Nov. 2 YouGov/The Economist 51 48 +3 Oct. 29-Nov. 1 Léger 47 45 +2 Oct. 29-Nov. 1 Change Research/CNBC 50 44 +5 Oct. 28-Nov. 1 Quinnipiac University 49 42 +7 Oct. 29-31 Morning Consult 52 46 +6 Oct. 29-31 NBC News/The Wall Street Journal 45 42 +3 Oct. 27-29 Fox News 55 44 +11 Oct. 27-29 Gravis Marketing 59 38 +21 Oct. 27-28 Harris/Harvard 50 45 +5 Average 51.0 43.9 +7.0 When one poll released favorability numbers among multiple populations, we used the group most likely to vote — for example, we preferred samples of likely voters over samples of registered voters. Only the last iteration of the Morning Consult tracking poll is used. Source: Polls
Since elections essentially boil down to a popularity contest, the fact that Biden was better-liked than Trump on Election Day probably helped him win where Hillary Clinton (who was as unpopular as Trump in 2016) lost. Biden may have had an easier time winning over voters with a low opinion of Trump simply because fewer of them had a low opinion of him — a problem that doomed Clinton.
What might happen to Trump’s and Biden’s popularity from here? Historically, new presidents have enjoyed a honeymoon phase where they become better-liked shortly after winning the election and taking office. And according to a couple new polls, Biden’s may already have begun. According to a Gallup poll of American adults out this week, Biden’s favorable rating is now 55 percent — 6 points higher than it was in late October and the highest it has been in that survey since before he announced he was running for president. And last week’s Morning Consult/Politico poll gave Biden a 57 percent favorable rating and a 41 percent unfavorable rating among registered voters — a vast improvement over his +6-point net favorability in their last pre-election survey together, in late October.
[Related: Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard]
That said, not all pollsters are picking up on this. Biden’s net favorability rating is just +2 points among registered voters in last week’s YouGov/The Economist poll, barely changed from their final pre-election survey. And Harris/Harvard put his net favorability rating among registered voters at +6 points the week before Thanksgiving, basically the same as they found right before the election. So we need more data before we can safely proclaim that Biden’s honeymoon is underway — especially since honeymoon periods may be increasingly elusive in this era of high partisanship.
As for Trump, presidents often become more popular once they leave office and people start viewing their tenures through rose-colored glasses. It’s too soon to say whether that’s going to happen with Trump; his approval rating has hovered steadily in the 44-45 percent range since Nov. 3. That said, 44-45 percent is among the highest approval rating he has achieved over the last four years — so a handful of people who didn’t approve of his job performance for most of his presidency do approve of it now. It will be interesting to see if this trend continues, especially if he runs again for president in 2024.
Other polling bites
With the promise of a coronavirus vaccine finally on the horizon, a new SurveyMonkey/Fortune poll finds that 40 percent of U.S. adults want to get the vaccine as soon as it becomes available. However, another 39 percent said they want to wait a while before getting it, and 19 percent said they never want to get the vaccine. Republicans (30 percent) and Black Americans (25 percent) were especially likely say they would turn down the vaccine.
In Ipsos’s latest coronavirus survey, conducted the two days before Thanksgiving, 62 percent of Americans said they were canceling their typical holiday travel plans, and 66 percent said they were doing more holiday shopping digitally this year.
We at FiveThirtyEight were glued to the election results as they came in about a month ago, and it turns out we weren’t alone. According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, 36 percent of Americans say they followed the results of the election “almost constantly,” while another 34 percent “checked in fairly often.” Twenty-two percent said they “checked in occasionally,” while only 7 percent “tuned out entirely.”
A Nov. 17-19 survey by Harris X/The Hill found that 60 percent of registered voters support Biden canceling up to $50,000 of student debt per person — something that prominent Senate Democrats are reportedly pressuring him to do via executive order.
A new poll from Research Co. has found that Americans disagree, 58 percent to 33 percent, with a proposal to lower the federal voting age to 16. However, they agree, 64 percent to 27 percent, with letting legal permanent residents (i.e., green-card holders) vote.
While 2020 is a year that few people will remember fondly, Americans are at least optimistic that 2021 will be better. According to a recent YouGov survey, 48 percent of adults think 2021 will be a better year for them personally than 2020 has been; 28 percent think it will be about the same, and only 9 percent think it will be worse.
Trump approval
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker, 43.6 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 52.8 percent disapprove (a net approval rating of -9.2 points). At this time last week, 44.1 percent approved and 52.6 percent disapproved (a net approval rating of -8.5 points). One month ago, Trump had an approval rating of 44.6 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.6 percent, for a net approval rating of -8.1 points.
How to make polls better | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-04--Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard

Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard

In this episode of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Galen Druke talks with two A+ rated pollsters — J. Ann @ @ @ @ @ about the challenges of polling and how to fix them .

In this episode of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Galen Druke talks with two A+ rated pollsters — J. Ann Selzer and Patrick Murray — about the challenges of polling and how to fix them.
[Related: Polling 101: What Happened To The Polls In 2016 — And What You Should Know About Them In 2020]


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-07--Don’t Believe Anything The 2020 Exit Polls Tell You

Since the 2020 election , you may have seen headlines make bold claims about how certain demographic groups voted .
@ @ @ @ @ explains , it ’ s always difficult to figure out trends in voter preferences — @ @ @ @ @ made it harder .

