fivethirtyeight--2020-08-04--What You Need To Know About Today’s Elections In Kansas, Michigan And Missouri

Call it Super Tuesday III : The last big primary day of the season is upon us .
Today , millions of voters in Arizona , Kansas , Michigan , Missouri and Washington go to the polls — or , more likely , fill out an absentee ballot — to decide the Republican and Democratic nominees for congressional and state office .
There are over a dozen races worth watching today , but here ’ s the skinny on the most consequential .
Kansas ’ s Republican primary for U.S. Senate might be the biggest down-ballot primary of the year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state , Democrats will have a real shot to win a Senate seat here for the first time since 1932 ( their longest drought anywhere in the nation ) if the GOP nominates former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach .
For reasons ranging from his quixotic pursuit of voter fraud to his far-right views on immigration , legal troubles and an incompetent campaign , Kobach is such a weak candidate that he already lost the 2018 race for governor to Democrat Laura Kelly .
And internal GOP polling has reportedly found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic state Sen. Barbara Bollier this November if Kobach is the nominee for Senate .
That ’ s enough to put Kobach and Bollier in a virtual tie in the few public polls of the race we ’ ve seen recently .
That ’ s not to say Republicans don ’ t have an alternative .
The problem is , they have two : Rep. Roger Marshall and plumbing and HVAC mogul Bob Hamilton .
And thanks to his ability to self-fund , Hamilton had spent the most as of July 15 ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ airwaves with campaign ads — and that ’ s on top of the years ’ worth of kitschy commercials his company is locally famous for .
However , Marshall has the support of the party establishment : In addition to the $ 2.3 million spent by Marshall ’ s campaign , the Senate Leadership Fund has spent $ 1.9 million to help him .
Marshall also has the endorsements of a prominent Kansas pro-life group , the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and retiring Sen. Pat Roberts .
But one big name has yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly urged the president to endorse Marshall , but ( so far at least ) he ’ s been unwilling to lift a finger against Kobach , his ideological doppelgänger .
A new super PAC with ties to McConnell , Plains PAC , has spent heavily ( $ 3.3 million ) this month on negative ads associating Kobach with white supremacists .
But the biggest spender in the Republican primary is actually a super PAC with Democratic ties : Sunflower State PAC , which has spent $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ attacking ” Kobach for being “ too conservative ” and actually attacking Marshall for being “ phony ” and “ soft on Trump.
” It ’ s not unheard of for parties to meddle in the other side ’ s primary like this to land their preferred opponent , but rarely have they gone so all-in on it .
Public polling of the race has been sparse ; the latest data we have is an internal Republican poll ( reported by Politico ) that put Marshall at 33 percent and Kobach at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But you know what we say about internal polls — and be extra careful with this one ; we don ’ t know which pollster even conducted it .
Remarkably , that is not the only race in Kansas in which a tainted nominee could cost Republicans the election in November .
Dogged by allegations of adultery , unwanted sexual advances , campaign-finance violations and inflating his résumé , Rep. Steve Watkins of the 2nd Congressional District was already facing a vigorous challenge from state Treasurer Jake LaTurner , the youngest statewide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 32 .
Then , on July 14 , Watkins was charged with three felonies and a misdemeanor for voting from an address where he does not live .
The scandal prompted Watkins to step down from his committee assignments in Washington and neighboring Rep. Ron Estes to endorse LaTurner .
( However , Republican brass such as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy have stuck with Watkins . )
Although this eastern Kansas district voted for Trump by 18 points in 2016 , it ’ s looking competitive this fall — and could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to a poll from LaTurner ’ s campaign ( mind you , hardly an unbiased source ) , Democratic Topeka Mayor Michelle De La Isla leads Watkins 50 percent to 37 percent , while De La Isla and LaTurner are locked in a virtual tie .
In Michigan , there are three interesting House primaries , but the one grabbing the most national attention is probably the rematch in the 13th Congressional District between Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Detroit City Council President Brenda Jones .
This is a race with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After the resignation of Democratic Rep. John Conyers in December 2017 , the seat hosted two elections in November 2018 — a regular race for Congress and a special election to complete Conyers ’ s unexpired term .
Tlaib and Jones faced off in crowded primaries , with Tlaib ultimately winning the regular primary and Jones the special .
Jones tried to mount a write-in campaign against Tlaib last November but lost , meaning Jones represented the district for a few weeks before Tlaib took office .
Now , though , Tlaib and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which might help Jones in the majority-Black , Detroit-based district as she is African American herself .
In 2018 , however , African American voters didn ’ t coalesce around a single candidate .
Instead , Tlaib , who is Palestinian American , came out on top .
However , this year Jones has the endorsement of every other Democrat who ran in 2018 , and she ’ s taken aim at Tlaib ’ s sometimes-controversial national profile as a member of “ The Squad , ” claiming Tlaib is prioritizing celebrity over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though , Tlaib appears to have the upper hand , in part because she held a massive 40-to-1 cash-on-hand advantage over Jones as of July 15 .
Tlaib has also attacked Jones for not living in the district , and it probably helps Tlaib that Jones has her fair share of controversies , too , including alleged violations of state campaign finance laws .
A July survey from Target Insyghts found Tlaib ahead 52 percent to 24 percent , so it looks as if this is Tlaib ’ s race to lose .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ re also keeping an eye on the Republican primary for the 3rd Congressional District , a Grand Rapids-based seat currently held by Rep. Justin Amash , a Libertarian and former Republican who isn ’ t seeking reelection .
The principal GOP contenders are state Rep. Lynn Afendoulis and Peter Meijer , a U.S. Army veteran and scion of the family that owns the eponymous Midwestern retail chain — which probably helps with his name recognition .
Meijer appears to have the upper hand , too , as he has support from House Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As of July 15 , he had raised a little over $ 1 million in contributions , compared to Afendoulis ’ s $ 625,000 .
Not to mention , he had a $ 400,000 to $ 140,000 cash edge for the home stretch ( Meijer has also loaned his campaign $ 475,000 ; Afendoulis has given hers $ 256,000 ) .
Still , Afendoulis argues she ’ s the only candidate with legislative experience and is the only conservative for the job , having earned an endorsement from Susan B. Anthony List , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s also questioned Meijer ’ s loyalty to Trump and the GOP , slamming him as a “ Never Trumper ” who helped Democrats by working for With Honor , a bipartisan group that aims to elect veterans to Congress .
A mid-June survey from Meijer ’ s campaign found him ahead of Afendoulis by 24 points , 41 percent to 17 percent , although we should take internal polls with a grain of salt .
Ultimately , the Republican winner will advance to face attorney Hillary Scholten , who is unopposed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carried this district by about 10 points in 2016 , 52 percent to 42 percent , election handicappers only give the GOP a narrow advantage in the race .
In the last district we ’ re watching , three Republicans are vying to replace retiring GOP Rep. Paul Mitchell in Michigan ’ s 10th District , which lies north of Detroit in “ The Thumb ” and is the most Republican-leaning seat in the state .
First up , state Rep. Shane Hernandez has enjoyed the backing of groups promoting limited government like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prosperity .
The Club ’ s political arm has spent about $ 1.5 million to help Hernandez , which includes ad buys featuring Mitchell endorsing Hernandez and emphasizing Hernandez ’ s support for Trump .
Meanwhile , businesswoman Lisa McClain had spent $ 1.6 million on the race as of July 15 — about four times as much as her opponents — and has run ads calling herself a conservative outsider and pro-Trump Republican .
McClain has also questioned Hernandez ’ s Trump bona fides by running an ad claiming that Hernandez opposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border wall in 2016 .
A super PAC backing McClain has also spent nearly $ 500,000 boosting her .
A third candidate , retired Air Force Brig .
Gen. Doug Slocum , has little outside support , but he ’ s stressed his early support for Trump and his extensive military service as a pilot in the Air Force and as commander of Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Macomb County , which is in the district .
The only recent survey of the race comes from Hernandez ’ s allies at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ narrowly leading McClain by 6 points , 33 percent to 27 percent , with Slocum in a distant third at 10 percent .
Progressive challengers have already unseated incumbent Democratic congressmen in two districts this year — could Missouri ’ s 1st Congressional District be next ?
A Clay — either current Rep. Lacy Clay or his father , Bill — has represented St. Louis in Congress continuously since 1969 , but registered nurse and Black Lives Matter activist Cori Bush is determined to bring that streak to an end .
Clay defeated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic primary here in 2018 , but it ’ s a much fairer fight this time around : Instead of being outspent more than three to one like she was in 2018 , Bush has spent nearly $ 442,000 this year to Clay ’ s more than $ 548,000 ( as of July 15 ) .
In addition , outside group Fight Corporate Monopolies has dropped six figures on an ad attacking Clay for fighting the Obama administration on Wall Street reform .
Generally , though , Clay has a pretty progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal than 83 percent of Democrats in the current Congress , according to DW-Nominate , and , like Bush , supports both single-payer health care and the Green New Deal .
On the other hand , the nationwide movement against police violence may help Bush , as she first rose to prominence amid the 2014 protests over the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson , which is in the district .
But whoever wins the primary will likely punch their ticket to Congress , since the 1st District is overwhelmingly Democratic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 , a ballot measure that would make Missouri the 39th state to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act .
In the face of opposition from Republican governors and legislatures , proponents of Medicaid expansion have had a lot of success recently at the ballot box — Idaho , Nebraska and Utah passed it in 2018 , and Oklahoma did so just a month ago — and Missouri looks like it could follow suit .
A June poll from Remington Research Group found Amendment 2 leading 47 percent to 40 percent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had outraised opponents by the shocking margin of $ 10.1 million to less than $ 112,000 .
If the amendment passes , an estimated 230,000 people would newly become eligible for Medicaid starting in 2021 .
There are also several races we didn ’ t have room to cover — like an “ accidental congressman ’ s ” comeback attempt in Michigan ’ s 11th District and the question of whether Washington state will elect its first Black representative or a protégée of Bernie Sanders in the open 10th District .
Feel free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full coverage up and down the ballot .
However , as usual , it could be several days before we get final results .
And if any of those results have an effect on who ’ s favored in November ( lookin ’ at you , Kansas ) , we ’ ll cover it for you right here on FiveThirtyEight.com .

