fivethirtyeight--2020-08-07--We’re Hiring A Part-Time Video And Motion Graphics Producer

FiveThirtyEight is seeking a part-time video and motion graphics producer to help us create weekly political videos to enhance our election coverage .
The producer should be available to work up to 29 hours a week during U.S. East Coast hours .
This job can be done remotely regardless of the status of the pandemic .
The producer ’ s main role will be to create videos based on FiveThirtyEight ’ s 2020 Election Forecast .
Our forecast shows the chances each candidate has of winning the election in November , and is rich with material we ’ d like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should feel comfortable editing short interviews with FiveThirtyEight reporters , creating original motion graphics and animations , and working with our existing graphics packages and design elements .
While this is a part-time role , the producer would be wholly integrated into the FiveThirtyEight team as a full-fledged member of our newsroom .
When not creating forecast videos , the producer is encouraged to pitch original ideas and work with reporters and visual journalists to bring new stories to life .
The video and motion graphics producer will report to the senior video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team and art director ( though , as FiveThirtyEight is a small newsroom , there will be opportunities to collaborate with many staffers in other departments as well ) .
Being able to leverage our existing forecast graphics and present them in fun , accessible ways to a video audience is a big part of the role .
As such , the producer should have experience working with Adobe Illustrator and After Effects , as well as Photoshop to integrate branding from our design team .
We work in Adobe Premiere for video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about editing software .
We care more about whether you are detail-oriented , can work on a deadline , and have a good narrative sense .
Experience working in a newsroom , especially on political stories , is a plus .
While the role will be focused on election coverage in the beginning , the focus will shift to our other beats — politics more generally , sports , and science — after the election .
We ’ re looking for someone with : • Experience animating graphics packages and creating motion graphics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and After Effects • An interest in and familiarity with U.S. electoral politics • Political reporting , particularly reporting on an election To apply , please send your resume , a cover letter and links to two samples of your work to Anna.Rothschild @ abc.com with “ Video and Motion Graphics Producer ” in the subject line .
We look forward to hearing from you !

FiveThirtyEight is seeking a part-time video and motion graphics producer to help us create weekly political videos to enhance our election coverage. The producer should be available to work up to 29 hours a week during U.S. East Coast hours. This job can be done remotely regardless of the status of the pandemic.
The producer’s main role will be to create videos based on FiveThirtyEight’s 2020 Election Forecast. Our forecast shows the chances each candidate has of winning the election in November, and is rich with material we’d like to make into videos. The producer should feel comfortable editing short interviews with FiveThirtyEight reporters, creating original motion graphics and animations, and working with our existing graphics packages and design elements. While this is a part-time role, the producer would be wholly integrated into the FiveThirtyEight team as a full-fledged member of our newsroom. When not creating forecast videos, the producer is encouraged to pitch original ideas and work with reporters and visual journalists to bring new stories to life. The video and motion graphics producer will report to the senior video producer and work closely with the video team and art director (though, as FiveThirtyEight is a small newsroom, there will be opportunities to collaborate with many staffers in other departments as well).
Being able to leverage our existing forecast graphics and present them in fun, accessible ways to a video audience is a big part of the role. As such, the producer should have experience working with Adobe Illustrator and After Effects, as well as Photoshop to integrate branding from our design team. We work in Adobe Premiere for video editing, but we are not picky about editing software. We care more about whether you are detail-oriented, can work on a deadline, and have a good narrative sense. Experience working in a newsroom, especially on political stories, is a plus.
While the role will be focused on election coverage in the beginning, the focus will shift to our other beats — politics more generally, sports, and science — after the election.
We’re looking for someone with:
Experience animating graphics packages and creating motion graphics and animations using Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, and After Effects
Fluency in Adobe Premiere or equivalent software
Experience editing videos on a tight deadline (e.g., in a breaking-news setting)
An interest in and familiarity with U.S. electoral politics
Bonus skills:
Newsroom experience
Political reporting, particularly reporting on an election
Script writing
To apply, please send your resume, a cover letter and links to two samples of your work to Anna.Rothschild@abc.com with “Video and Motion Graphics Producer” in the subject line. We look forward to hearing from you!


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-10--Why GOP Senators Are Sticking With Trump — Even Though It Might Hurt Them In November

Arizona Sen. Martha McSally handily defeated her primary challenger Tuesday , with the help of an endorsement from President Trump .
Her chances of winning the general election are even more closely tied to Trump ’ s — and she ’ s embracing that connection .
She has attacked the “ liberal hack media ” for criticizing the president , predicted he will win Arizona in November and repeatedly appeared with him in his visits to the state , following her advisors ’ plan to stay close to Trump , even if that means going down with a sinking ship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sinking feeling .
The U.S. Senate race in Arizona is rated as “ lean Democrat ” by most analysts .
And a recent Marist poll showed her doing even worse than Trump in the state , trailing Democrat Mark Kelly by 12 percentage points .
The same survey showed Trump trailing Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden by 5 points .
Now that McSally has made it past a primary challenge , though , she might benefit from shifting gears .
Research suggests Republicans running for the House and Senate this year would benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national Republican Party .
The problem is … that ’ s a lot harder than it used to be .
A little independence goes a long way Even in an age of nationalized politics , it still helps to have an independent identity from your party .
Voters tend to not like blind loyalty , and prefer representatives who are willing to compromise with the opposition party .
In 2018 , Republicans who were endorsed by Trump actually did worse in their general election races than Republicans the president ignored or disparaged , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who opposed their party ’ s major legislative initiative , repealing Obamacare , did better than those who supported it .
One study even found that Trump rallies raised more money for Democrats than they did for Republicans .
The reason GOP senators could benefit from some independence from the White House is that drawing attention to a candidate ’ s ties to Trump helps polarize a race along the same lines of presidential job approval .
And that is a particularly troubling trend for a president with poor approval ratings .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had more disapprovers than approvers in Arizona and other states with competitive Senate races , including Colorado and Maine .
Linked to Trump , the Republican senators in those states are now getting the same treatment ; McSally , Cory Gardner in Colorado and Susan Collins in Maine all have negative net approval ratings .
As political scientist ( and co-author of the study finding negative effects of Trump endorsements ) Andrew Ballard told me , “ Unpopular presidents probably need to be very strategic and judicious with their usage of their platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situations it can do more harm than good.
” Trump failed to follow this advice in 2018 and doesn ’ t seem to be paying it any more heed this year .
And most GOP senators are not effectively keeping their distance from Trump .
Senators up for reelection are siding with Trump Trump may not be able to resist intervening in Senate and House races , given his desire for being the center of attention .
But Republican legislators have choices about how to present themselves .
So far , they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obamacare , opposed the president ’ s impeachment and has rarely publicly criticized the Trump administration .
That is a big shift from 2016 , when she chose not to endorse Trump and bashed his behavior .
Moreover , McSally has voted with Trump ’ s position 95 percent of the time over the last two congressional sessions — far more often than you ’ d expect based on Arizona ’ s politics .
In fact , in the Senate , McSally has the fourth highest “ Trump Plus-Minus ” score , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ votes in line with the president ’ s position relative to what you would expect from that member based on the partisanship of their state or district .
Other Republican senators up for reelection this year have also remained loyal to Trump ’ s positions .
Gardner has voted with Trump 89 percent of the time during the 115th and 116th Congresses ( he has the second highest “ Trump Plus-Minus ” ) , Thom Tillis ( North Carolina ) with Trump 93 percent of the time , David Perdue ( Georgia ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) 91 percent and Steve Daines ( Montana ) 86 percent .
The one partial exception is Collins , who has sided with Trump two-thirds of the time over the last two Congresses ( though that is still far more than expected based on Trump ’ s losing margin in Maine ) .
Collins has clearly tried to put some distance between herself and Trump as her reelection race draws nearer — but not too much .
She did not support Obamacare repeal , though she voted to acquit the president in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court nominees .
She went from voting with Trump 77 percent of the time in the 115th Congress ( 2017-18 ) to only 46 percent in the 116th ( 2019-20 ) .
It ’ s been a tough balancing act that may end up pleasing no one .
Indeed , Collins has become the poster child for Republicans ’ unwillingness to seriously break with Trump .
She has been “ disappointed ” in Trump without taking action to restrain him so often that “ Saturday Night Live ” did a skit about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a chance to retain an independent reputation , something she ’ s cultivated for years by necessity in blue-ish Maine .
The problem is … that ’ s harder to do these days .
Why it ’ s become more difficult to break with the national party Many members of Congress used to have local reputations independent of their parties , presenting themselves as fighters for local interests and dollars in Washington .
Even if most voters hated Congress , they still liked their own representatives and senators .
But the long-term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ representatives through the lens of national and presidential politics ) and polarization ( voters see the parties as distinct and agree more with one side ) .
Voters learn less about their own legislators and more about the president , in part due to decreasing reliance on local news .
As a result , fewer voters split their tickets , voting for one party ’ s candidate for president and the other ’ s for Senate or the House .
Democrats have faced the same problem in trying to distinguish themselves from their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of West Virginia ’ s Joe Manchin and Montana ’ s Jon Tester in the 2018 midterms , but Missouri ’ s Claire McCaskill , North Dakota ’ s Heidi Heitkamp and Indiana ’ s Joe Donnelly weren ’ t able to overcome the Republican lean of their states .
Manchin went so far as to appear in ads showing him shooting at policies he disliked and proclaiming “ for me , it ’ s all about West Virginia.
” He won a state that Hillary Clinton lost by more than 42 points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senators to be seen as separated from their party ’ s president and his priorities .
So even if Republican senators do break with Trump , fewer voters now learn about it because they no longer see state-specific news .
Since voters tend to assume that partisans vote like their parties , voters are often unable to perceive moderate senators ’ divergent policy positions .
And legislators who do break with their party now face a risk of a primary challenger .
McSally won her 2018 Republican primary facing two candidates closely tied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ward .
In this year ’ s race to defend the seat she was appointed to , McSally this week fended off a primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy , who tried to build support from local pro-Trump groups .
“ More [ congressional ] members are running scared in the primaries , ” political scientist Sarah Treul told me .
“ Even if they ’ re actually not having quality challengers emerging , they ’ re afraid of it happening .
And I think a lot of them are spending time trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ward off one of those challengers from even coming to the table.
” That usually means doing little to upset the party ’ s base by breaking with the president .
Now that primary season is coming to an end , will Republicans start separating themselves from Trump ?
Some probably don ’ t need to do so to win reelection .
Despite his national unpopularity , senators in more Trump-leaning states , such as Ernst in Iowa and Daines in Montana , may be able to survive with a standard partisan vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Colorado and Tillis in North Carolina likely need to earn a substantial number of votes from Biden supporters to survive .
It ’ s just not clear whether they will break with Trump in public ways or whether late breaks would be enough to help them win .
That said , they may have one option to rally both the Republican faithful and a few swing voters .
It turns out some voters fear giving unified government to the president ’ s party and desire some balance .
If voters expect a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to support Republicans in Congress , which could perhaps keep the Senate in GOP hands .
So terrible Trump polls could be turned into something useful by Republican senators .
They might eventually need to argue that , if Trump is going to lose , voters should trust them to serve as a check on the Democratic agenda .

