fivethirtyeight--2020-05-20--Congress Could Extend The Recession If It Doesn’t Bail Out The States

A pandemic is an expensive thing to weather .
The COVID-19 crisis has already prompted a huge drop in state tax dollars , and seems likely to cost states hundreds of billions of dollars in lost revenue over the upcoming fiscal year .
That ’ s pushed governors to come to the federal government , hat in hand , asking for a federal bailout .
But while Democrats in Congress seem eager to oblige — a new stimulus package that narrowly passed the House on May 15 includes nearly $ 1 trillion for state , local and tribal governments — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t sold yet .
There ’ s a tinge of moral and political outrage to this debate .
Trump has repeatedly suggested that blue-state governors mismanaged their finances and don ’ t deserve a bailout .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , meanwhile , made headlines last month when he suggested that states should simply file for bankruptcy if they run out of money .
But experts think that doing nothing could be even more costly in the long run than bailing the states out .
Without a lifeline from the federal government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start slashing budgets and raising taxes .
Recessions are never easy on state finances , since states rely heavily on tax revenue — whether it ’ s income tax , sales tax or property tax — and all of those sources of income tend to fall when people lose their jobs or stop buying luxuries .
And because states generally have to balance their budgets — unlike the federal government , they can ’ t go into massive debt during a financial downturn and promise to pay it back later — they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in other ways .
In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis , many states took a hatchet to higher education funding and reduced their spending on K-12 education , infrastructure , local governments and their own government workforce — and raised taxes .
And states had barely recovered from the last recession when the COVID-19 crisis arrived .
The Great Recession technically ended in 2009 , but according to an analysis by the Pew Charitable Trusts published last year , the slowness of the recovery meant that state tax revenues didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2013 , adjusting for inflation — much longer than in the previous two recessions .
Over this period , states lost an estimated $ 283 billion in tax revenue .
“ It was kind of like falling off a cliff and then walking up a ramp , ” said Donald Boyd , co-director of the Project on State and Local Government Finance at the University of Albany .
This meant that even by the time state revenues had recovered , it took longer for dollars to start flowing toward education or infrastructure .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ rainy day funds , which they can draw on during emergencies , in case another recession hit .
But that prudent instinct left them with even less cash to spend on other things .
By 2018 , according to Pew , nearly half of the states were still spending less money than they were a decade earlier .
State funding for higher education was down 13 percent , and state infrastructure spending as a share of GDP was at its lowest level in more than 50 years .
“ Think about what happens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loses a job , ” said Barb Rosewicz , director of the State Fiscal Health project at the Pew Charitable Trusts .
“ There are things you stop spending money on — maybe you don ’ t put a new roof on your house , maybe you don ’ t save for your kid ’ s college education .
Even if the head of the household gets a new job and the salary goes back to where it ’ s been , there are all these deferred investments you want to catch up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states got left after the last recession.
” And now , states are facing an even more devastating budget crisis .
There is , of course , a huge amount of uncertainty about how long the COVID-19 pandemic will last , and some states are already beginning the process of reopening , which could bring lost tax money back into their coffers .
But the long-term outlook still looks bleak .
Analysts at the financial services company Moody ’ s gamed out a few scenarios in April — including one that was categorized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more like our current reality — and found that states could see a shortfall of $ 172 billion over the next 15 months .
That ’ s because in addition to a huge decline in tax revenue , states are facing new , unexpected costs .
Earlier relief bills did provide money , including $ 150 billion from the CARES Act , for the states to use to offset spending in response to the coronavirus , as well as some additional money for Medicaid .
But there hasn ’ t been any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact of the coronavirus crisis , and even the money that ’ s tied to health costs likely isn ’ t enough to cover the huge influx of people who have lost their jobs and employer-sponsored health care and now qualify for Medicaid .
The 36 states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act are facing a particularly large surge of new recipients , since it ’ s now especially easy for newly unemployed people to get covered .
It will be very , very difficult for states to pay for all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ raising taxes , even if they drain their rainy-day funds .
According to analysis by Moody ’ s , only five states have the reserves they ’ d need to fully float through a severe recession caused by COVID-19 .
Most states would need to fill gaps of at least 5 percent .
States are already facing hard choices about how to manage the giant holes in their budgets .
California , for instance , is borrowing money from the federal government to ensure that it can continue to make unemployment payments .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ significantly reduce their spending : Earlier this month , state agencies in Georgia were asked for a revised budget proposal for next year with cuts of 14 percent .
The trouble is that because states never returned to their pre-recession levels of spending , it will be even harder to find places to trim fat .
Higher education often gets slashed early in a recession , Rosewicz said , but because it now makes up an even slimmer portion of many states ’ budgets , it ’ s harder to reap significant savings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are simultaneously facing potentially large drop-offs in tuition if they can ’ t reopen in person in the fall .
Similarly , state workforces are smaller now , which means states can ’ t pocket as much money by laying off or furloughing workers .
And with public school teachers already protesting stagnant salaries in many states , significant cuts to K-12 education could be politically dicey .
So tax hikes could also be coming — which would also make it even harder to recover from the recession even after the economy starts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem is pretty obvious — raising taxes is going to make consumers less inclined to spend money , ” said Raymond Scheppach , a professor of public policy at the University of Virginia .
“ That will make it even harder to get the economy going again.
” But financial assistance from the federal government could still make a big difference , Scheppach and other experts told me .
Studies conducted in the aftermath of the Great Recession suggested that the stimulus funds that were sent to states to help cover Medicaid costs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employment , and general aid to state governments prevented them from slashing programs and raising taxes when those actions could have hurt the economy even more .
Of course , the stimulus funds during the Great Recession didn ’ t mean there were no tax increases or spending cuts .
But this is another situation , Rosewicz said , where an influx of federal cash would be a good investment , if it prevents states from cutting their budgets to the bone .
“ Federal aid isn ’ t the full solution — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t even have a good estimate of what the need is , because we don ’ t know how long it will be going on , ” she said .
“ But significant state tax increases and spending cuts will pull even more money out of the economy , and that will almost certainly prolong the recession , so in that sense federal aid is a really essential tool right now .
”

