fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--The Heat Took A Page From The Lakers’ Playbook

In Game 3 of the 2020 NBA Finals , with the Miami Heat down 0-2 and their championship hopes crumbling , Jimmy Butler turned in the most impressive performance of his career : a 40-point , 11-rebound , 13-assist triple-double in which he made 70 percent of his shots and defended LeBron James on more plays than any other player guarded anybody else .
It yielded the highest individual game score in Heat Finals history and the second highest overall in any Finals game ever .
This was history .
But in order to pull off the impossible , Butler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific way : hunting certain matchups .
For the duration of a back-and-forth fourth quarter , the five-time All-Star ventured outside Miami ’ s egalitarian offense to exploit favorable matchups that he could sink his teeth into .
Doing this often meant a teammate would give him a ball screen .
In the series ’ first two games , Butler had a player set a ball screen for him six times in the fourth quarter .
In the fourth quarter of Game 3 , it was nearly every play .
With LeBron as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heat set screen after screen and forced switch after switch until their best player was face-to-face with a defender he could annihilate .
Whether it was Kyle Kuzma , Markieff Morris , Rajon Rondo or Kentavious Caldwell-Pope , Butler tortured his new defender in several big spots , as LeBron called out the switch instead of fighting through screens and sticking with the original assignment .
According to Second Spectrum , Butler generated 1.44 points per possession when LeBron obliged to switch off of him .
Butler hulked up in the post and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a series of back-breaking fouls to complement the midrange pull-ups that pierced L.A. ’ s previously rock-solid defense .
He also unleashed a flurry of pinpoint passes to teammates who benefited from their own mismatch or the attention Butler drew .
If anyone asks , “ How did Jimmy take over the game without attempting a single three ?
” plays like this are the answer : The performance was iconic , doubly so thanks to the ironic subtext : Butler out LeBroned LeBron by using a tactic no player embraces more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , James has had a guard set a screen for him 182 times ( or 14.1 picks per 100 possessions ) .
Kemba Walker and Kawhi Leonard rank second and third in this category , and they have a combined 147 screens between them .
( Butler is fourth , with 69 . )
It ’ s a simple yet brilliant offensive maneuver that lends credence to LeBron ’ s status as the NBA ’ s resident chess master .
When a Laker guard sets a screen for LeBron , opposing teams are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s threat as a scorer vs. a facilitator .
We saw the strategy on repeat in Game 1 , when James lured Tyler Herro , Duncan Robinson and Goran Dragić into situations they simply weren ’ t used to dealing with .
The Heat struggled with a blend of switches and soft hedges that let James feast in ways he could not have if Butler , Andre Iguodala or Bam Adebayo were on him instead .
According to Second Spectrum , James received 29 ball screens in Game 1 , and 18 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To put this number in context , Giannis Antetokounmpo received eight ball screens from a guard during Milwaukee ’ s entire second-round series against Miami .
Boston ’ s Jayson Tatum did it 26 times , or 5.1 picks per 100 possessions , against the Heat in the Eastern Conference finals .
In Game 1 of the NBA Finals , LeBron logged 24.7 picks per 100 possessions with a guard , and through three games in the Finals , he sits at 21 — about seven more picks per 100 possessions than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the previous two rounds .
James has produced 1.33 points per possession during these playoffs whenever he is screened by a guard , and on the 41 plays when defenders hedged or showed to avoid an outright switch , the Lakers have scored a whopping 1.6 points per possession .
That number leaps up to 1.7 points per possession against Miami , which is catastrophic .
But the defensive strategy isn ’ t without merit because when executed properly ( much easier said than done ! )
, it stifles any north-south progress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James as the shot clock winds down .
In watching film , I found instances when the Heat have actually done a decent job jumping out at LeBron before recovering back to their own assignment .
Even then , though , they ’ ve still been vulnerable to the type of fire alarm chaos that takes over when an offense gets lucky on a broken play .
More often than not , James has been able to turn the corner on Robinson or Herro and get downhill with zero bodies in his path @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even split the defense and leave it in tatters .
And watch what happens on the back line here between Kelly Olynyk and a frantic Robinson , who isn ’ t sure exactly where he ’ s supposed to go after Butler yells at him to abandon the switch .
If they want to force a Game 6 , Miami needs to do a much better job executing this scheme .
At the same time , James computes everything in front of his eyes faster than any defense can react .
He poses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opening into a canyon of opportunity , which can make even the most disciplined defensive response end in disappointment .
Here ’ s Robinson scurrying back to Danny Green and running him off the 3-point line , which is generally the right idea .
But the margin for error is so slim .
Jae Crowder ’ s overhelp on the drive cracks open a look for Anthony Davis at the top of the key .
So why even put yourself in a rotation to begin with ?
When a smaller player switches onto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paint behind him and ostensibly construct a road block for the inevitable Mack truck drive towards the rim .
No player in NBA history has created more stress in those situations ; even if help is there early , it opens up shooters on the perimeter for wide-open looks .
And if the help isn ’ t there , well , see below : when Robinson simply switches onto LeBron , he becomes a sneaker in an empty dryer .
In Game 2 , Miami slowed this strategy down by going zone on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they had in any one game during this playoff run .
But in Game 3 , as Erik Spoelstra shifted back to man-to-man ( they were only in a zone on seven possessions ) , LeBron embraced the approach even more , using a guard to screen for him 22 times — his highest postseason count since at least 2014 that wasn ’ t against the Golden State Warriors .
By and large it was successful , bearing 1.53 points per possession .
Here ’ s another example of him drawing Robinson to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screen because he knows the Heat won ’ t switch , forcing Olynyk to take one step into the paint before firing a laser to Morris in the corner .
Again , this isn ’ t new .
It was immortalized as a punishing tactic during James ’ s triumphant 2016 Finals victory against Steph Curry and the Warriors .
If you ’ re LeBron , hunting the weak makes sense .
But in this series , he ’ s accepted a screen from a guard so often that he ’ s nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and he ’ s never seen it manufacture better offense in the playoffs .
This strategy for LeBron and the Lakers isn ’ t necessarily a last resort — as it was for Butler and Miami — but it might be more valuable as something to ease into over the course of a game , rather than using that scheme right from the jump .
The action is choppy and disruptive , not just to the opposing defense but also to L.A. ’ s own offensive flow .
To put it differently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the jab and don ’ t start their fights throwing haymakers .
One negative side effect of guards screening for LeBron in Game 3 was that the action removed Davis , who took one shot in the entire fourth quarter , from the offense .
Miami ’ s ability to switch the LeBron-Davis pick-and-roll has all but neutralized its threat — which is partially why Iguodala , Crowder and Solomon Hill have spent time on Davis so far .
As guards scamper up to set a screen for LeBron , Davis has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stool .
In general , most teams and players don ’ t reach for this scalpel so soon and so often , knowing it takes a half-court offense out of its normal rhythm and might result in a series of isolation chances that stagnates everybody else .
It also gives the opponent an idea of how to defend it later on in more important moments .
But LeBron is special .
His uniquely broad aptitude allows him not only to overpower smaller defenders who switch , but also to prey on an opponent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncomfortable rotation .
It ’ s a not-so-secret weapon that keeps coaches up at night and dictates who can or can ’ t stay on the floor .
Now , with Butler , James is seeing the same strategy used against his own team .
Switching is exactly what both offenses want .
If Butler looks to get himself going in the same way during Game 4 , expect the Lakers to show and recover just like the Heat have against LeBron .
Though again , that strategy is much easier said than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t much of a threat to pull up from three , he ’ s tenacious and swift enough to time his drives for extensive damage in the paint .
Either way , as the Finals move forward , Butler ’ s willingness and ability to embrace the exact same strategy that makes LeBron unstoppable could close the gap between these two remarkable teams .