Arizona Sen. Martha McSally handily defeated her primary challenger Tuesday, with the help of an endorsement from President Trump. Her chances of winning the general election are even more closely tied to Trump’s — and she’s embracing that connection. She has attacked the “liberal hack media” for criticizing the president, predicted he will win Arizona in November and repeatedly appeared with him in his visits to the state, following her advisors’ plan to stay close to Trump, even if that means going down with a sinking ship.
She may already be getting a sinking feeling. The U.S. Senate race in Arizona is rated as “lean Democrat” by most analysts. And a recent Marist poll showed her doing even worse than Trump in the state, trailing Democrat Mark Kelly by 12 percentage points. The same survey showed Trump trailing Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden by 5 points.
Now that McSally has made it past a primary challenge, though, she might benefit from shifting gears. Research suggests Republicans running for the House and Senate this year would benefit from distancing themselves from Trump and the national Republican Party. The problem is … that’s a lot harder than it used to be.
A little independence goes a long way
Even in an age of nationalized politics, it still helps to have an independent identity from your party. Voters tend to not like blind loyalty, and prefer representatives who are willing to compromise with the opposition party. In 2018, Republicans who were endorsed by Trump actually did worse in their general election races than Republicans the president ignored or disparaged, all else being equal. And Republicans who opposed their party’s major legislative initiative, repealing Obamacare, did better than those who supported it. One study even found that Trump rallies raised more money for Democrats than they did for Republicans.
The reason GOP senators could benefit from some independence from the White House is that drawing attention to a candidate’s ties to Trump helps polarize a race along the same lines of presidential job approval. And that is a particularly troubling trend for a president with poor approval ratings. For most of his presidency, Trump has had more disapprovers than approvers in Arizona and other states with competitive Senate races, including Colorado and Maine. Linked to Trump, the Republican senators in those states are now getting the same treatment; McSally, Cory Gardner in Colorado and Susan Collins in Maine all have negative net approval ratings.
As political scientist (and co-author of the study finding negative effects of Trump endorsements) Andrew Ballard told me, “Unpopular presidents probably need to be very strategic and judicious with their usage of their platform to endorse candidates, because in certain situations it can do more harm than good.” Trump failed to follow this advice in 2018 and doesn’t seem to be paying it any more heed this year. And most GOP senators are not effectively keeping their distance from Trump.
Senators up for reelection are siding with Trump
Trump may not be able to resist intervening in Senate and House races, given his desire for being the center of attention. But Republican legislators have choices about how to present themselves. So far, they are sticking with Trump.
McSally supported repealing Obamacare, opposed the president’s impeachment and has rarely publicly criticized the Trump administration. That is a big shift from 2016, when she chose not to endorse Trump and bashed his behavior. Moreover, McSally has voted with Trump’s position 95 percent of the time over the last two congressional sessions — far more often than you’d expect based on Arizona’s politics. In fact, in the Senate, McSally has the fourth highest “Trump Plus-Minus” score, which measures how often a member of Congress votes in line with the president’s position relative to what you would expect from that member based on the partisanship of their state or district.
Other Republican senators up for reelection this year have also remained loyal to Trump’s positions. Gardner has voted with Trump 89 percent of the time during the 115th and 116th Congresses (he has the second highest “Trump Plus-Minus”), Thom Tillis (North Carolina) with Trump 93 percent of the time, David Perdue (Georgia) 95 percent, Joni Ernst (Iowa) 91 percent and Steve Daines (Montana) 86 percent.
The one partial exception is Collins, who has sided with Trump two-thirds of the time over the last two Congresses (though that is still far more than expected based on Trump’s losing margin in Maine). Collins has clearly tried to put some distance between herself and Trump as her reelection race draws nearer — but not too much. She did not support Obamacare repeal, though she voted to acquit the president in his Senate trial and voted to confirm his Supreme Court nominees. She went from voting with Trump 77 percent of the time in the 115th Congress (2017-18) to only 46 percent in the 116th (2019-20).
It’s been a tough balancing act that may end up pleasing no one. Indeed, Collins has become the poster child for Republicans’ unwillingness to seriously break with Trump. She has been “disappointed” in Trump without taking action to restrain him so often that “Saturday Night Live” did a skit about it.
Still, Collins may still have a chance to retain an independent reputation, something she’s cultivated for years by necessity in blue-ish Maine. The problem is … that’s harder to do these days.
Why it’s become more difficult to break with the national party
Many members of Congress used to have local reputations independent of their parties, presenting themselves as fighters for local interests and dollars in Washington. Even if most voters hated Congress, they still liked their own representatives and senators.
But the long-term trends are nationalization (voters perceive their representatives through the lens of national and presidential politics) and polarization (voters see the parties as distinct and agree more with one side). Voters learn less about their own legislators and more about the president, in part due to decreasing reliance on local news. As a result, fewer voters split their tickets, voting for one party’s candidate for president and the other’s for Senate or the House.
Democrats have faced the same problem in trying to distinguish themselves from their party. Voters recognized the independent streak of West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and Montana’s Jon Tester in the 2018 midterms, but Missouri’s Claire McCaskill, North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp and Indiana’s Joe Donnelly weren’t able to overcome the Republican lean of their states. Manchin went so far as to appear in ads showing him shooting at policies he disliked and proclaiming “for me, it’s all about West Virginia.” He won a state that Hillary Clinton lost by more than 42 points.
Nationalization makes it more difficult for senators to be seen as separated from their party’s president and his priorities. So even if Republican senators do break with Trump, fewer voters now learn about it because they no longer see state-specific news. Since voters tend to assume that partisans vote like their parties, voters are often unable to perceive moderate senators’ divergent policy positions.
And legislators who do break with their party now face a risk of a primary challenger. McSally won her 2018 Republican primary facing two candidates closely tied to Trump: Joe Arpaio and Kelli Ward. In this year’s race to defend the seat she was appointed to, McSally this week fended off a primary challenge from Daniel McCarthy, who tried to build support from local pro-Trump groups.
“More [congressional] members are running scared in the primaries,” political scientist Sarah Treul told me. “Even if they’re actually not having quality challengers emerging, they’re afraid of it happening. And I think a lot of them are spending time trying to figure out how [they] can ward off one of those challengers from even coming to the table.”
That usually means doing little to upset the party’s base by breaking with the president.
Can Republicans still jump ship?
Now that primary season is coming to an end, will Republicans start separating themselves from Trump? Some probably don’t need to do so to win reelection. Despite his national unpopularity, senators in more Trump-leaning states, such as Ernst in Iowa and Daines in Montana, may be able to survive with a standard partisan vote.
But McSally, Collins, Gardner in Colorado and Tillis in North Carolina likely need to earn a substantial number of votes from Biden supporters to survive. It’s just not clear whether they will break with Trump in public ways or whether late breaks would be enough to help them win.
That said, they may have one option to rally both the Republican faithful and a few swing voters. It turns out some voters fear giving unified government to the president’s party and desire some balance. If voters expect a Democratic president, they are slightly more likely to support Republicans in Congress, which could perhaps keep the Senate in GOP hands.
So terrible Trump polls could be turned into something useful by Republican senators. They might eventually need to argue that, if Trump is going to lose, voters should trust them to serve as a check on the Democratic agenda.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-10--Politics Podcast: The Veepstakes Are Almost Over