Call it Super Tuesday III: The last big primary day of the season is upon us. Today, millions of voters in Arizona, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri and Washington go to the polls — or, more likely, fill out an absentee ballot — to decide the Republican and Democratic nominees for congressional and state office. There are over a dozen races worth watching today, but here’s the skinny on the most consequential.
Kansas
Kansas’s Republican primary for U.S. Senate might be the biggest down-ballot primary of the year. Although Kansas is normally a blood-red state, Democrats will have a real shot to win a Senate seat here for the first time since 1932 (their longest drought anywhere in the nation) if the GOP nominates former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.
For reasons ranging from his quixotic pursuit of voter fraud to his far-right views on immigration, legal troubles and an incompetent campaign, Kobach is such a weak candidate that he already lost the 2018 race for governor to Democrat Laura Kelly. And internal GOP polling has reportedly found that nearly 30 percent of Republicans would support Democratic state Sen. Barbara Bollier this November if Kobach is the nominee for Senate. That’s enough to put Kobach and Bollier in a virtual tie in the few public polls of the race we’ve seen recently.
That’s not to say Republicans don’t have an alternative. The problem is, they have two: Rep. Roger Marshall and plumbing and HVAC mogul Bob Hamilton. And thanks to his ability to self-fund, Hamilton had spent the most as of July 15 ($2.7 million), saturating the airwaves with campaign ads — and that’s on top of the years’ worth of kitschy commercials his company is locally famous for.
However, Marshall has the support of the party establishment: In addition to the $2.3 million spent by Marshall’s campaign, the Senate Leadership Fund has spent $1.9 million to help him. Marshall also has the endorsements of a prominent Kansas pro-life group, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and retiring Sen. Pat Roberts. But one big name has yet to weigh in: President Trump. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly urged the president to endorse Marshall, but (so far at least) he’s been unwilling to lift a finger against Kobach, his ideological doppelgänger.
A new super PAC with ties to McConnell, Plains PAC, has spent heavily ($3.3 million) this month on negative ads associating Kobach with white supremacists. But the biggest spender in the Republican primary is actually a super PAC with Democratic ties: Sunflower State PAC, which has spent $5.3 million, including on an ad “attacking” Kobach for being “too conservative” and actually attacking Marshall for being “phony” and “soft on Trump.” It’s not unheard of for parties to meddle in the other side’s primary like this to land their preferred opponent, but rarely have they gone so all-in on it.
Public polling of the race has been sparse; the latest data we have is an internal Republican poll (reported by Politico) that put Marshall at 33 percent and Kobach at 30 percent, with Hamilton further behind. But you know what we say about internal polls — and be extra careful with this one; we don’t know which pollster even conducted it.
Remarkably, that is not the only race in Kansas in which a tainted nominee could cost Republicans the election in November. Dogged by allegations of adultery, unwanted sexual advances, campaign-finance violations and inflating his résumé, Rep. Steve Watkins of the 2nd Congressional District was already facing a vigorous challenge from state Treasurer Jake LaTurner, the youngest statewide elected official in the country at age 32. Then, on July 14, Watkins was charged with three felonies and a misdemeanor for voting from an address where he does not live. The scandal prompted Watkins to step down from his committee assignments in Washington and neighboring Rep. Ron Estes to endorse LaTurner. (However, Republican brass such as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy have stuck with Watkins.)
Although this eastern Kansas district voted for Trump by 18 points in 2016, it’s looking competitive this fall — and could be especially vulnerable if Watkins wins the primary. According to a poll from LaTurner’s campaign (mind you, hardly an unbiased source), Democratic Topeka Mayor Michelle De La Isla leads Watkins 50 percent to 37 percent, while De La Isla and LaTurner are locked in a virtual tie.
Michigan
In Michigan, there are three interesting House primaries, but the one grabbing the most national attention is probably the rematch in the 13th Congressional District between Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Detroit City Council President Brenda Jones.
This is a race with a lot of history, too. After the resignation of Democratic Rep. John Conyers in December 2017, the seat hosted two elections in November 2018 — a regular race for Congress and a special election to complete Conyers’s unexpired term. Tlaib and Jones faced off in crowded primaries, with Tlaib ultimately winning the regular primary and Jones the special. Jones tried to mount a write-in campaign against Tlaib last November but lost, meaning Jones represented the district for a few weeks before Tlaib took office.
Now, though, Tlaib and Jones are the only primary contenders, which might help Jones in the majority-Black, Detroit-based district as she is African American herself. In 2018, however, African American voters didn’t coalesce around a single candidate. Instead, Tlaib, who is Palestinian American, came out on top. However, this year Jones has the endorsement of every other Democrat who ran in 2018, and she’s taken aim at Tlaib’s sometimes-controversial national profile as a member of “The Squad,” claiming Tlaib is prioritizing celebrity over her constituents.
For the moment, though, Tlaib appears to have the upper hand, in part because she held a massive 40-to-1 cash-on-hand advantage over Jones as of July 15. Tlaib has also attacked Jones for not living in the district, and it probably helps Tlaib that Jones has her fair share of controversies, too, including alleged violations of state campaign finance laws. A July survey from Target Insyghts found Tlaib ahead 52 percent to 24 percent, so it looks as if this is Tlaib’s race to lose.
Over in western Michigan, we’re also keeping an eye on the Republican primary for the 3rd Congressional District, a Grand Rapids-based seat currently held by Rep. Justin Amash, a Libertarian and former Republican who isn’t seeking reelection. The principal GOP contenders are state Rep. Lynn Afendoulis and Peter Meijer, a U.S. Army veteran and scion of the family that owns the eponymous Midwestern retail chain — which probably helps with his name recognition.
Meijer appears to have the upper hand, too, as he has support from House Republican leaders and leads the money race. As of July 15, he had raised a little over $1 million in contributions, compared to Afendoulis’s $625,000. Not to mention, he had a $400,000 to $140,000 cash edge for the home stretch (Meijer has also loaned his campaign $475,000; Afendoulis has given hers $256,000). Still, Afendoulis argues she’s the only candidate with legislative experience and is the only conservative for the job, having earned an endorsement from Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion rights. She’s also questioned Meijer’s loyalty to Trump and the GOP, slamming him as a “Never Trumper” who helped Democrats by working for With Honor, a bipartisan group that aims to elect veterans to Congress.
A mid-June survey from Meijer’s campaign found him ahead of Afendoulis by 24 points, 41 percent to 17 percent, although we should take internal polls with a grain of salt. Ultimately, the Republican winner will advance to face attorney Hillary Scholten, who is unopposed in the Democratic primary. And although Trump carried this district by about 10 points in 2016, 52 percent to 42 percent, election handicappers only give the GOP a narrow advantage in the race.
In the last district we’re watching, three Republicans are vying to replace retiring GOP Rep. Paul Mitchell in Michigan’s 10th District, which lies north of Detroit in “The Thumb” and is the most Republican-leaning seat in the state.
First up, state Rep. Shane Hernandez has enjoyed the backing of groups promoting limited government like the Club for Growth and Americans for Prosperity. The Club’s political arm has spent about $1.5 million to help Hernandez, which includes ad buys featuring Mitchell endorsing Hernandez and emphasizing Hernandez’s support for Trump. Meanwhile, businesswoman Lisa McClain had spent $1.6 million on the race as of July 15 — about four times as much as her opponents — and has run ads calling herself a conservative outsider and pro-Trump Republican. McClain has also questioned Hernandez’s Trump bona fides by running an ad claiming that Hernandez opposed Trump and the idea of building a border wall in 2016. A super PAC backing McClain has also spent nearly $500,000 boosting her. A third candidate, retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Doug Slocum, has little outside support, but he’s stressed his early support for Trump and his extensive military service as a pilot in the Air Force and as commander of Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Macomb County, which is in the district.
The only recent survey of the race comes from Hernandez’s allies at the Club, which in mid-July found him narrowly leading McClain by 6 points, 33 percent to 27 percent, with Slocum in a distant third at 10 percent.
Missouri
Progressive challengers have already unseated incumbent Democratic congressmen in two districts this year — could Missouri’s 1st Congressional District be next? A Clay — either current Rep. Lacy Clay or his father, Bill — has represented St. Louis in Congress continuously since 1969, but registered nurse and Black Lives Matter activist Cori Bush is determined to bring that streak to an end. Clay defeated Bush 57 percent to 37 percent in the Democratic primary here in 2018, but it’s a much fairer fight this time around: Instead of being outspent more than three to one like she was in 2018, Bush has spent nearly $442,000 this year to Clay’s more than $548,000 (as of July 15).
In addition, outside group Fight Corporate Monopolies has dropped six figures on an ad attacking Clay for fighting the Obama administration on Wall Street reform. Generally, though, Clay has a pretty progressive voting record: He’s more liberal than 83 percent of Democrats in the current Congress, according to DW-Nominate, and, like Bush, supports both single-payer health care and the Green New Deal. On the other hand, the nationwide movement against police violence may help Bush, as she first rose to prominence amid the 2014 protests over the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, which is in the district. But whoever wins the primary will likely punch their ticket to Congress, since the 1st District is overwhelmingly Democratic.
Missourians statewide will also vote on Amendment 2, a ballot measure that would make Missouri the 39th state to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. In the face of opposition from Republican governors and legislatures, proponents of Medicaid expansion have had a lot of success recently at the ballot box — Idaho, Nebraska and Utah passed it in 2018, and Oklahoma did so just a month ago — and Missouri looks like it could follow suit. A June poll from Remington Research Group found Amendment 2 leading 47 percent to 40 percent, and as of July 27, supporters had outraised opponents by the shocking margin of $10.1 million to less than $112,000. If the amendment passes, an estimated 230,000 people would newly become eligible for Medicaid starting in 2021.
There are also several races we didn’t have room to cover — like an “accidental congressman’s” comeback attempt in Michigan’s 11th District and the question of whether Washington state will elect its first Black representative or a protégée of Bernie Sanders in the open 10th District. Feel free to follow us on Twitter tonight for full coverage up and down the ballot. However, as usual, it could be several days before we get final results. And if any of those results have an effect on who’s favored in November (lookin’ at you, Kansas), we’ll cover it for you right here on FiveThirtyEight.com.
CORRECTION (August 4, 2020, 11:45 a.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated which candidate was trailing Marshall and Kobach in an internal Republican poll. It was Hamilton, not Marshall.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-04--The GDP Data Is Terrible. That Doesn’t Mean Trump Is Bound To Lose.