In Game 3 of the 2020 NBA Finals, with the Miami Heat down 0-2 and their championship hopes crumbling, Jimmy Butler turned in the most impressive performance of his career: a 40-point, 11-rebound, 13-assist triple-double in which he made 70 percent of his shots and defended LeBron James on more plays than any other player guarded anybody else. It yielded the highest individual game score in Heat Finals history and the second highest overall in any Finals game ever. This was history.
But in order to pull off the impossible, Butler had to impersonate LeBron in one very specific way: hunting certain matchups. For the duration of a back-and-forth fourth quarter, the five-time All-Star ventured outside Miami’s egalitarian offense to exploit favorable matchups that he could sink his teeth into. Doing this often meant a teammate would give him a ball screen. In the series’ first two games, Butler had a player set a ball screen for him six times in the fourth quarter. In the fourth quarter of Game 3, it was nearly every play.
With LeBron as Butler’s primary defender, the Heat set screen after screen and forced switch after switch until their best player was face-to-face with a defender he could annihilate. Whether it was Kyle Kuzma, Markieff Morris, Rajon Rondo or Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Butler tortured his new defender in several big spots, as LeBron called out the switch instead of fighting through screens and sticking with the original assignment.
According to Second Spectrum, Butler generated 1.44 points per possession when LeBron obliged to switch off of him. Butler hulked up in the post and on drives to the basket, drawing a series of back-breaking fouls to complement the midrange pull-ups that pierced L.A.’s previously rock-solid defense. He also unleashed a flurry of pinpoint passes to teammates who benefited from their own mismatch or the attention Butler drew. If anyone asks, “How did Jimmy take over the game without attempting a single three?” plays like this are the answer:
The performance was iconic, doubly so thanks to the ironic subtext: Butler out LeBroned LeBron by using a tactic no player embraces more than the 35-year-old. Across these entire playoffs, James has had a guard set a screen for him 182 times (or 14.1 picks per 100 possessions). Kemba Walker and Kawhi Leonard rank second and third in this category, and they have a combined 147 screens between them. (Butler is fourth, with 69.)
It’s a simple yet brilliant offensive maneuver that lends credence to LeBron’s status as the NBA’s resident chess master. When a Laker guard sets a screen for LeBron, opposing teams are forced to pick their poison: James’s threat as a scorer vs. a facilitator. We saw the strategy on repeat in Game 1, when James lured Tyler Herro, Duncan Robinson and Goran Dragić into situations they simply weren’t used to dealing with. The Heat struggled with a blend of switches and soft hedges that let James feast in ways he could not have if Butler, Andre Iguodala or Bam Adebayo were on him instead.
According to Second Spectrum, James received 29 ball screens in Game 1, and 18 of them were set by a guard. To put this number in context, Giannis Antetokounmpo received eight ball screens from a guard during Milwaukee’s entire second-round series against Miami. Boston’s Jayson Tatum did it 26 times, or 5.1 picks per 100 possessions, against the Heat in the Eastern Conference finals. In Game 1 of the NBA Finals, LeBron logged 24.7 picks per 100 possessions with a guard, and through three games in the Finals, he sits at 21 — about seven more picks per 100 possessions than we saw from him in each of the previous two rounds.
James has produced 1.33 points per possession during these playoffs whenever he is screened by a guard, and on the 41 plays when defenders hedged or showed to avoid an outright switch, the Lakers have scored a whopping 1.6 points per possession. That number leaps up to 1.7 points per possession against Miami, which is catastrophic. But the defensive strategy isn’t without merit because when executed properly (much easier said than done!), it stifles any north-south progress for the ballhandler while keeping Butler on James as the shot clock winds down. In watching film, I found instances when the Heat have actually done a decent job jumping out at LeBron before recovering back to their own assignment. Even then, though, they’ve still been vulnerable to the type of fire alarm chaos that takes over when an offense gets lucky on a broken play.
More often than not, James has been able to turn the corner on Robinson or Herro and get downhill with zero bodies in his path, time his own pull-up three or even split the defense and leave it in tatters.
And watch what happens on the back line here between Kelly Olynyk and a frantic Robinson, who isn’t sure exactly where he’s supposed to go after Butler yells at him to abandon the switch.
If they want to force a Game 6, Miami needs to do a much better job executing this scheme. At the same time, James computes everything in front of his eyes faster than any defense can react. He poses the constant threat of turning the narrowest opening into a canyon of opportunity, which can make even the most disciplined defensive response end in disappointment.
Here’s Robinson scurrying back to Danny Green and running him off the 3-point line, which is generally the right idea. But the margin for error is so slim. Jae Crowder’s overhelp on the drive cracks open a look for Anthony Davis at the top of the key.
So why even put yourself in a rotation to begin with? When a smaller player switches onto LeBron, help defenders dramatically pack the paint behind him and ostensibly construct a road block for the inevitable Mack truck drive towards the rim. No player in NBA history has created more stress in those situations; even if help is there early, it opens up shooters on the perimeter for wide-open looks. And if the help isn’t there, well, see below: when Robinson simply switches onto LeBron, he becomes a sneaker in an empty dryer.
In Game 2, Miami slowed this strategy down by going zone on 67 possessions — 15 more possessions than they had in any one game during this playoff run. But in Game 3, as Erik Spoelstra shifted back to man-to-man (they were only in a zone on seven possessions), LeBron embraced the approach even more, using a guard to screen for him 22 times — his highest postseason count since at least 2014 that wasn’t against the Golden State Warriors. By and large it was successful, bearing 1.53 points per possession. Here’s another example of him drawing Robinson to the point of attack, splitting the screen because he knows the Heat won’t switch, forcing Olynyk to take one step into the paint before firing a laser to Morris in the corner.
Again, this isn’t new. It was immortalized as a punishing tactic during James’s triumphant 2016 Finals victory against Steph Curry and the Warriors. If you’re LeBron, hunting the weak makes sense. But in this series, he’s accepted a screen from a guard so often that he’s nearly pushed the volume to a playoff-career-high rate, and he’s never seen it manufacture better offense in the playoffs.
This strategy for LeBron and the Lakers isn’t necessarily a last resort — as it was for Butler and Miami — but it might be more valuable as something to ease into over the course of a game, rather than using that scheme right from the jump. The action is choppy and disruptive, not just to the opposing defense but also to L.A.’s own offensive flow. To put it differently, it’s why boxers lead with the jab and don’t start their fights throwing haymakers.
One negative side effect of guards screening for LeBron in Game 3 was that the action removed Davis, who took one shot in the entire fourth quarter, from the offense. Miami’s ability to switch the LeBron-Davis pick-and-roll has all but neutralized its threat — which is partially why Iguodala, Crowder and Solomon Hill have spent time on Davis so far. As guards scamper up to set a screen for LeBron, Davis has all-too-often transformed into a very tall bar stool.
In general, most teams and players don’t reach for this scalpel so soon and so often, knowing it takes a half-court offense out of its normal rhythm and might result in a series of isolation chances that stagnates everybody else. It also gives the opponent an idea of how to defend it later on in more important moments. But LeBron is special. His uniquely broad aptitude allows him not only to overpower smaller defenders who switch, but also to prey on an opponent who’s been pressed into an uncomfortable rotation. It’s a not-so-secret weapon that keeps coaches up at night and dictates who can or can’t stay on the floor. Now, with Butler, James is seeing the same strategy used against his own team.
Switching is exactly what both offenses want. If Butler looks to get himself going in the same way during Game 4, expect the Lakers to show and recover just like the Heat have against LeBron. Though again, that strategy is much easier said than done — even if Butler isn’t much of a threat to pull up from three, he’s tenacious and swift enough to time his drives for extensive damage in the paint.
Either way, as the Finals move forward, Butler’s willingness and ability to embrace the exact same strategy that makes LeBron unstoppable could close the gap between these two remarkable teams.
Check out our latest NBA predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--The Seattle Storm’s Dynamic Duo Is On The Brink Of Another Title

In the 2018 WNBA season , the Seattle Storm romped to a championship thanks to a stacked roster .
But at the center of the team ’ s dominance was a pair of future Hall of Famers : the veteran point guard , Sue Bird , and the do-everything forward , Breanna Stewart .
The Storm were , by net rating , 15.7 points better than their opponents that regular season with Bird and Stewart together on the floor .
In the 2018 playoffs , against improved competition ?
Still 11.1 points better .
So it is more than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been completely overshadowed by … the 2020 performance of Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart .
In the 2020 regular season , Bird and Stewart were 27.2 points better than their opponents , the best mark among any duo with at least 200 minutes played .
And in the playoffs , they ’ ve posted a net rating of 20.7 , best among any pair with at least 100 minutes in the postseason .
“ I think our games complement each other , ” Bird said Monday , a day ahead of Game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a chance to sweep the Las Vegas Aces tonight and win its second WNBA title in three years .
“ And usually , the more you play with somebody , the more comfortable you get .
I do think a big part of it is just the level that Stewie is playing at .
I kind of am who I am — don ’ t get me wrong , I do what I do — but Stewie , right now , is playing at a very high level.
” Perhaps it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Stewart — after all , Bird set a single-game WNBA Finals assist record in Game 1 against the Aces , while eclipsing her own all-time mark for a single game in the process , with 16 dimes .
Nine of those 16 assists went to Stewart .
And Stewart has elevated her game in this series , including a 37-point , 15-rebound output in Game 1 , becoming the first player in WNBA Finals history to post a 35-and-15 game .
Even so , this ability to find each other isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 of Seattle ’ s semifinal win over the Minnesota Lynx , Stewart delivered seven assists of her own .
Five of them came on Sue Bird baskets .
Stewart , who matter-of-factly declared that she wanted to win four championships in college , then did so , never shies away from acknowledging her own level of play .
“ To be honest , I don ’ t think the numbers are shocking , ” Stewart said of the net ratings she and Bird have posted .
“ Between Sue and I , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is something that we work for .
[ Since ] I came into the league , [ we ’ ve been ] continuing to learn how to read defenses , from both my position and her position.
” The touchless artistry is something to be seen in the highlights just as clearly as the dominating numbers .
Take this moment from Game 1 in the Finals .
Vegas defends as well as anyone other than Seattle , so Bird ’ s delivery needs to be precise to keep the Aces from blowing up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looks when Gary Kloppenburg draws it up : Or take this delivery from Bird to Stewart , when the pair are on the break .
Are 39-year-old point guards supposed to be doing this ?
“ It ’ s really remarkable they have that chemistry that they have , ” Kloppenburg said .
“ Sue just knows where [ Stewart ’ s ] gon na be on the screen and rolls and all the different things that we do .
It just seems like they have such a synergy.
” All this comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rust from a 2019 season spent away from the game , after Stewart tore her Achilles and Bird injured her knee .
But to hear Stewart tell it , that actually served as added motivation — and contributed to the pair ’ s success .
“ When I got injured in 2019 , one of the things that I was most devastated about was not being able to have an opportunity to play with Sue that year , ” Stewart said .
“ Because I didn ’ t know how many more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that was just a year that was gone .
So to be able to have the opportunity to continue to be on the floor with her , we ’ re just taking advantage and enjoying playing with each other.
” The way they each frame the partnership is far beyond this year alone .
The two have played alongside each other since 2016 , after Seattle made Stewart their No .
1 overall pick in that year ’ s draft .
They both played in the same collegiate system at Connecticut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Still , when Stewart found out she was going to Seattle — in 2015 , really , the day the Storm won the draft lottery , since no one doubted the top pick in 2016 would be Stewart — her first reaction was about her future teammate .
“ That ’ s what I thought about , ” Stewart said .
“ I ’ m going to go play with the best point guard in the world.
” That partnership helped convince Bird to stay in Seattle , and it keeps her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have noticed that this comes not amid diminishing returns but with reaching new ceilings together .
“ Breanna is doing even more on the defensive end of the floor , ” Storm forward Natasha Howard said of what ’ s different in 2020 .
The numbers bear that out , too — Stewart posted more defensive win shares per game this season than she did during the 2018 campaign .
“ And she ’ s not settling on the offensive end .
She ’ s being mad aggressive.
” There ’ s at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seattle ’ s season , but if the Storm win the title , the duo will have posted the best net rating in the playoffs , minimum 100 minutes , of any championship team since Diana Taurasi and Brittney Griner destroyed opponents through the 2014 WNBA playoffs .
Kloppenburg , who has coached so many and observed many more of the best players in his long career , described the Bird-Stewart pair as “ single-minded in their rehab , ” and he struggled to come up with two teammates who have been better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarkable tandem , ” Kloppenburg said .
“ I really can ’ t think of too many like that , men or women throughout the years , that have that kind of synergy and ability to dominate .
”