After missing multiple self-imposed deadlines , presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is expected to announce his running mate this week @ @ @ @ @ the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew discusses the conflict within the Democratic Party over @ @ @ @ @ and why the campaign has floated disparate and little-known contenders .
They also compare Biden @ @ @ @ @ polls with Hillary Clinton ’ s standing at this point in 2016 , her peak @ @ @ @ @ can listen to the episode by clicking the “ play ” button in the audio @ @ @ @ @ it in iTunes , the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform .
If you @ @ @ @ @ learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast is recorded Mondays and Thursdays .
@ @ @ @ @ show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes .
Have a comment , @ @ @ @ @ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get in touch by email , on Twitter @ @ @ @ @

After missing multiple self-imposed deadlines, presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is expected to announce his running mate this week. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew discusses the conflict within the Democratic Party over who that pick should be and why the campaign has floated disparate and little-known contenders. They also compare Biden’s standing in the polls with Hillary Clinton’s standing at this point in 2016, her peak during that cycle.
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--2020-08-10--Do You Buy That … Kamala Harris Is Most Likely To Become Biden’s Running Mate?

Do You Buy That … Kamala Harris Is Most Likely To Become Biden ’ s Running Mate ?


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-11--What You Need To Know About Today’s Elections In Minnesota And Georgia

Believe it or not , the 2020 Democratic presidential primary is still going on — but it comes to an end today .
Connecticut ’ s presidential primary is the last of the cycle , and the fact that it ’ s happening so late in the season is rare .
According to presidential primaries expert and FiveThirtyEight contributor Josh Putnam , it marks the latest presidential nominating contest in the modern era .
But it ’ s not the presidential contest that will capture headlines today .
A total of five states will hold their down-ballot primaries or runoffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the radical wings and more moderate factions will continue for both parties .
Will a controversial member of “ the Squad ” — a group of first-term congresswomen of color known for their progressive views — lose her Democratic primary ?
And will Republicans send a believer in the QAnon conspiracy theory ( with a history of racist comments ) to Congress ?
We will ( maybe ) learn the answers today .
Two members of the Squad ( Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib ) have already routed their primary challengers this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pressley ) doesn ’ t even have an opponent .
But Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota ’ s 5th Congressional District might not find it so easy , as she ’ s facing a stiff challenge from attorney Antone Melton-Meaux .
Like Ocasio-Cortez ’ s and Tlaib ’ s challengers , Melton-Meaux has attacked Omar for basking in the spotlight of her national fame rather than attending to the needs of her Minneapolis-based district .
Omar , though , has racked up a long list of controversies .
First , she has made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ linking politicians ’ support for Israel to campaign donations from Jewish advocacy groups , for which she apologized in 2019 .
Omar has also been accused of misusing campaign funds , most notably by paying thousands of dollars to a political consultant whose wife claimed he was having an affair with Omar ( since then , Omar and the consultant have divorced their respective spouses and gotten married themselves ) .
But Melton-Meaux has issues of his own .
Omar ’ s allies recently filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing him of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100,000 in campaign funds through “ mysterious shell companies.
” And of course , the campaign is an ideological fight as well .
Although Melton-Meaux has branded himself as a progressive , his policy positions are much more moderate than Omar ’ s .
For instance , he does not want to defund the police , and he prefers a public option to a single-payer health care system .
It ’ s hard to know how close this primary is .
In early July , the Omar campaign released an internal poll from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 66 percent to 29 percent .
However , the money race implies a much tighter race .
With the help of Omar ’ s well-funded political enemies , Melton-Meaux had raised an impressive $ 4.2 million as of July 22 — almost as much as Omar ’ s $ 4.3 million .
The pro-Israel super PAC Americans for Tomorrow ’ s Future has also spent $ 2.1 million against Omar on attack ads and direct mail .
Omar ’ s recent release of her own negative ad against Melton-Meaux may signal the race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re also monitoring two Republican congressional runoffs in Georgia , and undoubtedly the most combustible contest is the 14th Congressional District race between controversy-laden construction company owner Marjorie Taylor Greene and neurosurgeon Dr. John Cowan .
Today ’ s winner will be all but certain to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Tom Graves , as President Trump won 75 percent of the northwest Georgia district ’ s vote in 2016 .
At first , it seemed as if Greene was the front-runner .
After all , she won 40 percent to Cowan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote June 9 .
However , Greene ’ s conspiratorial and racist views may have undermined her path to victory .
For starters , she has refused to disavow QAnon , an FBI-labeled domestic terror threat that claims there ’ s a deep state conspiracy against Trump .
And just after the June primary , Politico uncovered videos of Greene making racist , Islamophobic and anti-Semitic statements , which prompted many national GOP leaders and Georgia Republicans to oppose her and/or back Cowan .
Koch Industries ’ political action committee even asked for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to her campaign .
Not that Greene needed that contribution to shore up her finances — as of July 22 , she had loaned herself $ 900,000 out of the nearly $ 1.6 million she ’ d raised overall .
But it still meant Cowan , who collected about $ 1.2 million ( of which $ 200,000 was self-funded ) , entered the home stretch with $ 237,000 cash on hand , compared to roughly $ 144,000 for Greene .
Nonetheless , despite public opposition from many Republican leaders , there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greene .
For his part , Cowan has pitched himself as a pro-Trump conservative who doesn ’ t have Greene ’ s baggage .
He ’ s also criticized Greene for accepting coronavirus relief funds for her company even though she ’ s self-funded more than half of her campaign .
He has also tried to get to the right of Greene on immigration , running an ad accusing her company of not using the Department of Homeland Security ’ s E-Verify program to check the immigration status of workers — a contention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called Cowan a “ globalist Never Trumper ” who ’ s “ too afraid to take on China.
” She ’ s also made a play for conservative voters angered by recent protests against the police by attacking Cowan for not speaking out in support of former Atlanta police officer Garrett Rolfe , who faces 11 charges , including murder , for shooting a Black man who had fallen asleep in his car at a Wendy ’ s drive-thru .
Greene ’ s campaign slogan is “ Save America , stop socialism.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough for Greene to win today .
A late July survey from Cowan ’ s campaign found the pair tied at 38 percent , numbers that were actually slightly worse for Cowan than in a late June poll from his campaign that put him ahead 43 percent to 40 percent .
Next door in Georgia ’ s 9th Congressional District , the Republican runoff will also likely decide the November winner in this conservative seat in northeast Georgia , which is open because GOP Rep. Doug Collins is running for the U.S. Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gurtler and gun store owner and veteran Andrew Clyde appears to be wide open , after they finished with 21 percent and 18 percent , respectively , in a crowded primary June 9 .
Gurtler has touted his belief in limited government and has acquired the moniker “ Dr .
No ” for his tendency to vote against bills in the state legislature .
This approach has won him allies — the conservative Club for Growth endorsed his candidacy — but not all of his no votes are popular .
For instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP after he was the only Republican to vote against a resolution commending President Trump for killing an Iranian commander considered a terrorist by the U.S. government .
As for Clyde , he ’ s built a reputation for successfully taking on the Internal Revenue Service after it tried to seize nearly $ 1 million from him .
However , Gurtler has questioned why Clyde ’ s business has continued to sell guns to the agency , as that is seemingly at odds with Clyde ’ s anti-government rhetoric .
We haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Gurtler appears to have the most financial backing , even though Clyde had outraised Gurtler about $ 877,000 to $ 660,000 as of July 22 .
Unlike Gurtler , Clyde has mostly self-funded his campaign , and outside groups have poured in around $ 1.9 million on behalf of Gurtler or against Clyde .
The campaign arm of the Club for Growth has been very active , spending about $ 500,000 boosting Gurtler and $ 653,000 attacking Clyde .
Additionally , Protect Freedom PAC has spent $ 494,000 to help Gurtler while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrown in about $ 414,000 to support him or hit Clyde .
So we ’ ll have to see whether all that money pays off for Gurtler in the end .
The three races we ’ ve highlighted — especially the ones in Minnesota ’ s 5th District and Georgia ’ s 14th District — all take place in districts that are safely in one party ’ s column , but who wins the primary still matters as it will affect the House ’ s ideological composition and each party ’ s internal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see just how these races shape the parties going forward .

