fivethirthyeight--2020-07-02--The Unemployment Rate Is Falling, But More People Are Losing Their Jobs Permanently

These days , reading the monthly jobs report can feel like opening a time capsule .
According to the data for June , which was released today , the recovery from the COVID-19 recession was still chugging along as of the middle of last month , when the two surveys that form the backbone of the report were conducted .
The unemployment rate fell from 13.3 percent in May to 11.1 percent in June , and 4.8 million more people were employed in June than in May .
Those numbers look promising — but it ’ s important to remember @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what the economy looked like in mid-June .
And a lot has changed since then .
Most importantly , COVID-19 infections have spiked in states across the country , and many governors have rolled back the phased reopenings that brought many jobless workers back into the labor force .
That could have a seismic impact on the sectors of the economy , like leisure and hospitality , that saw the biggest gains in June .
Even underneath the surface of the June report , there were signs that the recession is deepening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have permanently lost their jobs rose quite a bit — signaling that for an increasing number of Americans , getting back to work won ’ t be an easy matter .
And the unemployment rate for white Americans continues to be much lower than the unemployment rate for Black , Hispanic or Asian Americans .
That ’ s an important reminder that some workers are continuing to do much better than others as the recovery creaks into gear .
If you just focus on the report ’ s headline numbers — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the country ’ s economic situation was looking up in June .
In fact , the drop in the unemployment rate may have been even more dramatic than the topline number lets on .
Over the past few months , the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been struggling with an issue that ’ s unique to our pandemic-ridden times : A substantial number of workers were reporting that they were absent from their jobs for the entire week referenced in the survey for “ other reasons.
” That probably meant they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — but they weren ’ t counted as unemployed .
To be clear : The BLS has been extremely transparent about the presence of this problem , and it does not mean that the numbers were fudged .
Our methods for measuring unemployment are simply not designed for a pandemic-induced recession .
But it is important to take the misclassification issue into account because if those workers had been included in April , BLS estimates that the unemployment rate would have been about 20 percent ; in May , the rate would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the BLS reported that it mostly had the misclassification issue under control — which meant the actual unemployment rate declined even more substantially , to around 12 percent .
Bear in mind , though , that we still have a long way to go before we ’ re anywhere near pre-pandemic levels of unemployment .
It ’ s all about your frame of reference : An 11.1 percent unemployment rate is stunningly low compared with where we were in April , when close to 20 percent of the population was unemployed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at any point in modern history — including the unemployment rate at the apex of the Great Recession .
And there are many reasons to believe that the recovery could stall — or even backslide — in the coming months .
One clue is tucked in the June report : Of those who did lose jobs , a larger share of them were permanent than in previous months .
In April and May , 88.6 percent of job losses were classified by the BLS as “ temporary , ” which fit the early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down temporarily to stop the spread of COVID-19 but planned to reopen later as the virus came under control — particularly with the assistance of government loans such as the Paycheck Protection Program , which incentivized small businesses to keep employees on payroll during the closures .
But in June , the share of job losses that were temporary fell to 78.6 percent , a sign that a growing number of workers will not have a job waiting for them when the crisis lifts .
“ As more job losses become permanent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like an ordinary recession , where in recent history the recovery has been a slow slog , ” said Nick Bunker , the director of economic research for North America at the Indeed Hiring Lab , a research institute connected to the job-search site Indeed .
“ That means the hopes of a quick recovery will be slimmer and slimmer.
” The fact that some of the industries hit hardest early in the recession made big gains in June is both good and bad news .
Leisure and hospitality , which had lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and April , built on its May gains to add 2.1 million more workers in June , an increase of nearly 21 percent month over month .
Similarly , retail trade , which lost 2.4 million jobs in March and April , bounced back with about 740,000 new workers in June , a 5.4 percent increase month over month .
And education and health services , another of the industries most affected ( with 2.8 million total job losses in March and April ) , added 568,000 jobs in June , for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Overall , almost every major industry sector of the economy added jobs in June , with total private employment up by 4.3 percent since May .
However , it is worth noting that despite better-than-expected jobs reports in both May and now June , total private employment is still down 10.2 percent relative to its pre-crisis level in February .
Things are looking better , but there is still a lot of room for improvement .
And the hammer might fall yet again on sectors like leisure and hospitality , which includes the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and even bars and casinos to reopen at partial capacity in May and June — only to abruptly close them again when case counts started to spike .
That means that some of the workers who finally got to return to their jobs as servers , bartenders or blackjack dealers might well be unemployed again in the July report .