The Seattle Storm’s Dynamic Duo Is On The Brink Of Another Title The combined performance of Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart is outshining that from their last championship, in 2018.
In the 2018 WNBA season, the Seattle Storm romped to a championship thanks to a stacked roster. But at the center of the team’s dominance was a pair of future Hall of Famers: the veteran point guard, Sue Bird, and the do-everything forward, Breanna Stewart.
The Storm were, by net rating, 15.7 points better than their opponents that regular season with Bird and Stewart together on the floor. In the 2018 playoffs, against improved competition? Still 11.1 points better.
So it is more than a little shocking that the 2018 Bird-Stewart duo has been completely overshadowed by … the 2020 performance of Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart.
In the 2020 regular season, Bird and Stewart were 27.2 points better than their opponents, the best mark among any duo with at least 200 minutes played. And in the playoffs, they’ve posted a net rating of 20.7, best among any pair with at least 100 minutes in the postseason.
“I think our games complement each other,” Bird said Monday, a day ahead of Game 3 of the WNBA Finals. Seattle has a chance to sweep the Las Vegas Aces tonight and win its second WNBA title in three years. “And usually, the more you play with somebody, the more comfortable you get. I do think a big part of it is just the level that Stewie is playing at. I kind of am who I am — don’t get me wrong, I do what I do — but Stewie, right now, is playing at a very high level.”
Perhaps it’s natural for Bird to pass credit to Stewart — after all, Bird set a single-game WNBA Finals assist record in Game 1 against the Aces, while eclipsing her own all-time mark for a single game in the process, with 16 dimes. Nine of those 16 assists went to Stewart. And Stewart has elevated her game in this series, including a 37-point, 15-rebound output in Game 1, becoming the first player in WNBA Finals history to post a 35-and-15 game.
Even so, this ability to find each other isn’t a one-way street. In Game 3 of Seattle’s semifinal win over the Minnesota Lynx, Stewart delivered seven assists of her own. Five of them came on Sue Bird baskets.
Stewart, who matter-of-factly declared that she wanted to win four championships in college, then did so, never shies away from acknowledging her own level of play.
“To be honest, I don’t think the numbers are shocking,” Stewart said of the net ratings she and Bird have posted. “Between Sue and I, what we do together on the court is something that we work for. [Since] I came into the league, [we’ve been] continuing to learn how to read defenses, from both my position and her position.”
The touchless artistry is something to be seen in the highlights just as clearly as the dominating numbers. Take this moment from Game 1 in the Finals. Vegas defends as well as anyone other than Seattle, so Bird’s delivery needs to be precise to keep the Aces from blowing up the play. This is how it looks when Gary Kloppenburg draws it up:
Or take this delivery from Bird to Stewart, when the pair are on the break. Are 39-year-old point guards supposed to be doing this?
Well, Sue Bird does.
“It’s really remarkable they have that chemistry that they have,” Kloppenburg said. “Sue just knows where [Stewart’s] gonna be on the screen and rolls and all the different things that we do. It just seems like they have such a synergy.”
All this comes despite both players needing to cast off the rust from a 2019 season spent away from the game, after Stewart tore her Achilles and Bird injured her knee. But to hear Stewart tell it, that actually served as added motivation — and contributed to the pair’s success.
“When I got injured in 2019, one of the things that I was most devastated about was not being able to have an opportunity to play with Sue that year,” Stewart said. “Because I didn’t know how many more years she was going to be playing, and that was just a year that was gone. So to be able to have the opportunity to continue to be on the floor with her, we’re just taking advantage and enjoying playing with each other.”
The way they each frame the partnership is far beyond this year alone. The two have played alongside each other since 2016, after Seattle made Stewart their No. 1 overall pick in that year’s draft. They both played in the same collegiate system at Connecticut, though more than a decade apart. Still, when Stewart found out she was going to Seattle — in 2015, really, the day the Storm won the draft lottery, since no one doubted the top pick in 2016 would be Stewart — her first reaction was about her future teammate.
“That’s what I thought about,” Stewart said. “I’m going to go play with the best point guard in the world.”
That partnership helped convince Bird to stay in Seattle, and it keeps her wanting to play. Even their teammates have noticed that this comes not amid diminishing returns but with reaching new ceilings together.
“Breanna is doing even more on the defensive end of the floor,” Storm forward Natasha Howard said of what’s different in 2020. The numbers bear that out, too — Stewart posted more defensive win shares per game this season than she did during the 2018 campaign. “And she’s not settling on the offensive end. She’s being mad aggressive.”
There’s at least one more game to go in Seattle’s season, but if the Storm win the title, the duo will have posted the best net rating in the playoffs, minimum 100 minutes, of any championship team since Diana Taurasi and Brittney Griner destroyed opponents through the 2014 WNBA playoffs.
Kloppenburg, who has coached so many and observed many more of the best players in his long career, described the Bird-Stewart pair as “single-minded in their rehab,” and he struggled to come up with two teammates who have been better.
“I think they are a remarkable tandem,” Kloppenburg said. “I really can’t think of too many like that, men or women throughout the years, that have that kind of synergy and ability to dominate.”


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--This Rotation Isn’t ‘Vintage Braves,’ But Atlanta Is Making It Work