A pandemic is an expensive thing to weather. The COVID-19 crisis has already prompted a huge drop in state tax dollars, and seems likely to cost states hundreds of billions of dollars in lost revenue over the upcoming fiscal year. That’s pushed governors to come to the federal government, hat in hand, asking for a federal bailout. But while Democrats in Congress seem eager to oblige — a new stimulus package that narrowly passed the House on May 15 includes nearly $1 trillion for state, local and tribal governments — congressional Republicans and President Trump aren’t sold yet.
There’s a tinge of moral and political outrage to this debate. Trump has repeatedly suggested that blue-state governors mismanaged their finances and don’t deserve a bailout. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, meanwhile, made headlines last month when he suggested that states should simply file for bankruptcy if they run out of money.
But experts think that doing nothing could be even more costly in the long run than bailing the states out. Without a lifeline from the federal government, states would have no choice but to start slashing budgets and raising taxes.
Recessions are never easy on state finances, since states rely heavily on tax revenue — whether it’s income tax, sales tax or property tax — and all of those sources of income tend to fall when people lose their jobs or stop buying luxuries. And because states generally have to balance their budgets — unlike the federal government, they can’t go into massive debt during a financial downturn and promise to pay it back later — they have to make up that missing revenue in other ways. In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, many states took a hatchet to higher education funding and reduced their spending on K-12 education, infrastructure, local governments and their own government workforce — and raised taxes.
Subscribe to our coronavirus podcast, PODCAST-19
And states had barely recovered from the last recession when the COVID-19 crisis arrived. The Great Recession technically ended in 2009, but according to an analysis by the Pew Charitable Trusts published last year, the slowness of the recovery meant that state tax revenues didn’t return to their pre-recession levels until 2013, adjusting for inflation — much longer than in the previous two recessions. Over this period, states lost an estimated $283 billion in tax revenue. “It was kind of like falling off a cliff and then walking up a ramp,” said Donald Boyd, co-director of the Project on State and Local Government Finance at the University of Albany.
This meant that even by the time state revenues had recovered, it took longer for dollars to start flowing toward education or infrastructure. States did put more money into their rainy day funds, which they can draw on during emergencies, in case another recession hit. But that prudent instinct left them with even less cash to spend on other things. By 2018, according to Pew, nearly half of the states were still spending less money than they were a decade earlier. State funding for higher education was down 13 percent, and state infrastructure spending as a share of GDP was at its lowest level in more than 50 years.
“Think about what happens if the main breadwinner in a household loses a job,” said Barb Rosewicz, director of the State Fiscal Health project at the Pew Charitable Trusts. “There are things you stop spending money on — maybe you don’t put a new roof on your house, maybe you don’t save for your kid’s college education. Even if the head of the household gets a new job and the salary goes back to where it’s been, there are all these deferred investments you want to catch up on. And that’s how states got left after the last recession.”
And now, states are facing an even more devastating budget crisis. There is, of course, a huge amount of uncertainty about how long the COVID-19 pandemic will last, and some states are already beginning the process of reopening, which could bring lost tax money back into their coffers. But the long-term outlook still looks bleak. Analysts at the financial services company Moody’s gamed out a few scenarios in April — including one that was categorized as “severe” but looks more and more like our current reality — and found that states could see a shortfall of $172 billion over the next 15 months.
That’s because in addition to a huge decline in tax revenue, states are facing new, unexpected costs. Earlier relief bills did provide money, including $150 billion from the CARES Act, for the states to use to offset spending in response to the coronavirus, as well as some additional money for Medicaid. But there hasn’t been any federal money directed at the state-level economic impact of the coronavirus crisis, and even the money that’s tied to health costs likely isn’t enough to cover the huge influx of people who have lost their jobs and employer-sponsored health care and now qualify for Medicaid. The 36 states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act are facing a particularly large surge of new recipients, since it’s now especially easy for newly unemployed people to get covered.
It will be very, very difficult for states to pay for all of these expenses without cutting costs or raising taxes, even if they drain their rainy-day funds. According to analysis by Moody’s, only five states have the reserves they’d need to fully float through a severe recession caused by COVID-19. Most states would need to fill gaps of at least 5 percent.
States are already facing hard choices about how to manage the giant holes in their budgets. California, for instance, is borrowing money from the federal government to ensure that it can continue to make unemployment payments. But other states are already looking to significantly reduce their spending: Earlier this month, state agencies in Georgia were asked for a revised budget proposal for next year with cuts of 14 percent.
The trouble is that because states never returned to their pre-recession levels of spending, it will be even harder to find places to trim fat. Higher education often gets slashed early in a recession, Rosewicz said, but because it now makes up an even slimmer portion of many states’ budgets, it’s harder to reap significant savings by making cuts — especially since universities are simultaneously facing potentially large drop-offs in tuition if they can’t reopen in person in the fall. Similarly, state workforces are smaller now, which means states can’t pocket as much money by laying off or furloughing workers. And with public school teachers already protesting stagnant salaries in many states, significant cuts to K-12 education could be politically dicey.
So tax hikes could also be coming — which would also make it even harder to recover from the recession even after the economy starts to pick up again. “The problem is pretty obvious — raising taxes is going to make consumers less inclined to spend money,” said Raymond Scheppach, a professor of public policy at the University of Virginia. “That will make it even harder to get the economy going again.”
But financial assistance from the federal government could still make a big difference, Scheppach and other experts told me. Studies conducted in the aftermath of the Great Recession suggested that the stimulus funds that were sent to states to help cover Medicaid costs or invest in new infrastructure helped increase employment, and general aid to state governments prevented them from slashing programs and raising taxes when those actions could have hurt the economy even more.
Of course, the stimulus funds during the Great Recession didn’t mean there were no tax increases or spending cuts. But this is another situation, Rosewicz said, where an influx of federal cash would be a good investment, if it prevents states from cutting their budgets to the bone. “Federal aid isn’t the full solution — this is an unprecedented crisis and we don’t even have a good estimate of what the need is, because we don’t know how long it will be going on,” she said. “But significant state tax increases and spending cuts will pull even more money out of the economy, and that will almost certainly prolong the recession, so in that sense federal aid is a really essential tool right now.”


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-21--Confidence Interval: If Trump Loses In 2020, He’ll Be The Nominee Again In 2024

Welcome to another episode of Confidence Interval , where we make a persuasive case for a hot take … and @ @ @ @ @ really feel about the idea .
Here , elections analyst Nathaniel Rakich argues that if @ @ @ @ @ in 2020 , he ’ ll be the GOP ’ s nominee again in 2024 @

Welcome to another episode of Confidence Interval, where we make a persuasive case for a hot take … and then reveal how confident we really feel about the idea. Here, elections analyst Nathaniel Rakich argues that if President Trump loses the election in 2020, he’ll be the GOP’s nominee again in 2024.


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-21--The Pandemic Has Pushed Biden to the Left. How Far Will He Go?