In this week ’ s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew discusses how well economic data can predict the outcome @ @ @ @ @ also take a look at what could happen if President Trump casts doubt on the @ @ @ @ @ November .

In this week’s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew discusses how well economic data can predict the outcome of an election. They also take a look at what could happen if President Trump casts doubt on the legitimacy of the election in November.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-05--The Federal Clampdown On Portland Shows Just How Fragile Our Democracy Is

In the video , Juniper Simonis screams as they are pushed to the ground , struggling , by a group of men in military fatigues who wield large , black weapons .
While Simonis is handcuffed and their service dog barks , the men surround them , a wall of camo , blocking the videographer from capturing the full extent of what ’ s happening .
Simonis wears shorts and a tank top , but the men appear dressed for war .
The officers ’ uniforms bear a large patch that says “ police , ” but they aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agents , but with no name tags or badges , they are , in the moment of Simonis ’ s arrest , impossible to identify .
Simonis is an American scientist — a computational ecological who does data analysis for researchers and the government .
Last month , Simonis was detained outside a federal courthouse in Portland , Oregon , by mysterious men now known to be agents of the Department of Homeland Security , a federal agency created to fight terrorism .
By Simonis ’ s own estimation , the scientist spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ custody .
For the first 45 minutes or so , they said , they were held in a parking garage without having been read their rights .
Simonis was then transferred to a U.S.
Marshals ’ lockup .
Their request to call a lawyer or a friend was refused .
Eventually , Simonis was given a citation for vandalism related to chalking the sidewalk in front of the courthouse , and sent out the door in the middle of the night with no way home .
Simonis ’ s story is not how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But over the last few weeks , it ’ s become part of a familiar pattern .
DHS agents in Portland have tear-gassed protesters and pulled individuals into unmarked vans , and some of those people were banned from attending any more protests as a condition of being released from jail .
The agency also collected information on journalists who published leaked documents .
Late last week , a deal was struck with Oregon ’ s governor to withdraw the troops .
The governor said it was happening immediately , but DHS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that they wouldn ’ t leave until “ [ W ] e are assured that the courthouse and other federal facilities will no longer be attacked nightly.
” These events sit in a weird nexus .
They are extraordinary enough to draw the attention of legal scholars and criticism from civil liberties groups .
But politically , the response has been divided .
House Democrats called for an investigation , while Sen. Rand Paul is the only congressional Republican to speak out against the DHS response .
The media ’ s reaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with outlets like the National Review telling readers that the events in Portland were justified and The Atlantic saying justification was impossible .
That divided response makes some experts almost as concerned as the arrests .
Partisanship is dangerous , they told us , particularly when it ’ s accompanied by a long series of warning signs that could signal serious danger for American democracy .
Portland is not the first place the federal government has stepped in with disproportionate force against the will of local authorities .
In 1794 , George Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into Pennsylvania to put down an anti-tax revolt .
And while that is a very long time to reach back for precedent , experts say it ’ s important to understand the context of American history when it comes to violation of democratic norms .
“ Contrary to what a lot of people assume , American democracy has always been fragile and in real danger of backsliding , ” said Suzanne Mettler , a professor of American politics at Cornell University and one of the authors of “ Four Threats : The Recurring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other experts , consider our current time period one in which authoritarianism poses a serious risk — but not because of what is happening with the DHS in Portland .
Instead , it ’ s more likely that recent events are a symptom of something bigger , a risk that has steadily grown in the last several decades .
Instead , they point to the political polarization evident in public opinion on Portland as indicative of the danger we ’ re in .
When it comes to Portland , specifically , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a survey fielded by Data for Progress on July 28 , respondents were split about Trump ’ s decision to send DHS to Oregon , with 42 percent calling the deployment of federal police “ essential ” and 45 percent calling it an “ overstep.
” And that split was highly partisan .
Broken down by party affiliation , nearly three-quarters of Republicans favored the decision while a similar proportion of Democrats opposed it .
( Full disclosure : Shom Mazumder , one of the authors of this article , is a fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by itself , isn ’ t much of a shock .
We are , for better or for worse , used to all sorts of issues dividing public opinion .
The terrifying thing is the way it links partisan politics and authoritarianism .
According to a recent report by the Democracy Fund ’ s Voter Study Group , support for democracy is in no way universal .
In fact , their findings show that 1 in 3 Americans have , at some point in the last three years , supported some kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20 percent said it was very important to live in a democracy .
And separate polling , commissioned by Mazumder before Portland , from YouGov Blue , an arm of YouGov that primarily serves Democratic and progressive clients , underscores this as well .
Although it found that Republicans were less supportive overall of democracy — 1 out of 4 Republicans said that democracy is a “ very bad ” or “ fairly bad ” way to govern the country compared to just four percent of Democrats .
There was also more support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the survey as someone “ who does not have to bother with Congress and elections ” among Republicans .
But it wasn ’ t just Republicans driving these anti-democratic views .
A significant percentage of Democrats said they preferred to have “ experts , not the government ” make decisions on what they think is best for the country .
That isn ’ t necessarily all that surprising when you consider we ’ ve spent the last 30 years building up an increasingly apocalyptic view of our political opponents and their intentions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ asked Americans about the amount of partisan animosity they held .
In that time , the percentage of people who rate the opposing party as “ very unfavorable ” has climbed from about 20 percent to more than 50 percent .
In fact , as of 2016 , more than 40 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said they saw the other side as a threat to the nation .
That poses a real threat to our democracy , too .
“ If we view that if one party gets into power they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of life or the nation as a whole , we ’ ll do whatever we can to keep them out or keep ourselves in , ” said Jennifer McCoy , a professor of political science at Georgia State University .
That , she added , is when people start to tolerate the violation of democratic norms .
“ The goal is to stay in power or get in power and it overrides the value of respecting democratic principles , ” she said .
In fact , research from political scientists Matt Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that survey measures might even underestimate the American public ’ s commitment to upholding democratic norms , especially when subverting norms might help get one side ’ s preferred candidate pushed through .
Looking at situations in American history and around the world , McCoy , Mettler and other experts have found that extreme polarization is one major red flag that shows a democracy is in trouble .
That ’ s because people will condone all kinds of violence in the name of protecting themselves , said Christian Davenport , professor of political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Violations of norms — even the law — become justifiable depending on who is doing the rule-breaking and who is being targeted .
Through that lens , it makes perfect sense why Americans are politically divided on Portland : It ’ s actually a divide over whether you see the protesters as a threat .
And that should make us all very uncomfortable — no matter which side of the aisle we ’ re on .
Because evidence points to the fact that many Americans , regardless of their party affiliation , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their political opponents .
Back in March , McCoy and other researchers surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans about their support for various anti-democratic policies under different scenarios where one party , or the other , was in power .
The results from this survey have not yet been published , but their preliminary analysis finds significantly higher support for such policies as prosecuting journalists , banning protests and disqualifying political opponents from elections in situations when a respondent ’ s preferred party was in power — and hoping to stay there .
The effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican power .
But it existed for Democrats , as well .
For instance , while 23.6 percent of Democrats and 22.7 percent of Republicans said the president should do what the people want , even if it goes against existing laws , when their party was out of power , those numbers jumped to 29.6 percent and 35.1 percent , respectively , when the rule of law became inconvenient to keeping the other side at bay .
Not all experts who study democratic erosion think what ’ s going on in Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Robert Mickey , a professor of political science at the University of Michigan , told us he ’ s more concerned with threats to voting rights and sees Portland as especially dangerous political theater .
But all of the experts we spoke to said our democracy is in a dangerous place , and that the partisan split we see over things like federal agents dragging a screaming woman into a courthouse is part of that .
“ We ’ re not immune to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t be cavalier in thinking we are .
”