That everything these days is in a state of flux complicates even the most seasoned experts ’ ability to read the report .
Erica Groshen , who served as BLS commissioner from 2013 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremely difficult to isolate the impact of the many different forces that are churning underneath the report .
“ We ’ ve got all of these effects that are going at cross-purposes , ” she said .
“ We have the ongoing effects of restrictions in place .
We have the effects of some restrictions being lifted .
And we have the deepening of the recession itself.
” All of that , she said , makes it hard to assess exactly what ’ s happening under the surface — much less what will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gains have not been equally distributed throughout the population — another theme of this very unequal recession .
Although the unemployment rate for women dropped at a faster rate ( 2.8 percentage points ) than for men ( 1.6 ) in June , women still had a higher overall unemployment rate than men did .
Likewise , the unemployment rate for white Americans dropped by 2.3 percentage points last month , while it only fell by 1.4 percent for Black Americans and 1.2 percentage points for Asian Americans .
And at 15.4 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unemployment rate of any racial or ethnic group , 5.3 percentage points higher than their white counterparts .
Perhaps one bit of encouraging data in this jobs report was that the unemployment rate for Latino or Hispanic Americans did drop by quite a bit — it was down 3.1 percentage points in June .
However , that still left their overall unemployment rate at 14.5 percent , which is not only far higher than it was before the coronavirus recession began ( it was 4.4 percent in February ) but also higher than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent ) or Asian ( 13.8 percent ) Americans .
As we ’ ve said often during this crisis , you really need the next jobs report in order to interpret the current one .
The June report shows that the unexpected employment gains of May were not a mirage — the economy really did start recovering earlier and more quickly than many economists expected .
But next month ’ s report could be a sobering reminder of just how fragile any economic gains are — at least while the virus is still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the country .
So we ’ ll know better by next month whether the concerning trends in this report have deepened , as well as how much the recent COVID-19 outbreaks across the country have hamstrung the nascent recovery .
In typical fashion , our economic data is moving at a much slower pace than the virus , which leaves us guessing at where things might head next .
CORRECTION ( July 2 , 2020 , 4:45 p.m. ) : An earlier version of the permanent layoffs chart in this article incorrectly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the thousands when they should have been in the millions .

These days, reading the monthly jobs report can feel like opening a time capsule. According to the data for June, which was released today, the recovery from the COVID-19 recession was still chugging along as of the middle of last month, when the two surveys that form the backbone of the report were conducted. The unemployment rate fell from 13.3 percent in May to 11.1 percent in June, and 4.8 million more people were employed in June than in May.
Those numbers look promising — but it’s important to remember that they’re just a snapshot of what the economy looked like in mid-June. And a lot has changed since then. Most importantly, COVID-19 infections have spiked in states across the country, and many governors have rolled back the phased reopenings that brought many jobless workers back into the labor force. That could have a seismic impact on the sectors of the economy, like leisure and hospitality, that saw the biggest gains in June.
Even underneath the surface of the June report, there were signs that the recession is deepening. Crucially, the number of workers who have permanently lost their jobs rose quite a bit — signaling that for an increasing number of Americans, getting back to work won’t be an easy matter. And the unemployment rate for white Americans continues to be much lower than the unemployment rate for Black, Hispanic or Asian Americans. That’s an important reminder that some workers are continuing to do much better than others as the recovery creaks into gear.
If you just focus on the report’s headline numbers — the unemployment rate and number of payroll jobs — the country’s economic situation was looking up in June. In fact, the drop in the unemployment rate may have been even more dramatic than the topline number lets on. Over the past few months, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been struggling with an issue that’s unique to our pandemic-ridden times: A substantial number of workers were reporting that they were absent from their jobs for the entire week referenced in the survey for “other reasons.” That probably meant they were temporarily out of work because of COVID-19 — but they weren’t counted as unemployed.
To be clear: The BLS has been extremely transparent about the presence of this problem, and it does not mean that the numbers were fudged. Our methods for measuring unemployment are simply not designed for a pandemic-induced recession. But it is important to take the misclassification issue into account because if those workers had been included in April, BLS estimates that the unemployment rate would have been about 20 percent; in May, the rate would have been about 16 percent. By June, the BLS reported that it mostly had the misclassification issue under control — which meant the actual unemployment rate declined even more substantially, to around 12 percent.