Believe it or not, the 2020 Democratic presidential primary is still going on — but it comes to an end today. Connecticut’s presidential primary is the last of the cycle, and the fact that it’s happening so late in the season is rare. According to presidential primaries expert and FiveThirtyEight contributor Josh Putnam, it marks the latest presidential nominating contest in the modern era.
But it’s not the presidential contest that will capture headlines today. A total of five states will hold their down-ballot primaries or runoffs today, in which the fight between the radical wings and more moderate factions will continue for both parties. Will a controversial member of “the Squad” — a group of first-term congresswomen of color known for their progressive views — lose her Democratic primary? And will Republicans send a believer in the QAnon conspiracy theory (with a history of racist comments) to Congress? We will (maybe) learn the answers today.
Minnesota
Two members of the Squad (Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib) have already routed their primary challengers this year, and another (Rep. Ayanna Pressley) doesn’t even have an opponent. But Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District might not find it so easy, as she’s facing a stiff challenge from attorney Antone Melton-Meaux.
Like Ocasio-Cortez’s and Tlaib’s challengers, Melton-Meaux has attacked Omar for basking in the spotlight of her national fame rather than attending to the needs of her Minneapolis-based district. Omar, though, has racked up a long list of controversies. First, she has made a number of anti-Semitic comments, including linking politicians’ support for Israel to campaign donations from Jewish advocacy groups, for which she apologized in 2019. Omar has also been accused of misusing campaign funds, most notably by paying thousands of dollars to a political consultant whose wife claimed he was having an affair with Omar (since then, Omar and the consultant have divorced their respective spouses and gotten married themselves).
But Melton-Meaux has issues of his own. Omar’s allies recently filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing him of concealing the true recipients of almost $100,000 in campaign funds through “mysterious shell companies.” And of course, the campaign is an ideological fight as well. Although Melton-Meaux has branded himself as a progressive, his policy positions are much more moderate than Omar’s. For instance, he does not want to defund the police, and he prefers a public option to a single-payer health care system.
It’s hard to know how close this primary is. In early July, the Omar campaign released an internal poll from Change Research showing the incumbent leading Melton-Meaux 66 percent to 29 percent. However, the money race implies a much tighter race. With the help of Omar’s well-funded political enemies, Melton-Meaux had raised an impressive $4.2 million as of July 22 — almost as much as Omar’s $4.3 million. The pro-Israel super PAC Americans for Tomorrow’s Future has also spent $2.1 million against Omar on attack ads and direct mail. Omar’s recent release of her own negative ad against Melton-Meaux may signal the race is tightening in the final days.
Georgia
We’re also monitoring two Republican congressional runoffs in Georgia, and undoubtedly the most combustible contest is the 14th Congressional District race between controversy-laden construction company owner Marjorie Taylor Greene and neurosurgeon Dr. John Cowan. Today’s winner will be all but certain to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Tom Graves, as President Trump won 75 percent of the northwest Georgia district’s vote in 2016.
At first, it seemed as if Greene was the front-runner. After all, she won 40 percent to Cowan’s 21 percent in the initial vote June 9. However, Greene’s conspiratorial and racist views may have undermined her path to victory. For starters, she has refused to disavow QAnon, an FBI-labeled domestic terror threat that claims there’s a deep state conspiracy against Trump. And just after the June primary, Politico uncovered videos of Greene making racist, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic statements, which prompted many national GOP leaders and Georgia Republicans to oppose her and/or back Cowan. Koch Industries’ political action committee even asked for a refund on its $5,000 donation to her campaign.
Not that Greene needed that contribution to shore up her finances — as of July 22, she had loaned herself $900,000 out of the nearly $1.6 million she’d raised overall. But it still meant Cowan, who collected about $1.2 million (of which $200,000 was self-funded), entered the home stretch with $237,000 cash on hand, compared to roughly $144,000 for Greene. Nonetheless, despite public opposition from many Republican leaders, there’s been very little outside spending aimed at Greene.
For his part, Cowan has pitched himself as a pro-Trump conservative who doesn’t have Greene’s baggage. He’s also criticized Greene for accepting coronavirus relief funds for her company even though she’s self-funded more than half of her campaign. He has also tried to get to the right of Greene on immigration, running an ad accusing her company of not using the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify program to check the immigration status of workers — a contention Greene denies.
Meanwhile, Greene has called Cowan a “globalist Never Trumper” who’s “too afraid to take on China.” She’s also made a play for conservative voters angered by recent protests against the police by attacking Cowan for not speaking out in support of former Atlanta police officer Garrett Rolfe, who faces 11 charges, including murder, for shooting a Black man who had fallen asleep in his car at a Wendy’s drive-thru. Greene’s campaign slogan is “Save America, stop socialism.”
And those sorts of appeals may be enough for Greene to win today. A late July survey from Cowan’s campaign found the pair tied at 38 percent, numbers that were actually slightly worse for Cowan than in a late June poll from his campaign that put him ahead 43 percent to 40 percent.
Next door in Georgia’s 9th Congressional District, the Republican runoff will also likely decide the November winner in this conservative seat in northeast Georgia, which is open because GOP Rep. Doug Collins is running for the U.S. Senate. The clash between state Rep. Matt Gurtler and gun store owner and veteran Andrew Clyde appears to be wide open, after they finished with 21 percent and 18 percent, respectively, in a crowded primary June 9.
Gurtler has touted his belief in limited government and has acquired the moniker “Dr. No” for his tendency to vote against bills in the state legislature. This approach has won him allies — the conservative Club for Growth endorsed his candidacy — but not all of his no votes are popular. For instance, Gurtler has caught flak from some in the GOP after he was the only Republican to vote against a resolution commending President Trump for killing an Iranian commander considered a terrorist by the U.S. government.
As for Clyde, he’s built a reputation for successfully taking on the Internal Revenue Service after it tried to seize nearly $1 million from him. However, Gurtler has questioned why Clyde’s business has continued to sell guns to the agency, as that is seemingly at odds with Clyde’s anti-government rhetoric.
We haven’t seen any polls here, but Gurtler appears to have the most financial backing, even though Clyde had outraised Gurtler about $877,000 to $660,000 as of July 22. Unlike Gurtler, Clyde has mostly self-funded his campaign, and outside groups have poured in around $1.9 million on behalf of Gurtler or against Clyde. The campaign arm of the Club for Growth has been very active, spending about $500,000 boosting Gurtler and $653,000 attacking Clyde. Additionally, Protect Freedom PAC has spent $494,000 to help Gurtler while a single-candidate super PAC backing Gurtler has thrown in about $414,000 to support him or hit Clyde. So we’ll have to see whether all that money pays off for Gurtler in the end.
The three races we’ve highlighted — especially the ones in Minnesota’s 5th District and Georgia’s 14th District — all take place in districts that are safely in one party’s column, but who wins the primary still matters as it will affect the House’s ideological composition and each party’s internal politics. We’ll be watching to see just how these races shape the parties going forward.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-11--Five Ways Trump And GOP Officials Are Undermining The Election Process