Since the 2020 election, you may have seen headlines make bold claims about how certain demographic groups voted. As quantitative editor Laura Bronner explains, it’s always difficult to figure out trends in voter preferences — and a pandemic has only made it harder.
[Related: Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard]
How to make polls better | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-07--Latest Polls Of The Georgia Senate Runoff Elections

No candidate in either of Georgia ’ s Senate races won a majority of the vote on Nov. 3 , @ @ @ @ @ seats , with the top two candidates in each race facing off .
Control of @ @ @ @ @ the outcome of these two races .
The Senate currently stands at 50 Republicans and @ @ @ @ @ win both runoffs , the party will have control of the chamber because Vice President-elect @ @ @ @ @ ties .
But if Republicans win one of the two races , they will maintain @ @ @ @ @ averages use all runoff polls conducted since the Nov. 3 general election .
We adjust @ @ @ @ @ on how much each poll differs from the polling consensus .

Our polling averages for these races are final and no longer updating.
Latest Polls Of The Georgia Senate Runoffs Two runoff elections on Jan. 5 will determine which party controls the Senate
No candidate in either of Georgia’s Senate races won a majority of the vote on Nov. 3, triggering a runoff for both seats, with the top two candidates in each race facing off. Control of the Senate now hinges on the outcome of these two races.
Georgia’s regular Senate election Republican Sen. David Perdue is running for reelection against Democrat Jon Ossoff in a regularly scheduled election. Georgia’s special Senate election Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler faces Democrat Raphael Warnock in a special election. Loeffler was appointed to fill former Sen. Johnny Isakson’s seat after he resigned.
The Senate currently stands at 50 Republicans and 48 Democrats. If Democrats win both runoffs, the party will have control of the chamber because Vice President-elect Kamala Harris would break any ties. But if Republicans win one of the two races, they will maintain control.
All runoff polls FiveThirtyEight’s averages use all runoff polls conducted since the Nov. 3 general election. We adjust polls for house effects based on how much each poll differs from the polling consensus.


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-07--What The Polls Say About Georgia’s Senate Runoffs

Headed into the 2020 election , we knew that Election Day might turn into Election Week or even Election Month because of the huge increase in mail voting due to the coronavirus pandemic .
While it thankfully didn ’ t take a month to find out who won the presidency or which party will control the House , we are still in the dark about who will control the U.S. Senate .
The answer now hinges on Georgia and its two Senate races .
That ’ s right , Georgia is holding an unprecedented double runoff for both its Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Hollywood-style flourish , these two races will decide which party controls the chamber in the next Congress .
In other words , Georgia is now at the center of the political universe , and the outcome here is uncertain considering the state just voted Democratic in the presidential election for the first time in 28 years .
We don ’ t have a ton of polls of these runoffs yet , but FiveThirtyEight is rolling out its polling averages for both of the contests today to help everyone keep tabs on where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not forecasts like the ones we published for the White House , Senate and House before the November election ; they do not account for non-polling factors such as the state ’ s base partisanship , demographics or candidate quality .
They are simply a fancy snapshot of what the polling says right now . )
And based on the initial wave of polls conducted since the Nov. 3 general election , both runoff races look very close .
In the regularly scheduled Senate race , Republican Sen. David Perdue is roughly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the special election , Democrat Raphael Warnock holds a narrow lead over Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler ( who was appointed in January 2020 to fill a vacancy , which is why she ’ s up for election ) .
As we said at the outset , there hasn ’ t been a ton of polling yet , so it ’ s hard to read too much into the few polls we do have .
But less than a week after the general election , GOP pollster Remington Research went into the field @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the regularly scheduled contest and Loeffler and Warnock locked in a virtual tie in the special election .
Then in mid-November , Insider Advantage/Fox5 Atlanta found both sets of candidates running neck and neck .
Two late-November polls were somewhat more bullish for Democrats .
RMG Research/PoliticalIQ found both races to be very tight but with Ossoff and Warnock leading by 1 and 2 points , respectively , while a SurveyUSA/WXIA-TV poll gave Ossoff a 2-point edge over Perdue and Warnock a 7-point lead over Loeffler .
Lastly , Republican pollster Trafalgar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ showed Ossoff and Perdue separated by less than 1 point , but Loeffler ahead by about 5 points .
Of course , some may wonder if it ’ s worth putting much stock in these runoff surveys after polls across the country underestimated President Trump ’ s support in November .
But remember the polls in Georgia actually did pretty well : Biden led by 1.2 points in FiveThirtyEight ’ s final Georgia polling average , and he wound up winning the state by about 0.3 points , meaning the polls were only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we don ’ t think you should dismiss these runoff polls just yet .
Unsurprisingly , the runoff polls show the two races shaping up pretty similarly to each other , and the expectation is that each party ’ s vote share will be about the same in both races , much as they were in the initial vote .
In the regular contest , Perdue won 49.7 percent support while Ossoff garnered 47.9 percent .
Because of Georgia ’ s rules for holding special elections , that contest included multiple contenders from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total for each party was still very close to the Perdue-Ossoff split : The Republican candidates combined had a narrow 1-point edge , 49.4 percent to 48.4 percent , over the Democrats .
Now , it ’ s true that Democrats running in the special election did slightly better than Ossoff , but one key challenge for both Loeffler and Warnock in the special election is that each will have to consolidate support from voters who backed other candidates in the first round of the special election .
( Republican candidates other than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than Warnock won 15.5 percent . )
But in such a polarized and partisan environment , both Democratic and Republican voters should mostly come home to their nominees .
Take the latest SurveyUSA poll of the race , where Warnock attracted 97 percent of Democrats and Loeffler won 92 percent of Republicans .
It was a similar story with the InsideAdvantage survey : Warnock won 94 percent of Democrats while Loeffler won 89 percent of Republicans .
That means much of the race could boil down to how independents swing ; in SurveyUSA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they split almost evenly in both races .
But with about four weeks of campaigning to go , voters ’ preferences could change .
The state is already being bombarded with arguments from both sides : A staggering $ 283 million has been spent on TV ads , and observers estimate that the total could reach half a billion dollars when all is said and done .
Trump himself held a rally there on Saturday , which could inspire his base to turn out for Loeffler and Perdue but could also incite Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Georgia , as you may have heard , is now a purple state ; in fact , it was the state decided by the smallest margin in the 2020 presidential election . )
But not all of the messaging is consistent , at least on the GOP side : Some pro-Trump figures who still ( falsely ) insist that last month ’ s presidential vote in Georgia was rigged are urging Republicans not to participate in an election they do not view as fair .
While it seems unlikely that the message can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drive up turnout , there are signs that Republicans ’ current lack of faith in the electoral process could keep some of them away from the ballot box .
According to the SurveyUSA poll , just 16 percent of Republicans said they had “ full confidence ” that runoff votes will be counted accurately , although there ’ s no reason to think they won ’ t be .
And among registered voters who backed Trump in November but said they aren ’ t likely to vote in the runoffs , 23 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay home was that they believed the voting process was rigged .
We ’ ll hopefully get a clearer picture of the evolution of the race as we get more polls in the coming weeks , so be sure to bookmark our Georgia runoff polling averages and check back regularly .
For now , though , the early polls suggest both contests will be quite competitive , and while the GOP has historically done better in Georgia runoffs than in the preceding general election , there ’ s never been a runoff like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only who will be Georgia ’ s next two senators , but also which party will control the entire Senate .