In the video, Juniper Simonis screams as they are pushed to the ground, struggling, by a group of men in military fatigues who wield large, black weapons. While Simonis is handcuffed and their service dog barks, the men surround them, a wall of camo, blocking the videographer from capturing the full extent of what’s happening. Simonis wears shorts and a tank top, but the men appear dressed for war. The officers’ uniforms bear a large patch that says “police,” but they aren’t police. They’re federal agents, but with no name tags or badges, they are, in the moment of Simonis’s arrest, impossible to identify.
Simonis is an American scientist — a computational ecologist who does data analysis for researchers and the government. Last month, Simonis was detained outside a federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, by mysterious men now known to be agents of the Department of Homeland Security, a federal agency created to fight terrorism. By Simonis’s own estimation, the scientist spent around eight hours in the agents’ custody. For the first 45 minutes or so, they said, they were held in a parking garage without having been read their rights. Simonis was then transferred to a U.S. Marshals’ lockup. Their request to call a lawyer or a friend was refused. Eventually, Simonis was given a citation for vandalism related to chalking the sidewalk in front of the courthouse, and sent out the door in the middle of the night with no way home.
Simonis’s story is not how most Americans expect law enforcement to work. But over the last few weeks, it’s become part of a familiar pattern. DHS agents in Portland have tear-gassed protesters and pulled individuals into unmarked vans, and some of those people were banned from attending any more protests as a condition of being released from jail. The agency also collected information on journalists who published leaked documents.
Late last week, a deal was struck with Oregon’s governor to withdraw the troops. The governor said it was happening immediately, but DHS officials said it was a phased withdrawal and that they wouldn’t leave until “[W]e are assured that the courthouse and other federal facilities will no longer be attacked nightly.”
These events sit in a weird nexus. They are extraordinary enough to draw the attention of legal scholars and criticism from civil liberties groups. But politically, the response has been divided. House Democrats called for an investigation, while Sen. Rand Paul is the only congressional Republican to speak out against the DHS response. The media’s reaction has also fallen along well-worn lines, with outlets like the National Review telling readers that the events in Portland were justified and The Atlantic saying justification was impossible. That divided response makes some experts almost as concerned as the arrests. Partisanship is dangerous, they told us, particularly when it’s accompanied by a long series of warning signs that could signal serious danger for American democracy.
Portland is not the first place the federal government has stepped in with disproportionate force against the will of local authorities. In 1794, George Washington himself led a militia of 13,000 men into Pennsylvania to put down an anti-tax revolt. And while that is a very long time to reach back for precedent, experts say it’s important to understand the context of American history when it comes to violation of democratic norms. “Contrary to what a lot of people assume, American democracy has always been fragile and in real danger of backsliding,” said Suzanne Mettler, a professor of American politics at Cornell University and one of the authors of “Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy.”
She, and other experts, consider our current time period one in which authoritarianism poses a serious risk — but not because of what is happening with the DHS in Portland. Instead, it’s more likely that recent events are a symptom of something bigger, a risk that has steadily grown in the last several decades. Instead, they point to the political polarization evident in public opinion on Portland as indicative of the danger we’re in.
When it comes to Portland, specifically, the partisan divide is definitely real. In a survey fielded by Data for Progress on July 28, respondents were split about Trump’s decision to send DHS to Oregon, with 42 percent calling the deployment of federal police “essential” and 45 percent calling it an “overstep.” And that split was highly partisan. Broken down by party affiliation, nearly three-quarters of Republicans favored the decision while a similar proportion of Democrats opposed it. (Full disclosure: Shom Mazumder, one of the authors of this article, is a fellow at Data for Progress.)
That, by itself, isn’t much of a shock. We are, for better or for worse, used to all sorts of issues dividing public opinion. The terrifying thing is the way it links partisan politics and authoritarianism. According to a recent report by the Democracy Fund’s Voter Study Group, support for democracy is in no way universal. In fact, their findings show that 1 in 3 Americans have, at some point in the last three years, supported some kind of authoritarian view, and only about 80 percent said it was very important to live in a democracy.
And separate polling, commissioned by Mazumder before Portland, from YouGov Blue, an arm of YouGov that primarily serves Democratic and progressive clients, underscores this as well. Although it found that Republicans were less supportive overall of democracy — 1 out of 4 Republicans said that democracy is a “very bad” or “fairly bad” way to govern the country compared to just four percent of Democrats. There was also more support for a strong leader, defined in the survey as someone “who does not have to bother with Congress and elections” among Republicans. But it wasn’t just Republicans driving these anti-democratic views. A significant percentage of Democrats said they preferred to have “experts, not the government” make decisions on what they think is best for the country.
That isn’t necessarily all that surprising when you consider we’ve spent the last 30 years building up an increasingly apocalyptic view of our political opponents and their intentions. Since 1994, Pew Research Center has asked Americans about the amount of partisan animosity they held. In that time, the percentage of people who rate the opposing party as “very unfavorable” has climbed from about 20 percent to more than 50 percent. In fact, as of 2016, more than 40 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said they saw the other side as a threat to the nation.
That poses a real threat to our democracy, too. “If we view that if one party gets into power they’ll be a threat to my way of life or the nation as a whole, we’ll do whatever we can to keep them out or keep ourselves in,” said Jennifer McCoy, a professor of political science at Georgia State University. That, she added, is when people start to tolerate the violation of democratic norms. “The goal is to stay in power or get in power and it overrides the value of respecting democratic principles,” she said.
In fact, research from political scientists Matt Graham and Milan Svolik of Yale University found that survey measures might even overestimate the American public’s commitment to upholding democratic norms, especially when subverting norms might help get one side’s preferred candidate pushed through.
Looking at situations in American history and around the world, McCoy, Mettler and other experts have found that extreme polarization is one major red flag that shows a democracy is in trouble. That’s because people will condone all kinds of violence in the name of protecting themselves, said Christian Davenport, professor of political science at the University of Michigan. Violations of norms — even the law — become justifiable depending on who is doing the rule-breaking and who is being targeted.
Through that lens, it makes perfect sense why Americans are politically divided on Portland: It’s actually a divide over whether you see the protesters as a threat. And that should make us all very uncomfortable — no matter which side of the aisle we’re on. Because evidence points to the fact that many Americans, regardless of their party affiliation, are willing to condone violence and repression against their political opponents.
Back in March, McCoy and other researchers surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans about their support for various anti-democratic policies under different scenarios where one party, or the other, was in power. The results from this survey have not yet been published, but their preliminary analysis finds significantly higher support for such policies as prosecuting journalists, banning protests and disqualifying political opponents from elections in situations when a respondent’s preferred party was in power — and hoping to stay there. The effect was larger among Republicans hoping to consolidate Republican power. But it existed for Democrats, as well. For instance, while 23.6 percent of Democrats and 22.7 percent of Republicans said the president should do what the people want, even if it goes against existing laws, when their party was out of power, those numbers jumped to 29.6 percent and 35.1 percent, respectively, when the rule of law became inconvenient to keeping the other side at bay.
Not all experts who study democratic erosion think what’s going on in Portland is a threat to democracy, though. Robert Mickey, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan, told us he’s more concerned with threats to voting rights and sees Portland as especially dangerous political theater.
But all of the experts we spoke to said our democracy is in a dangerous place, and that the partisan split we see over things like federal agents dragging a screaming woman into a courthouse is part of that. “We’re not immune to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States,” Mettler said. “And we can’t be cavalier in thinking we are.”
CORRECTION (August 5, 2020, 1:58 p.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the percentage of Americans who said it was very important to live in a democracy. It was 80 percent, not 20 percent. It also said that survey measures might underestimate the American public’s commitment to upholding democratic norms, when in fact, they might overestimate them.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-05--Biden Is Polling Better Than Clinton At Her Peak

Election Day is now just three months away , and the overall trajectory of the race hasn ’ t changed much recently : Joe Biden continues to hold a sizable lead over President Trump .
Biden is now up by 8 percentage points in FiveThirtyEight ’ s national polling average , and he has an advantage of 5 points or more in several key battleground states like Florida , Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin .
Faced with these numbers , though , a lot of people — Republicans , Democrats and people with no particular party affiliation — raise a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hillary Clinton leading in the polls too ?
” Well , yes .
But not quite like this .
We compared Biden ’ s standing to where Clinton was at this point in the polls four years ago .
We specifically chose this point in the cycle in 2016 because it ’ s about where Clinton hit her peak — on Aug. 7 , 2016 , following the Democratic National Convention , Clinton had a 7.5-point lead over Trump in national polls .
Clinton never topped that lead .
But as you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at her post-convention peak , Clinton ’ s lead over Trump still wasn ’ t as large as Biden ’ s is now .
This means that the sizable advantage Biden currently holds isn ’ t the product of a convention-induced sugar high but rather the larger electoral environment , which is very poor for Trump .
That ’ s no guarantee Biden ’ s lead will hold — it ’ s hard to know what the post-convention bounces will look like this year , for example , given that they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But Biden seems to be starting from a better baseline than Clinton .
Crucially , he enjoys a higher level of average support than Clinton ever did .
Clinton led in most national polls , but was typically garnering support only in the low- to mid-40s .
Biden ’ s share has been hovering around 50 percent .
As a result , some of the uncertainty about the trajectory of the Trump-Biden race might be reduced , in part because there are simply fewer voters who haven ’ t made up their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third-party voters than in 2016 .
Combined , Clinton and Trump had secured 84 percent of support , on average , in national polls in early August 2016 .
By comparison , Biden and Trump currently combine for 92 percent .
Things are mostly good for Biden at the state-level , too .
Just as he does nationally , Biden enjoys more overall support than Clinton in each of the battleground states we looked at .
But there are a couple of significant caveats : As the chart below shows , there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ margin against Trump is actually lower than Clinton ’ s was at this point in 2016 .
( Although remember , we ’ re comparing Biden to Clinton at her peak nationally . )
Let ’ s start with the eight states where Biden has more support and better margins .
These are states where Biden is doing much better than Clinton , even at her peak .
In Arizona and Texas , for instance , Biden is attracting about 6 to 10 more percentage points in total support than Clinton and has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In other words , Biden may actually be a slight favorite in Arizona and Texas may end up a toss-up , which definitely wasn ’ t the case in 2016 .
And in a perennial swing state like Florida that has shown signs of getting redder in recent years , Biden is attracting about 4 more points in overall support , and his margin over Trump is better , too .
If Biden were to win Florida , that would undoubtedly narrow Trump ’ s path to reelection .
But there are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over Trump is smaller than Clinton ’ s was at this point in the campaign .
In Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin , for example , Biden ’ s margin over Trump is about 2 to 4 points smaller than Clinton ’ s was .
But he ’ s also at or very close to 50 percent in each of those states , which wasn ’ t the case for Clinton .
Still , it ’ s notable that Biden ’ s margins tend to be lower than Clinton ’ s in many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be due to Trump ’ s resiliency in the region , but also perhaps a shift in the pollster methodologies : In 2016 , many polls in these states underestimated Trump ’ s support in part because they didn ’ t weight by education , an important consideration as white voters without a college degree broke strongly for the president .
All in all , national and battleground state polling at this point suggests that Biden is in a better position to win 270 electoral votes — and the presidency — than Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Just consider this simple arithmetic : If we take all the swing states in which Biden leads by at least 5 percentage points and add their electoral votes to those from the “ safely blue ” states that always go Democratic , Biden has 307 electoral votes .
So if the race were to tighten by a few percentage points and Biden were to lose every other state , even the ones where he currently holds smaller leads — such as in Arizona and North Carolina — Biden would still win the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cushier margin than Clinton ’ s 272 electoral votes at this same point in 2016 .
That said , while fewer undecided and third-party voters will likely make the polls less volatile and therefore decrease uncertainty , other factors unique to 2020 add uncertainty : namely , the novel coronavirus , the economic collapse and the nationwide scramble to make voting safe during a pandemic .
There ’ s a long way to go in this campaign .
We still have to see how the public responds to Biden ’ s vice presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t know what course the pandemic will take or how the economy will change .
For now , the fallout from the coronavirus appears to be hurting Trump ’ s chances , but that ’ s not written in stone — and neither is Biden ’ s sizable edge .
If the race tightens a little , Biden would likely still be a decent favorite .
If the race tightens more than that — and it could — Trump can win a second term .