Bear in mind, though, that we still have a long way to go before we’re anywhere near pre-pandemic levels of unemployment. It’s all about your frame of reference: An 11.1 percent unemployment rate is stunningly low compared with where we were in April, when close to 20 percent of the population was unemployed. But it’s still higher than at any point in modern history — including the unemployment rate at the apex of the Great Recession.
And there are many reasons to believe that the recovery could stall — or even backslide — in the coming months. One clue is tucked in the June report: Of those who did lose jobs, a larger share of them were permanent than in previous months.
In April and May, 88.6 percent of job losses were classified by the BLS as “temporary,” which fit the early theme of this recession: Businesses shut down temporarily to stop the spread of COVID-19 but planned to reopen later as the virus came under control — particularly with the assistance of government loans such as the Paycheck Protection Program, which incentivized small businesses to keep employees on payroll during the closures. But in June, the share of job losses that were temporary fell to 78.6 percent, a sign that a growing number of workers will not have a job waiting for them when the crisis lifts.
“As more job losses become permanent, this recession will look more and more like an ordinary recession, where in recent history the recovery has been a slow slog,” said Nick Bunker, the director of economic research for North America at the Indeed Hiring Lab, a research institute connected to the job-search site Indeed. “That means the hopes of a quick recovery will be slimmer and slimmer.”
The fact that some of the industries hit hardest early in the recession made big gains in June is both good and bad news. Leisure and hospitality, which had lost a staggering 8.3 million jobs in March and April, built on its May gains to add 2.1 million more workers in June, an increase of nearly 21 percent month over month. Similarly, retail trade, which lost 2.4 million jobs in March and April, bounced back with about 740,000 new workers in June, a 5.4 percent increase month over month. And education and health services, another of the industries most affected (with 2.8 million total job losses in March and April), added 568,000 jobs in June, for a 2.6 percent gain month over month.
Overall, almost every major industry sector of the economy added jobs in June, with total private employment up by 4.3 percent since May. However, it is worth noting that despite better-than-expected jobs reports in both May and now June, total private employment is still down 10.2 percent relative to its pre-crisis level in February. Things are looking better, but there is still a lot of room for improvement.
And the hammer might fall yet again on sectors like leisure and hospitality, which includes the restaurant industry. Several states allowed restaurants and even bars and casinos to reopen at partial capacity in May and June — only to abruptly close them again when case counts started to spike. That means that some of the workers who finally got to return to their jobs as servers, bartenders or blackjack dealers might well be unemployed again in the July report.
That everything these days is in a state of flux complicates even the most seasoned experts’ ability to read the report. Erica Groshen, who served as BLS commissioner from 2013 to 2017, said it’s extremely difficult to isolate the impact of the many different forces that are churning underneath the report. “We’ve got all of these effects that are going at cross-purposes,” she said. “We have the ongoing effects of restrictions in place. We have the effects of some restrictions being lifted. And we have the deepening of the recession itself.” All of that, she said, makes it hard to assess exactly what’s happening under the surface — much less what will happen next.
And again, the gains have not been equally distributed throughout the population — another theme of this very unequal recession. Although the unemployment rate for women dropped at a faster rate (2.8 percentage points) than for men (1.6) in June, women still had a higher overall unemployment rate than men did. Likewise, the unemployment rate for white Americans dropped by 2.3 percentage points last month, while it only fell by 1.4 percent for Black Americans and 1.2 percentage points for Asian Americans. And at 15.4 percent, Black Americans still have the highest unemployment rate of any racial or ethnic group, 5.3 percentage points higher than their white counterparts.
Perhaps one bit of encouraging data in this jobs report was that the unemployment rate for Latino or Hispanic Americans did drop by quite a bit — it was down 3.1 percentage points in June. However, that still left their overall unemployment rate at 14.5 percent, which is not only far higher than it was before the coronavirus recession began (it was 4.4 percent in February) but also higher than the unemployment rates for white (10.1 percent) or Asian (13.8 percent) Americans.
As we’ve said often during this crisis, you really need the next jobs report in order to interpret the current one. The June report shows that the unexpected employment gains of May were not a mirage — the economy really did start recovering earlier and more quickly than many economists expected. But next month’s report could be a sobering reminder of just how fragile any economic gains are — at least while the virus is still spiraling out of control in many parts of the country. So we’ll know better by next month whether the concerning trends in this report have deepened, as well as how much the recent COVID-19 outbreaks across the country have hamstrung the nascent recovery. In typical fashion, our economic data is moving at a much slower pace than the virus, which leaves us guessing at where things might head next.