It may have been in Major League Baseball ’ s new best-of-three wild-card round , but the Atlanta Braves ’ series victory over the Cincinnati Reds last week was a long time coming .
Going into these playoffs , Atlanta hadn ’ t won a postseason series since defeating the Houston Astros in the 2001 National League Division Series .
The 19 intervening years saw Atlanta transition away from its division-streak era — led by three aces and plenty of other icons — through a period of three brief postseason bids with Jason Heyward and Brian McCann leading the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this current club : Ronald Acuña Jr. , Freddie Freeman and Ozzie Albies .
Now that it has ended its series-win drought , Atlanta is hoping to march even deeper into the postseason .
And our prediction model gives the Braves the second-best chance to make the World Series of any NL team … trailing only the juggernaut Los Angeles Dodgers .
( Small detail ! )
If they do it , Atlanta will have to lean on one of the most untested rotations ever , but one that proved to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lineup and bullpen that are sure to provide plenty of help , too .
The Braves ’ biggest Achilles ’ heel all season has been starting pitching .
Although lefty Max Fried had an excellent season , putting up 2.2 wins above replacement ( the equivalent of 6.0 in a 162-game season ) with a 7-0 record and a 2.25 earned-run average , the rotation as a whole was hampered by injuries and other problems .
With Mike Soroka and Cole Hamels sidelined for nearly the entire season — and 2019 starter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for poor performance early on — Braves starters collectively produced just 4.2 total WAR this season , which ranked 27th in baseball .
Heading into the division series against the Miami Marlins , Atlanta finds itself staring at a cobbled-together rotation consisting of Fried , a pair of rookies — Ian Anderson and Kyle Wright — and an as-yet-unknown fourth option , if necessary .
Greg Maddux , Tom Glavine and John Smoltz , this isn ’ t .
( Not yet , at least . )
In fact , Atlanta is rolling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accomplished rotation in modern postseason history .
Among Fried ( 5.8 ) , Anderson ( 1.2 ) and Wright ( -0.4 ) , Atlanta ’ s presumptive top three have produced 6.6 total regular-season WAR in their careers going into the playoffs .
Among teams that used at least three starters in any postseason since MLB ’ s playoffs first expanded in 1969 , no other rotation boasted a top three with fewer lifetime WAR going into the playoffs : That ’ s a little unfair to the Braves ’ trio because their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a full schedule in 2020 .
But even if we prorate the 2020 WAR of Fried , Anderson and Wright up to 162 team games , they would come in with a total of just 12.6 — which would rank them third on the list above .
Either way , it underscores just how little established starting pitching Atlanta can count on as it tries to mount a deep postseason run .
Not that it was apparent against Cincinnati .
Fried and Anderson combined to strike out 14 Reds batters ( walking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wild-card round , part of a dominating performance that saw Braves hurlers allow zero total runs in 22 innings .
( Game 1 was a 13-inning marathon that Atlanta eventually won , 1-0 , on a Freeman walk-off single . )
Though Cincinnati wasn ’ t an elite hitting team during the regular season , finishing 23rd in weighted runs created plus ( wRC+ ) , it was still impressive to see the Braves ’ patchwork staff limit Joey Votto , Jesse Winker and company to a .169 average and a .411 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series .
For longtime Braves observers , it might have even brought back memories of Atlanta dismantling Cincinnati ’ s lineup en route to the 1995 World Series .
Braves manager Brian Snitker is hoping his young starters can replicate that effort against a Marlins offense that rated as subpar ( 18th ) by wRC+ during the regular season — though one that produced a slightly above-average .711 OPS against the Chicago Cubs in a wild-card sweep .
But he is also cognizant he may need to ask a lot of his bullpen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a performance in the manner of the San Diego Padres ’ nine-reliever victory in Game 3 of their wild-card round last week against the St. Louis Cardinals .
“ I ’ d be very confident we could put something similar to that together , ” Snitker told reporters when asked to compare bullpen strategies with what San Diego did .
And Atlanta did have the majors ’ third-best bullpen by WAR during the regular season .
Mark Melancon , Shane Greene , Tyler Matzek , Grant Dayton , A.J .
Minter , Chris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posted ERAs under 2.80 , which is roughly 70 percent better than league average .
But managing their workload will nonetheless be tricky , given the rotation ’ s uncertainties .
“ I think the bullpen is going to be a challenge , just trying to spread it out to keep guys available , ” Snitker said .
“ Realistically , guys could go four out of five [ days ] .
It ’ s the playoffs .
I probably wouldn ’ t like to do that , but we might have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Braves ’ lineup remains his team ’ s greatest strength .
Atlanta missed out on leading MLB in runs scored by a single run , finishing with 348 to the Dodgers ’ 349 .
Over a full , 162-game season , Atlanta ’ s tally extrapolates to 940 runs , which would have been the most in franchise history since the Boston Beaneaters scored 1,008 in 1893 .
Four members of the 2020 Braves ’ starting lineup — Freeman ( 187 ) , Acuña ( 159 ) , Marcell Ozuna ( 179 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 145 ) — had wRC+ marks of 145 or higher ( meaning they hit at least 45 percent better than average ) , and three more members — Albies , Dansby Swanson and Adam Duvall — were at least above average .
Although Cincinnati ’ s Trevor Bauer , the NL ERA leader , and company kept Atlanta ’ s hitters in check for most of Game 1 , they broke out late in Game 2 to seal the series .
That outburst was sparked by a mammoth home run from the underrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s hitters should be as dangerous as ever this week against Miami , the same team they scored a mind-boggling 29 runs against on Sept. 9 .
We currently give the Braves a 71 percent chance of advancing past the Marlins into the NLCS .
Of course , if they make it , there is a 73 percent chance the Dodgers will be waiting for them .
Famously , the Dodgers haven ’ t won a World Series since 1988 , while the Braves won it last in 1995 .
But that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any of Atlanta ’ s major pro sports teams in the more than 50 years since the Braves moved from Milwaukee and the Falcons were added to the NFL .
Sneakily , Atlanta has been building one of the most underperforming sports resumes of any big-league city , and that ’ s without even getting into how its teams have lost at times .
Talent-wise , this Braves team is one of the strongest entries in the Atlanta sports canon during that drought .
Now , all it needs to do — easier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for once .

It may have been in Major League Baseball’s new best-of-three wild-card round, but the Atlanta Braves’ series victory over the Cincinnati Reds last week was a long time coming. Going into these playoffs, Atlanta hadn’t won a postseason series since defeating the Houston Astros in the 2001 National League Division Series. The 19 intervening years saw Atlanta transition away from its division-streak era — led by three aces and plenty of other icons — through a period of three brief postseason bids with Jason Heyward and Brian McCann leading the way, and finally ahead with the core of this current club: Ronald Acuña Jr., Freddie Freeman and Ozzie Albies.
Now that it has ended its series-win drought, Atlanta is hoping to march even deeper into the postseason. And our prediction model gives the Braves the second-best chance to make the World Series of any NL team … trailing only the juggernaut Los Angeles Dodgers. (Small detail!) If they do it, Atlanta will have to lean on one of the most untested rotations ever, but one that proved to be an unexpected strength against Cincinnati — and a lineup and bullpen that are sure to provide plenty of help, too.
The Braves’ biggest Achilles’ heel all season has been starting pitching. Although lefty Max Fried had an excellent season, putting up 2.2 wins above replacement (the equivalent of 6.0 in a 162-game season) with a 7-0 record and a 2.25 earned-run average, the rotation as a whole was hampered by injuries and other problems. With Mike Soroka and Cole Hamels sidelined for nearly the entire season — and 2019 starter Mike Foltynewicz banished from the active roster for poor performance early on — Braves starters collectively produced just 4.2 total WAR this season, which ranked 27th in baseball. Heading into the division series against the Miami Marlins, Atlanta finds itself staring at a cobbled-together rotation consisting of Fried, a pair of rookies — Ian Anderson and Kyle Wright — and an as-yet-unknown fourth option, if necessary.
Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine and John Smoltz, this isn’t. (Not yet, at least.) In fact, Atlanta is rolling with what’s possibly the least accomplished rotation in modern postseason history. Among Fried (5.8), Anderson (1.2) and Wright (-0.4), Atlanta’s presumptive top three have produced 6.6 total regular-season WAR in their careers going into the playoffs. Among teams that used at least three starters in any postseason since MLB’s playoffs first expanded in 1969, no other rotation boasted a top three with fewer lifetime WAR going into the playoffs:
Atlanta’s starters don’t have much experience Fewest total career regular-season WAR (going into the postseason) for a playoff team’s top three starters, 1969-2020 Season Team TOP THREE STARTERS Total WAR 2020 Braves M. Fried, I. Anderson, K. Wright 6.6 1984 Royals B. Black, C. Leibrandt, B. Saberhagen 10.8 1976 Royals D. Leonard, L. Gura, A. Hassler 12.5 2012 Athletics B. Anderson, J. Parker, T. Milone 14.2 2007 Rockies J. Francis, J. Fogg, U. Jimenez 14.9 2011 D-backs I. Kennedy, D. Hudson, J. Collmenter 15.0 2010 Rays M. Garza, D. Price, W. Davis 17.3 2015 Astros D. Keuchel, C. McHugh, L. McCullers 18.0 1984 Padres E. Whitson, E. Show, M. Thurmond 18.5 2019 Rays C. Morton, T. Glasnow, D. Castillo 18.7 1970 Pirates B. Moose, D. Ellis, L. Walker 19.1 2013 Pirates F. Liriano, C. Morton, G. Cole 19.1 2011 Rangers C. Wilson, C. Lewis, D. Holland 20.4 2012 Orioles J. Saunders, J. Hammel, M. Gonzalez 20.6 2009 Twins C. Pavano, N. Blackburn, B. Duensing 20.8 Among playoff teams that used at least three starters in a postseason. Sources: Baseball-Reference.com, FanGraphs, Baseball Databank
That’s a little unfair to the Braves’ trio because their pitchers didn’t have the benefit of a full schedule in 2020. But even if we prorate the 2020 WAR of Fried, Anderson and Wright up to 162 team games, they would come in with a total of just 12.6 — which would rank them third on the list above. Either way, it underscores just how little established starting pitching Atlanta can count on as it tries to mount a deep postseason run.
Not that it was apparent against Cincinnati. Fried and Anderson combined to strike out 14 Reds batters (walking just two) over 13 innings during the wild-card round, part of a dominating performance that saw Braves hurlers allow zero total runs in 22 innings. (Game 1 was a 13-inning marathon that Atlanta eventually won, 1-0, on a Freeman walk-off single.) Though Cincinnati wasn’t an elite hitting team during the regular season, finishing 23rd in weighted runs created plus (wRC+), it was still impressive to see the Braves’ patchwork staff limit Joey Votto, Jesse Winker and company to a .169 average and a .411 OPS while holding them scoreless in the series. For longtime Braves observers, it might have even brought back memories of Atlanta dismantling Cincinnati’s lineup en route to the 1995 World Series.
Braves manager Brian Snitker is hoping his young starters can replicate that effort against a Marlins offense that rated as subpar (18th) by wRC+ during the regular season — though one that produced a slightly above-average .711 OPS against the Chicago Cubs in a wild-card sweep. But he is also cognizant he may need to ask a lot of his bullpen going forward. It may even require a performance in the manner of the San Diego Padres’ nine-reliever victory in Game 3 of their wild-card round last week against the St. Louis Cardinals.
“I’d be very confident we could put something similar to that together,” Snitker told reporters when asked to compare bullpen strategies with what San Diego did. And Atlanta did have the majors’ third-best bullpen by WAR during the regular season. Mark Melancon, Shane Greene, Tyler Matzek, Grant Dayton, A.J. Minter, Chris Martin and Darren O’Day each posted ERAs under 2.80, which is roughly 70 percent better than league average. But managing their workload will nonetheless be tricky, given the rotation’s uncertainties.
“I think the bullpen is going to be a challenge, just trying to spread it out to keep guys available,” Snitker said. “Realistically, guys could go four out of five [days]. It’s the playoffs. I probably wouldn’t like to do that, but we might have to do that.”
Fortunately for Snitker, the Braves’ lineup remains his team’s greatest strength. Atlanta missed out on leading MLB in runs scored by a single run, finishing with 348 to the Dodgers’ 349. Over a full, 162-game season, Atlanta’s tally extrapolates to 940 runs, which would have been the most in franchise history since the Boston Beaneaters scored 1,008 in 1893. Four members of the 2020 Braves’ starting lineup — Freeman (187), Acuña (159), Marcell Ozuna (179) and Travis d’Arnaud (145) — had wRC+ marks of 145 or higher (meaning they hit at least 45 percent better than average), and three more members — Albies, Dansby Swanson and Adam Duvall — were at least above average. Although Cincinnati’s Trevor Bauer, the NL ERA leader, and company kept Atlanta’s hitters in check for most of Game 1, they broke out late in Game 2 to seal the series.
That outburst was sparked by a mammoth home run from the underrated Ozuna, an ex-Marlin. And Atlanta’s hitters should be as dangerous as ever this week against Miami, the same team they scored a mind-boggling 29 runs against on Sept. 9.
We currently give the Braves a 71 percent chance of advancing past the Marlins into the NLCS. Of course, if they make it, there is a 73 percent chance the Dodgers will be waiting for them. Famously, the Dodgers haven’t won a World Series since 1988, while the Braves won it last in 1995. But that was also the lone championship won by any of Atlanta’s major pro sports teams in the more than 50 years since the Braves moved from Milwaukee and the Falcons were added to the NFL. Sneakily, Atlanta has been building one of the most underperforming sports resumes of any big-league city, and that’s without even getting into how its teams have lost at times. Talent-wise, this Braves team is one of the strongest entries in the Atlanta sports canon during that drought. Now, all it needs to do — easier said than done — is keep winning, for once.
Check out our latest MLB predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--How The Two-Party System Obscures The Complexity Of Black Americans’ Politics