There has long been conflict in the United States over who gets to vote and how .
In the years since Barack Obama ’ s election as president , those voting debates have become increasingly partisan , with Republican elected officials often pushing measures like requiring photo IDs that make it harder for people to vote , and Democratic officials advancing provisions like same-day registration that make it easier to vote .
That long-running conflict over voting has reached a new , more critical phase for two reasons .
First , the outbreak of COVID-19 means that people might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote in person .
Secondly , Donald Trump , unlike previous presidents , regularly breaks with democratic norms and values and is now openly suggesting that he might manipulate the electoral system to help him win a second term .
“ Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail , ” was the headline of an article in Politico last weekend ( that was a news article , not an opinion piece ) .
Politico ’ s reporting found that the White House was considering using executive actions to insert itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usually run by states , including finding ways to make it harder for people to vote by mail .
I think it ’ s totally appropriate for people to , well , freak out about the potential undermining of the electoral process by Trump and his allies .
That said , there is now a flurry of lawsuits , judicial rulings , decisions by election officials at the local and state levels , and claims of voter fraud and voter suppression that can be a bit of minefield to wade through .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get confusing .
So to better understand what ’ s a really big deal versus something that might be problematic but perhaps not as important , we broke out the potential ways that Trump and the GOP could limit voting or undermine the electoral process into five general tactics .
These tactics are roughly ordered from least to most alarming .
This is not any kind of formal legal guide , although we consulted with some experts for this piece , and some of those experts have law degrees .
This analysis also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approach to voting rights issues .
But we opted to focus on the Republicans because their approach is more controversial than the Democratic one ( which is largely to make it easier to vote ) and because perhaps the most important figure in the current voting wars is the Republican president .
Here are the tactics : 1 .
Opposing changes to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 A lot of the litigation around voting this year pits groups allied with liberal-leaning parts of the electorate , like the NAACP Legal Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyers affiliated with the Democratic Party , against officials in charge of administering elections ( secretaries of state , for example ) .
In these cases , the litigants are trying to get judges to change or invalidate existing laws and force officials to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted .
The litigants often invoke the pandemic in demanding these changes , but they are changes in the voting process that these litigants would likely prefer outside of the COVID-19 context , too .
For example , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center are trying to get struck down a requirement in Alabama that voters include a copy of their photo ID with their application for an absentee ballot .
Getting a copy of your photo ID does potentially increase your chances of getting COVID-19 , their brief argues .
But the LDF opposed provisions requiring people to present photo IDs as part of the voting process well before the coronavirus pandemic .
Marc Elias , a leading Democratic election attorney , is filing lawsuits in more than two dozen states ( including basically every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his “ four pillars ” for mail-in voting in the 2020 election : • The government prepays the postage for mail-in ballots .
• Ballots postmarked before or on Election Day are counted ( as opposed to counting only ballots received by Election Day ) .
• Signature requirements for mail-in ballots are administered in a voter-friendly way .
( Elias suggests requiring election officials across the country to contact voters before their ballots are ruled invalid because the signature on the ballot does not match the signature election officials have on file @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowed to collect the ballots of people and turn them in ( to ease voting for people who might not have easy access to mail services ) .
Liberal-leaning lawyers like Elias are losing some of these cases in court ( or at least not getting all the accommodations that they want ) , with Republicans — including the Trump campaign — filing briefs opposing changes that might make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted .
It ’ s not ideal that Republicans are taking this tact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important .
And the GOP often uses false or misleading rhetoric to oppose measures making voting easier , such as dubbing efforts by groups to collect and turn in mail-in ballots “ ballot harvesting ” and suggesting , without evidence , that the process will lead to widespread voter fraud .
That said , we cast this tactic as the least problematic one Republicans are employing because there are instances of Republicans opposing new steps to make voting easier , rather than creating new barriers to voting .
Also , even most blue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four of Elias ’ s pillars in place .
Only seven states ( California , Colorado , Hawaii , Nevada , Oregon , Utah and Washington ) got “ A ” ratings for their vote-by-mail systems in a recent Brookings Institute report .
2 .
Seeking to invalidate laws that make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 During the pandemic , some states , particularly those run by Democrats , are taking affirmative steps to make it much easier to vote .
For example , California and Nevada are planning to send mail-in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their states .
Election officials in Pennsylvania have set up boxes for people to drop off their absentee ballots , as opposed to requiring all voters to send them through the mail .
The Trump campaign is filing lawsuits to stop the moves in Nevada , Pennsylvania and other states .
The Republican National Committee ( which is tightly aligned with the Trump campaign ) is involved in litigation in 17 states , again including virtually every battleground state , to enforce its voting agenda , which includes : • Requiring ballots to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Opposing people or groups being able to turn in mail-in ballots of other voters .
• Opposing newly enacted plans to allow basically all voters in a given state to vote by mail .
You can see why this is more problematic in terms of democratic values than the previous category : Local and state officials are taking affirmative steps to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted amid a pandemic and the sitting president ’ s campaign is trying to reverse those decisions .
For this category @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the U.S. Supreme Court appointed by Republican presidents are likely to be particularly important .
In all four of the most recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights issues , the court ’ s conservative majority rejected attempts by liberal litigants to get existing law changed to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 ( the first category we listed above ) .
Those rulings have infuriated liberals , but I can ’ t say that I ’ m surprised by them — Chief Justice John Roberts regularly votes both to uphold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the judgements of local officials and other branches of government in ways that sometimes align with the more liberal justices and other times with the court ’ s conservatives .
So it would be more surprising ( and alarming ) if Roberts and the high court struck down new laws , like those in California , making it easier to vote .
3 .
Advancing new practices and provisions that make it harder to vote This tactic refers to moves like rolling back the number of early voting days in a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
These are all strategies that Republicans have employed pre-COVID-19 .
Republicans aren ’ t rolling out a lot of new provisions to make it harder to vote in 2020 because they already passed a lot of them from 2011 to 2018 , and they couldn ’ t pass a lot of them in 2019 and 2020 .
( Democrats made a lot of gains at the state level in 2018 , and it would have been controversial to adopt such measures after the virus outbreak . )
But Republicans are trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get each struck down by courts .
First , in Florida specifically , Republicans are complicating the process for ex-felons who have served their sentences to regain their voting rights , despite a 2018 ballot initiative , supported by 65 percent of Florida voters , that was intended to do just that .
And in states around the country , GOP officials are planning to send an unusually large number of people to individual voting locations as “ poll watchers.
” Poll watchers have been used by both parties .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Trump in particular creates the potential for GOP poll watchers to show up at voting places specifically to look for voters they might view as both illegitimate and liberal-leaning ( people of color and people around age 18 in particular ) and push for the officials running those polling locations to more closely scrutinize those voters .
I view this category as particularly problematic , in terms of democratic values , because it raises the specter of people facing increased difficulty voting in large part because they are perceived to likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who would be newly eligible to vote in Florida are disproportionately Black . )
What I ’ m talking about here is largely rhetoric that has no direct impact , but has the potential to undermine confidence in the election system .
Think about Trump ’ s comments about potentially changing the day of the election or the unfounded suggestions by the president , Attorney General William Barr and other conservatives that mail-in voting will lead to fraud .
How this tactic affects the election depends on two factors .
First , do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , echo Trump ’ s rhetoric , thereby creating a situation where one of the country ’ s two major political parties is questioning the electoral system ?
And second , do GOP elected officials start acting on this rhetoric , such as trying to roll back existing vote-by-mail programs or not counting ballots received after Election Day in states where it is legal to count them ?
In other words , this kind of rhetoric presents two potential risks , undermining the public ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and — if the rhetoric leads to action — literally compromising the legitimacy of the election .
5 .
Fundamental changes to the electoral process Speaking of actually compromising the election … The recent changes at the U.S .
Postal Service that are slowing down mail delivery across the country are arguably the biggest threat to the American election system in 2020 .
If mail delivery continues to be slowed down , that creates two very important potential problems .
First , in states where ballots must be received by officials before Election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Conference of State Legislatures ) , a slowed-down mail system could disenfranchise thousands and perhaps even millions of people .
Secondly , a slower system creates the potential for a ton of ballots to arrive either just before , on or after Election Day , meaning that the counting of votes might stretch on for days or weeks and Americans wouldn ’ t know the winner of the presidential election for a long time .
That ’ s not ideal in any circumstances , but particularly with a president like Trump who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for election results before trying to declare himself the winner .
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , a longtime GOP donor who has given more than $ 2 million over the last few years to Trump ’ s campaign and other Republican causes , says the changes he has made since taking his post in June are intended to reduce the USPS ’ s spending and make it more cost-efficient .
I don ’ t have any proof he is lying , but it ’ s also doubtful that DeJoy would be candid about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote-by-mail systems and helping Trump win .
Either way , it ’ s a strange decision to overhaul the mailing system in a way that appears to be making it harder to send things through USPS quickly when the U.S. will be relying on the Postal Service more than ever before as part of the electoral process .
And if Trump followed through on changing the day of the election ( which he can not do on his own ) or limiting vote by mail , those changes would go into this category @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking about these categories both in terms of the horse race and in terms of broader questions of democratic norms and values .
The first three are problematic in terms of democratic norms and values because Republicans seem to be intentionally making it harder for people to vote .
And if this race gets tighter , those moves could prove decisive .
If we reach the later stages of the campaign and polls still show Biden with a clear lead nationally and in most swing states , it ’ s less likely that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Then again , we haven ’ t really faced a situation like this before . )
On the other hand , the last two categories are huge , both in terms of democratic values and electoral repercussions .
If people ’ s mail-in ballots aren ’ t received until way after Election Day , and Trump and his allies are falsely suggesting that mail-in ballots are somewhat fraudulent anyway , that undermines the election results and creates the potential for Trump to try to remain in office even if Biden is @ @ @ @