CORRECTION (July 2, 2020, 4:45 p.m.): An earlier version of the permanent layoffs chart in this article incorrectly labeled the numbers of layoffs as being in the thousands when they should have been in the millions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-02--The Winners And Losers In Our Updated NBA Forecast

When last we left the 2019-20 NBA season , the Los Angeles Lakers were championship favorites — with the rival L.A. Clippers and the Milwaukee Bucks not too far behind — as teams prepped for the final 17 or so games in the regular season .
Then , the coronavirus put everything on hold for four months .
Only now is the sport gearing up for its return , with an ambitious plan to play the rest of the season in a “ bubble ” at Walt Disney World in Orlando , Florida .
Although playing sports during a pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commissioner Adam Silver recently said he feels “ pretty confident ” in the procedures he and his team have put in place .
So with the restart schedule released late last week , we ’ ve relaunched our FiveThirtyEight NBA prediction model to forecast the mini-regular season finale , the play-in scenarios and , of course , the postseason .
As a refresher : These predictions are based on 100,000 simulations of the rest of the season and playoffs , using team ratings to generate win probabilities for each game .
Those team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s performance in RAPTOR — the Robust Algorithm ( using ) Player Tracking ( and ) On/Off Ratings — which measures his influence on offense and defense , and playing-time forecasts ( including each team ’ s expected rotation and injuries ) .
There are postseason adjustments for players who typically exceed expectations in the playoffs and a bunch of other bells and whistles you can read about here .
Why it only took one player with coronavirus to shutter sports Add it all up , and it gives a snapshot of where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the restart — which isn ’ t exactly the same as how things looked when the league hit the pause button .
Let ’ s go through exactly what changed in the forecast between then and now .
Which teams look stronger on paper now ?
As a side effect of the long layoff , a number of players have recovered from injuries that slowed them down or kept them out back in March .
Among teams invited to Orlando , the Milwaukee Bucks ( +74 rating points ) , Philadelphia 76ers ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ +55 ) gained the most points in our talent ratings ( which estimate the current state of each team ) .
For the Bucks , the reason is simple : MVP front-runner Giannis Antetokounmpo has recovered from a sprained knee that was affecting him around when the break happened .
Likewise , Portland will get back a healthier Jusuf Nurkić ; Nurkić , whom RAPTOR considered an elite player last season but who hasn ’ t played yet in 2019-20 , was set to come back in limited fashion in March , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ play normal minutes now .
And for Philly , Ben Simmons should be at 100 percent again after a back injury had landed him on the injured list in February .
[ Related : How Do You Play Sports In The Middle Of A Pandemic ? ]
Most teams saw their ratings go up for similar reasons , with an extra few months helping banged-up players recover .
Among teams not already eliminated , the next-biggest gains in talent rating were the Celtics ( +26 ) , Magic ( +18 ) and Grizzlies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will make the trip to Disney World , only 16 will make the playoffs — just like a normal postseason .
The remaining eight-game regular-season slate will be used to whittle down the field , with a potential play-in tournament finishing that job if a conference ’ s No .
9 seed finishes within four games of the No .
8 .
Most of the remaining teams had already all but locked up their playoff status by March — back then , our model gave 15 teams a playoff probability of 98 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the West was still legitimately up for grabs , with the Pelicans ( 60 percent ) , Grizzlies ( 15 percent ) , Blazers ( 14 percent ) , Kings ( 9 percent ) and even Spurs ( 2 percent ) in the mix when play stopped .
The revised schedule changed those odds quite a bit .
The biggest winners of the new format are Ja Morant and the Grizzlies , whose playoff chances ticked up by 22 percentage points and now sit at 37 percent .
The Wizards also went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eastern Conference playoff bid , bringing them up to 8 percent .
That means the biggest postseason downgrades came to the Pelicans ( down 15 percentage points ) , who now have only a 45 percent chance , with the Nets ( -5 percentage points ) , Blazers ( -4 ) , Kings ( -2 ) , Spurs ( -2 ) and Magic ( -1 ) dropping as well .
New Orleans ’ s entire playoff bid was premised on having enough games with Zion Williamson ( and an easy schedule ) to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part is still true , but with 10 fewer games left to play , the Pelicans ’ margin for error got much smaller .
What about NBA Finals and — especially !
— title odds ?
But enough about fringe teams that are battling for the right to be overmatched in the first round .
Let ’ s talk about the contenders .
In terms of Finals odds , the biggest beneficiaries of the new format are the aforementioned Sixers , who gained 7 percentage points compared with their standing in March .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ schedule and Simmons ’ s return to health .