Six weeks ago , when Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the presidential race , it seemed like the Democratic Party ’ s left wing suffered a major and potentially long-lasting defeat .
Not only had Sanders lost , but former Vice President Joe Biden had won while casting many left-wing ideas as both unrealistic and detrimental to Democrats ’ chances of winning elections .
But if Biden is elected in November , the left may get a presidency it likes after all — or at least one it hates less than anticipated .
The coronavirus outbreak and the resulting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political discourse to the left : Ideas that would have been considered too liberal for most Democrats a few months ago are now being proposed by Republicans .
And if American politics is moving left , expect Biden to do the same .
Biden was often cast as a centrist or a moderate during the Democratic primaries , but those labels don ’ t really describe his politics that well — he doesn ’ t really seem to have any kind of set ideology at all .
Instead , Biden ’ s long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is fairly flexible on policy — shifting his positions to whatever is in the mainstream of the Democratic Party at a given moment .
So if Biden wins the presidency and his fellow Democrats are still clamoring for more government spending to help the pandemic recovery , Biden is likely to be a fairly liberal president , no matter how moderate he sounded in the primaries .
Biden positions himself in the center of the Democratic Party Biden is a centrist in a certain way — he has historically positioned himself in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party ’ s most liberal and most conservative members .
( And he does that positioning generally on foreign policy , economics and social issues . )
The center of the party is a moving target of course .
“ The best way to understand Biden is as a reflection or reaction to the party ’ s main planks throughout the last 40 years , rather than leading or shaping it , ” said Lily Geismer , a history professor at Claremont McKenna College who has written extensively about the Democratic Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t see Biden as embodying any of the ideological terms or positions of centrist or liberal , certainly not center-left and not really neoliberal either .
Instead I see his ideology as first and foremost a Democrat .
He has throughout his career toed the party line rather than an ideological one.
” Serving in the Senate from 1973-2009 , Biden was always more liberal than at least 44 percent of his Democratic colleagues but always less liberal than at least 43 percent of his colleagues , according to DW-Nominate scores of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ranged between the 44th and 57th percentile in terms of liberalism among Democratic senators in his Senate years — smack dab in the middle of the party .
Liberal Democrats have been sharply critical of some of Biden ’ s votes in the Senate , mostly notably his support for the 1994 anti-crime bill that increased penalties for some offenses and the 2002 resolution to authorize war with Iraq .
But on both issues , Biden was within the Democratic Party consensus at the time .
Nearly all Senate Democrats ( 54 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as did 188 of the 252 House Democrats who voted on the measure , which was signed into law by a Democratic president ( Bill Clinton ) .
A majority of House Democrats ( 126 of 207 ) opposed the Iraq War resolution , but the majority of Biden ’ s Senate Democratic colleagues were in favor of it ( 28 of 49 ) .
Biden ’ s tenure as vice president also suggests that he would govern from the middle of the Democratic Party .
There is not a clear record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — of the positions Biden took in internal policy debates within the Obama administration .
And the role of a vice president essentially requires him to publicly praise whatever decision the president ultimately makes .
But Biden has described himself as an “ Obama Democrat ” and strongly defended the administration ’ s record .
And while Obama himself and the Obama administration are somewhat hard to categorize ideologically , the former president and his team generally took approaches that did not satisfy the most liberal elements of the party but were fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself from the Obama administration , it was to stake out a position that was within the Democratic mainstream .
Take Biden ’ s announcement in 2012 that he supported same-sex marriages — though Obama had not yet come out publicly for legalizing same-sex unions , the majority of Democratic voters already held this position .
And Biden also supported the Obama ’ s administration push for more lenient criminal justice policies , even as Sen. Biden had been a key figure in the Democrats ’ tough on crime posture in the 1980s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the times was also evident in Biden ’ s 2020 primary platform .
Biden adopted fairly liberal policies — not as liberal as those of Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren , but more liberal than his pre-campaign record suggested .
The Democratic Party is more liberal now than it was when Bill Clinton took office , or even when Obama was inaugurated , and Biden ’ s platform reflects that shift .
Some of Biden ’ s 2020 policy proposals are notably to the left of the Obama administration ’ s stances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including Biden ’ s support for the abolition of the death penalty , halting nearly all deportations of undocumented immigrants in his first 100 days as president and free four-year college for Americans in households with incomes up to $ 125,000 a year .
It ’ s hard to measure the precise center of American politics and how it has changed over the last few months .
But it ’ s certainly moved left in response to the COVID-19 crisis — toward way more federal spending .
Sen. Mitt Romney , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to temporarily boost the pay of grocery store clerks and others in “ essential ” jobs by $ 12 per hour .
Republicans in Congress supported a $ 2 trillion economic stimulus provision , which gave many Americans a one-time payment of $ 1,200 and boosted unemployment benefits by $ 600 per week .
More moderate House Democrats , usually wary of being cast as too liberal , backed the $ 2 trillion bill and a subsequent $ 3 trillion economic stimulus bill .
Mirroring the shift in his party , Biden and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and presidency — rolling out more liberal policy plans , speaking in increasingly populist terms and joining forces with the most progressive voices in the party .
Biden himself has invoked the idea that he might be entering the Oval Office facing a crisis on the scale of the Great Depression .
He recently told Politico that he supported a stimulus that was “ a hell of a lot bigger ” than the $ 2 trillion provision passed in March and that he was annoyed with Wall Street firms because “ this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their asses out.
” The former vice president is also reportedly considering Warren as a potential running mate more seriously than before because of her experience on economic issues .
Last week , he appointed some of the party ’ s most prominent liberal figures , including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal , to a team advising him on policy .
“ What I ’ ve heard the vice president say over and over again is this crisis is shining a bright , bright light on so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and so many inequities .
It is exacerbating and shining a light on environmental-justice issues , racial inequalities , so many other problems , ” Stef Feldman , a top Biden policy adviser , recently told New York magazine .
“ It seems clear that Biden gets the seriousness of the moment and the need to change directions in an American economy that was systemically unfair even before it was broken to pieces by a pandemic , ” said Jeff Hauser of the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research , a Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generally more in line with Sanders and Warren than Biden .
But don ’ t expect Biden to move too far left We should note three important caveats here .
First , some of these shifts leftward from Biden are probably best explained by his need to woo Sanders ’ s supporters , rather than as a response to COVID-19 .
Sanders handily won “ very liberal ” voters and voters under the age of 45 during the Democratic primary — and Biden probably wants those two blocs to be enthusiastically behind him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s likely that Biden , for example , would have tried to appeal to Ocasio-Cortez in some way even if the coronavirus outbreak had never happened .
Secondly , it ’ s not clear how notable or long-lasting these shifts are .
You could argue that Biden is calling for a bigger federal response to a massive pandemic and elevated unemployment levels , and that this leftward shift isn ’ t particularly striking .
And since the former vice president often calibrates his views to match the current consensus , you could see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crisis recedes and/or if polls start showing a majority of Americans are leery of more government intervention to help with the COVID-19 recovery .
Those are two fairly unlikely scenarios right now , but at some point more moderate Democrats might shift away from supporting more federal spending in the wake of the coronavirus .
If a big bloc of Democrats shifted right , I would expect Biden to follow suit .
Thirdly , Biden ’ s leftward shifts will likely be constrained by both his own instincts and those of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inner circle are perpetually worried that the Democrats will move too far left on policy issues and scare off swing voters .
Some of his top advisers , electoral politics aside , are just somewhat centrist and wary of liberal ideas .
Biden himself seems deeply invested in the idea that he can cut deals with Republicans and tamp down the partisan divide in Washington , a vision that is probably in tension with a more leftish presidency .
“ Does he stay on the 50-yard line , splitting the difference between anti-government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bipartisan deals , ” David Dayen of the left-leaning The American Prospect wrote recently .
“ Or does he surge toward the end zone with ‘ Roosevelt ’ written on it , transforming the nation through ‘ bold , persistent experimentation ’ that fills in all the cracks the coronavirus exposed ?
” “ Joe Biden is running on the most progressive platform of any Democratic nominee in recent history .
But given the pandemic , he has to look at the New Deal and Great Society traditions in the Democratic Party and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the communications director for Justice Democrats , a left-wing group aligned with Ocasio-Cortez and other very progressive Democrats .
All that said , it seems fairly likely that Biden , if he wins , will enter the Oval Office with Americans struggling through a recession and the public and his party clamoring for the federal government to do more to help those who are struggling .
In that scenario , we might look back at how Biden won the Democratic primary — by emphasizing his moderation — and marvel that he became @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