Election Day is now just three months away, and the overall trajectory of the race hasn’t changed much recently: Joe Biden continues to hold a sizable lead over President Trump. Biden is now up by 8 percentage points in FiveThirtyEight’s national polling average, and he has an advantage of 5 points or more in several key battleground states like Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Faced with these numbers, though, a lot of people — Republicans, Democrats and people with no particular party affiliation — raise a reasonable question: “Wasn’t Hillary Clinton leading in the polls too?”
Well, yes. But not quite like this. We compared Biden’s standing to where Clinton was at this point in the polls four years ago. We specifically chose this point in the cycle in 2016 because it’s about where Clinton hit her peak — on Aug. 7, 2016, following the Democratic National Convention, Clinton had a 7.5-point lead over Trump in national polls.
Clinton never topped that lead. But as you can see in the chart below, even at her post-convention peak, Clinton’s lead over Trump still wasn’t as large as Biden’s is now.
This means that the sizable advantage Biden currently holds isn’t the product of a convention-induced sugar high but rather the larger electoral environment, which is very poor for Trump. That’s no guarantee Biden’s lead will hold — it’s hard to know what the post-convention bounces will look like this year, for example, given that they’re remote affairs and scheduled back to back.
But Biden seems to be starting from a better baseline than Clinton. Crucially, he enjoys a higher level of average support than Clinton ever did.
Clinton led in most national polls, but was typically garnering support only in the low- to mid-40s. Biden’s share has been hovering around 50 percent. As a result, some of the uncertainty about the trajectory of the Trump-Biden race might be reduced, in part because there are simply fewer voters who haven’t made up their minds and because signs point to fewer third-party voters than in 2016. Combined, Clinton and Trump had secured 84 percent of support, on average, in national polls in early August 2016. By comparison, Biden and Trump currently combine for 92 percent.
Things are mostly good for Biden at the state-level, too. Just as he does nationally, Biden enjoys more overall support than Clinton in each of the battleground states we looked at. But there are a couple of significant caveats: As the chart below shows, there are several key states where Biden’s margin against Trump is actually lower than Clinton’s was at this point in 2016. (Although remember, we’re comparing Biden to Clinton at her peak nationally.)
Let’s start with the eight states where Biden has more support and better margins. These are states where Biden is doing much better than Clinton, even at her peak. In Arizona and Texas, for instance, Biden is attracting about 6 to 10 more percentage points in total support than Clinton and has consistently topped her margin against Trump. In other words, Biden may actually be a slight favorite in Arizona and Texas may end up a toss-up, which definitely wasn’t the case in 2016. And in a perennial swing state like Florida that has shown signs of getting redder in recent years, Biden is attracting about 4 more points in overall support, and his margin over Trump is better, too. If Biden were to win Florida, that would undoubtedly narrow Trump’s path to reelection.
But there are also nine states where Biden’s margin over Trump is smaller than Clinton’s was at this point in the campaign. In Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, for example, Biden’s margin over Trump is about 2 to 4 points smaller than Clinton’s was. But he’s also at or very close to 50 percent in each of those states, which wasn’t the case for Clinton. Still, it’s notable that Biden’s margins tend to be lower than Clinton’s in many Rust Belt battleground states. That could be due to Trump’s resiliency in the region, but also perhaps a shift in the pollster methodologies: In 2016, many polls in these states underestimated Trump’s support in part because they didn’t weight by education, an important consideration as white voters without a college degree broke strongly for the president.
All in all, national and battleground state polling at this point suggests that Biden is in a better position to win 270 electoral votes — and the presidency — than Clinton was at this point in the cycle. Just consider this simple arithmetic: If we take all the swing states in which Biden leads by at least 5 percentage points and add their electoral votes to those from the “safely blue” states that always go Democratic, Biden has 307 electoral votes. So if the race were to tighten by a few percentage points and Biden were to lose every other state, even the ones where he currently holds smaller leads — such as in Arizona and North Carolina — Biden would still win the presidency. That’s a much cushier margin than Clinton’s 272 electoral votes at this same point in 2016.
That said, while fewer undecided and third-party voters will likely make the polls less volatile and therefore decrease uncertainty, other factors unique to 2020 add uncertainty: namely, the novel coronavirus, the economic collapse and the nationwide scramble to make voting safe during a pandemic. There’s a long way to go in this campaign. We still have to see how the public responds to Biden’s vice presidential pick and the party conventions. We don’t know what course the pandemic will take or how the economy will change. For now, the fallout from the coronavirus appears to be hurting Trump’s chances, but that’s not written in stone — and neither is Biden’s sizable edge. If the race tightens a little, Biden would likely still be a decent favorite. If the race tightens more than that — and it could — Trump can win a second term.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-05--We’re Looking For A Temporary Producer For Our Politics Podcast

The next few months are going to be exciting — and busy !
— for the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast .
We ’ re hiring a producer in a temporary role through Inauguration Day 2021 to work 2-3 days a week in the beginning , and perhaps more often as the election approaches .
You ’ ll help with production on our politics podcast , particularly with audio editing and research .
You will also work with our producer and host , Galen Druke , every week , playing an integral role in what goes on the air .
A typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for our Monday show , helping book a guest for a Thursday show and pulling archival audio for a long-term documentary project .
We ’ re looking for someone with : • A deep understanding of the 2020 election and an ability to track political news as it develops .
• Some experience booking guests — we ’ ll be asking you to find sources , decide which sources are the best ones to speak to and prep for those interviews .
The job can be done remotely , regardless of the status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appealing , please apply !
Send a cover letter with thoughts on the podcast and a resume to galen dot druke at fivethirtyeight dot com .

The next few months are going to be exciting — and busy! — for the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast. We’re hiring a producer in a temporary role through Inauguration Day 2021 to work two to three days a week in the beginning, and perhaps more often as the election approaches. You’ll help with production on our politics podcast, particularly with audio editing and research.
You will also work with our producer and host, Galen Druke, every week, playing an integral role in what goes on the air. A typical week might include doing a research roundup for our Monday show, helping book a guest for a Thursday show and pulling archival audio for a long-term documentary project.
We’re looking for someone with:
Fluency in audio-editing software, ideally Pro Tools or Hindenburg.
A deep understanding of the 2020 election and an ability to track political news as it develops.
Some experience reporting or producing political journalism. Student journalism counts!
Bonus skill:
Some experience booking guests — we’ll be asking you to find sources, decide which sources are the best ones to speak to and prep for those interviews.
The job can be done remotely, regardless of the status of the pandemic. If this sounds appealing, please apply! Send a cover letter with thoughts on the podcast and a resume to galen dot druke at fivethirtyeight dot com.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-05--What Happened In Portland Shows Just How Fragile Our Democracy Is