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

There has long been conflict in the United States over who gets to vote and how. In the years since Barack Obama’s election as president, those voting debates have become increasingly partisan, with Republican elected officials often pushing measures like requiring photo IDs that make it harder for people to vote, and Democratic officials advancing provisions like same-day registration that make it easier to vote.
That long-running conflict over voting has reached a new, more critical phase for two reasons. First, the outbreak of COVID-19 means that people might be risking their health if they opt to vote in person. Secondly, Donald Trump, unlike previous presidents, regularly breaks with democratic norms and values and is now openly suggesting that he might manipulate the electoral system to help him win a second term.
“Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail,” was the headline of an article in Politico last weekend (that was a news article, not an opinion piece). Politico’s reporting found that the White House was considering using executive actions to insert itself into the election process, which is usually run by states, including finding ways to make it harder for people to vote by mail.
I think it’s totally appropriate for people to, well, freak out about the potential undermining of the electoral process by Trump and his allies. That said, there is now a flurry of lawsuits, judicial rulings, decisions by election officials at the local and state levels, and claims of voter fraud and voter suppression that can be a bit of minefield to wade through. It’s a lot and it can get confusing.
So to better understand what’s a really big deal versus something that might be problematic but perhaps not as important, we broke out the potential ways that Trump and the GOP could limit voting or undermine the electoral process into five general tactics. These tactics are roughly ordered from least to most alarming. This is not any kind of formal legal guide, although we consulted with some experts for this piece, and some of those experts have law degrees. This analysis also includes some details of the Democrats’ approach to voting rights issues. But we opted to focus on the Republicans because their approach is more controversial than the Democratic one (which is largely to make it easier to vote) and because perhaps the most important figure in the current voting wars is the Republican president.
Here are the tactics:
1. Opposing changes to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19
A lot of the litigation around voting this year pits groups allied with liberal-leaning parts of the electorate, like the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) and lawyers affiliated with the Democratic Party, against officials in charge of administering elections (secretaries of state, for example). In these cases, the litigants are trying to get judges to change or invalidate existing laws and force officials to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted.
The litigants often invoke the pandemic in demanding these changes, but they are changes in the voting process that these litigants would likely prefer outside of the COVID-19 context, too. For example, the LDF and the Southern Poverty Law Center are trying to get struck down a requirement in Alabama that voters include a copy of their photo ID with their application for an absentee ballot. Getting a copy of your photo ID does potentially increase your chances of getting COVID-19, their brief argues. But the LDF opposed provisions requiring people to present photo IDs as part of the voting process well before the coronavirus pandemic.
Marc Elias, a leading Democratic election attorney, is filing lawsuits in more than two dozen states (including basically every key swing state), to enforce his “four pillars” for mail-in voting in the 2020 election:
The government prepays the postage for mail-in ballots. Ballots postmarked before or on Election Day are counted (as opposed to counting only ballots received by Election Day). Signature requirements for mail-in ballots are administered in a voter-friendly way. (Elias suggests requiring election officials across the country to contact voters before their ballots are ruled invalid because the signature on the ballot does not match the signature election officials have on file.) Individuals or groups are allowed to collect the ballots of people and turn them in (to ease voting for people who might not have easy access to mail services).
Liberal-leaning lawyers like Elias are losing some of these cases in court (or at least not getting all the accommodations that they want), with Republicans — including the Trump campaign — filing briefs opposing changes that might make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted. It’s not ideal that Republicans are taking this tack, as the right to vote is so important. And the GOP often uses false or misleading rhetoric to oppose measures making voting easier, such as dubbing efforts by groups to collect and turn in mail-in ballots “ballot harvesting” and suggesting, without evidence, that the process will lead to widespread voter fraud.
That said, we cast this tactic as the least problematic one Republicans are employing because there are instances of Republicans opposing new steps to make voting easier, rather than creating new barriers to voting. Also, even most blue states don’t currently have all four of Elias’s pillars in place. Only seven states (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Washington) got “A” ratings for their vote-by-mail systems in a recent Brookings Institute report.
2. Seeking to invalidate laws that make it easier to vote amid COVID-19
During the pandemic, some states, particularly those run by Democrats, are taking affirmative steps to make it much easier to vote. For example, California and Nevada are planning to send mail-in ballots to all the registered voters in their states. Election officials in Pennsylvania have set up boxes for people to drop off their absentee ballots, as opposed to requiring all voters to send them through the mail.
The Trump campaign is filing lawsuits to stop the moves in Nevada, Pennsylvania and other states. The Republican National Committee (which is tightly aligned with the Trump campaign) is involved in litigation in 17 states, again including virtually every battleground state, to enforce its voting agenda, which includes:
Requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Keeping current photo ID and signature laws in place. Opposing people or groups being able to turn in mail-in ballots of other voters. Opposing newly enacted plans to allow basically all voters in a given state to vote by mail.
You can see why this is more problematic in terms of democratic values than the previous category: Local and state officials are taking affirmative steps to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted amid a pandemic and the sitting president’s campaign is trying to reverse those decisions.
[newsletter-politics]
For this category, the actions of the five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court appointed by Republican presidents are likely to be particularly important. In all four of the most recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights issues, the court’s conservative majority rejected attempts by liberal litigants to get existing law changed to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 (the first category we listed above). Those rulings have infuriated liberals, but I can’t say that I’m surprised by them — Chief Justice John Roberts regularly votes both to uphold existing legal precedents and to show deference to the judgements of local officials and other branches of government in ways that sometimes align with the more liberal justices and other times with the court’s conservatives. So it would be more surprising (and alarming) if Roberts and the high court struck down new laws, like those in California, making it easier to vote.
3. Advancing new practices and provisions that make it harder to vote
This tactic refers to moves like rolling back the number of early voting days in a state or making it harder for students to vote. These are all strategies that Republicans have employed pre-COVID-19. Republicans aren’t rolling out a lot of new provisions to make it harder to vote in 2020 because they already passed a lot of them from 2011 to 2018, and they couldn’t pass a lot of them in 2019 and 2020. (Democrats made a lot of gains at the state level in 2018, and it would have been controversial to adopt such measures after the virus outbreak.)
But Republicans are trying two new strategies, with liberals seeking to get each struck down by courts. First, in Florida specifically, Republicans are complicating the process for ex-felons who have served their sentences to regain their voting rights, despite a 2018 ballot initiative, supported by 65 percent of Florida voters, that was intended to do just that. And in states around the country, GOP officials are planning to send an unusually large number of people to individual voting locations as “poll watchers.” Poll watchers have been used by both parties. But the rhetoric about voter fraud from Fox News and Trump in particular creates the potential for GOP poll watchers to show up at voting places specifically to look for voters they might view as both illegitimate and liberal-leaning (people of color and people around age 18 in particular) and push for the officials running those polling locations to more closely scrutinize those voters.
I view this category as particularly problematic, in terms of democratic values, because it raises the specter of people facing increased difficulty voting in large part because they are perceived to likely to oppose Republican candidates. (The ex-felons who would be newly eligible to vote in Florida are disproportionately Black.)
4. Anti-democratic rhetoric
What I’m talking about here is largely rhetoric that has no direct impact, but has the potential to undermine confidence in the election system. Think about Trump’s comments about potentially changing the day of the election or the unfounded suggestions by the president, Attorney General William Barr and other conservatives that mail-in voting will lead to fraud.
How this tactic affects the election depends on two factors. First, do other members of the Republican Party, such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, echo Trump’s rhetoric, thereby creating a situation where one of the country’s two major political parties is questioning the electoral system? And second, do GOP elected officials start acting on this rhetoric, such as trying to roll back existing vote-by-mail programs or not counting ballots received after Election Day in states where it is legal to count them?
In other words, this kind of rhetoric presents two potential risks, undermining the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of the election and — if the rhetoric leads to action — literally compromising the legitimacy of the election.
5. Fundamental changes to the electoral process
Speaking of actually compromising the election … The recent changes at the U.S. Postal Service that are slowing down mail delivery across the country are arguably the biggest threat to the American election system in 2020. If mail delivery continues to be slowed down, that creates two very important potential problems. First, in states where ballots must be received by officials before Election Day (33, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures), a slowed-down mail system could disenfranchise thousands and perhaps even millions of people. Secondly, a slower system creates the potential for a ton of ballots to arrive either just before, on or after Election Day, meaning that the counting of votes might stretch on for days or weeks and Americans wouldn’t know the winner of the presidential election for a long time. That’s not ideal in any circumstances, but particularly with a president like Trump who can’t be expected to wait for election results before trying to declare himself the winner.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a longtime GOP donor who has given more than $2 million over the last few years to Trump’s campaign and other Republican causes, says the changes he has made since taking his post in June are intended to reduce the USPS’s spending and make it more cost-efficient. I don’t have any proof he is lying, but it’s also doubtful that DeJoy would be candid about it if his real goal was complicating vote-by-mail systems and helping Trump win. Either way, it’s a strange decision to overhaul the mailing system in a way that appears to be making it harder to send things through USPS quickly when the U.S. will be relying on the Postal Service more than ever before as part of the electoral process.
And if Trump followed through on changing the day of the election (which he cannot do on his own) or limiting vote by mail, those changes would go into this category as well.
It’s worth thinking about these categories both in terms of the horse race and in terms of broader questions of democratic norms and values. The first three are problematic in terms of democratic norms and values because Republicans seem to be intentionally making it harder for people to vote. And if this race gets tighter, those moves could prove decisive. If we reach the later stages of the campaign and polls still show Biden with a clear lead nationally and in most swing states, it’s less likely that these tactics would literally swing the election. (Then again, we haven’t really faced a situation like this before.)
On the other hand, the last two categories are huge, both in terms of democratic values and electoral repercussions. If people’s mail-in ballots aren’t received until way after Election Day, and Trump and his allies are falsely suggesting that mail-in ballots are somewhat fraudulent anyway, that undermines the election results and creates the potential for Trump to try to remain in office even if Biden is the rightful victor.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-11--Emergency Politics Podcast: Harris Is Biden’s VP Pick

After months of speculation , Joe Biden announced California Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate on Tuesday .
In @ @ @ @ @ FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Perry Bacon Jr. and Sarah Frostenson break down what the choice @ @ @ @ @ campaign and the Democratic Party .
You can listen to the episode by clicking the @ @ @ @ @ the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN App or @ @ @ @ @ If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics @ @ @ @ @ Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review @ @ @ @ @ comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get @ @ @ @ @ on Twitter or in the comments .