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

Six weeks ago, when Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the presidential race, it seemed like the Democratic Party’s left wing suffered a major and potentially long-lasting defeat. Not only had Sanders lost, but former Vice President Joe Biden had won while casting many left-wing ideas as both unrealistic and detrimental to Democrats’ chances of winning elections.
But if Biden is elected in November, the left may get a presidency it likes after all — or at least one it hates less than anticipated. The coronavirus outbreak and the resulting massive surge in unemployment has moved American political discourse to the left: Ideas that would have been considered too liberal for most Democrats a few months ago are now being proposed by Republicans. And if American politics is moving left, expect Biden to do the same. Biden was often cast as a centrist or a moderate during the Democratic primaries, but those labels don’t really describe his politics that well — he doesn’t really seem to have any kind of set ideology at all.
Instead, Biden’s long record in public office suggests that he is fairly flexible on policy — shifting his positions to whatever is in the mainstream of the Democratic Party at a given moment. So if Biden wins the presidency and his fellow Democrats are still clamoring for more government spending to help the pandemic recovery, Biden is likely to be a fairly liberal president, no matter how moderate he sounded in the primaries.
Biden positions himself in the center of the Democratic Party
Biden is a centrist in a certain way — he has historically positioned himself in the center of the Democratic Party, between the party’s most liberal and most conservative members. (And he does that positioning generally on foreign policy, economics and social issues.) The center of the party is a moving target of course.
“The best way to understand Biden is as a reflection or reaction to the party’s main planks throughout the last 40 years, rather than leading or shaping it,” said Lily Geismer, a history professor at Claremont McKenna College who has written extensively about the Democratic Party and liberalism. “I don’t see Biden as embodying any of the ideological terms or positions of centrist or liberal, certainly not center-left and not really neoliberal either. Instead I see his ideology as first and foremost a Democrat. He has throughout his career toed the party line rather than an ideological one.”
Subscribe to our coronavirus podcast, PODCAST-19
Serving in the Senate from 1973-2009, Biden was always more liberal than at least 44 percent of his Democratic colleagues but always less liberal than at least 43 percent of his colleagues, according to DW-Nominate scores of his Senate votes. Put another way, he ranged between the 44th and 57th percentile in terms of liberalism among Democratic senators in his Senate years — smack dab in the middle of the party.
Liberal Democrats have been sharply critical of some of Biden’s votes in the Senate, mostly notably his support for the 1994 anti-crime bill that increased penalties for some offenses and the 2002 resolution to authorize war with Iraq. But on both issues, Biden was within the Democratic Party consensus at the time. Nearly all Senate Democrats (54 of 56) backed the crime bill, as did 188 of the 252 House Democrats who voted on the measure, which was signed into law by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton). A majority of House Democrats (126 of 207) opposed the Iraq War resolution, but the majority of Biden’s Senate Democratic colleagues were in favor of it (28 of 49).
Biden’s tenure as vice president also suggests that he would govern from the middle of the Democratic Party. There is not a clear record — akin to Senate roll call votes — of the positions Biden took in internal policy debates within the Obama administration. And the role of a vice president essentially requires him to publicly praise whatever decision the president ultimately makes. But Biden has described himself as an “Obama Democrat” and strongly defended the administration’s record. And while Obama himself and the Obama administration are somewhat hard to categorize ideologically, the former president and his team generally took approaches that did not satisfy the most liberal elements of the party but were fairly liberal.
When Biden did publicly separate himself from the Obama administration, it was to stake out a position that was within the Democratic mainstream. Take Biden’s announcement in 2012 that he supported same-sex marriages — though Obama had not yet come out publicly for legalizing same-sex unions, the majority of Democratic voters already held this position. And Biden also supported the Obama’s administration push for more lenient criminal justice policies, even as Sen. Biden had been a key figure in the Democrats’ tough on crime posture in the 1980s and 1990s.
That willingness to change with the times was also evident in Biden’s 2020 primary platform. Biden adopted fairly liberal policies — not as liberal as those of Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, but more liberal than his pre-campaign record suggested. The Democratic Party is more liberal now than it was when Bill Clinton took office, or even when Obama was inaugurated, and Biden’s platform reflects that shift. Some of Biden’s 2020 policy proposals are notably to the left of the Obama administration’s stances when it left office in early 2017, including Biden’s support for the abolition of the death penalty, halting nearly all deportations of undocumented immigrants in his first 100 days as president and free four-year college for Americans in households with incomes up to $125,000 a year.
The Democratic Party’s center is moving left
It’s hard to measure the precise center of American politics and how it has changed over the last few months. But it’s certainly moved left in response to the COVID-19 crisis — toward way more federal spending. Sen. Mitt Romney, a Republican, recently proposed using federal dollars to temporarily boost the pay of grocery store clerks and others in “essential” jobs by $12 per hour. Republicans in Congress supported a $2 trillion economic stimulus provision, which gave many Americans a one-time payment of $1,200 and boosted unemployment benefits by $600 per week. More moderate House Democrats, usually wary of being cast as too liberal, backed the $2 trillion bill and a subsequent $3 trillion economic stimulus bill .
Mirroring the shift in his party, Biden and his advisers are now reimagining his candidacy and presidency — rolling out more liberal policy plans, speaking in increasingly populist terms and joining forces with the most progressive voices in the party. Biden himself has invoked the idea that he might be entering the Oval Office facing a crisis on the scale of the Great Depression.
Confidence Interval: If Trump Loses In 2020, Heâll Be The Nominee Again In 2024
He recently told Politico that he supported a stimulus that was “a hell of a lot bigger” than the $2 trillion provision passed in March and that he was annoyed with Wall Street firms because “this is the second time we’ve bailed their asses out.” The former vice president is also reportedly considering Warren as a potential running mate more seriously than before because of her experience on economic issues. Last week, he appointed some of the party’s most prominent liberal figures, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal, to a team advising him on policy.
“What I’ve heard the vice president say over and over again is this crisis is shining a bright, bright light on so many systemic problems in our country, and so many inequities. It is exacerbating and shining a light on environmental-justice issues, racial inequalities, so many other problems,” Stef Feldman, a top Biden policy adviser, recently told New York magazine.
“It seems clear that Biden gets the seriousness of the moment and the need to change directions in an American economy that was systemically unfair even before it was broken to pieces by a pandemic,” said Jeff Hauser of the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank whose proposals are generally more in line with Sanders and Warren than Biden.
But don’t expect Biden to move too far left
We should note three important caveats here. First, some of these shifts leftward from Biden are probably best explained by his need to woo Sanders’s supporters, rather than as a response to COVID-19. Sanders handily won “very liberal” voters and voters under the age of 45 during the Democratic primary — and Biden probably wants those two blocs to be enthusiastically behind him in the general election. It’s likely that Biden, for example, would have tried to appeal to Ocasio-Cortez in some way even if the coronavirus outbreak had never happened.
Secondly, it’s not clear how notable or long-lasting these shifts are. You could argue that Biden is calling for a bigger federal response to a massive pandemic and elevated unemployment levels, and that this leftward shift isn’t particularly striking. And since the former vice president often calibrates his views to match the current consensus, you could see him backtracking from his newfound liberalism when the crisis recedes and/or if polls start showing a majority of Americans are leery of more government intervention to help with the COVID-19 recovery. Those are two fairly unlikely scenarios right now, but at some point more moderate Democrats might shift away from supporting more federal spending in the wake of the coronavirus. If a big bloc of Democrats shifted right, I would expect Biden to follow suit.
Thirdly, Biden’s leftward shifts will likely be constrained by both his own instincts and those of his top advisers. Both Biden and his inner circle are perpetually worried that the Democrats will move too far left on policy issues and scare off swing voters. Some of his top advisers, electoral politics aside, are just somewhat centrist and wary of liberal ideas. Biden himself seems deeply invested in the idea that he can cut deals with Republicans and tamp down the partisan divide in Washington, a vision that is probably in tension with a more leftish presidency.
“Does he stay on the 50-yard line, splitting the difference between anti-government conservatism and progressive populism, and cutting bipartisan deals,” David Dayen of the left-leaning The American Prospect wrote recently. “Or does he surge toward the end zone with ‘Roosevelt’ written on it, transforming the nation through ‘bold, persistent experimentation’ that fills in all the cracks the coronavirus exposed?”
“Joe Biden is running on the most progressive platform of any Democratic nominee in recent history. But given the pandemic, he has to look at the New Deal and Great Society traditions in the Democratic Party and go bigger,” said Waleed Shahid, the communications director for Justice Democrats, a left-wing group aligned with Ocasio-Cortez and other very progressive Democrats.
All that said, it seems fairly likely that Biden, if he wins, will enter the Oval Office with Americans struggling through a recession and the public and his party clamoring for the federal government to do more to help those who are struggling. In that scenario, we might look back at how Biden won the Democratic primary — by emphasizing his moderation — and marvel that he became the most liberal president in recent history.


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-21--Politics Podcast: One Virus, A World Full Of Responses

As COVID-19 spread across the globe , different countries — with different political systems — have all dealt with a @ @ @ @ @ help put the U.S. experience in context , we look at the political responses and @ @ @ @ @ and the European Union with University of Richmond political scientist Dan Chen and Politico Europe @ @ @ @ @ this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast .
You can listen to the episode by @ @ @ @ @ button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN @ @ @ @ @ platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The @ @ @ @ @ and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and @ @ @ @ @ a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
@ @ @ @ @ , on Twitter or in the comments .

As COVID-19 spread across the globe, different countries — with different political systems — all had to deal with a very similar challenge. To help put the U.S. experience in context, we look at the political responses and public reactions in both China and the European Union with University of Richmond political scientist Dan Chen and Politico Europe intelligence analyst Cornelius Hirsch in this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast.
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Mondays and Thursdays. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-21--How Bad Is The COVID-19 Misinformation Epidemic?