Joe Biden has encountered a number of awkward moments with Black voters this summer .
Whether telling Black voters that they “ ain ’ t Black ” if they ’ re considering voting for Trump or telling reporters that the Latino community is “ incredibly diverse , ” “ unlike ” the Black community , Biden , like many other politicians , has repeatedly failed to demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of Black people ’ s politics .
This is likely a byproduct of the fact that Black Americans are nearly uniform in their support for the Democratic Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American National Election Study , for example , 82 percent of Black Americans identified as Democrats , with 90 percent casting their ballot for the Democratic Party ’ s nominee , Hillary Clinton .
Only 10 percent voted for Donald Trump , the Republican nominee .
For scholars and analysts obsessed with partisanship , it is no wonder that Black Americans appear monolithic .
If partisanship is politics and politics is partisanship , Black partisanship must tell us all we need to know about Black people ’ s politics , or so the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a candidate to support are , however , only two expressions of an individual ’ s politics .
Yes , Black people are overwhelmingly Democratic and , like most Americans , vote in line with that partisan identity .
But we know , both from debates among Black people throughout this year ’ s Democratic presidential primary and from the historical record that Black Americans , like members of any group , often disagree with one another about politics .
The argument here is straightforward : Black people ’ s politics can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduced to partisanship .
So what other markers might better showcase the diversity of Black political thought ?
One obvious candidate is how Black Americans identify ideologically .
There is , after all , much more diversity in Black Americans ’ ideological identities than in their partisan identities .
In 2016 , for example , 45 percent of Black Americans identified as liberal and 43 percent identified as conservative .
This is a far cry from the near-uniformity of Black partisanship .
In fact , this ideological variation has led some scholars and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why conservative-identifying Black Americans remain so loyal to the Democratic Party .
The problem is that this ideological split is an illusion .
It turns out , a large subset of Black Americans simply don ’ t make use of the terms “ liberal ” and “ conservative ” when discussing politics .
That is , these terms — which are familiar to those who participate in certain types of elite political discourse — are often just unfamiliar to many Black Americans for whom these terms are not part of their political lexicon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this piece , Jefferson , found in his research .
In the 2012 ANES , for example , 44 percent of Black Americans categorized Barack Obama as conservative .
A similar share categorized Mitt Romney as liberal .
And 35 percent of Black Americans said the Democratic Party was more conservative than the Republican Party .
In other words , ideological identification actually tells us very little about Black people ’ s politics because standard ideological terms are not commonplace in Black Americans ’ political discourse .
So while the standard survey item @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appears to work fine for white Americans , the question — and ideological identification , more generally — simply can not be used to accurately represent the contours of Black people ’ s politics .
So , what do we do if we want to get a more accurate portrait of Black public opinion ?
Look at their policy preferences .
Following an approach similar to one taken by political scientists Shawn Treier and Sunshine Hillygus , we looked at what Black people think about various economic and social policies , splitting respondents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : 1 ) respondents who adopt the more liberal policy position ; 2 ) respondents who adopt a status quo or moderate position ; and 3 ) respondents who adopt the more conservative issue position .
And as you can see in the chart below , Black Americans have diverse views on government spending , which is masked when we focus solely on Black partisanship .
Take Black Americans ’ attitudes toward two issues for which they are often thought to have uniformly liberal preferences ( especially in comparison to white people ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out , Black public opinion is much more complex .
On the question of whether spending on crime should be increased , decreased , or kept the same , 84 percent of Black respondents said that spending should be increased .
And when asked the same about welfare spending , 28 percent of Black respondents agree that spending should be decreased while only 31 percent adopted the more liberal view that welfare spending should be increased .
This diversity in Black Americans ’ preferences — not to mention the conservative bent on some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be wary of claims that the “ Black community , ” as a whole , supports any particular party ’ s policies .
What about Black Americans ’ attitudes toward social issues that they ’ re perceived to hold liberal positions on , such as affirmative action and the death penalty ?
On the question of whether Black Americans should be given preferential treatment in hiring and promoting decisions , 51 percent of Black Americans oppose it ( 49 percent support it ) .
Likewise with the death penalty , which disproportionately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black Americans support capital punishment for people convicted of murder .
( Although 63 percent oppose it . )
So , why does this all matter ?
First , as analysts of and participants in the American political system , we should have an accurate portrait of what the public desires .
This point is even more important for elites interested in convincing Black Americans to support their candidacies .
They must recognize disagreements that exist among Black voters if they are to build the broadest coalition of Black support .
Second , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a singular fact — even when that is partisanship or vote choice — limits our understanding of conflict , which is the essence of politics .
The key takeaway from our analysis is this : There is no “ Black vote ” and you should be skeptical of anyone who claims that there is some cohesive “ Black community.
” To be sure , we ’ ve only presented a snapshot of the diversity of Black political thought ; readers interested in learning more should read ( or skim ) a few key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to be sure , but anyone seriously interested in understanding the complexities of Black politics would do well to read these texts ( and talk to some Black people ) .