After months of speculation, Joe Biden announced Tuesday that California Sen. Kamala Harris would be his running mate. In this emergency edition of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Perry Bacon Jr. and Sarah Frostenson discuss what this choice means for Biden’s campaign and the Democratic Party.
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--2020-08-11--Kamala Harris Is Biden’s VP Pick — Here’s What It Means For The Election And Beyond

Former Vice President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden announced Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate today .
Here ’ s a look at what this choice means and … what it doesn ’ t .
It ’ s a historic choice , with the potential for even more history to be made .
Harris is the first Asian American and the first Black woman in American history to be a general election candidate for president or vice president for either of the two major political parties .
( Harris ’ s mother was born in India , her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ graduate students at the University of California at Berkeley , in the 1960s . )
Harris is just the second Black person ( after Barack Obama ) and the fourth woman ( after Democrats Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Hillary Clinton in 2016 , and Republican Sarah Palin in 2008 ) to be on a presidential ticket for one of the two major parties .
If she and Biden win the November election , she would be the first Asian American , the first woman of any race or ethnicity and the second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice president or president .
Harris ’ s selection is the latest sign of the increasing diversity of the Democratic Party .
Democrats last had an all-white , all-male ticket in 2004 , with then Sens .
John Kerry and John Edwards .
This vice presidential process , with Biden committing to choosing a woman fairly early on and then choosing a Black woman , suggests the Democrats may rarely in the future have a ticket of two white men .
They may also rarely in the future have a ticket of two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton and Tim Kaine ) or two men ( as in 2012 , with Obama and Biden ) .
It ’ s another illustration of the power of Black Americans in the Democratic Party .
A clear plurality of Black voters favored Biden throughout 2019 , helping keep the former vice president near the top of polls through most of the Democratic primary race .
Black voters in South Carolina and then other states , particularly in the South , strongly supported Biden and played a key role in his winning the nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hampshire and Nevada .
After it was clear Biden would be the party ’ s nominee , a lot of prominent Black Democrats — mostly notably Rep. James Clyburn , the highest-ranking Black Democrat in the House — pushed for Biden to pick a Black woman as his running mate .
With Harris ’ s selection , their wish was granted .
It ’ s another defeat for the party ’ s left wing .
With Sens .
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren losing the nomination contest , many liberal activists pushed Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They were unsuccessful .
Harris has a fairly liberal voting record in the Senate , but she ’ s not nearly as far to the left as Warren .
Harris hasn ’ t called for the breakup of Facebook , for example , or supported a wealth tax .
The Democratic Party is moving left ideologically .
But liberal activists may have a hard time getting their main policy goals adopted , even if Democrats control the House , Senate and the presidency next year .
The most important figures in Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer , all of whom have kept some distance from the party ’ s left wing .
Let ’ s pause there for a moment .
I could have made the preceding three points — the history of the selection , the power of Black voters and the loss for the Left — and even used nearly the exact same words in some of those sections if Biden had selected one of the other Black women who was reportedly being considered for vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams , Rep. Karen Bass , Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms , Rep. Val Demings and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice .
The implications of Harris ’ s selection , however , become more complicated when you look at Harris specifically , as opposed to the selection of a Black woman more generally .
So here ’ s what ’ s not clear : We don ’ t know if Harris will help or hurt Biden win the general election .
Research suggests that the electoral impact of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would expect Harris to follow the same pattern .
Harris is a sitting senator who was competent during the debates she participated in during the 2020 Democratic primary process , so she is unlikely to make huge gaffes that raise questions about why Biden selected her ( in the way that Palin became a problem for John McCain in 2008 ) .
At the same time , a senator from California doesn ’ t provide an obvious electoral boost in a key swing state .
Also , overall , Harris wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ran for president last year .
So the most likely outcome is that Harris ’ s selection doesn ’ t change much — either Biden keeps his current lead and wins the presidency or Trump comes back based on factors that don ’ t have a lot to do with Harris .
But politics is dynamic , so I ’ m not sure that prediction will come true .
We don ’ t know if Harris will boost the ticket with Black voters .
I don ’ t want to downplay Harris ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters are expected to account for about 13 percent of the expected 2020 electorate , a much bigger share than Asian Americans ( 5 percent ) .
Black voters are also a particularly sizable and important bloc in key swing states such as Florida ( 13 percent ) , Michigan ( 13 percent ) , North Carolina ( 23 percent ) , Pennsylvania ( 11 percent ) and Wisconsin ( 5 percent . )
I am addressing Harris ’ s potential appeal to Black voters specifically not because I think Black voters are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black woman like Harris , but rather because much of the conversation around the vice presidential selection has implied that picking a Black person will create extra enthusiasm for the ticket with Black voters .
The percentage of Black voting-eligible people who cast ballots was significantly higher in 2008 ( 65 percent ) and 2012 ( 66 percent ) , when there was a Black candidate on the ticket , compared to 2004 and 2016 ( both around 60 percent ) when there was not .
Some political science research shows that Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black candidate is on the ballot , although that finding is somewhat contested , and that research is about voting for a Black candidate at the top of the ticket , not a white candidate with a Black running mate .
So it ’ s not a crazy idea that Harris might boost the ticket with Black voters .
It has some empirical basis .
But I think the stronger case , at least based on what we know right now , is that she won ’ t have much of an effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not ?
First of all , while it happened in 2008 and 2012 , it ’ s just really hard for Democrats to get that much more support from Black voters , who even in elections like 2004 or 2016 vote at fairly high rates ( significantly higher than Asian American or Hispanic voters ) and overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates .
Second , it ’ s not 2008 or 2012 , when Black voters had the chance to elect and then reelect the first Black president .
Third , Harris herself seems unlikely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not a random guess — Harris ran for president for much of last year and was not the preferred candidate of older Black voters in the Democratic primary ( that was Biden ) or younger Black voters ( that was Sanders or Warren in earlier stages of the race ) .
Obama , in contrast , had very strong Black support during his 2008 primary run , previewing what would happen in his two general election campaigns .
We don ’ t know how Harris ’ s selection affects the protest movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of George Floyd .
Another part of the discourse has been that the selection of a Black woman became more necessary in the wake of the national protests around racial inequality over the last several months .
But it ’ s not clear the Black Lives Matter activists organizing these protests view a Black woman being picked as vice president as a major priority in terms of addressing racial inequality in America ( as opposed to , for example , reducing spending on policing . )
And some more liberal Black people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was too punitive toward people who committed minor crimes like truancy when she was the district attorney in San Francisco and then the attorney general of California .
I would emphasize all of this is a bit unknown .
Maybe Harris ’ s choice will be applauded by BLM activists ; it ’ s just not a given .
We don ’ t know if Harris is now the most-likely Democratic nominee in 2024 .
If Biden and Harris lose , Harris ’ s presidential ambitions are likely over .
( Just ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palin , Paul Ryan and Tim Kaine . )
But if they win , remember that Biden will enter office at age 78 and that in March he described himself as a “ bridge ” figure who will help usher in the Democratic Party ’ s next generation of leaders .
So is Harris being set up to be the Democratic front-runner and likely nominee in 2024 ?
I don ’ t know .
And honestly , Biden and Harris may not know either .
But this matters , for two big reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , expect Trump and his campaign , who have had a hard time casting Biden as an extremist or a radical , to make attacks on Harris with sexist and racist undertones , cast her as an ultra-liberal Californian out of touch with Middle American values and suggest that voting for Biden in November means that Harris will be running the country for 12 years .
Second , if Harris is vice president , she would need to make sure she is ready to run for president in 2024 — in case Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a second term or isn ’ t up to it — while also ensuring she isn ’ t portrayed by the media as constantly planning her 2024 campaign , which would likely irritate Biden and other Democrats .
Biden made the predictable pick ( in fact , we kind of predicted it in March ) .
Harris is more liberal than Biden but not Sanders/Warren-left , and she is an Asian and Black woman in a party that always wants to show it cares about traditionally marginalized groups and probably feels the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more in the wake of the Floyd protests .
So Biden choosing someone with Harris ’ s political , biographical and demographic attributes makes a lot of sense .
The biggest unknowns are around Harris herself and her electoral skills .
Harris is a good politician based on these facts alone : She was elected senator in the nation ’ s most populous state and in a country with a lot of race and gender discrimination , Harris is the second Black woman ever elected to the Senate , and arguably the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That said , it ’ s still not clear if she is a particularly strong politician on the national stage , and therefore if she will be that helpful for Democrats in the No .
2 slot in 2020 or as the main candidate in a future presidential election .