In the video , Juniper Simonis screams as they are pushed to the ground , struggling , by a group of men in military fatigues who wield large , black weapons .
While Simonis is handcuffed and their service dog barks , the men surround them , a wall of camo , blocking the videographer from capturing the full extent of what ’ s happening .
Simonis wears shorts and a tank top , but the men appear dressed for war .
The officers ’ uniforms bear a large patch that says “ police , ” but they aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agents , but with no name tags or badges , they are , in the moment of Simonis ’ s arrest , impossible to identify .
Simonis is an American scientist — a computational ecologist who does data analysis for researchers and the government .
Last month , Simonis was detained outside a federal courthouse in Portland , Oregon , by mysterious men now known to be agents of the Department of Homeland Security , a federal agency created to fight terrorism .
By Simonis ’ s own estimation , the scientist spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ custody .
For the first 45 minutes or so , they said , they were held in a parking garage without having been read their rights .
Simonis was then transferred to a U.S.
Marshals ’ lockup .
Their request to call a lawyer or a friend was refused .
Eventually , Simonis was given a citation for vandalism related to chalking the sidewalk in front of the courthouse , and sent out the door in the middle of the night with no way home .
Simonis ’ s story is not how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But over the last few weeks , it ’ s become part of a familiar pattern .
DHS agents in Portland have tear-gassed protesters and pulled individuals into unmarked vans , and some of those people were banned from attending any more protests as a condition of being released from jail .
The agency also collected information on journalists who published leaked documents .
Late last week , a deal was struck with Oregon ’ s governor to withdraw the troops .
The governor said it was happening immediately , but DHS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that they wouldn ’ t leave until “ [ W ] e are assured that the courthouse and other federal facilities will no longer be attacked nightly.
” These events sit in a weird nexus .
They are extraordinary enough to draw the attention of legal scholars and criticism from civil liberties groups .
But politically , the response has been divided .
House Democrats called for an investigation , while Sen. Rand Paul is the only congressional Republican to speak out against the DHS response .
The media ’ s reaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with outlets like the National Review telling readers that the events in Portland were justified and The Atlantic saying justification was impossible .
That divided response makes some experts almost as concerned as the arrests .
Partisanship is dangerous , they told us , particularly when it ’ s accompanied by a long series of warning signs that could signal serious danger for American democracy .
Portland is not the first place the federal government has stepped in with disproportionate force against the will of local authorities .
In 1794 , George Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into Pennsylvania to put down an anti-tax revolt .
And while that is a very long time to reach back for precedent , experts say it ’ s important to understand the context of American history when it comes to violation of democratic norms .
“ Contrary to what a lot of people assume , American democracy has always been fragile and in real danger of backsliding , ” said Suzanne Mettler , a professor of American politics at Cornell University and one of the authors of “ Four Threats : The Recurring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other experts , consider our current time period one in which authoritarianism poses a serious risk — but not because of what is happening with the DHS in Portland .
Instead , it ’ s more likely that recent events are a symptom of something bigger , a risk that has steadily grown in the last several decades .
Instead , they point to the political polarization evident in public opinion on Portland as indicative of the danger we ’ re in .
When it comes to Portland , specifically , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a survey fielded by Data for Progress on July 28 , respondents were split about Trump ’ s decision to send DHS to Oregon , with 42 percent calling the deployment of federal police “ essential ” and 45 percent calling it an “ overstep.
” And that split was highly partisan .
Broken down by party affiliation , nearly three-quarters of Republicans favored the decision while a similar proportion of Democrats opposed it .
( Full disclosure : Shom Mazumder , one of the authors of this article , is a fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by itself , isn ’ t much of a shock .
We are , for better or for worse , used to all sorts of issues dividing public opinion .
The terrifying thing is the way it links partisan politics and authoritarianism .
According to a recent report by the Democracy Fund ’ s Voter Study Group , support for democracy is in no way universal .
In fact , their findings show that 1 in 3 Americans have , at some point in the last three years , supported some kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 80 percent said it was very important to live in a democracy .
And separate polling , commissioned by Mazumder before Portland , from YouGov Blue , an arm of YouGov that primarily serves Democratic and progressive clients , underscores this as well .
Although it found that Republicans were less supportive overall of democracy — 1 out of 4 Republicans said that democracy is a “ very bad ” or “ fairly bad ” way to govern the country compared to just four percent of Democrats .
There was also more support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the survey as someone “ who does not have to bother with Congress and elections ” among Republicans .
But it wasn ’ t just Republicans driving these anti-democratic views .
A significant percentage of Democrats said they preferred to have “ experts , not the government ” make decisions on what they think is best for the country .
That isn ’ t necessarily all that surprising when you consider we ’ ve spent the last 30 years building up an increasingly apocalyptic view of our political opponents and their intentions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ asked Americans about the amount of partisan animosity they held .
In that time , the percentage of people who rate the opposing party as “ very unfavorable ” has climbed from about 20 percent to more than 50 percent .
In fact , as of 2016 , more than 40 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said they saw the other side as a threat to the nation .
That poses a real threat to our democracy , too .
“ If we view that if one party gets into power they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of life or the nation as a whole , we ’ ll do whatever we can to keep them out or keep ourselves in , ” said Jennifer McCoy , a professor of political science at Georgia State University .
That , she added , is when people start to tolerate the violation of democratic norms .
“ The goal is to stay in power or get in power and it overrides the value of respecting democratic principles , ” she said .
In fact , research from political scientists Matt Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that survey measures might even overestimate the American public ’ s commitment to upholding democratic norms , especially when subverting norms might help get one side ’ s preferred candidate pushed through .
Looking at situations in American history and around the world , McCoy , Mettler and other experts have found that extreme polarization is one major red flag that shows a democracy is in trouble .
That ’ s because people will condone all kinds of violence in the name of protecting themselves , said Christian Davenport , professor of political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Violations of norms — even the law — become justifiable depending on who is doing the rule-breaking and who is being targeted .
Through that lens , it makes perfect sense why Americans are politically divided on Portland : It ’ s actually a divide over whether you see the protesters as a threat .
And that should make us all very uncomfortable — no matter which side of the aisle we ’ re on .
Because evidence points to the fact that many Americans , regardless of their party affiliation , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their political opponents .
Back in March , McCoy and other researchers surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans about their support for various anti-democratic policies under different scenarios where one party , or the other , was in power .
The results from this survey have not yet been published , but their preliminary analysis finds significantly higher support for such policies as prosecuting journalists , banning protests and disqualifying political opponents from elections in situations when a respondent ’ s preferred party was in power — and hoping to stay there .
The effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican power .
But it existed for Democrats , as well .
For instance , while 23.6 percent of Democrats and 22.7 percent of Republicans said the president should do what the people want , even if it goes against existing laws , when their party was out of power , those numbers jumped to 29.6 percent and 35.1 percent , respectively , when the rule of law became inconvenient to keeping the other side at bay .
Not all experts who study democratic erosion think what ’ s going on in Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Robert Mickey , a professor of political science at the University of Michigan , told us he ’ s more concerned with threats to voting rights and sees Portland as especially dangerous political theater .
But all of the experts we spoke to said our democracy is in a dangerous place , and that the partisan split we see over things like federal agents dragging a screaming woman into a courthouse is part of that .
“ We ’ re not immune to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t be cavalier in thinking we are.
” CORRECTION ( August 5 , 2020 , 1:58 p.m. ) : An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the percentage of Americans who said it was very important to live in a democracy .
It was 80 percent , not 20 percent .
It also said that survey measures might underestimate the American public ’ s commitment to upholding democratic norms , when in fact , they might overestimate them .


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-06--What To Watch For In Tennessee’s Primary

Five states already voted on Tuesday , but this election week isn ’ t over yet — an idea we should all get accustomed to as November nears .
Tennessee , the only state that holds its primaries on a Thursday , goes to the polls today .
The marquee race is a Senate primary , but there are also a handful of House contests worth keeping an eye on , so here ’ s an overview of what to watch in the Volunteer State .
In the Republican primary for U.S. Senate , the race to succeed retiring GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close battle between former U.S .
Ambassador to Japan Bill Hagerty and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Manny Sethi .
And the stakes are high : The eventual Republican nominee is all but guaranteed to win in November because of Tennessee ’ s dark red hue .
Initially , the race wasn ’ t all that competitive either .
With President Trump ’ s endorsement , Hagerty had long been the favorite , but recent polls show that this race has tightened considerably .
A mid-July poll from JMC Analytics found Hagerty ahead by just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 32 percent , while The Trafalgar Group gave Hagerty only a 3-point edge , 42 percent to 39 percent , earlier in July .
It ’ s also grown nastier as both Hagerty and Sethi try to one-up each other in proving their conservative bona fides .
For his part , Sethi has tried to target conservatives who might be upset with the anti-police brutality protests following George Floyd ’ s death , asking if they ’ re “ sick of the mobs yet.
” And in another ad , Sethi played up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe “ Black lives matter ” because Planned Parenthood places clinics near neighborhoods occupied primarily by people of color .
Meanwhile , as the Trump-backed candidate , Hagerty has taken every opportunity to echo the president , including blaming China for initially covering up the coronavirus .
He ’ s also repeatedly stressed his “ conservative Tennessee values ” as a native son of the state and introduced a dark racial undertone to the race by consistently mispronouncing Sethi ’ s last name as “ Set-ee ” instead of “ Seth-ee.
” According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was inadvertent , and that “ he didn ’ t know which pronunciation Sethi , the son of Indian immigrants , prefers.
” Hagerty and his allies have also repeatedly hit Sethi for making a $ 50 donation to a Democratic congressional candidate in 2008 through ActBlue , a liberal online fundraising platform .
In one ad , Hagerty made the dubious link between this contribution and the recent protests , claiming that Sethi is “ bankrolling the rioters.
” Standing With Conservatives , a Hagerty-aligned group , also attacked the donation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as abortion rights and gun control .
But Sethi hasn ’ t been afraid to fire back , running an ad in which his wife took responsibility for the 2008 contribution , then attacking Hagerty for making much larger donations to Mitt Romney and Al Gore in past presidential campaigns .
That said , Hagerty has a clear resource advantage : He had raised $ 12.3 million as of July 17 , $ 6.5 million of which came from personal loans , while Sethi had raised only $ 4.6 million ( $ 1.9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pocket ) .
Hagerty entered the final stretch with seven times more cash on hand — about $ 2.7 million to Sethi ’ s $ 386,000 .
Still , Sethi has benefited from slightly more outside spending , either from groups supporting him or attacking Hagerty , about $ 2.5 million compared to roughly $ 1.7 million for Hagerty .
Plus , Sethi has endorsements from GOP notables such as Sens .
Ted Cruz and Rand Paul .
Paul , from next-door Kentucky , even cut an ad for Sethi asking voters to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” But that doesn ’ t mean every GOP senator is behind Sethi — Tennessee ’ s other senator , Marsha Blackburn , has endorsed Hagerty .
Don ’ t be surprised if this race proves to be a nailbiter .
There ’ s also a crowded , fractious GOP primary in Tennessee ’ s 1st Congressional District .
The eastern Tennessee seat is the most Republican-leaning district in the state , and Republican Rep. Phil Roe ’ s retirement has attracted a number of viable contenders .
It ’ s nigh impossible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the candidates with the most money are drawing a lot from their own bank accounts .
Pharmacist Diana Harshbarger has raised nearly $ 1.5 million and pathologist Joshua Gapp has raised about $ 850,000 , but nearly all their money comes from personal loans .
Additionally , former Kingsport Mayor John Clark has loaned himself nearly $ 500,000 of the roughly $ 650,000 he ’ s put together .
Three other notable candidates — state Sen. Rusty Crowe , former Johnson City Mayor Steve Darden and state Rep. Timothy Hill — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but they have managed to raise between $ 230,000 and $ 375,000 .
And crucially for Hill , he ’ s also benefited from about $ 945,000 in spending by the campaign arm of the Club for Growth , which endorsed him .
No other candidate has received much outside assistance .
In addition to supporting Hill , the Club ’ s ad spending has mostly targeted Harshbarger and Crowe , which suggests they may be the leading contenders .
The most recent poll confirms this to some extent , though it showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late-July survey by Spry Strategies/WJHL found Crowe and Harshbarger tied for the lead with 16 percent , followed by Gapp at 12 percent , Hill at 10 percent and both Clark and Darden at 9 percent .
Two other primaries are also on our radar .
In the Nashville-based 5th Congressional District , Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper , who has held the seat since 2003 , faces attorney Keeda Haynes .
Haynes , who is Black , served almost four years in jail for a marijuana-related offense she denies committing before becoming a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cooper from the left in a highly-educated district that has become more liberal over the last few cycles .
( Cooper is a long-standing member of the Blue Dog Coalition . )
Haynes might have a difficult time unseating Cooper , though , as he ’ s raised about seven times as much and the district isn ’ t as urban or racially diverse as some of the other districts that have cast out white Democratic incumbents in recent years .
However , that ’ s not the case in the Memphis-based 9th @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s residents are Black , but the seat is held by seven-term Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen , who is white .
However , Cohen has regularly fended off Black primary challengers , so former Shelby County Democratic Party Chair and Navy veteran Corey Strong will be looking to pull an upset as Strong has little money while Cohen is sitting on $ 1.2 million in the bank .
We ’ ll be sure to keep you updated if something significant happens in any of these races .
And if you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that Hawaii ’ s primaries are this Saturday .