Headed into the 2020 election, we knew that Election Day might turn into Election Week or even Election Month because of the huge increase in mail voting due to the coronavirus pandemic. While it thankfully didn’t take a month to find out who won the presidency or which party will control the House, we are still in the dark about who will control the U.S. Senate.
The answer now hinges on Georgia and its two Senate races. That’s right, Georgia is holding an unprecedented double runoff for both its Senate seats on Jan. 5, and in a Hollywood-style flourish, these two races will decide which party controls the chamber in the next Congress. In other words, Georgia is now at the center of the political universe, and the outcome here is uncertain considering the state just voted Democratic in the presidential election for the first time in 28 years.
Don’t believe anything 2020 exit polls tell you | FiveThirtyEight
We don’t have a ton of polls of these runoffs yet, but FiveThirtyEight is rolling out its polling averages for both of the contests today to help everyone keep tabs on where things stand. (Note that these are not forecasts like the ones we published for the White House, Senate and House before the November election; they do not account for non-polling factors such as the state’s base partisanship, demographics or candidate quality. They are simply a fancy snapshot of what the polling says right now.)
[Related: There Wasn’t That Much Split-Ticket Voting In 2020]
And based on the initial wave of polls conducted since the Nov. 3 general election, both runoff races look very close. In the regularly scheduled Senate race, Republican Sen. David Perdue is roughly tied with Democrat Jon Ossoff, while in the special election, Democrat Raphael Warnock holds a narrow lead over Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler (who was appointed in January 2020 to fill a vacancy, which is why she’s up for election).
As we said at the outset, there hasn’t been a ton of polling yet, so it’s hard to read too much into the few polls we do have. But less than a week after the general election, GOP pollster Remington Research went into the field and found Perdue ahead by 4 points in the regularly scheduled contest and Loeffler and Warnock locked in a virtual tie in the special election. Then in mid-November, Insider Advantage/Fox5 Atlanta found both sets of candidates running neck and neck. Two late-November polls were somewhat more bullish for Democrats. RMG Research/PoliticalIQ found both races to be very tight but with Ossoff and Warnock leading by 1 and 2 points, respectively, while a SurveyUSA/WXIA-TV poll gave Ossoff a 2-point edge over Perdue and Warnock a 7-point lead over Loeffler. Lastly, Republican pollster Trafalgar Group just released an early-December poll that showed Ossoff and Perdue separated by less than 1 point, but Loeffler ahead by about 5 points.
Of course, some may wonder if it’s worth putting much stock in these runoff surveys after polls across the country underestimated President Trump’s support in November. But remember the polls in Georgia actually did pretty well: Biden led by 1.2 points in FiveThirtyEight’s final Georgia polling average, and he wound up winning the state by about 0.3 points, meaning the polls were only off by about a point. So we don’t think you should dismiss these runoff polls just yet.
Unsurprisingly, the runoff polls show the two races shaping up pretty similarly to each other, and the expectation is that each party’s vote share will be about the same in both races, much as they were in the initial vote. In the regular contest, Perdue won 49.7 percent support while Ossoff garnered 47.9 percent. Because of Georgia’s rules for holding special elections, that contest included multiple contenders from each party, but the aggregate vote total for each party was still very close to the Perdue-Ossoff split: The Republican candidates combined had a narrow 1-point edge, 49.4 percent to 48.4 percent, over the Democrats.
Now, it’s true that Democrats running in the special election did slightly better than Ossoff, but one key challenge for both Loeffler and Warnock in the special election is that each will have to consolidate support from voters who backed other candidates in the first round of the special election. (Republican candidates other than Loeffler won 23.5 percent while Democrats other than Warnock won 15.5 percent.) But in such a polarized and partisan environment, both Democratic and Republican voters should mostly come home to their nominees.
[Related: Democrats’ 2020 House And Senate Map Could Spell Trouble In Future Elections]
Take the latest SurveyUSA poll of the race, where Warnock attracted 97 percent of Democrats and Loeffler won 92 percent of Republicans. It was a similar story with the InsideAdvantage survey: Warnock won 94 percent of Democrats while Loeffler won 89 percent of Republicans. That means much of the race could boil down to how independents swing; in SurveyUSA’s poll, for instance, they split almost evenly in both races. But with about four weeks of campaigning to go, voters’ preferences could change.
The state is already being bombarded with arguments from both sides: A staggering $283 million has been spent on TV ads, and observers estimate that the total could reach half a billion dollars when all is said and done. Trump himself held a rally there on Saturday, which could inspire his base to turn out for Loeffler and Perdue but could also incite Democrats to turn out in opposition. (Georgia, as you may have heard, is now a purple state; in fact, it was the state decided by the smallest margin in the 2020 presidential election.)
But not all of the messaging is consistent, at least on the GOP side: Some pro-Trump figures who still (falsely) insist that last month’s presidential vote in Georgia was rigged are urging Republicans not to participate in an election they do not view as fair. While it seems unlikely that the message can compete with a nine-digit ad campaign to drive up turnout, there are signs that Republicans’ current lack of faith in the electoral process could keep some of them away from the ballot box. According to the SurveyUSA poll, just 16 percent of Republicans said they had “full confidence” that runoff votes will be counted accurately, although there’s no reason to think they won’t be. And among registered voters who backed Trump in November but said they aren’t likely to vote in the runoffs, 23 percent said the main reason they planned to stay home was that they believed the voting process was rigged.
We’ll hopefully get a clearer picture of the evolution of the race as we get more polls in the coming weeks, so be sure to bookmark our Georgia runoff polling averages and check back regularly. For now, though, the early polls suggest both contests will be quite competitive, and while the GOP has historically done better in Georgia runoffs than in the preceding general election, there’s never been a runoff like this before — one that will decide not only who will be Georgia’s next two senators, but also which party will control the entire Senate.
Will Georgia stay blue? | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-08--How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map