Joe Biden has encountered a number of awkward moments with Black voters this summer.
Whether telling Black voters that they “ain’t Black” if they’re considering voting for Trump or telling reporters that the Latino community is “incredibly diverse,” “unlike” the Black community, Biden, like many other politicians, has repeatedly failed to demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of Black people’s politics.
This is likely a byproduct of the fact that Black Americans are nearly uniform in their support for the Democratic Party. According to data from the 2016 American National Election Study, for example, 82 percent of Black Americans identified as Democrats, with 90 percent casting their ballot for the Democratic Party’s nominee, Hillary Clinton. Only 10 percent voted for Donald Trump, the Republican nominee. For scholars and analysts obsessed with partisanship, it is no wonder that Black Americans appear monolithic. If partisanship is politics and politics is partisanship, Black partisanship must tell us all we need to know about Black people’s politics, or so the logic goes.
Choosing a political party and a candidate to support are, however, only two expressions of an individual’s politics. Yes, Black people are overwhelmingly Democratic and, like most Americans, vote in line with that partisan identity. But we know, both from debates among Black people throughout this year’s Democratic presidential primary and from the historical record that Black Americans, like members of any group, often disagree with one another about politics.
The argument here is straightforward: Black people’s politics cannot — and should not — be reduced to partisanship.
So what other markers might better showcase the diversity of Black political thought?
One obvious candidate is how Black Americans identify ideologically. There is, after all, much more diversity in Black Americans’ ideological identities than in their partisan identities. In 2016, for example, 45 percent of Black Americans identified as liberal and 43 percent identified as conservative. This is a far cry from the near-uniformity of Black partisanship.
In fact, this ideological variation has led some scholars and other analysts of American politics to wonder why conservative-identifying Black Americans remain so loyal to the Democratic Party.
The problem is that this ideological split is an illusion. It turns out, a large subset of Black Americans simply don’t make use of the terms “liberal” and “conservative” when discussing politics. That is, these terms — which are familiar to those who participate in certain types of elite political discourse — are often just unfamiliar to many Black Americans for whom these terms are not part of their political lexicon, as one of the authors of this piece, Jefferson, found in his research.
In the 2012 ANES, for example, 44 percent of Black Americans categorized Barack Obama as conservative. A similar share categorized Mitt Romney as liberal. And 35 percent of Black Americans said the Democratic Party was more conservative than the Republican Party. In other words, ideological identification actually tells us very little about Black people’s politics because standard ideological terms are not commonplace in Black Americans’ political discourse.
So while the standard survey item used to capture how Americans identify ideologically appears to work fine for white Americans, the question — and ideological identification, more generally — simply cannot be used to accurately represent the contours of Black people’s politics.
So, what do we do if we want to get a more accurate portrait of Black public opinion? Look at their policy preferences.
Following an approach similar to one taken by political scientists Shawn Treier and Sunshine Hillygus, we looked at what Black people think about various economic and social policies, splitting respondents into three separate bins for each policy: 1) respondents who adopt the more liberal policy position; 2) respondents who adopt a status quo or moderate position; and 3) respondents who adopt the more conservative issue position. And as you can see in the chart below, Black Americans have diverse views on government spending, which is masked when we focus solely on Black partisanship.
Take Black Americans’ attitudes toward two issues for which they are often thought to have uniformly liberal preferences (especially in comparison to white people): crime and welfare. It turns out, Black public opinion is much more complex. On the question of whether spending on crime should be increased, decreased, or kept the same, 84 percent of Black respondents said that spending should be increased. And when asked the same about welfare spending, 28 percent of Black respondents agree that spending should be decreased while only 31 percent adopted the more liberal view that welfare spending should be increased.
This diversity in Black Americans’ preferences — not to mention the conservative bent on some of these key issues — suggests we should be wary of claims that the “Black community,” as a whole, supports any particular party’s policies.
What about Black Americans’ attitudes toward social issues that they’re perceived to hold liberal positions on, such as affirmative action and the death penalty? On the question of whether Black Americans should be given preferential treatment in hiring and promoting decisions, 51 percent of Black Americans oppose it (49 percent support it). Likewise with the death penalty, which disproportionately affects Black people, 37 percent of Black Americans support capital punishment for people convicted of murder. (Although 63 percent oppose it.)
So, why does this all matter?
First, as analysts of and participants in the American political system, we should have an accurate portrait of what the public desires. This point is even more important for elites interested in convincing Black Americans to support their candidacies. They must recognize disagreements that exist among Black voters if they are to build the broadest coalition of Black support. Second, reducing the politics of any group to a singular fact — even when that is partisanship or vote choice — limits our understanding of conflict, which is the essence of politics.
The key takeaway from our analysis is this: There is no “Black vote” and you should be skeptical of anyone who claims that there is some cohesive “Black community.”
To be sure, we’ve only presented a snapshot of the diversity of Black political thought; readers interested in learning more should read (or skim) a few key texts:
This is an incomplete list, to be sure, but anyone seriously interested in understanding the complexities of Black politics would do well to read these texts (and talk to some Black people).


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-07--VP Debates Usually Don’t Matter. But We’re Way Past Usual.

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight ’ s politics chat .
The transcript below has been lightly edited .
sarah ( Sarah Frostenson , politics editor ) : President Trump may still not be out of the woods with his coronavirus diagnosis — he is back at the White House now after three days at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and still receiving treatment — but the vice presidential debate is moving ahead as planned .
There are a number of new precautions in place for the debate , too , given the renewed focus on the coronavirus , including a hotly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and no handshakes upon arrival .
We have less of an idea this time around about which topics Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris will debate , but without a doubt the coronavirus will be front and center — in fact , it might be hard for other topics to break through in the 90 minutes they have .
We know from our poll with Ipsos before the last presidential debate that the coronavirus is the most important issue to voters here in 2020 , and that most voters think Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do you see the conversation around the coronavirus playing out tonight ?
What will be Harris ’ s stance ?
Pence ’ s ?
This will be the issue tonight , right ?
meredithconroy ( Meredith Conroy , political science professor at California State University , San Bernardino , and FiveThirtyEight contributor ) : Yeah , Sarah , there ’ s little doubt that coronavirus will be the issue tonight .
After months of Trump trying to downplay the virus , Pence will be forced to grapple with it more directly , given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nrakich ( Nathaniel Rakich , elections analyst ) : I would be shocked if the debate doesn ’ t kick off with the coronavirus and spend a substantial amount of time on it .
And I am really curious to see whether the share of Americans who say that the coronavirus is the most important issue to them rises in our Ipsos poll .
I haven ’ t seen the new data yet , but it will be available to you , dear reader , on the live blog tonight !
Specifically , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the share of voters who back Trump and prioritize the coronavirus rises .
There was a big partisan split on the issue last time , with Democrats far more likely to say it was their top issue .
meredithconroy : That will be interesting to see .
I think it ’ s possible it is still below the economy for Republicans in the poll , though .
The administration hasn ’ t really changed its tune on the severity of the virus , despite the president ’ s diagnosis , right ?
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is even more reckless ?
nrakich : Right — in fact , the president has downplayed the severity of the virus in the last couple days , tweeting “ don ’ t be afraid of Covid ” and taking off his mask when he returned to the White House .
sarah : Does Pence lean into that messaging , then ?
nrakich : I kind of think he will try to walk it back .
Pence is kind of the ticket ’ s “ what the president meant to say was … ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence comes at this from a somewhat different position than Trump — he is charged with leading the White House Coronavirus Task Force .
I ’ m not sure that means he echoes guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , or corrects his boss ’ s recent tweets and messages , though .
In fact , perhaps foreshadowing what to expect , Pence ’ s spokesperson , Katie Miller , already chided Harris ’ s camp for asking for more precautions at the debate , saying , “ If Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ herself , have at it.
” nrakich : A more interesting question might be , how hard does Harris attack Trump for this ?
She has a lot of material to work with ( e.g.
, not wearing a mask , not taking the proper precautions to prevent spread among White House staffers ) , but will it come off in bad taste ?
perry ( Perry Bacon Jr. , senior writer ) : Doesn ’ t seem too hard for Harris to say , “ I wish the president good health , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in dealing with the virus .
And I don ’ t expect Pence to walk back a ton of what Trump has said or done .
The kind of non-Trump Republican position on the coronavirus has been : “ We can ’ t shut down the country in fear of this virus , kids need to go to school , our economy can ’ t be closed , ” and I assume Pence will say versions of that throughout the debate .
It ’ s a more polite version of what Trump says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
nrakich : I don ’ t know about that , Perry .
The polls suggest people are really turned off by Trump ’ s blasé attitude toward the virus .
I think Pence will want to counter the perception that Trump isn ’ t taking it seriously — which by definition I think involves telling people to , well , “ worry about Covid ” ( though of course not in those exact words ) .
meredithconroy : I think it ’ s possible they ’ re past that now , Nathaniel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on downplaying the seriousness of the virus .
sarah : If anything , Pence might want to actively pivot away from conversation on the coronavirus as much as he can , because this is something Trump has consistently gotten poor marks on : nrakich : That would kind of be the strategy we saw at the Republican National Convention ?
Try to change the subject to something like the pre-pandemic roaring economy or democratic socialism .
It ’ s harder to do in a debate , though .
meredithconroy : Yes .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on the coronavirus and those most affected by it .
Plus , she ’ s a good messenger for that .
More women than men are facing job losses , and Black communities account for a disproportionate number of deaths .
sarah : But if you ’ re Pence , maybe pivot to something like talk around an upcoming vaccine , or the upcoming Supreme Court nomination ?
meredithconroy : Speaking of messengers … Pence is a great spokesperson for the SCOTUS nomination , as a religious liberty conservative .
perry : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on COVID-19 will be bad for Trump-Pence .
So I would assume the moderator , to show balance , will harp on some subject that is designed to make Harris look bad .
My assumption is this will be about abolishing/defunding the police .
Also , Biden kind of non-answered on abolishing the filibuster and adding seats to the Supreme Court in the last debate , so I would assume that is a subject that Harris will be pushed on , too .
sarah : That ’ s a good point , Perry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate around the Supreme Court could possibly back Harris into a corner , too , if Pence is adamant about the GOP ’ s timeline to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before the election , which might push Harris into saying something about increasing the number of justices on the court .
nrakich : Harris is also on the Senate Judiciary Committee and was a big Brett Kavanaugh opponent .
Pence may try to accuse her of obstructing Republican-appointed judges out of hand .
But again , the polls are not on Republicans ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate should wait until after the election to confirm a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
perry : Only 32 percent of Americans support adding justices to the Supreme Court , compared to 54 percent opposed , in a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll .
At the same time , a 6-3 court might strike down Biden ’ s entire legislative agenda .
So I would assume Harris wants to stay vague on that issue , as Biden has .
nrakich : Why do you think they are being coy on that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really get it .
Even in a dream Democratic scenario , there won ’ t be enough votes in the Senate to pack the court anyway .
And as Perry said , polling shows most people are opposed to it .
So saying “ we oppose court packing ” seems like the politically expedient answer .
perry : Because I think a 6-3 court will be open to striking down any Democratic legislation even on the flimsiest of grounds , so I think they have to keep the idea open .
nrakich : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t think court packing is high on voters ’ radar .
I just thought it was a weird unforced error by Biden to dodge the question at the last debate .
perry : The Democrats ’ actual position is probably closer to : “ A Supreme Court that strikes down Obamacare , Roe v. Wade and the Voting Rights Act with Barrett and Gorsuch in the majority is illegitimate , in our view , and we would take action to address that.
” I just don ’ t know if Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : I ’ m surprised either candidate got in anything substantive in the last debate with all the interruptions .
But speaking of debates … even though we ’ re pretty skeptical that debates move the needle all that much ( although we did see a slight uptick for Biden following the first debate ) , do you think this debate might have more of an effect just given the uncertainty around the last two debates actually happening ?
Trump has said he plans to debate next week , but is it possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him because of his diagnosis ?
nrakich : I don ’ t see next week ’ s debate happening as planned .
If Trump insists on going , I don ’ t think Biden will go .
I do think that makes today ’ s debate more important than a vice-presidential debate usually is ( which is not very important ) .
Also , I think Trump ’ s diagnosis has highlighted , erm , shall I say , the fragility of both presidential candidates , which might have voters taking a closer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perry : I am really skeptical the debate commission stops the sitting president from debating .
The people in charge of these debates didn ’ t force his staff to wear masks or stop him from interrupting every 10 seconds in the last debate .
sarah : But at the very least , they ’ ll make him take a COVID-19 test and if it comes back positive … I think they ’ d have to stop him , or at least that ’ s what their guidelines seem to suggest .
perry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the power to make the sitting president take a COVID-19 test and reveal the results .
I might be wrong .
But this is a really interesting test of power .
And I think Trump will not back down .
meredithconroy : I don ’ t want to speculate , but depending on Trump ’ s health , he may hope they do cancel the debate .
We ’ ll just have to wait and see .
But another reason this debate might be more important than a typical VP debate is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now , right ?
sarah : Or more seriously considering who is in the No .
2 role ?
nrakich : Not sure about that , Meredith .
The TV ratings for the first debate were down from 2016 , just like they were for the conventions .
( Insert obligatory caveat about how TV ratings are falling across the board and it ’ s possible people just switched from watching the debate on TV to streaming it online . )
perry : So focusing on this debate , I actually think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these polls have Trump in the low 40s , down by double digits .
I assume that means some GOP-leaning voters are undecided right now .
So if Pence kind of reminds those people that they really hate the Democrats , even if they aren ’ t that into Trump , that is helpful for the GOP side .
meredithconroy : Yeah , I think that ’ s a possibility , Perry .
I think a lot of people — maybe more moderate people or the less politically engaged — came away from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was chaos , and American politics is a mess , ” but not necessarily attributing the chaos to the instigator ( Trump ) .
If Pence can assuage those feelings , I think people on the fence might , for now , stay on the fence instead of deciding to stay home or vote for Biden .
sarah : Trump ’ s approval rating has slowly been ticking back up , too , even though his standing in the national polls hasn ’ t improved … How do you take into account Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his standing in the horse race ?
Is this some of the upside Pence could possibly tap into tonight ?
nrakich : We at FiveThirtyEight are skeptical about weighting polls by partisanship , but it ’ s at least possible there ’ s a touch of nonresponse bias ( i.e.
, demoralized Republicans don ’ t want to take polls right now ) in the polls immediately following the first debate .
So a more , er , conventional performance by Pence could correct that .
But I wouldn ’ t read too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re less than a month until the election ; head-to-head polls have fully come into their predictive power .
Plus , it ’ s not like Trump ’ s approval rating has improved to 50 percent or even 45 percent .
It ’ s at 43 percent — right around where it ’ s been for most of his term .
sarah : OK , to wrap .
Tonight we see the other half of the ticket .
What case does Harris need to make for Biden-Harris ?
And what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump-Pence ?
perry : Biden is winning .
Harris ’ s job is to do no harm .
To me , Pence can ’ t fully explain away Trump ’ s handling of COVID-19 .
So he needs to hammer other issues ( the police , the Supreme Court , taxes ) where Republicans are stronger .
nrakich : I don ’ t think voters decide who to vote for based on the bottom half of the ticket .
So I think Pence and Harris need to successfully argue that their running mates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But voters already know Trump and Biden so well — very , very few have no opinion of them in polls — that I ’ m not sure the candidates can say anything to change their minds .
Honestly , maybe what Pence needs to do is create some highly newsworthy moment that distracts from what is frankly a terrible news cycle right now for Trump .
meredithconroy : Ha !
Interesting theory , Nathaniel .
But has Pence ever driven the news cycle ?
I anticipate that Pence will use the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far/radical left , ” like Trump attempted to do to Biden in the debate last week .
And I am going to risk being very wrong and speculate that Pence also doubles down on Trump ’ s recent messages around the coronavirus and tries to play down its seriousness .
nrakich : “ But has Pence ever driven the news cycle ?
” – > No .