Five states already voted on Tuesday, but this election week isn’t over yet — an idea we should all get accustomed to as November nears. Tennessee, the only state that holds its primaries on a Thursday, goes to the polls today. The marquee race is a Senate primary, but there are also a handful of House contests worth keeping an eye on, so here’s an overview of what to watch in the Volunteer State.
In the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, the race to succeed retiring GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander has turned into a close battle between former U.S. Ambassador to Japan Bill Hagerty and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Manny Sethi. And the stakes are high: The eventual Republican nominee is all but guaranteed to win in November because of Tennessee’s dark red hue.
Initially, the race wasn’t all that competitive either. With President Trump’s endorsement, Hagerty had long been the favorite, but recent polls show that this race has tightened considerably. A mid-July poll from JMC Analytics found Hagerty ahead by just 4 percentage points, 36 percent to 32 percent, while The Trafalgar Group gave Hagerty only a 3-point edge, 42 percent to 39 percent, earlier in July. It’s also grown nastier as both Hagerty and Sethi try to one-up each other in proving their conservative bona fides.
For his part, Sethi has tried to target conservatives who might be upset with the anti-police brutality protests following George Floyd’s death, asking if they’re “sick of the mobs yet.” And in another ad, Sethi played up his anti-abortion views by questioning whether liberals believe “Black lives matter” because Planned Parenthood places clinics near neighborhoods occupied primarily by people of color. Meanwhile, as the Trump-backed candidate, Hagerty has taken every opportunity to echo the president, including blaming China for initially covering up the coronavirus. He’s also repeatedly stressed his “conservative Tennessee values” as a native son of the state and introduced a dark racial undertone to the race by consistently mispronouncing Sethi’s last name as “Set-ee” instead of “Seth-ee.” According to Politico, Hagerty said the mispronunciation was inadvertent, and that “he didn’t know which pronunciation Sethi, the son of Indian immigrants, prefers.”
Hagerty and his allies have also repeatedly hit Sethi for making a $50 donation to a Democratic congressional candidate in 2008 through ActBlue, a liberal online fundraising platform. In one ad, Hagerty made the dubious link between this contribution and the recent protests, claiming that Sethi is “bankrolling the rioters.” Standing With Conservatives, a Hagerty-aligned group, also attacked the donation, arguing that Sethi supports liberal policies such as abortion rights and gun control. But Sethi hasn’t been afraid to fire back, running an ad in which his wife took responsibility for the 2008 contribution, then attacking Hagerty for making much larger donations to Mitt Romney and Al Gore in past presidential campaigns.
That said, Hagerty has a clear resource advantage: He had raised $12.3 million as of July 17, $6.5 million of which came from personal loans, while Sethi had raised only $4.6 million ($1.9 million of which came from his own pocket). Hagerty entered the final stretch with seven times more cash on hand — about $2.7 million to Sethi’s $386,000. Still, Sethi has benefited from slightly more outside spending, either from groups supporting him or attacking Hagerty, about $2.5 million compared to roughly $1.7 million for Hagerty. Plus, Sethi has endorsements from GOP notables such as Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Paul, from next-door Kentucky, even cut an ad for Sethi asking voters to back “the constitutional conservative Tennessee deserves.” But that doesn’t mean every GOP senator is behind Sethi — Tennessee’s other senator, Marsha Blackburn, has endorsed Hagerty. Don’t be surprised if this race proves to be a nailbiter.
There’s also a crowded, fractious GOP primary in Tennessee’s 1st Congressional District. The eastern Tennessee seat is the most Republican-leaning district in the state, and Republican Rep. Phil Roe’s retirement has attracted a number of viable contenders.
It’s nigh impossible to pick out who the front-runners are, but the candidates with the most money are drawing a lot from their own bank accounts. Pharmacist Diana Harshbarger has raised nearly $1.5 million and pathologist Joshua Gapp has raised about $850,000, but nearly all their money comes from personal loans. Additionally, former Kingsport Mayor John Clark has loaned himself nearly $500,000 of the roughly $650,000 he’s put together. Three other notable candidates — state Sen. Rusty Crowe, former Johnson City Mayor Steve Darden and state Rep. Timothy Hill — haven’t self-funded as much, but they have managed to raise between $230,000 and $375,000. And crucially for Hill, he’s also benefited from about $945,000 in spending by the campaign arm of the Club for Growth, which endorsed him. No other candidate has received much outside assistance.
In addition to supporting Hill, the Club’s ad spending has mostly targeted Harshbarger and Crowe, which suggests they may be the leading contenders. The most recent poll confirms this to some extent, though it showed a pretty unpredictable race overall: A late-July survey by Spry Strategies/WJHL found Crowe and Harshbarger tied for the lead with 16 percent, followed by Gapp at 12 percent, Hill at 10 percent and both Clark and Darden at 9 percent.
Two other primaries are also on our radar. In the Nashville-based 5th Congressional District, Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper, who has held the seat since 2003, faces attorney Keeda Haynes. Haynes, who is Black, served almost four years in jail for a marijuana-related offense she denies committing before becoming a public defender. She is now challenging Cooper from the left in a highly-educated district that has become more liberal over the last few cycles. (Cooper is a long-standing member of the Blue Dog Coalition.) Haynes might have a difficult time unseating Cooper, though, as he’s raised about seven times as much and the district isn’t as urban or racially diverse as some of the other districts that have cast out white Democratic incumbents in recent years. However, that’s not the case in the Memphis-based 9th Congressional District. Two-thirds of the district’s residents are Black, but the seat is held by seven-term Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, who is white. However, Cohen has regularly fended off Black primary challengers, so former Shelby County Democratic Party Chair and Navy veteran Corey Strong will be looking to pull an upset as Strong has little money while Cohen is sitting on $1.2 million in the bank.
We’ll be sure to keep you updated if something significant happens in any of these races. And if you’re craving even more elections this week, remember that Hawaii’s primaries are this Saturday.


fivethirtyeight--2020-08-07--Trump Wants To Postpone The Election, But Americans Really Don’t