Presidential elections are decided at the margins , meaning how a handful of states shift from one election to the next can be enough to cast one party out of the White House and bring the other one in .
This was certainly true in 2020 , as Joe Biden edged out President Trump thanks to narrow victories in key swing states such as Arizona , Georgia , Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — all states Trump carried in 2016 .
However , it wasn ’ t a uniform swing .
The size and scope of these shifts varied , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some formerly blue states returned to their pre-2016 status ; some once-red states lurched to the left , in some cases even voting Democratic for the first time in decades ; and some competitive states didn ’ t shift much at all .
Below , we ’ ve broken out how 16 battleground states voted since 2000 and what the ever-changing Electoral College map could mean going forward .
The “ blue wall ” went once again Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , from 2000 to 2020 Let ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blue wall ” that Biden won back .
By winning Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in addition to every state Hillary Clinton carried in 2016 , Biden clinched the presidency .
In fact , it looks like Wisconsin will be the tipping-point state in the Electoral College , or the state that delivered Biden the presidency , although we ’ re still awaiting the final vote certification in several states .
And even though these states ended up in Biden ’ s column , his margin of victory was pretty narrow .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Pennsylvania by a little more than 1 point , and Wisconsin by less than 1 point .
Granted , Trump carried each of these states by less than 1 point in 2016 , but Biden ’ s margins were slim and it 's unclear moving forward whether these states will remain blue .
Biden was able to win these three states by improving on Clinton ’ s margins in predominantly suburban and exurban counties around big cities like Detroit , Milwaukee and Philadelphia , where more white voters with a college degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trend that was true across the country .
In fact , it was thanks to gains in these types of places that Biden was able to offset Trump ’ s otherwise much stronger performance in rural areas , as well as Trump ’ s slight improvement in the city of Philadelphia proper .
Case in point : Even though Biden is on track to win by a slightly larger national margin than Barack Obama in 2012 , his margins in Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were much smaller than Obama ’ s in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these states have changed since 2008 , gradually ( or , in some cases , not so gradually ) shifting to the right .
Part of this boils down to demographics .
Non-Hispanic white voters without a four-year college degree , who make up a majority of the population in these three states,1 have moved sharply toward the GOP in the Trump era .
And while some pre-election polling suggested these voters might not back Trump to the same extent as they did four years ago , it appears that wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ college degree not only stuck with Trump in 2020 — in some places , they even supported him by even greater margins .
But Biden ’ s victory didn ’ t just involve winning back historically blue turf .
He also won by breaking through in two traditionally Republican states in the Sun Belt , Arizona and Georgia , which have gradually shifted blue in the Trump era .
Two Sun Belt states went for the first time in more than 20 years Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then-GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney by 9 points in 2012 , Arizona shifted more than 5 points toward the Democrats in 2016 and then another 4 points in 2020 to hand Biden a slim 0.3-point win .
Similarly , Georgia went for Romney by 8 points in 2012 , but then shifted about 3 points toward Democrats in 2016 before moving another 5 points in 2020 , which was enough for Biden to carry it by about 0.3 points .
The fact these two states ended up in Biden ’ s win column @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though , as the 2018 midterm elections foreshadowed Biden ’ s potential to carry each state .
Democrats won a U.S. Senate seat in Arizona for the first time since 1988 and lost Georgia ’ s governorship by about 1 point .
Biden won these two states in large part by improving upon Democrats ’ performance in each state ’ s metro area .
For instance , he won Maricopa County , which includes Phoenix and usually makes up 60 percent of Arizona ’ s total vote share , by 2 points .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ area , improving on Clinton ’ s margin in the 10 counties that make up the Atlanta Regional Commission by 9 points , enabling him to win Georgia .
Biden was also aided by the fact that both of these states are more racially diverse than states in the Upper Midwest .
While the same forces at work in Arizona and Georgia were also a part of the story in North Carolina and Texas , these two states still ultimately remained in Trump ’ s column .
Other southern states shifted to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , from 2000 to 2020 In both states , Biden did better in the more diverse and well-educated major metropolitan areas , but that proved insufficient .
However , he still made some gains .
In Texas , for instance , Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry Tarrant County ( Fort Worth ) since 1964 , and in North Carolina , he improved on Clinton ’ s margins in the two most populous counties in the state , Mecklenburg ( Charlotte ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even carried some suburban and exurban counties that Trump won in 2016 , such as Williamson County outside of Austin , Texas , and New Hanover County , North Carolina ( Wilmington ) .
But Trump still piled up a vote haul in Texas ’ s extensive rural areas and mid-sized cities large enough to overcome Biden ’ s improvement in the state ’ s major metro areas .
And in North Carolina , Biden lost ground in places where a large share of white voters don ’ t have a four-year college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton in some rural North Carolina counties with large Black populations and in many heavily Latino Texas counties along the U.S.-Mexico border .
Even as southern states like Georgia , North Carolina and Texas moved to the left in this election , one nearby battleground did not : Florida .
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , from 2000 to 2020 Long regarded as a pivotal swing state , Florida was one of the few states that voted more Republican in 2020 , with Trump carrying Florida by more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 point four years ago .
Part of the reason Trump was able to bolster his margin in Florida and move the state further to the right was because of his improved showing among Hispanic voters , especially Cuban Americans .
Trump ultimately didn ’ t win urban counties like Miami-Dade , but it is where he improved the most , in part because of his increased support among Cuban American voters .
( Miami-Dade is roughly one-third Cuban , and areas where Cubans were more heavily concentrated saw the biggest swings toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote share in Osceola County , which has a large Puerto Rican population , although not by nearly as much as in Miami-Dade .
But by narrowing his deficit with Hispanic voters in addition to once again running up huge margins in more rural parts of the state , Trump managed to win a larger share of Florida ’ s vote than he did in 2016 .
As Florida — generally considered a purple state — voted more Republican for the fourth cycle in a row , five other ostensibly purple states that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some of them featured very tight races in 2016 , but the 2020 results , if anything , suggest that a couple may not really be battleground states moving forward — at least in presidential contests .
The `` `` states that easily went for Biden ... Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , from 2000 to 2020 ... including some states that went narrowly for Clinton After moving away from the GOP in the Obama era , and sticking with Democrats in 2016 , Colorado and Virginia went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2020 , calling into question just how “ swingy ” they really are .
At the very least , the Trump GOP appears to be a poor fit in these states , as both have relatively diverse populations — Colorado ’ s population is about one-fifth Hispanic and Virginia ’ s is about one-fifth Black — and their white residents are more likely to hold a four-year college degree than those in any other battleground state .
What ’ s more , the big metropolitan areas in each state have also moved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with the Denver area and Washington , D.C. , suburbs in northern Virginia becoming deep blue .
As for the three other states that narrowly went for Clinton in 2016 — Maine , Minnesota and New Hampshire — we might not want to revoke their purple-state status just yet .
However , they did return to roughly where they were pre-2016 , backing Biden by high , single-digit margins .
Yes , each of these states are among the more rural states — and Trump did have an advantage in the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maine ’ s 2nd Congressional District , where he won an electoral vote ) — but it still wasn ’ t enough to overcome the margins Biden ran up in the more populous parts of these states .
Not every battleground state saw movement in 2020 , though .
Iowa , Nevada and Ohio ended up with roughly the same margin as in 2016 , despite polls showing a close race in both Iowa and Ohio .
Some barely budged at all Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state , from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s rather decisive victories in Iowa and Ohio is that those states aren ’ t really battlegrounds anymore , and instead may have experienced a permanent shift to the right after being quite competitive prior to 2016 .
Considering both states have a large share of white voters without a college degree , this makes sense , as these results speak to just how entrenched this group has become with the GOP .
Biden did gain some ground in urban and suburban counties in these states , but less populous areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further to the right — keeping both states firmly in Republican hands .
Meanwhile , Biden did hold steady in Nevada , but the fact the state didn ’ t nudge toward the left could spell opportunity for Republicans down the road .
While Nevada is far more ethnically diverse than Iowa and Ohio ( its population is about 29 percent Hispanic ) , it ’ s similar to those two Midwestern states in that its white voters are far less likely to have a four-year college degree than in many other battleground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slight improvement among Hispanic voters , that meant the president was able to reduce his deficit in Clark County ( Las Vegas ) , home to almost 70 percent of the state ’ s vote , by about 1 point while also still winning more votes in many of the state ’ s rural counties .
Biden ’ s gains in the Reno area , which has a higher share of white voters with a college degree , cancelled out shifts elsewhere in the state , but it ’ s possible Democrats could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ahead .
All in all , the shifts we witnessed in the 2020 election give us at least some clues to how the Electoral College map may look going forward .
Arizona and Georgia will likely now be seen as key swing states , while Colorado , Virginia , Iowa and Ohio may no longer be in the conversation around battleground states .
Meanwhile , Florida ’ s shift to the right could make it a firmer linchpin in Republican electoral strategy , as Democrats will likely turn to North Carolina and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can make them winnable in the near future .
After all , as we saw in 2020 , it ’ s small shifts that can change the outcome of an election .