The COVID-19 pandemic has been equally defined by how much we don ’ t know as how much we do .
That vacuum has been quickly filled with bullshit .
The United Nations secretary-general has warned we ’ re living through “ a pandemic of misinformation , ” and the head of the World Health Organization said it ’ s an “ infodemic.
” In the midst of battling a global health emergency , we find ourselves fending off another scourge of conspiracy theories and misinformation .
It certainly feels like there ’ s a lot of fake news swirling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does it compare to another major misinformation magnet : the 2016 election ?
Research on coronavirus misinformation is largely limited to public opinion surveys and preprint research that has yet to be peer-reviewed .
But when we compare those preliminary findings to research on the 2016 election , they suggest that more people are seeing — and believing — misinformation now , and it may have something to do with the challenge of understanding a new disease .
Measuring exactly how much bunk is out there to begin with is a challenge , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shared through social media , said Gordon Pennycook , a behavioral psychologist at Canada ’ s University of Regina who studies fake news .
It ’ s possible to measure , for instance , the number of tweets linking to specific fake news websites , but no way to see every instance a particular false claim is made on Facebook , especially when those claims can take many forms , including memes , Pennycook said .
An easier measure is how many people recall having seen fake news .
A Pew Research Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March found that 48 percent of Americans reported seeing at least some made-up news about the outbreak .
Only 20 percent of respondents said they had seen no fake news ; the remaining 32 percent said they had seen “ not much.
” In a preprint paper from researchers at Cornell University , respondents were simply asked if they remember seeing certain claims about coronavirus , some of which were true and some of which were false .
About 7 percent of respondents accurately recalled seeing a false claim .
But just because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t mean you believe it .
I ’ ve seen plenty of bogus claims on my Facebook timeline , myself , and I haven ’ t started drinking bleach yet .
So far , research indicates the number of people who actually believe these ideas is dependent on the claim .
In that Cornell paper , the percent of respondents who both recalled seeing fake news and believing it ranged from 14 percent to 19 percent .
This represents a higher percentage of the population actually believing fake news than we saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Journal of Economic Perspectives found that only 8 percent of Americans both recalled seeing and believing a piece of fake news about the 2016 election .
“ So , on average , double the rate of people recalled and believed in fake news in the COVID context compared to what we saw in 2016 , ” said Douglas Kriner , a government professor at Cornell and one of the authors of the preprint .
Other studies have found a wider range in how willing people are to believe in something .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March whether they believed specific claims about COVID-19 , without indicating whether they were true or false .
The percent of Americans who said they believed false claims ranged from less than 1 percent ( the claim that eating garlic can cure the coronavirus , even though it can not ) to just over 20 percent ( the claim that seasonal flu was just as dangerous as COVID-19 , even though the flu is far less deadly ) .
And a survey from Pew Research Center conducted in mid-March reported nearly 3 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a lab , either accidentally or on purpose .
( The evidence heavily points to the virus emerging naturally . )
Many Americans are also having difficulty discerning accurate information .
For example , in the Cornell paper , when shown headlines about treatments for COVID-19 , 40 percent of respondents , on average , judged real headlines in this category to be true , and the remaining 60 percent were “ almost evenly divided between identifying the headline as false or acknowledging that they were unsure.
” “ If people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information is true , that is a real problem from a public health perspective , ” said Sarah Kreps , a government and law professor at Cornell and a co-author of the paper .
In another preprint co-authored by Pennycook , respondents were able to distinguish between accurate and false information about COVID-19 pretty well when prompted to .
But when asked only whether they would share the information on social media — and not if they believe it to be true or not — more were willing to share fake news .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ like 65-ish percent of the time and the false content they believe like 25 percent of the time , so not great but at least there ’ s a difference , ” Pennycook said .
“ If instead you ask them which ones they would share on social media , they ’ re terrible at discerning between them .
They don ’ t , basically.
” One of the reasons we might be seeing more people falling for misinformation is the knowledge gap that comes with an emerging disease like COVID-19 .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know about this virus , and that lack of understanding can create a vacuum that is all too easily filled by conspiracy theories and misinformation .
“ An analogy that might be helpful here is autism : science still doesn ’ t have a clear explanation of why autism occurs , ” said Brendan Nyhan , a government professor at Dartmouth College who studies disinformation .
“ That ’ s created a demand for explanations of why children develop it that anti-vaccine activists have taken advantage of .
They ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ develop autism , taking advantage of the coincidence in time between when autism manifests and when children get vaccines.
” So what do we do while we wait for better scientific answers on COVID-19 ?
Social media sites , for their part , have enacted measures to limit and remove false information about COVID-19 .
Facebook , YouTube and Vimeo , for example , all removed the viral video “ Plandemic ” that claimed a shadowy group of elites was using the coronavirus to gain power .
But an analysis from the nonprofit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take up to 22 days for Facebook to label fact-checked COVID-19 misinformation on the site , and that it can spread to millions of users in the meantime .
And MIT researchers have found that misinformation peddlers can get around Facebook ’ s efforts to quell fake news by using an archived version of a URL via the Wayback Machine .
Studies have also found mixed results when it comes to issuing corrections on misinformation .
One study on disinformation around Zika and yellow fever outbreaks in Brazil , published earlier this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , found that priming people with a factsheet of accurate information had no significant impact on people ’ s beliefs in subsequent false claims .
One of Pennycook ’ s papers suggests that merely prompting people to think about the fact that not everything online is true can be enough to reduce the amount of misinformation they share .
But each of the researchers I spoke to expressed concern about people ’ s ability to discern accurate information in a pandemic , and what impact the deluge of bunk might have on making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The problem is we can ’ t say how much fake news is reinforcing beliefs and entrenching beliefs and causing people , almost , to enter this domain of nihilism where they just throw up their hands , ” Kreps said .
“ They don ’ t know what to believe , so they ’ re not going to believe anything .
Not believing anything can be as pernicious as believing fake news .
”

The COVID-19 pandemic has been equally defined by how much we don’t know as how much we do. That vacuum has been quickly filled with bullshit. The United Nations secretary-general has warned we’re living through “a pandemic of misinformation,” and the head of the World Health Organization said it’s an “infodemic.” In the midst of battling a global health emergency, we find ourselves fending off another scourge of conspiracy theories and misinformation.
It certainly feels like there’s a lot of fake news swirling around about the coronavirus, but how does it compare to another major misinformation magnet: the 2016 election? Research on coronavirus misinformation is largely limited to public opinion surveys and preprint research that has yet to be peer-reviewed. But when we compare those preliminary findings to research on the 2016 election, they suggest that more people are seeing — and believing — misinformation now, and it may have something to do with the challenge of understanding a new disease.
Measuring exactly how much bunk is out there to begin with is a challenge, in part because so much misinformation is shared through social media, said Gordon Pennycook, a behavioral psychologist at Canada’s University of Regina who studies fake news. It’s possible to measure, for instance, the number of tweets linking to specific fake news websites, but no way to see every instance a particular false claim is made on Facebook, especially when those claims can take many forms, including memes, Pennycook said.
An easier measure is how many people recall having seen fake news. A Pew Research Center survey conducted in the second week of March found that 48 percent of Americans reported seeing at least some made-up news about the outbreak. Only 20 percent of respondents said they had seen no fake news; the remaining 32 percent said they had seen “not much.” In a preprint paper from researchers at Cornell University, respondents were simply asked if they remember seeing certain claims about coronavirus, some of which were true and some of which were false. About 7 percent of respondents accurately recalled seeing a false claim.
But just because you’ve seen fake news doesn’t mean you believe it. I’ve seen plenty of bogus claims on my Facebook timeline, myself, and I haven’t started drinking bleach yet. So far, research indicates the number of people who actually believe these ideas is dependent on the claim. In that Cornell paper, the percent of respondents who both recalled seeing fake news and believing it ranged from 14 percent to 19 percent. This represents a higher percentage of the population actually believing fake news than we saw in 2016. One study published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives found that only 8 percent of Americans both recalled seeing and believing a piece of fake news about the 2016 election.
“So, on average, double the rate of people recalled and believed in fake news in the COVID context compared to what we saw in 2016,” said Douglas Kriner, a government professor at Cornell and one of the authors of the preprint.
Other studies have found a wider range in how willing people are to believe in something. A preprint from Pennycook asked Americans in late March whether they believed specific claims about COVID-19, without indicating whether they were true or false. The percent of Americans who said they believed false claims ranged from less than 1 percent (the claim that eating garlic can cure the coronavirus, even though it cannot) to just over 20 percent (the claim that seasonal flu was just as dangerous as COVID-19, even though the flu is far less deadly). And a survey from Pew Research Center conducted in mid-March reported nearly 3 in 10 Americans believe the coronavirus was created in a lab, either accidentally or on purpose. (The evidence heavily points to the virus emerging naturally.)
Many Americans are also having difficulty discerning accurate information. For example, in the Cornell paper, when shown headlines about treatments for COVID-19, 40 percent of respondents, on average, judged real headlines in this category to be true, and the remaining 60 percent were “almost evenly divided between identifying the headline as false or acknowledging that they were unsure.”
“If people are unable to discern and say that true information is true, that is a real problem from a public health perspective,” said Sarah Kreps, a government and law professor at Cornell and a co-author of the paper.
In another preprint co-authored by Pennycook, respondents were able to distinguish between accurate and false information about COVID-19 pretty well when prompted to. But when asked only whether they would share the information on social media — and not if they believe it to be true or not — more were willing to share fake news.
“They still only believe true content like 65-ish percent of the time and the false content they believe like 25 percent of the time, so not great but at least there’s a difference,” Pennycook said. “If instead you ask them which ones they would share on social media, they’re terrible at discerning between them. They don’t, basically.”
One of the reasons we might be seeing more people falling for misinformation is the knowledge gap that comes with an emerging disease like COVID-19. There’s a lot we still don’t know about this virus, and that lack of understanding can create a vacuum that is all too easily filled by conspiracy theories and misinformation.
“An analogy that might be helpful here is autism: science still doesn’t have a clear explanation of why autism occurs,” said Brendan Nyhan, a government professor at Dartmouth College who studies disinformation. “That’s created a demand for explanations of why children develop it that anti-vaccine activists have taken advantage of. They’ve provided a simple story of why children develop autism, taking advantage of the coincidence in time between when autism manifests and when children get vaccines.”
So what do we do while we wait for better scientific answers on COVID-19? Social media sites, for their part, have enacted measures to limit and remove false information about COVID-19. Facebook, YouTube and Vimeo, for example, all removed the viral video “Plandemic” that claimed a shadowy group of elites was using the coronavirus to gain power. But an analysis from the nonprofit activist organization Avaaz found that it can take up to 22 days for Facebook to label fact-checked COVID-19 misinformation on the site, and that it can spread to millions of users in the meantime. And MIT researchers have found that misinformation peddlers can get around Facebook’s efforts to quell fake news by using an archived version of a URL via the Wayback Machine.
Studies have also found mixed results when it comes to issuing corrections on misinformation. One study on disinformation around Zika and yellow fever outbreaks in Brazil, published earlier this year in Science Advances and co-authored by Nyhan, found that priming people with a factsheet of accurate information had no significant impact on people’s beliefs in subsequent false claims.
One of Pennycook’s papers suggests that merely prompting people to think about the fact that not everything online is true can be enough to reduce the amount of misinformation they share. But each of the researchers I spoke to expressed concern about people’s ability to discern accurate information in a pandemic, and what impact the deluge of bunk might have on making sure the truth gets communicated.
“The problem is we can’t say how much fake news is reinforcing beliefs and entrenching beliefs and causing people, almost, to enter this domain of nihilism where they just throw up their hands,” Kreps said. “They don’t know what to believe, so they’re not going to believe anything. Not believing anything can be as pernicious as believing fake news.”