Welcome to Pollapalooza , our weekly polling roundup .
Last week , President Trump sparked a firestorm by calling for the postponement of the November election as the country prepares to vote amid the coronavirus pandemic .
And although the president can not actually delay the vote — Congress determines the federal election date — this hasn ’ t stopped Trump from repeatedly casting doubt on the election results and exacerbating Americans ’ already-flagging confidence in the integrity of the electoral process .
But so far , Trump ’ s idea of postponing the election isn ’ t very popular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Americans strongly oppose postponing the election , even in the face of a public health crisis .
Reuters/Ipsos found that 66 percent of registered voters opposed a delay , while just 23 percent supported it ( 11 percent weren ’ t sure ) .
The Economist/YouGov found that 66 percent of adults opposed postponement , compared to just 15 percent who backed it ( 19 percent weren ’ t sure ) .
Politico/Morning Consult also asked voters how they felt about delaying the election , giving them three choices : Postpone the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but with mostly in-person voting , or hold the election as scheduled but with most Americans voting by mail .
It also found that most opposed postponing : Just 7 percent backed delaying the election , down from 16 percent in April when the pollster last asked about this , while 86 percent of respondents said the election should stay on schedule , one way or another .
However , as with most issues in American politics , there were notable partisan splits , although the polls disagreed as to just how far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue .
In the Reuters/Ipsos poll , for instance , 79 percent of Democrats opposed a delay compared to only 51 percent of Republicans .
Whereas in that Economist/YouGov poll , the gap was smaller : Seventy-seven percent of Democrats opposed a delay , versus 59 percent of Republicans .
Politico/Morning Consult found an even smaller partisan divide , with 93 percent of Democrats saying the election should be held as scheduled , compared to 82 percent of Republicans .
It ’ s worth noting that the Politico/Morning Consult survey offered respondents three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partisan breakdown to some extent , as some Republicans might prefer postponement to a largely vote-by-mail election .
Americans were also split on Trump ’ s motivation for suggesting a delay to the election .
Among Republicans in that Reuters/Ipsos poll , 41 percent said Trump ’ s tweet was driven by a fear of voter fraud , and 21 percent said Trump wanted to protect Americans from getting the coronavirus at polling places .
Only 17 percent of Republicans said he was trying to either distract the country from the pandemic or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( another 16 percent weren ’ t sure of his motivations ) .
Conversely , a whopping 63 percent of Democrats said Trump wanted a delay to the election to improve his chances of winning , while another 19 percent thought he wanted to distract the country .
Just 10 percent of Democrats thought Trump ’ s main motivation was either a fear of voter fraud or a desire to protect Americans from contracting the virus .
Politico/Morning Consult ’ s question on postponing the election also offered some insight into how respondents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The share who desired a predominantly vote-by-mail election hadn ’ t really changed since April , but the share who preferred mostly in-person balloting shot up to 34 percent from just 19 percent in the spring — a shift largely driven by Republicans and independents .
Fifty-five percent of Republicans said they wanted most voters to physically go to the polls , up from 32 percent in April , as did 30 percent of independents , a share that had doubled from 15 percent in April .
However , only slightly more Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the spring ( 18 percent versus 10 percent ) .
As for mail-in voting , there was one notable development : Fewer Republicans supported it .
The share of Republicans who said they wanted an on-schedule , mostly vote-by-mail election slid from 38 percent in April to 27 percent in August .
And that shift in Republican attitudes in the Politico/Morning Consult survey reveals how Trump ’ s call to postpone the election could gain traction if he keeps trumpeting it .
After all , the president has repeatedly denounced voting by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve seen the share of Republicans who want a mostly vote-by-mail election decrease .
For now , though , the thought of postponing the election is very unpopular .
And it probably doesn ’ t help the president that most Republican elites view the idea as a non-starter .
But if the president keeps pushing the issue , don ’ t count out more Republican voters supporting a delay .
• The coronavirus threat has influenced attitudes toward schools reopening , and a poll from Gallup conducted in mid-to-late July found that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some form of distance learning for their children .
Thirty-six percent preferred a mixed approach involving some in-person and remote learning , while 28 percent wanted full-time remote learning .
Just 36 percent wanted full-time in-person schooling this fall .
These views represented a major shift from late May and early June , when Gallup found that a majority of parents preferred full-time in-person schooling for their children in the fall .
• Teachers are struggling with how they feel about in-person and distance learning , too .
An NPR/Ipsos poll conducted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ K-12 teachers preferred fall classes to be remote , while 34 percent preferred a return to in-person learning .
Eighty-two percent of teachers said they ’ re concerned about returning to in-person teaching , but 84 percent also said they ’ re worried that distance learning will cause some students to fall behind .
And only 37 percent said their school district has provided them with enough training to teach in the fall while the pandemic is going on .
• A new survey from NBC News/SurveyMonkey found that Americans trusted Trump significantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their state ’ s governor , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases .
Fifty-eight percent said they don ’ t trust what the president has said about the pandemic , while just 31 percent said they do .
Unsurprisingly , 93 percent of Democrats said they didn ’ t trust what Trump had said about the coronavirus , as did 66 percent of independents .
Meanwhile , 69 percent of Republicans said they trusted what Trump had to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said they didn ’ t .
• Gallup recently found that public approval of the U.S. Supreme Court is at its highest level since 2009 .
Overall , 58 percent of Americans approve of the court ’ s job performance , similar to the 61 percent approval it enjoyed 11 years ago .
Attitudes toward the court also differ little by party , as 60 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Democrats approved of its performance .
This is a stark departure from the partisan differences in public approval of the court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leagues have had mixed success restarting play in the age of the coronavirus , and a new survey from Morning Consult found that most fans of football — both professional and college — don ’ t think the sport should return as scheduled .
Only 32 percent of NFL fans thought the season should be played as planned , 33 percent said it should be postponed , and 18 percent said it should be canceled ( 17 percent weren ’ t sure ) .
College football fans were even more pessimistic : Just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead as planned , 34 percent said it should be postponed , and 24 percent preferred cancellation .
• The social media platform TikTok could be banned by the U.S. government , so YouGov polled Americans about how they viewed a potential ban .
The survey found that 35 percent either “ strongly ” or “ somewhat ” supported a ban , while 33 percent either “ somewhat ” or “ strongly ” opposed one .
Another 15 percent said they didn ’ t know , and 17 percent said they were unfamiliar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 25 — the app ’ s most active users — were most likely to oppose a ban : Forty-four percent opposed a ban , while 34 percent supported one .
According to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval tracker , 41.3 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president , while 54.7 percent disapprove ( a net approval rating of -13.5 points ) .
At this time last week , 40.6 percent approved and 55.1 percent disapproved ( a net approval rating of -14.5 points ) .
One month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 40.7 percent and a disapproval rating of 55.9 percent , for a net approval rating of -15.2 points .
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot , Democrats currently lead by 7.8 percentage points ( 48.2 percent to 40.5 percent ) .
A week ago , Democrats led Republicans by 8.3 points ( 49.1 percent to 40.8 percent ) .
At this time last month , voters preferred Democrats by 8.8 points ( 49.2 percent to 40.4 percent ) .

Welcome to Pollapalooza, our weekly polling roundup.
Poll(s) of the week
Last week, President Trump sparked a firestorm by calling for the postponement of the November election as the country prepares to vote amid the coronavirus pandemic. And although the president cannot actually delay the vote — Congress determines the federal election date — this hasn’t stopped Trump from repeatedly casting doubt on the election results and exacerbating Americans’ already-flagging confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.
But so far, Trump’s idea of postponing the election isn’t very popular. Three new polls this week found that Americans strongly oppose postponing the election, even in the face of a public health crisis. Reuters/Ipsos found that 66 percent of registered voters opposed a delay, while just 23 percent supported it (11 percent weren’t sure). The Economist/YouGov found that 66 percent of adults opposed postponement, compared to just 15 percent who backed it (19 percent weren’t sure). Politico/Morning Consult also asked voters how they felt about delaying the election, giving them three choices: Postpone the election, hold the election as scheduled but with mostly in-person voting, or hold the election as scheduled but with most Americans voting by mail. It also found that most opposed postponing: Just 7 percent backed delaying the election, down from 16 percent in April when the pollster last asked about this, while 86 percent of respondents said the election should stay on schedule, one way or another.
However, as with most issues in American politics, there were notable partisan splits, although the polls disagreed as to just how far apart Democrats and Republicans were on the issue. In the Reuters/Ipsos poll, for instance, 79 percent of Democrats opposed a delay compared to only 51 percent of Republicans. Whereas in that Economist/YouGov poll, the gap was smaller: Seventy-seven percent of Democrats opposed a delay, versus 59 percent of Republicans. Politico/Morning Consult found an even smaller partisan divide, with 93 percent of Democrats saying the election should be held as scheduled, compared to 82 percent of Republicans. It’s worth noting that the Politico/Morning Consult survey offered respondents three options, which might have affected the partisan breakdown to some extent, as some Republicans might prefer postponement to a largely vote-by-mail election.
Americans were also split on Trump’s motivation for suggesting a delay to the election. Among Republicans in that Reuters/Ipsos poll, 41 percent said Trump’s tweet was driven by a fear of voter fraud, and 21 percent said Trump wanted to protect Americans from getting the coronavirus at polling places. Only 17 percent of Republicans said he was trying to either distract the country from the pandemic or give himself a better shot at victory (another 16 percent weren’t sure of his motivations). Conversely, a whopping 63 percent of Democrats said Trump wanted a delay to the election to improve his chances of winning, while another 19 percent thought he wanted to distract the country. Just 10 percent of Democrats thought Trump’s main motivation was either a fear of voter fraud or a desire to protect Americans from contracting the virus.
Politico/Morning Consult’s question on postponing the election also offered some insight into how respondents want Americans to cast their ballots. The share who desired a predominantly vote-by-mail election hadn’t really changed since April, but the share who preferred mostly in-person balloting shot up to 34 percent from just 19 percent in the spring — a shift largely driven by Republicans and independents. Fifty-five percent of Republicans said they wanted most voters to physically go to the polls, up from 32 percent in April, as did 30 percent of independents, a share that had doubled from 15 percent in April. However, only slightly more Democrats wanted mostly in-person voting than they did in the spring (18 percent versus 10 percent). As for mail-in voting, there was one notable development: Fewer Republicans supported it. The share of Republicans who said they wanted an on-schedule, mostly vote-by-mail election slid from 38 percent in April to 27 percent in August.
And that shift in Republican attitudes in the Politico/Morning Consult survey reveals how Trump’s call to postpone the election could gain traction if he keeps trumpeting it. After all, the president has repeatedly denounced voting by mail, and correspondingly, we’ve seen the share of Republicans who want a mostly vote-by-mail election decrease.
For now, though, the thought of postponing the election is very unpopular. And it probably doesn’t help the president that most Republican elites view the idea as a non-starter. But if the president keeps pushing the issue, don’t count out more Republican voters supporting a delay.
Other polling bites
Trump approval
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker, 41.3 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 54.7 percent disapprove (a net approval rating of -13.5 points). At this time last week, 40.6 percent approved and 55.1 percent disapproved (a net approval rating of -14.5 points). One month ago, Trump had an approval rating of 40.7 percent and a disapproval rating of 55.9 percent, for a net approval rating of -15.2 points.
Generic ballot
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot, Democrats currently lead by 7.8 percentage points (48.2 percent to 40.5 percent). A week ago, Democrats led Republicans by 8.3 points (49.1 percent to 40.8 percent). At this time last month, voters preferred Democrats by 8.8 points (49.2 percent to 40.4 percent).