Presidential elections are decided at the margins, meaning how a handful of states shift from one election to the next can be enough to cast one party out of the White House and bring the other one in. This was certainly true in 2020, as Joe Biden edged out President Trump thanks to narrow victories in key swing states such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — all states Trump carried in 2016. However, it wasn’t a uniform swing. The size and scope of these shifts varied, and many may not be lasting. Some formerly blue states returned to their pre-2016 status; some once-red states lurched to the left, in some cases even voting Democratic for the first time in decades; and some competitive states didn’t shift much at all. Below, we’ve broken out how 16 battleground states voted since 2000 and what the ever-changing Electoral College map could mean going forward.
The “blue wall” went blue once again
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
Pennsylvania Wisconsin Michigan
Let’s start with the much fabled “blue wall” that Biden won back. By winning Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in addition to every state Hillary Clinton carried in 2016, Biden clinched the presidency. In fact, it looks like Wisconsin will be the tipping-point state in the Electoral College, or the state that delivered Biden the presidency, although we’re still awaiting the final vote certification in several states.
And even though these states ended up in Biden’s column, his margin of victory was pretty narrow. He won Michigan by about 3 percentage points, Pennsylvania by a little more than 1 point, and Wisconsin by less than 1 point. Granted, Trump carried each of these states by less than 1 point in 2016, but Biden’s margins were slim and it's unclear moving forward whether these states will remain blue.
Biden was able to win these three states by improving on Clinton’s margins in predominantly suburban and exurban counties around big cities like Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, where more white voters with a college degree backed the Democratic presidential ticket — a trend that was true across the country. In fact, it was thanks to gains in these types of places that Biden was able to offset Trump’s otherwise much stronger performance in rural areas, as well as Trump’s slight improvement in the city of Philadelphia proper. Case in point: Even though Biden is on track to win by a slightly larger national margin than Barack Obama in 2012, his margins in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were much smaller than Obama’s in 2012.
This underscores just how much these states have changed since 2008, gradually (or, in some cases, not so gradually) shifting to the right. Part of this boils down to demographics. Non-Hispanic white voters without a four-year college degree, who make up a majority of the population in these three states,1 have moved sharply toward the GOP in the Trump era. And while some pre-election polling suggested these voters might not back Trump to the same extent as they did four years ago, it appears that wasn’t the case. White voters without a college degree not only stuck with Trump in 2020 — in some places, they even supported him by even greater margins.
But Biden’s victory didn’t just involve winning back historically blue turf. He also won by breaking through in two traditionally Republican states in the Sun Belt, Arizona and Georgia, which have gradually shifted blue in the Trump era.
Two Sun Belt states went blue for the first time in more than 20 years
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
Arizona Georgia
After comfortably backing then-GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney by 9 points in 2012, Arizona shifted more than 5 points toward the Democrats in 2016 and then another 4 points in 2020 to hand Biden a slim 0.3-point win. Similarly, Georgia went for Romney by 8 points in 2012, but then shifted about 3 points toward Democrats in 2016 before moving another 5 points in 2020, which was enough for Biden to carry it by about 0.3 points. The fact these two states ended up in Biden’s win column wasn’t a total surprise, though, as the 2018 midterm elections foreshadowed Biden’s potential to carry each state. Democrats won a U.S. Senate seat in Arizona for the first time since 1988 and lost Georgia’s governorship by about 1 point.
Biden won these two states in large part by improving upon Democrats’ performance in each state’s metro area. For instance, he won Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix and usually makes up 60 percent of Arizona’s total vote share, by 2 points. He also surged in the Atlanta metro area, improving on Clinton’s margin in the 10 counties that make up the Atlanta Regional Commission by 9 points, enabling him to win Georgia. Biden was also aided by the fact that both of these states are more racially diverse than states in the Upper Midwest.
While the same forces at work in Arizona and Georgia were also a part of the story in North Carolina and Texas, these two states still ultimately remained in Trump’s column.
Other southern states shifted to the left , but they didn't flip
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
North Carolina Texas
In both states, Biden did better in the more diverse and well-educated major metropolitan areas, but that proved insufficient. However, he still made some gains. In Texas, for instance, Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry Tarrant County (Fort Worth) since 1964, and in North Carolina, he improved on Clinton’s margins in the two most populous counties in the state, Mecklenburg (Charlotte) and Wake (Raleigh). He even carried some suburban and exurban counties that Trump won in 2016, such as Williamson County outside of Austin, Texas, and New Hanover County, North Carolina (Wilmington).