Former Vice President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden announced Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate today. Here’s a look at what this choice means and … what it doesn’t.
It’s a historic choice, with the potential for even more history to be made.
Harris is the first Asian American and the first Black woman in American history to be a general election candidate for president or vice president for either of the two major political parties. (Harris’s mother was born in India, her father in Jamaica. They met as graduate students at the University of California at Berkeley, in the 1960s.) Harris is just the second Black person (after Barack Obama) and the fourth woman (after Democrats Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Republican Sarah Palin in 2008) to be on a presidential ticket for one of the two major parties. If she and Biden win the November election, she would be the first Asian American, the first woman of any race or ethnicity and the second Black person in U.S. history to be vice president or president.
Harris’s selection is the latest sign of the increasing diversity of the Democratic Party. Democrats last had an all-white, all-male ticket in 2004, with then Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards. This vice presidential process, with Biden committing to choosing a woman fairly early on and then choosing a Black woman, suggests the Democrats may rarely in the future have a ticket of two white men. They may also rarely in the future have a ticket of two white people (as in 2016 with Clinton and Tim Kaine) or two men (as in 2012, with Obama and Biden).
It’s another illustration of the power of Black Americans in the Democratic Party.
A clear plurality of Black voters favored Biden throughout 2019, helping keep the former vice president near the top of polls through most of the Democratic primary race. Black voters in South Carolina and then other states, particularly in the South, strongly supported Biden and played a key role in his winning the nomination despite lackluster showings in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.
After it was clear Biden would be the party’s nominee, a lot of prominent Black Democrats — mostly notably Rep. James Clyburn, the highest-ranking Black Democrat in the House — pushed for Biden to pick a Black woman as his running mate. With Harris’s selection, their wish was granted.
It’s another defeat for the party’s left wing.
With Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren losing the nomination contest, many liberal activists pushed Biden to pick Warren as his running mate. They were unsuccessful. Harris has a fairly liberal voting record in the Senate, but she’s not nearly as far to the left as Warren. Harris hasn’t called for the breakup of Facebook, for example, or supported a wealth tax.
The Democratic Party is moving left ideologically. But liberal activists may have a hard time getting their main policy goals adopted, even if Democrats control the House, Senate and the presidency next year. The most important figures in Washington in 2021 might be Biden, Harris, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer, all of whom have kept some distance from the party’s left wing.
Let’s pause there for a moment. I could have made the preceding three points — the history of the selection, the power of Black voters and the loss for the Left — and even used nearly the exact same words in some of those sections if Biden had selected one of the other Black women who was reportedly being considered for vice president. That list includes former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, Rep. Karen Bass, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, Rep. Val Demings and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice.
The implications of Harris’s selection, however, become more complicated when you look at Harris specifically, as opposed to the selection of a Black woman more generally. So here’s what’s not clear:
We don’t know if Harris will help or hurt Biden win the general election.
Research suggests that the electoral impact of vice presidential candidates is fairly limited. I would expect Harris to follow the same pattern. Harris is a sitting senator who was competent during the debates she participated in during the 2020 Democratic primary process, so she is unlikely to make huge gaffes that raise questions about why Biden selected her (in the way that Palin became a problem for John McCain in 2008). At the same time, a senator from California doesn’t provide an obvious electoral boost in a key swing state. Also, overall, Harris wasn’t a particularly effective candidate when she ran for president last year.
So the most likely outcome is that Harris’s selection doesn’t change much — either Biden keeps his current lead and wins the presidency or Trump comes back based on factors that don’t have a lot to do with Harris. But politics is dynamic, so I’m not sure that prediction will come true.
We don’t know if Harris will boost the ticket with Black voters.
I don’t want to downplay Harris’s Indian American roots. But Black voters are expected to account for about 13 percent of the expected 2020 electorate, a much bigger share than Asian Americans (5 percent). Black voters are also a particularly sizable and important bloc in key swing states such as Florida (13 percent), Michigan (13 percent), North Carolina (23 percent), Pennsylvania (11 percent) and Wisconsin (5 percent.) I am addressing Harris’s potential appeal to Black voters specifically not because I think Black voters are likely to be particularly energized by a Black woman like Harris, but rather because much of the conversation around the vice presidential selection has implied that picking a Black person will create extra enthusiasm for the ticket with Black voters.
The percentage of Black voting-eligible people who cast ballots was significantly higher in 2008 (65 percent) and 2012 (66 percent), when there was a Black candidate on the ticket, compared to 2004 and 2016 (both around 60 percent) when there was not. Some political science research shows that Black people vote at higher rates when a Black candidate is on the ballot, although that finding is somewhat contested, and that research is about voting for a Black candidate at the top of the ticket, not a white candidate with a Black running mate.
So it’s not a crazy idea that Harris might boost the ticket with Black voters. It has some empirical basis. But I think the stronger case, at least based on what we know right now, is that she won’t have much of an effect in terms of Black voters.
Why not? First of all, while it happened in 2008 and 2012, it’s just really hard for Democrats to get that much more support from Black voters, who even in elections like 2004 or 2016 vote at fairly high rates (significantly higher than Asian American or Hispanic voters) and overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates.
Second, it’s not 2008 or 2012, when Black voters had the chance to elect and then reelect the first Black president. Third, Harris herself seems unlikely to particularly excite Black voters. This is not a random guess — Harris ran for president for much of last year and was not the preferred candidate of older Black voters in the Democratic primary (that was Biden) or younger Black voters (that was Sanders or Warren in earlier stages of the race). Obama, in contrast, had very strong Black support during his 2008 primary run, previewing what would happen in his two general election campaigns.
We don’t know how Harris’s selection affects the protest movement that has emerged since the police killing of George Floyd.
Another part of the discourse has been that the selection of a Black woman became more necessary in the wake of the national protests around racial inequality over the last several months. But it’s not clear the Black Lives Matter activists organizing these protests view a Black woman being picked as vice president as a major priority in terms of addressing racial inequality in America (as opposed to, for example, reducing spending on policing.) And some more liberal Black people are wary of Harris because they felt she was too punitive toward people who committed minor crimes like truancy when she was the district attorney in San Francisco and then the attorney general of California.
I would emphasize all of this is a bit unknown. Maybe Harris’s choice will be applauded by BLM activists; it’s just not a given.
We don’t know if Harris is now the most-likely Democratic nominee in 2024.
If Biden and Harris lose, Harris’s presidential ambitions are likely over. (Just ask Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Sarah Palin, Paul Ryan and Tim Kaine.) But if they win, remember that Biden will enter office at age 78 and that in March he described himself as a “bridge” figure who will help usher in the Democratic Party’s next generation of leaders.
So is Harris being set up to be the Democratic front-runner and likely nominee in 2024? I don’t know. And honestly, Biden and Harris may not know either. But this matters, for two big reasons. First, in the 2020 election, expect Trump and his campaign, who have had a hard time casting Biden as an extremist or a radical, to make attacks on Harris with sexist and racist undertones, cast her as an ultra-liberal Californian out of touch with Middle American values and suggest that voting for Biden in November means that Harris will be running the country for 12 years.
Second, if Harris is vice president, she would need to make sure she is ready to run for president in 2024 — in case Biden either doesn’t want to run for a second term or isn’t up to it — while also ensuring she isn’t portrayed by the media as constantly planning her 2024 campaign, which would likely irritate Biden and other Democrats.
Biden made the predictable pick (in fact, we kind of predicted it in March). Harris is more liberal than Biden but not Sanders/Warren-left, and she is an Asian and Black woman in a party that always wants to show it cares about traditionally marginalized groups and probably feels the need to showcase its racial diversity even more in the wake of the Floyd protests. So Biden choosing someone with Harris’s political, biographical and demographic attributes makes a lot of sense.
The biggest unknowns are around Harris herself and her electoral skills. Harris is a good politician based on these facts alone: She was elected senator in the nation’s most populous state and in a country with a lot of race and gender discrimination, Harris is the second Black woman ever elected to the Senate, and arguably the first to be a serious presidential candidate. That said, it’s still not clear if she is a particularly strong politician on the national stage, and therefore if she will be that helpful for Democrats in the No. 2 slot in 2020 or as the main candidate in a future presidential election.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-11--How Biden’s Standing In The Polls Compares To Clinton’s At This Point In 2016

In this week ’ s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew compares Joe Biden ’ s standing in the polls @ @ @ @ @ s standing at this time in 2016 — her peak of the overall campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ on who Biden could pick as his running mate .

How Biden’s Standing In The Polls Compares To Clinton’s At This Point In 2016
In this week’s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew compares Joe Biden’s standing in the polls now with Hillary Clinton’s standing at this time in 2016 — her peak of the overall campaign. They also continue to speculate on who Biden could pick as his running mate.


2020 Election Forecast

The presidential race is in many ways just getting started .
On Tuesday , we got Joe Biden ’ s VP pick ( Sen. Kamala Harris ) , the Democratic National Convention is next week , and the Republican National Convention soon after .
So while it ’ s clear that Biden is comfortably ahead of Trump right now — nationally and in most battleground states — the forecast shows Trump with a meaningful chance of winning because there ’ s still plenty of time for the race to tighten .
• But wait !
Should you even trust the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls in 2016 , right ?
Yes .
But Clinton had only a small advantage in most surveys — Trump ’ s win was well within the range of normal polling error .
• As elections analyst Geoffrey Skelley wrote last week , Biden ’ s lead over Trump has already topped Clinton ’ s post-convention peak .
Biden also enjoys more overall support than Clinton .
In other words , there ’ s a genuine difference between Biden ’ s position now and Clinton ’ s four years ago .
• Check @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our forecast for more .

The winding path to victory
States that are forecasted to vote for one candidate by a big margin are at the ends of the path, while tighter races are in the middle. Bigger segments mean more Electoral College votes. Trace the path from either end to see which state could put one candidate over the top.