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.
sarah (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): President Trump may still not be out of the woods with his coronavirus diagnosis — he is back at the White House now after three days at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and still receiving treatment — but the vice presidential debate is moving ahead as planned.
There are a number of new precautions in place for the debate, too, given the renewed focus on the coronavirus, including a hotly disputed plexiglass barrier to separate the candidates and no handshakes upon arrival.
We have less of an idea this time around about which topics Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris will debate, but without a doubt the coronavirus will be front and center — in fact, it might be hard for other topics to break through in the 90 minutes they have.
So let’s start there.
We know from our poll with Ipsos before the last presidential debate that the coronavirus is the most important issue to voters here in 2020, and that most voters think Biden is better on the issue.
On COVID-19, almost everyone prefers Biden Share of people who named each issue as the most important one facing the U.S., and whether they think Trump or Biden would handle that issue better, according to a FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos poll Who’s better on the issue… issue share TRUMP biden COVID-19 31.7% 19.5% – 78.8% – The economy 21.6 79.1 – 19.6 – Health care 7.9 22.0 – 76.1 – Racial inequality 7.4 8.4 – 86.6 – Climate change 5.2 2.6 – 96.4 – Violent crime 4.8 79.3 – 17.7 – The Supreme Court 4.5 50.7 – 47.8 – Economic inequality 3.0 15.1 – 76.8 – Immigration 2.8 70.1 – 29.9 – Education 2.6 52.1 – 45.9 – Abortion 2.3 96.0 – 2.1 – Gun policy 1.9 66.9 – 30.3 – Other 1.6 55.1 – 43.5 – Respondents who didn’t name a top issue are not shown. Data comes from polling done by Ipsos for FiveThirtyEight, using Ipsos’s KnowledgePanel, a probability-based online panel that is recruited to be representative of the U.S. population. The poll was conducted Sept. 21-28 among a general population sample of adults, with 3,133 respondents and a margin of error of +/- 1.9 percentage points.
How do you see the conversation around the coronavirus playing out tonight? What will be Harris’s stance? Pence’s? This will be the issue tonight, right?
meredithconroy (Meredith Conroy, political science professor at California State University, San Bernardino, and FiveThirtyEight contributor): Yeah, Sarah, there’s little doubt that coronavirus will be the issue tonight. After months of Trump trying to downplay the virus, Pence will be forced to grapple with it more directly, given the president’s recent diagnosis.
nrakich (Nathaniel Rakich, elections analyst): I would be shocked if the debate doesn’t kick off with the coronavirus and spend a substantial amount of time on it. And I am really curious to see whether the share of Americans who say that the coronavirus is the most important issue to them rises in our Ipsos poll. I haven’t seen the new data yet, but it will be available to you, dear reader, on the live blog tonight!
Specifically, I’m curious to see whether the share of voters who back Trump and prioritize the coronavirus rises. There was a big partisan split on the issue last time, with Democrats far more likely to say it was their top issue.
meredithconroy: That will be interesting to see. I think it’s possible it is still below the economy for Republicans in the poll, though. The administration hasn’t really changed its tune on the severity of the virus, despite the president’s diagnosis, right? In fact, you could argue their messaging is even more reckless?
nrakich: Right — in fact, the president has downplayed the severity of the virus in the last couple days, tweeting “don’t be afraid of Covid” and taking off his mask when he returned to the White House.
sarah: Does Pence lean into that messaging, then?
nrakich: I kind of think he will try to walk it back. Pence is kind of the ticket’s “what the president meant to say was …” ambassador.
meredithconroy: Right. And Pence comes at this from a somewhat different position than Trump — he is charged with leading the White House Coronavirus Task Force. I’m not sure that means he echoes guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or corrects his boss’s recent tweets and messages, though.
In fact, perhaps foreshadowing what to expect, Pence’s spokesperson, Katie Miller, already chided Harris’s camp for asking for more precautions at the debate, saying, “If Sen. Harris wants to use a fortress around herself, have at it.”
nrakich: A more interesting question might be, how hard does Harris attack Trump for this? She has a lot of material to work with (e.g., not wearing a mask, not taking the proper precautions to prevent spread among White House staffers), but will it come off in bad taste?
perry (Perry Bacon Jr., senior writer): Doesn’t seem too hard for Harris to say, “I wish the president good health,” but then harp on his failures in dealing with the virus.
And I don’t expect Pence to walk back a ton of what Trump has said or done. The kind of non-Trump Republican position on the coronavirus has been: “We can’t shut down the country in fear of this virus, kids need to go to school, our economy can’t be closed,” and I assume Pence will say versions of that throughout the debate. It’s a more polite version of what Trump says, but not necessarily all that different.
meredithconroy: Yeah. I think you’re right, Perry.
nrakich: I don’t know about that, Perry. The polls suggest people are really turned off by Trump’s blasé attitude toward the virus.
I think Pence will want to counter the perception that Trump isn’t taking it seriously — which by definition I think involves telling people to, well, “worry about Covid” (though of course not in those exact words).
meredithconroy: I think it’s possible they’re past that now, Nathaniel, given that Trump is doubling down on downplaying the seriousness of the virus.
sarah: If anything, Pence might want to actively pivot away from conversation on the coronavirus as much as he can, because this is something Trump has consistently gotten poor marks on:
nrakich: That would kind of be the strategy we saw at the Republican National Convention? Try to change the subject to something like the pre-pandemic roaring economy or democratic socialism. It’s harder to do in a debate, though.
meredithconroy: Yes. I think Harris would want to keep the focus on the coronavirus and those most affected by it. Plus, she’s a good messenger for that. More women than men are facing job losses, and Black communities account for a disproportionate number of deaths.
sarah: But if you’re Pence, maybe pivot to something like talk around an upcoming vaccine, or the upcoming Supreme Court nomination?
meredithconroy: Speaking of messengers … Pence is a great spokesperson for the SCOTUS nomination, as a religious liberty conservative.
perry: A debate with a lot of focus on COVID-19 will be bad for Trump-Pence. So I would assume the moderator, to show balance, will harp on some subject that is designed to make Harris look bad. My assumption is this will be about abolishing/defunding the police. Also, Biden kind of non-answered on abolishing the filibuster and adding seats to the Supreme Court in the last debate, so I would assume that is a subject that Harris will be pushed on, too.
sarah: That’s a good point, Perry. And I can see how a debate around the Supreme Court could possibly back Harris into a corner, too, if Pence is adamant about the GOP’s timeline to confirm Amy Coney Barrett before the election, which might push Harris into saying something about increasing the number of justices on the court.
nrakich: Harris is also on the Senate Judiciary Committee and was a big Brett Kavanaugh opponent. Pence may try to accuse her of obstructing Republican-appointed judges out of hand.
But again, the polls are not on Republicans’ side here. Most Americans think the Senate should wait until after the election to confirm a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
perry: Only 32 percent of Americans support adding justices to the Supreme Court, compared to 54 percent opposed, in a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll. At the same time, a 6-3 court might strike down Biden’s entire legislative agenda. So I would assume Harris wants to stay vague on that issue, as Biden has.
nrakich: Why do you think they are being coy on that, Perry? I don’t really get it.
Even in a dream Democratic scenario, there won’t be enough votes in the Senate to pack the court anyway. And as Perry said, polling shows most people are opposed to it. So saying “we oppose court packing” seems like the politically expedient answer.
perry: Because I think a 6-3 court will be open to striking down any Democratic legislation even on the flimsiest of grounds, so I think they have to keep the idea open.
nrakich: That’s fair. And I don’t think court packing is high on voters’ radar. I just thought it was a weird unforced error by Biden to dodge the question at the last debate.
perry: The Democrats’ actual position is probably closer to: “A Supreme Court that strikes down Obamacare, Roe v. Wade and the Voting Rights Act with Barrett and Gorsuch in the majority is illegitimate, in our view, and we would take action to address that.” I just don’t know if Harris can say that right now.
sarah: I’m surprised either candidate got in anything substantive in the last debate with all the interruptions. But speaking of debates … even though we’re pretty skeptical that debates move the needle all that much (although we did see a slight uptick for Biden following the first debate), do you think this debate might have more of an effect just given the uncertainty around the last two debates actually happening?
Trump has said he plans to debate next week, but is it possible the debate commission won’t let him because of his diagnosis?
nrakich: I don’t see next week’s debate happening as planned. If Trump insists on going, I don’t think Biden will go.
I do think that makes today’s debate more important than a vice-presidential debate usually is (which is not very important).
Also, I think Trump’s diagnosis has highlighted, erm, shall I say, the fragility of both presidential candidates, which might have voters taking a closer look at their No. 2s.
perry: I am really skeptical the debate commission stops the sitting president from debating. The people in charge of these debates didn’t force his staff to wear masks or stop him from interrupting every 10 seconds in the last debate.
sarah: But at the very least, they’ll make him take a COVID-19 test and if it comes back positive … I think they’d have to stop him, or at least that’s what their guidelines seem to suggest.
perry: I don’t think they have the power to make the sitting president take a COVID-19 test and reveal the results. I might be wrong. But this is a really interesting test of power.
And I think Trump will not back down.
meredithconroy: I don’t want to speculate, but depending on Trump’s health, he may hope they do cancel the debate. We’ll just have to wait and see.
But another reason this debate might be more important than a typical VP debate is simply that more people are paying attention right now, right?
sarah: Or more seriously considering who is in the No. 2 role?
nrakich: Not sure about that, Meredith. The TV ratings for the first debate were down from 2016, just like they were for the conventions. (Insert obligatory caveat about how TV ratings are falling across the board and it’s possible people just switched from watching the debate on TV to streaming it online.)
perry: So focusing on this debate, I actually think this debate matters electorally. Some of these polls have Trump in the low 40s, down by double digits. I assume that means some GOP-leaning voters are undecided right now. So if Pence kind of reminds those people that they really hate the Democrats, even if they aren’t that into Trump, that is helpful for the GOP side.
meredithconroy: Yeah, I think that’s a possibility, Perry. I think a lot of people — maybe more moderate people or the less politically engaged — came away from that first debate saying “Wow that was chaos, and American politics is a mess,” but not necessarily attributing the chaos to the instigator (Trump). If Pence can assuage those feelings, I think people on the fence might, for now, stay on the fence instead of deciding to stay home or vote for Biden.
sarah: Trump’s approval rating has slowly been ticking back up, too, even though his standing in the national polls hasn’t improved …
How do you take into account Trump’s approval rating when thinking about his standing in the horse race? Is this some of the upside Pence could possibly tap into tonight?
nrakich: We at FiveThirtyEight are skeptical about weighting polls by partisanship, but it’s at least possible there’s a touch of nonresponse bias (i.e., demoralized Republicans don’t want to take polls right now) in the polls immediately following the first debate.
Do you hear that sound? It’s the partisan non-response alarm going off https://t.co/0ENKBW2kov — G. Elliott Morris (@gelliottmorris) October 6, 2020
So a more, er, conventional performance by Pence could correct that.
But I wouldn’t read too much into Trump’s approval rating. We’re less than a month until the election; head-to-head polls have fully come into their predictive power. Plus, it’s not like Trump’s approval rating has improved to 50 percent or even 45 percent. It’s at 43 percent — right around where it’s been for most of his term.
sarah: OK, to wrap. Tonight we see the other half of the ticket. What case does Harris need to make for Biden-Harris? And what case does Pence need to make for Trump-Pence?
perry: Biden is winning. Harris’s job is to do no harm. To me, Pence can’t fully explain away Trump’s handling of COVID-19. So he needs to hammer other issues (the police, the Supreme Court, taxes) where Republicans are stronger.
nrakich: I don’t think voters decide who to vote for based on the bottom half of the ticket. So I think Pence and Harris need to successfully argue that their running mates are the best choice for the country.
But voters already know Trump and Biden so well — very, very few have no opinion of them in polls — that I’m not sure the candidates can say anything to change their minds. Honestly, maybe what Pence needs to do is create some highly newsworthy moment that distracts from what is frankly a terrible news cycle right now for Trump.
meredithconroy: Ha! Interesting theory, Nathaniel. But has Pence ever driven the news cycle?
I anticipate that Pence will use the debate to tie Harris to the “far/radical left,” like Trump attempted to do to Biden in the debate last week. And I am going to risk being very wrong and speculate that Pence also doubles down on Trump’s recent messages around the coronavirus and tries to play down its seriousness.
nrakich: “But has Pence ever driven the news cycle?” –> No.
And that’s the ballgame.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-07--What To Watch For During The Vice Presidential Debate