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-21--How Biden Could Be The Most Liberal President In Modern U.S. History

Six weeks ago , when Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the presidential race , it seemed like the Democratic Party ’ s left wing suffered a major and potentially long-lasting defeat .
Not only had Sanders lost , but former Vice President Joe Biden had won while casting many left-wing ideas as both unrealistic and detrimental to Democrats ’ chances of winning elections .
But if Biden is elected in November , the left may get a presidency it likes after all — or at least one it hates less than anticipated .
The coronavirus outbreak and the resulting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political discourse to the left : Ideas that would have been considered too liberal for most Democrats a few months ago are now being proposed by Republicans .
And if American politics is moving left , expect Biden to do the same .
Biden was often cast as a centrist or a moderate during the Democratic primaries , but those labels don ’ t really describe his politics that well — he doesn ’ t really seem to have any kind of set ideology at all .
Instead , Biden ’ s long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is fairly flexible on policy — shifting his positions to whatever is in the mainstream of the Democratic Party at a given moment .
So if Biden wins the presidency and his fellow Democrats are still clamoring for more government spending to help the pandemic recovery , Biden is likely to be a fairly liberal president , no matter how moderate he sounded in the primaries .
Biden positions himself in the center of the Democratic Party Biden is a centrist in a certain way — he has historically positioned himself in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party ’ s most liberal and most conservative members .
( And he does that positioning generally on foreign policy , economics and social issues . )
The center of the party is a moving target of course .
“ The best way to understand Biden is as a reflection or reaction to the party ’ s main planks throughout the last 40 years , rather than leading or shaping it , ” said Lily Geismer , a history professor at Claremont McKenna College who has written extensively about the Democratic Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t see Biden as embodying any of the ideological terms or positions of centrist or liberal , certainly not center-left and not really neoliberal either .
Instead I see his ideology as first and foremost a Democrat .
He has throughout his career toed the party line rather than an ideological one.
” Serving in the Senate from 1973-2009 , Biden was always more liberal than at least 44 percent of his Democratic colleagues but always less liberal than at least 43 percent of his colleagues , according to DW-Nominate scores of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ranged between the 44th and 57th percentile in terms of liberalism among Democratic senators in his Senate years — smack dab in the middle of the party .
Liberal Democrats have been sharply critical of some of Biden ’ s votes in the Senate , mostly notably his support for the 1994 anti-crime bill that increased penalties for some offenses and the 2002 resolution to authorize war with Iraq .
But on both issues , Biden was within the Democratic Party consensus at the time .
Nearly all Senate Democrats ( 54 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as did 188 of the 252 House Democrats who voted on the measure , which was signed into law by a Democratic president ( Bill Clinton ) .
A majority of House Democrats ( 126 of 207 ) opposed the Iraq War resolution , but the majority of Biden ’ s Senate Democratic colleagues were in favor of it ( 28 of 49 ) .
Biden ’ s tenure as vice president also suggests that he would govern from the middle of the Democratic Party .
There is not a clear record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — of the positions Biden took in internal policy debates within the Obama administration .
And the role of a vice president essentially requires him to publicly praise whatever decision the president ultimately makes .
But Biden has described himself as an “ Obama Democrat ” and strongly defended the administration ’ s record .
And while Obama himself and the Obama administration are somewhat hard to categorize ideologically , the former president and his team generally took approaches that did not satisfy the most liberal elements of the party but were fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself from the Obama administration , it was to stake out a position that was within the Democratic mainstream .
Take Biden ’ s announcement in 2012 that he supported same-sex marriages — though Obama had not yet come out publicly for legalizing same-sex unions , the majority of Democratic voters already held this position .
And Biden also supported the Obama ’ s administration push for more lenient criminal justice policies , even as Sen. Biden had been a key figure in the Democrats ’ tough on crime posture in the 1980s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the times was also evident in Biden ’ s 2020 primary platform .
Biden adopted fairly liberal policies — not as liberal as those of Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren , but more liberal than his pre-campaign record suggested .
The Democratic Party is more liberal now than it was when Bill Clinton took office , or even when Obama was inaugurated , and Biden ’ s platform reflects that shift .
Some of Biden ’ s 2020 policy proposals are notably to the left of the Obama administration ’ s stances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including Biden ’ s support for the abolition of the death penalty , halting nearly all deportations of undocumented immigrants in his first 100 days as president and free four-year college for Americans in households with incomes up to $ 125,000 a year .
It ’ s hard to measure the precise center of American politics and how it has changed over the last few months .
But it ’ s certainly moved left in response to the COVID-19 crisis — toward way more federal spending .
Sen. Mitt Romney , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to temporarily boost the pay of grocery store clerks and others in “ essential ” jobs by $ 12 per hour .
Republicans in Congress supported a $ 2 trillion economic stimulus provision , which gave many Americans a one-time payment of $ 1,200 and boosted unemployment benefits by $ 600 per week .
More moderate House Democrats , usually wary of being cast as too liberal , backed the $ 2 trillion bill and a subsequent $ 3 trillion economic stimulus bill .
Mirroring the shift in his party , Biden and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and presidency — rolling out more liberal policy plans , speaking in increasingly populist terms and joining forces with the most progressive voices in the party .
Biden himself has invoked the idea that he might be entering the Oval Office facing a crisis on the scale of the Great Depression .
Confidence Interval : If Trump Loses In 2020 , He ’ ll Be The Nominee Again In 2024 He recently told Politico that he supported a stimulus that was “ a hell of a lot bigger ” than the $ 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was annoyed with Wall Street firms because “ this is the second time we ’ ve bailed their asses out.
” The former vice president is also reportedly considering Warren as a potential running mate more seriously than before because of her experience on economic issues .
Last week , he appointed some of the party ’ s most prominent liberal figures , including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal , to a team advising him on policy .
“ What I ’ ve heard the vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this crisis is shining a bright , bright light on so many systemic problems in our country , and so many inequities .
It is exacerbating and shining a light on environmental-justice issues , racial inequalities , so many other problems , ” Stef Feldman , a top Biden policy adviser , recently told New York magazine .
“ It seems clear that Biden gets the seriousness of the moment and the need to change directions in an American economy that was systemically unfair even before it was broken to pieces by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the left-leaning Center for Economic and Policy Research , a Washington , D.C.-based think tank whose proposals are generally more in line with Sanders and Warren than Biden .
But don ’ t expect Biden to move too far left We should note three important caveats here .
First , some of these shifts leftward from Biden are probably best explained by his need to woo Sanders ’ s supporters , rather than as a response to COVID-19 .
Sanders handily won “ very liberal ” voters and voters under the age of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden probably wants those two blocs to be enthusiastically behind him in the general election .
It ’ s likely that Biden , for example , would have tried to appeal to Ocasio-Cortez in some way even if the coronavirus outbreak had never happened .
Secondly , it ’ s not clear how notable or long-lasting these shifts are .
You could argue that Biden is calling for a bigger federal response to a massive pandemic and elevated unemployment levels , and that this leftward shift isn ’ t particularly striking .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his views to match the current consensus , you could see him backtracking from his newfound liberalism when the crisis recedes and/or if polls start showing a majority of Americans are leery of more government intervention to help with the COVID-19 recovery .
Those are two fairly unlikely scenarios right now , but at some point more moderate Democrats might shift away from supporting more federal spending in the wake of the coronavirus .
If a big bloc of Democrats shifted right , I would expect Biden to follow suit .
Thirdly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be constrained by both his own instincts and those of his top advisers .
Both Biden and his inner circle are perpetually worried that the Democrats will move too far left on policy issues and scare off swing voters .
Some of his top advisers , electoral politics aside , are just somewhat centrist and wary of liberal ideas .
Biden himself seems deeply invested in the idea that he can cut deals with Republicans and tamp down the partisan divide in Washington , a vision that is probably in tension with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay on the 50-yard line , splitting the difference between anti-government conservatism and progressive populism , and cutting bipartisan deals , ” David Dayen of the left-leaning The American Prospect wrote recently .
“ Or does he surge toward the end zone with ‘ Roosevelt ’ written on it , transforming the nation through ‘ bold , persistent experimentation ’ that fills in all the cracks the coronavirus exposed ?
” “ Joe Biden is running on the most progressive platform of any Democratic nominee in recent history .
But given the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Deal and Great Society traditions in the Democratic Party and go bigger , ” said Waleed Shahid , the communications director for Justice Democrats , a left-wing group aligned with Ocasio-Cortez and other very progressive Democrats .
All that said , it seems fairly likely that Biden , if he wins , will enter the Oval Office with Americans struggling through a recession and the public and his party clamoring for the federal government to do more to help those who are struggling .
In that scenario , we might look back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — by emphasizing his moderation — and marvel that he became the most liberal president in recent history .