But Trump still piled up a vote haul in Texas’s extensive rural areas and mid-sized cities large enough to overcome Biden’s improvement in the state’s major metro areas. And in North Carolina, Biden lost ground in places where a large share of white voters don’t have a four-year college degree. He also did worse than Clinton in some rural North Carolina counties with large Black populations and in many heavily Latino Texas counties along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Even as southern states like Georgia, North Carolina and Texas moved to the left in this election, one nearby battleground did not: Florida.
Is Florida a Republican state now?
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
Florida
Long regarded as a pivotal swing state, Florida was one of the few states that voted more Republican in 2020, with Trump carrying Florida by more than 3 points after winning there by just 1 point four years ago.
Part of the reason Trump was able to bolster his margin in Florida and move the state further to the right was because of his improved showing among Hispanic voters, especially Cuban Americans. Trump ultimately didn’t win urban counties like Miami-Dade, but it is where he improved the most, in part because of his increased support among Cuban American voters. (Miami-Dade is roughly one-third Cuban, and areas where Cubans were more heavily concentrated saw the biggest swings toward Trump.) Trump also improved his vote share in Osceola County, which has a large Puerto Rican population, although not by nearly as much as in Miami-Dade.
But by narrowing his deficit with Hispanic voters in addition to once again running up huge margins in more rural parts of the state, Trump managed to win a larger share of Florida’s vote than he did in 2016. As Florida — generally considered a purple state — voted more Republican for the fourth cycle in a row, five other ostensibly purple states that in the end went pretty decisively blue. Some of them featured very tight races in 2016, but the 2020 results, if anything, suggest that a couple may not really be battleground states moving forward — at least in presidential contests.
The " purple " states that easily went for Biden ...
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
Colorado Virginia
... including some states that went narrowly for Clinton
Maine Minnesota New Hampshire
After moving away from the GOP in the Obama era, and sticking with Democrats in 2016, Colorado and Virginia went for Biden by more than 10 points in 2020, calling into question just how “swingy” they really are. At the very least, the Trump GOP appears to be a poor fit in these states, as both have relatively diverse populations — Colorado’s population is about one-fifth Hispanic and Virginia’s is about one-fifth Black — and their white residents are more likely to hold a four-year college degree than those in any other battleground state. What’s more, the big metropolitan areas in each state have also moved sharply toward the Democrats in recent years, with the Denver area and Washington, D.C., suburbs in northern Virginia becoming deep blue.
As for the three other states that narrowly went for Clinton in 2016 — Maine, Minnesota and New Hampshire — we might not want to revoke their purple-state status just yet. However, they did return to roughly where they were pre-2016, backing Biden by high, single-digit margins. Yes, each of these states are among the more rural states — and Trump did have an advantage in the most rural parts of these states (see Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, where he won an electoral vote) — but it still wasn’t enough to overcome the margins Biden ran up in the more populous parts of these states.
Not every battleground state saw movement in 2020, though. Iowa, Nevada and Ohio ended up with roughly the same margin as in 2016, despite polls showing a close race in both Iowa and Ohio.
Some swing states barely budged at all
Democratic or Republican presidential vote share margin by state, from 2000 to 2020
Nevada Iowa Ohio
One way to read Trump’s rather decisive victories in Iowa and Ohio is that those states aren’t really battlegrounds anymore, and instead may have experienced a permanent shift to the right after being quite competitive prior to 2016. Considering both states have a large share of white voters without a college degree, this makes sense, as these results speak to just how entrenched this group has become with the GOP. Biden did gain some ground in urban and suburban counties in these states, but less populous areas stuck with Trump — or even moved further to the right — keeping both states firmly in Republican hands.
Meanwhile, Biden did hold steady in Nevada, but the fact the state didn’t nudge toward the left could spell opportunity for Republicans down the road. While Nevada is far more ethnically diverse than Iowa and Ohio (its population is about 29 percent Hispanic), it’s similar to those two Midwestern states in that its white voters are far less likely to have a four-year college degree than in many other battleground states. Coupled with Trump’s slight improvement among Hispanic voters, that meant the president was able to reduce his deficit in Clark County (Las Vegas), home to almost 70 percent of the state’s vote, by about 1 point while also still winning more votes in many of the state’s rural counties. Biden’s gains in the Reno area, which has a higher share of white voters with a college degree, cancelled out shifts elsewhere in the state, but it’s possible Democrats could have trouble holding onto Nevada in the years ahead.
All in all, the shifts we witnessed in the 2020 election give us at least some clues to how the Electoral College map may look going forward. Arizona and Georgia will likely now be seen as key swing states, while Colorado, Virginia, Iowa and Ohio may no longer be in the conversation around battleground states. Meanwhile, Florida’s shift to the right could make it a firmer linchpin in Republican electoral strategy, as Democrats will likely turn to North Carolina and Texas in the hopes that demographic change can make them winnable in the near future. After all, as we saw in 2020, it’s small shifts that can change the outcome of an election.