Members of the FiveThirtyEight politics crew discuss what they ’ ll be paying attention to during tonight ’ s debate @ @ @ @ @ debate more important than it has been in previous years , given the age of @ @ @ @ @ threat of COVID-19 ?

Members of the FiveThirtyEight politics crew discuss what they’ll be paying attention to during tonight’s debate. Is the vice presidential debate more important than it has been in previous years, given the age of the presidential candidates and the threat of COVID-19?


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-07--Vice Presidential Debate, Harris vs. Pence: Live Updates

Search
No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-07--The President Took A Rare Combination Of COVID-19 Drugs. Will It Help?

After testing positive for COVID-19 last week , President Trump was given three drugs in various phases of testing : @ @ @ @ @ and a steroid .
On this week ’ s episode of PODCAST-19 , we discuss @ @ @ @ @ are combined and why the average American can ’ t expect to receive the same @ @ @ @ @ want to miss an episode of PODCAST-19 , FiveThirtyEight ’ s weekly look at what @ @ @ @ @ we know we don ’ t know — about COVID-19 ?
Subscribe on your favorite @ @ @ @ @ , here ’ s where to do it on Apple Podcasts and Spotify .

After testing positive for COVID-19 last week, President Trump was given three drugs in various phases of testing: an antiviral, monoclonal antibodies and a steroid. On this week’s episode of PODCAST-19, we discuss what happens when all three are combined and why the average American can’t expect to receive the same treatment.
Don’t want to miss an episode of PODCAST-19, FiveThirtyEight’s weekly look at what we know — and what we know we don’t know — about COVID-19? Subscribe on your favorite podcasting app. For example, here’s where to do it on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.