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-20--What Would Happen If Congress Lets The States Go Broke?


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-22--Democrats And Republicans Are Increasingly Split On The Coronavirus Crisis

Welcome to Pollapalooza , our weekly polling roundup .
When it comes to the coronavirus pandemic , one of the storylines we ’ ve been following is the growing gap between how Democrats and Republicans view the crisis .
The most obvious divide until this point has been largely political : that is , how Democrats and Republicans view President Trump ’ s handling of the pandemic .
As FiveThirtyEight ’ s tracker on coronavirus polls shows , 82.2 percent of Republicans approve of the president ’ s response compared with just 12.5 percent of Democrats .
But since Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern times , it ’ s not exactly stunning that his approval rating on handling the crisis — 42.7 percent — is more or less identical to his overall job approval rating .
By comparison , attitudes toward state governors and their handling of the pandemic don ’ t seem especially partisan — at least at this point .
A new poll from SurveyMonkey found that every governor ’ s approval rating was higher than Trump ’ s — except for Georgia Gov .
Brian Kemp ’ s , whose rating was on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And 42 governors had an approval rating of 60 percent or higher regardless of their states ’ political lean .
This includes some Republican governors in blue states — such as Maryland Gov .
Larry Hogan and Massachusetts Gov .
Charlie Baker — and some Democratic governors in red states — like Montana Gov .
Steve Bullock and Kentucky Gov .
Andy Beshear .
Still , we are starting to see more pronounced splits between Democrats and Republicans on their attitudes toward the coronavirus crisis .
The Axios/Ipsos tracking poll found , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felt there was a moderate to large risk in attending in-person gatherings compared with 51 percent of Republicans , a 27-percentage-point gap that has doubled since mid-April .
As for when to end social distancing and reopen businesses , a new poll from The Economist/YouGov found that 34 percent of Republicans said it was already “ safe right now ” compared with only 6 percent of Democrats .
And when it comes to attending large political rallies , Republicans were nearly twice as likely as Democrats ( 38 percent to 22 percent ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attending one sometime in the next six months ( or sooner ) based on what they know about COVID-19 , according to a new poll from Morning Consult .
However , Americans overall continue to be very worried about the U.S. economy in the face of the health crisis : In FiveThirtyEight ’ s tracker , 87.3 percent said they were very or somewhat concerned — right in line with where the numbers have hovered since March .
As a result , there is still fairly strong support for government intervention to aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For Progress ’ s latest tracking poll found that 58 percent of Americans supported more government spending to fight the pandemic , even if this increased the national debt and deficit , compared with 42 percent who said the government had spent either enough or too much already .
There was a partisan split on this question , though , with 70 percent of Democrats supporting more government spending compared with 42 percent of Republicans .
Specific policy ideas such as giving grants to businesses , direct cash transfers to individuals , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent or more of Americans ( including majorities of Democrats and Republicans ) .
However , there is some evidence that Democrats and Republicans are split over how and when the economy should reopen .
A new HuffPost/YouGov survey found that 46 percent of Americans overall backed reopening some parts of the economy while maintaining partial restrictions on nonessential activities ; 30 percent preferred to keep all nonessential businesses and activities shut down or restricted .
About half of Democrats favored keeping nonessential businesses shut down and nonessential activities restricted , while only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contrast , Republicans were more likely to support reopening some parts of the economy : 57 percent of Republicans said they wanted reopening with some restrictions compared with 38 percent of Democrats .
And 22 percent of Republicans said there shouldn ’ t be any restrictions on reopening businesses or resuming activities versus just 3 percent of Democrats .
The HuffPost/YouGov survey also found that 47 percent of Americans felt that policies in their area were “ about right , ” while 24 percent felt there weren ’ t enough restrictions .
Only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too many restrictions .
But , again , there was a partisan split on this question : 37 percent of Republicans said there were too many restrictions compared with 7 percent of Democrats .
Still , similar shares of Republicans ( 52 percent ) and Democrats ( 49 percent ) thought local actions were on the mark .
There are also signs that the debate over privacy and public health could turn even more partisan .
For the moment , Americans seem willing to sacrifice some privacy to combat the novel coronavirus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ protecting people ’ s medical privacy and preventing the spread of COVID-19 , a new Gallup survey found that 61 percent of Americans would choose limiting the spread of the disease — even if doing so meant revealing people ’ s sensitive medical information .
But here , too , there were some partisan differences : 57 percent of Republicans prioritized protecting medical privacy compared with 42 of independents and just 23 percent of Democrats .
This could be an increasingly controversial topic in the coming weeks , though — tellingly , members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposed legislation aimed at protecting patient privacy and security .
• Morning Consult found that voters increasingly viewed Trump instead of former President Barack Obama as responsible for the state of the economy .
Overall , 63 percent of respondents said Trump was responsible for current economic conditions , while 16 percent said Obama was responsible .
This amounts to a small but notable change from August 2019 , when 55 percent said Trump and 27 percent said Obama .
Democrats appear to be driving this shift , too .
In 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was responsible for the then-strong economy , but in the latest survey , 70 percent said Trump was responsible .
• Gallup found that 31 percent of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing , the highest its approval rating has been since September 2009 and the second straight month it has risen .
The approval bump comes in the wake of four coronavirus-related bills that Congress has passed , including a $ 2.2 trillion aid package in March that nearly 8 in 10 Americans support .
• New polling from Morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felt China was mostly responsible for the current state of the pandemic because it originated there , while 38 percent felt the U.S. was mostly at fault because of its response to the virus .
But the responses broke by party line , representing another area of partisan disagreement over the coronavirus .
While 79 percent of Republicans blamed China , compared with 10 percent who blamed the U.S. , just 26 percent of Democrats blamed China , compared with 61 percent who blamed the U.S. • Left-leaning firm Civiqs offered some hopeful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The firm found former Vice President Joe Biden in a close race with Trump , leading 48 percent to 47 percent .
In the state ’ s regularly scheduled Senate race , the pollster also found Republican Sen. David Perdue only narrowly ahead — or slightly behind — the three main Democratic contenders .
Meanwhile , in the special election Senate race , the pollster found appointed Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler well behind the principal Democratic contenders in a hypothetical runoff , while GOP Rep. Doug Collins ran neck and neck with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their nominee for the state ’ s U.S. Senate race in a July 14 primary runoff , and a new survey from GOP pollster Cygnal found former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville up 55 percent to 32 percent over former Attorney General Jeff Sessions .
Sessions held this Senate seat before joining Trump ’ s cabinet in 2017 .
• The winner of Utah ’ s GOP gubernatorial primary on June 30 will likely become the state ’ s next governor , and a new poll of the Republican contest from UtahPolicy.com/KUTV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cox ahead 39 percent to 32 percent over former Gov .
Jon Huntsman .
Former state House Speaker Greg Hughes received 23 percent , while former Utah Republican Party chairman Thomas Wright had 6 percent .
According to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval tracker , 42.8 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president , while 53.5 percent disapprove ( a net approval rating of -10.7 points ) .
At this time last week , 43.6 percent approved and 52.0 percent disapproved ( for a net approval rating of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump had an approval rating of 43.7 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.1 percent , for a net approval rating of -8.4 points .
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot , Democrats currently lead by 7.9 percentage points ( 48.2 percent to 40.3 percent ) .
A week ago , Democrats led Republicans by 7.7 points ( 48.9 percent to 41.2 percent ) .
At this time last month , voters preferred Democrats by 8.0 points ( 48.4 percent to 40.4 percent ) .