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-09--Politics Podcast: The Electoral Challenges Facing The Republican Party

The November election was the seventh time in eight elections that Republicans lost the national popular vote and was a @ @ @ @ @ president .
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew asks why @ @ @ @ @ the challenges facing the Republican Party electorally .
They also check in on FiveThirtyEight ’ @ @ @ @ @ of the Senate runoff elections in Georgia .
You can listen to the episode by @ @ @ @ @ button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN @ @ @ @ @ platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The @ @ @ @ @ Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating @ @ @ @ @ Have a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” @ @ @ @ @ email , on Twitter or in the comments .

The November election was the seventh time in eight presidential elections that Republicans lost the national popular vote, and it was a rare loss for an incumbent president. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew asks why President Trump lost and considers the challenges facing the GOP electorally. They also check in on FiveThirtyEight’s newly launched polling average of the Senate runoff elections in Georgia.
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 is recorded 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--2020-12-07--Exit Polls Came Up Short This Year. Here’s Why.

Since the 2020 election , you may have seen headlines make bold claims about how certain demographic groups voted .
@ @ @ @ @ explains , it ’ s always difficult to figure out trends in voter preferences — @ @ @ @ @ made it harder .
[ Related : Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard ]


fivethirtyeight--2020-12-09--Where Are Georgia’s Senate Candidates Getting All That Cash From?

The extremely tight runoff elections for Senate in Georgia could end up being the two most expensive Senate races in U.S. history , and money is already pouring in .
In less than three weeks ( from Nov. 4 through Nov. 23 ) , grassroots fundraising platforms ActBlue and WinRed funneled a combined $ 167.6 million directly to the four candidates ’ campaigns .
And this doesn ’ t even include the money candidates have raised through more traditional means ( e.g.
, large donors writing checks ) , which we won ’ t have data for until Dec. 24 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports are due ) , or money being raised and spent by outside groups like super PACs .
Eventually , that will probably add millions of dollars to these totals ( especially for Republican Sens .
Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue , for whom online donations were a minority of total donations in the first round of voting ) .
That is far more than the same candidates raised on these platforms before the general election .
In fact , from Sept. 1 through Nov. 3 , the four campaigns raised only $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less than a third of the money in more than triple the amount of time .
As you can see in the chart below , donations skyrocketed a few days after Election Day , around the time it became clear that the runoffs would decide which party controls the Senate in 2021 .
The candidates raised a combined $ 46.1 million on Nov. 8 , 9 and 10 alone .
That is , in a word , bonkers .
But will all that money really matter ?
Most political science research has found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that big of a factor in partisan elections .
And while a large number of individual contributions can be a sign of grassroots enthusiasm for a candidate ( which , in turn , can predict electoral success ) , in this case most of those contributions are coming from out of state .
That means those eye-popping numbers might not tell us anything about how voters in Georgia feel about the candidates .
For example , 96 percent of the money Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff have raised for the runoff through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ ve raised a combined $ 4.3 million from Georgians on the platform , which puts the state seventh in cash donated to its own races via ActBlue , behind California ( $ 25.8 million ) , New York ( $ 10.6 million ) , Washington ( $ 6.2 million ) , Massachusetts ( $ 5.8 million ) , Texas ( $ 4.9 million ) and Florida ( $ 4.8 million ) .
Of course , a lot of that is because states like California and Texas simply have a lot more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a per capita basis , Georgians were only the 11th-biggest contributor to Warnock and Ossoff on ActBlue , giving $ 401 per 1,000 people .
In fact , the 10 states with more donations per capita are all known for being Democratic bastions , with Massachusetts ( $ 847 per 1,000 people ) and Washington ( $ 811 per 1,000 people ) leading the way .
But it ’ s not just Democrats who are receiving a lot of out-of-state money .
A full 92 percent of Republicans ’ runoff donations on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too .
And their top source of cash has also been California ( $ 6.8 million ) , followed by Texas ( $ 6.6 million ) , Florida ( $ 6.5 million ) and then Georgia ( $ 4.4 million ) .
But although Loeffler and Perdue have gotten less money overall through these platforms , after you control for population , they have gotten more money from Georgians ( $ 411 per 1,000 people ) than from residents of any other state ( Florida is a distant second , at $ 301 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you rummage through those jaw-dropping receipts , you discover that Warnock and Ossoff have gotten about the same amount in online donations from Georgians as Loeffler and Perdue have ( $ 4.3 million vs. $ 4.4 million ) .
While the Democrats probably aren ’ t disappointed to have so much more out-of-state money at their disposal , it might not be as helpful as you ’ d think for winning votes in Georgia itself .
After all , Democrats consistently trounced Republicans in the fundraising battle in 2020 Senate races but still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races .
It ’ s worth remembering , though , that the data we have so far is incomplete ; ActBlue and WinRed are just two of many sources for campaign cash .
There ’ s also still a long way to go ( 27 days , in fact ) until the finish line in Georgia , so it ’ s still anyone ’ s race — regardless of who is raking in the most money .

The extremely tight runoff elections for Senate in Georgia could end up being the two most expensive Senate races in U.S. history, and money is already pouring in.
Will Georgia stay blue? | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
In less than three weeks (from Nov. 4 through Nov. 23), grassroots fundraising platforms ActBlue and WinRed funneled a combined $167.6 million directly to the four candidates’ campaigns. And this doesn’t even include the money candidates have raised through more traditional means (e.g., large donors writing checks), which we won’t have data for until Dec. 24 (when the next Federal Election Commission reports are due), or money being raised and spent by outside groups like super PACs. Eventually, that will probably add millions of dollars to these totals (especially for Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, for whom online donations were a minority of total donations in the first round of voting).
An expensive Georgia runoff Money sent to each Georgia Senate runoff candidate via ActBlue or WinRed, Nov. 4-23 Candidate Party Money Raised Raphael Warnock D $57,117,111 Jon Ossoff D 54,886,783 David Perdue R 28,589,916 Kelly Loeffler R 26,995,653 Total 167,589,463 Sources: ActBlue, WinRed
That is far more than the same candidates raised on these platforms before the general election. In fact, from Sept. 1 through Nov. 3, the four campaigns raised only $50.4 million on ActBlue and WinRed — less than a third of the money in more than triple the amount of time. As you can see in the chart below, donations skyrocketed a few days after Election Day, around the time it became clear that the runoffs would decide which party controls the Senate in 2021. The candidates raised a combined $46.1 million on Nov. 8, 9 and 10 alone. That is, in a word, bonkers.
But will all that money really matter? Most political science research has found that campaign spending isn’t actually that big of a factor in partisan elections. And while a large number of individual contributions can be a sign of grassroots enthusiasm for a candidate (which, in turn, can predict electoral success), in this case most of those contributions are coming from out of state. That means those eye-popping numbers might not tell us anything about how voters in Georgia feel about the candidates.
[Related: Why The GOP Isn’t Able To Win The Popular Vote]
For example, 96 percent of the money Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff have raised for the runoff through ActBlue have come from out-of-state donors. They’ve raised a combined $4.3 million from Georgians on the platform, which puts the state seventh in cash donated to its own races via ActBlue, behind California ($25.8 million), New York ($10.6 million), Washington ($6.2 million), Massachusetts ($5.8 million), Texas ($4.9 million) and Florida ($4.8 million).
Of course, a lot of that is because states like California and Texas simply have a lot more people than other states. But even on a per capita basis, Georgians were only the 11th-biggest contributor to Warnock and Ossoff on ActBlue, giving $401 per 1,000 people. In fact, the 10 states with more donations per capita are all known for being Democratic bastions, with Massachusetts ($847 per 1,000 people) and Washington ($811 per 1,000 people) leading the way.
But it’s not just Democrats who are receiving a lot of out-of-state money. A full 92 percent of Republicans’ runoff donations on WinRed have come from outside Georgia, too. And their top source of cash has also been California ($6.8 million), followed by Texas ($6.6 million), Florida ($6.5 million) and then Georgia ($4.4 million ).
But although Loeffler and Perdue have gotten less money overall through these platforms, after you control for population, they have gotten more money from Georgians ($411 per 1,000 people) than from residents of any other state (Florida is a distant second, at $301 per 1,000 people).
[Related: How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map]
So once you rummage through those jaw-dropping receipts, you discover that Warnock and Ossoff have gotten about the same amount in online donations from Georgians as Loeffler and Perdue have ($4.3 million vs. $4.4 million). While the Democrats probably aren’t disappointed to have so much more out-of-state money at their disposal, it might not be as helpful as you’d think for winning votes in Georgia itself. After all, Democrats consistently trounced Republicans in the fundraising battle in 2020 Senate races but still wound up losing most of the competitive races. It’s worth remembering, though, that the data we have so far is incomplete; ActBlue and WinRed are just two of many sources for campaign cash. There’s also still a long way to go (27 days, in fact) until the finish line in Georgia, so it’s still anyone’s race — regardless of who is raking in the most money.