Welcome to Pollapalooza, our weekly polling roundup.
Poll(s) of the week
When it comes to the coronavirus pandemic, one of the storylines we’ve been following is the growing gap between how Democrats and Republicans view the crisis.
The most obvious divide until this point has been largely political: that is, how Democrats and Republicans view President Trump’s handling of the pandemic. As FiveThirtyEight’s tracker on coronavirus polls shows, 82.2 percent of Republicans approve of the president’s response compared with just 12.5 percent of Democrats. But since Trump is arguably the most polarizing president in modern times, it’s not exactly stunning that his approval rating on handling the crisis — 42.7 percent — is more or less identical to his overall job approval rating.
By comparison, attitudes toward state governors and their handling of the pandemic don’t seem especially partisan — at least at this point. A new poll from SurveyMonkey found that every governor’s approval rating was higher than Trump’s — except for Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp’s, whose rating was on par with the president’s. And 42 governors had an approval rating of 60 percent or higher regardless of their states’ political lean. This includes some Republican governors in blue states — such as Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker — and some Democratic governors in red states — like Montana Gov. Steve Bullock and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear.
Still, we are starting to see more pronounced splits between Democrats and Republicans on their attitudes toward the coronavirus crisis. The Axios/Ipsos tracking poll found, for instance, that 78 percent of Democrats felt there was a moderate to large risk in attending in-person gatherings compared with 51 percent of Republicans, a 27-percentage-point gap that has doubled since mid-April. As for when to end social distancing and reopen businesses, a new poll from The Economist/YouGov found that 34 percent of Republicans said it was already “safe right now” compared with only 6 percent of Democrats. And when it comes to attending large political rallies, Republicans were nearly twice as likely as Democrats (38 percent to 22 percent) to say they’d be comfortable attending one sometime in the next six months (or sooner) based on what they know about COVID-19, according to a new poll from Morning Consult.
However, Americans overall continue to be very worried about the U.S. economy in the face of the health crisis: In FiveThirtyEight’s tracker, 87.3 percent said they were very or somewhat concerned — right in line with where the numbers have hovered since March.
As a result, there is still fairly strong support for government intervention to aid different parts of the economy. Data For Progress’s latest tracking poll found that 58 percent of Americans supported more government spending to fight the pandemic, even if this increased the national debt and deficit, compared with 42 percent who said the government had spent either enough or too much already. There was a partisan split on this question, though, with 70 percent of Democrats supporting more government spending compared with 42 percent of Republicans. Specific policy ideas such as giving grants to businesses, direct cash transfers to individuals, and universal paid leave were supported by 60 percent or more of Americans (including majorities of Democrats and Republicans).
However, there is some evidence that Democrats and Republicans are split over how and when the economy should reopen. A new HuffPost/YouGov survey found that 46 percent of Americans overall backed reopening some parts of the economy while maintaining partial restrictions on nonessential activities; 30 percent preferred to keep all nonessential businesses and activities shut down or restricted. About half of Democrats favored keeping nonessential businesses shut down and nonessential activities restricted, while only 16 percent of Republicans agreed. By contrast, Republicans were more likely to support reopening some parts of the economy: 57 percent of Republicans said they wanted reopening with some restrictions compared with 38 percent of Democrats. And 22 percent of Republicans said there shouldn’t be any restrictions on reopening businesses or resuming activities versus just 3 percent of Democrats.
The HuffPost/YouGov survey also found that 47 percent of Americans felt that policies in their area were “about right,” while 24 percent felt there weren’t enough restrictions. Only 21 percent felt that their area had too many restrictions. But, again, there was a partisan split on this question: 37 percent of Republicans said there were too many restrictions compared with 7 percent of Democrats. Still, similar shares of Republicans (52 percent) and Democrats (49 percent) thought local actions were on the mark.
There are also signs that the debate over privacy and public health could turn even more partisan. For the moment, Americans seem willing to sacrifice some privacy to combat the novel coronavirus. When they are forced to choose between protecting people’s medical privacy and preventing the spread of COVID-19, a new Gallup survey found that 61 percent of Americans would choose limiting the spread of the disease — even if doing so meant revealing people’s sensitive medical information. But here, too, there were some partisan differences: 57 percent of Republicans prioritized protecting medical privacy compared with 42 of independents and just 23 percent of Democrats. This could be an increasingly controversial topic in the coming weeks, though — tellingly, members of Congress from both parties have already proposed legislation aimed at protecting patient privacy and security.
Other polling bites
Morning Consult found that voters increasingly viewed Trump instead of former President Barack Obama as responsible for the state of the economy. Overall, 63 percent of respondents said Trump was responsible for current economic conditions, while 16 percent said Obama was responsible. This amounts to a small but notable change from August 2019, when 55 percent said Trump and 27 percent said Obama. Democrats appear to be driving this shift, too. In 2019, just 49 percent of Democrats said Trump was responsible for the then-strong economy, but in the latest survey, 70 percent said Trump was responsible.
Gallup found that 31 percent of Americans approved of the job Congress was doing, the highest its approval rating has been since September 2009 and the second straight month it has risen. The approval bump comes in the wake of four coronavirus-related bills that Congress has passed, including a $2.2 trillion aid package in March that nearly 8 in 10 Americans support.
its approval rating has been since September 2009 and the second straight month it has risen. The approval bump comes in the wake of four coronavirus-related bills that Congress has passed, including a $2.2 trillion aid package in March that nearly 8 in 10 Americans support. New polling from Morning Consult found that 48 percent of Americans felt China was mostly responsible for the current state of the pandemic because it originated there, while 38 percent felt the U.S. was mostly at fault because of its response to the virus. But the responses broke by party line, representing another area of partisan disagreement over the coronavirus. While 79 percent of Republicans blamed China, compared with 10 percent who blamed the U.S., just 26 percent of Democrats blamed China, compared with 61 percent who blamed the U.S.
Left-leaning firm Civiqs offered some hopeful electoral news for Democrats in Georgia. The firm found former Vice President Joe Biden in a close race with Trump, leading 48 percent to 47 percent. In the state’s regularly scheduled Senate race, the pollster also found Republican Sen. David Perdue only narrowly ahead — or slightly behind — the three main Democratic contenders. Meanwhile, in the special election Senate race, the pollster found appointed Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler well behind the principal Democratic contenders in a hypothetical runoff, while GOP Rep. Doug Collins ran neck and neck with the Democrats.
Alabama Republicans will choose their nominee for the state’s U.S. Senate race in a July 14 primary runoff, and a new survey from GOP pollster Cygnal found former Auburn University football coach Tommy Tuberville up 55 percent to 32 percent over former Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Sessions held this Senate seat before joining Trump’s cabinet in 2017.
The winner of Utah’s GOP gubernatorial primary on June 30 will likely become the state’s next governor, and a new poll of the Republican contest from UtahPolicy.com/KUTV 2 News found Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox ahead 39 percent to 32 percent over former Gov. Jon Huntsman. Former state House Speaker Greg Hughes received 23 percent, while former Utah Republican Party chairman Thomas Wright had 6 percent.
Trump approval
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker, 42.8 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 53.5 percent disapprove (a net approval rating of -10.7 points). At this time last week, 43.6 percent approved and 52.0 percent disapproved (for a net approval rating of -8.4 points). One month ago, Trump had an approval rating of 43.7 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.1 percent, for a net approval rating of -8.4 points.
Generic ballot
In our average of polls of the generic congressional ballot, Democrats currently lead by 7.9 percentage points (48.2 percent to 40.3 percent). A week ago, Democrats led Republicans by 7.7 points (48.9 percent to 41.2 percent). At this time last month, voters preferred Democrats by 8.0 points (48.4 percent to 40.4 percent).


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-22--There’s Been A World Of Differences In Responding To COVID-19

On this week ’ s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Galen Druke speaks with two experts about the different reactions to @ @ @ @ @ and in China .

There’s Been A World Of Differences In Responding To COVID-19
On this week’s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Galen Druke speaks with two experts about the different reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe and in China.


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-22--The Gap Between Democrats And Republicans Is Growing On The Coronavirus Crisis


fivethirtyeight--2020-05-25--Do You Buy That … Biden Should Pick A Running Mate From A Swing State?

Do You Buy That … Biden Should Pick A Running Mate From A Swing State ?
Filed under Do You @ @