The third-year former No .
1 overall pick is one of the league ’ s most polarizing players , but RAPTOR still considers him extremely valuable ( with the 30th-best per-possession rating of anyone logging at least 1,500 minutes ) .
In turn , that change helped drop the Bucks ’ chances of winning the East by 8 percentage points — though they remain conference favorites in our revised model , with a 36 percent Finals probability .
When we re-ran the model , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Finals increased by a percentage point with a healthy Kemba Walker and Jaylen Brown .
[ Related : The Best NBA Players This Season , According To RAPTOR ] Out West , improved Finals odds belong to the Lakers ( up 3 percentage points ) and Mavericks ( +1 ) .
L.A. will be without Avery Bradley for the restart — it signed J.R. Smith to pick up the slack , which should be fun — but the model has some Lakers rated higher than either Bradley or Smith actually gaining the missing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highly interesting team for its own reasons , led by Luka Dončić ’ s off-the-charts offensive stats .
Both of those gains came at the expense of the Rockets ( down 2 percentage points ) , Clippers ( -1 ) and Nuggets ( -1 ) , though L.A. ’ s other top contender remains the second-most likely team to win the West , with a 38 percent chance to make the Finals .
Finally , we get to the championship probabilities .
They changed in similar fashion to the Finals odds — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Lakers ( +3 ) gained , while the Bucks ( -5 ) and Clippers ( -1 ) lost ground .
But overall , the NBA championship picture looks pretty similar to how it did back in March : The Lakers are still favorites , with the Clippers and Bucks sitting behind them .
The Sixers have gained ground ; the small-ball Rockets , Celtics , defending-champion Raptors ( remember them ? )
and Nuggets are hanging around the periphery of the title race .
We lost a few interesting storylines , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ll end up with the true best team as champion .
There ’ s also no way to predict how the league ’ s bubble plan will fare when real people get placed into it and are expected to live their lives and play high-level basketball at the same time .
But if the logistics work , the finish to this strange NBA campaign should be just as intriguing as promised at the start of the season , long before we knew what 2020 had in store for the world .

When last we left the 2019-20 NBA season, the Los Angeles Lakers were championship favorites — with the rival L.A. Clippers and the Milwaukee Bucks not too far behind — as teams prepped for the final 17 or so games in the regular season.
Then, the coronavirus put everything on hold for four months.
Only now is the sport gearing up for its return, with an ambitious plan to play the rest of the season in a “bubble” at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida. Although playing sports during a pandemic will be a huge challenge, league commissioner Adam Silver recently said he feels “pretty confident” in the procedures he and his team have put in place. So with the restart schedule released late last week, we’ve relaunched our FiveThirtyEight NBA prediction model to forecast the mini-regular season finale, the play-in scenarios and, of course, the postseason.
As a refresher: These predictions are based on 100,000 simulations of the rest of the season and playoffs, using team ratings to generate win probabilities for each game. Those team ratings are determined by each player’s performance in RAPTOR — the Robust Algorithm (using) Player Tracking (and) On/Off Ratings — which measures his influence on offense and defense, and playing-time forecasts (including each team’s expected rotation and injuries). There are postseason adjustments for players who typically exceed expectations in the playoffs and a bunch of other bells and whistles you can read about here.
Why it only took one player with coronavirus to shutter sports
Add it all up, and it gives a snapshot of where we think each team stands heading into the restart — which isn’t exactly the same as how things looked when the league hit the pause button. Let’s go through exactly what changed in the forecast between then and now.
Which teams look stronger on paper now?
As a side effect of the long layoff, a number of players have recovered from injuries that slowed them down or kept them out back in March. Among teams invited to Orlando, the Milwaukee Bucks (+74 rating points), Philadelphia 76ers (+66) and Portland Trail Blazers (+55) gained the most points in our talent ratings (which estimate the current state of each team). For the Bucks, the reason is simple: MVP front-runner Giannis Antetokounmpo has recovered from a sprained knee that was affecting him around when the break happened. Likewise, Portland will get back a healthier Jusuf Nurkić; Nurkić, whom RAPTOR considered an elite player last season but who hasn’t played yet in 2019-20, was set to come back in limited fashion in March, and our depth charts have him set to play normal minutes now. And for Philly, Ben Simmons should be at 100 percent again after a back injury had landed him on the injured list in February.
[Related: How Do You Play Sports In The Middle Of A Pandemic?]
Most teams saw their ratings go up for similar reasons, with an extra few months helping banged-up players recover. Among teams not already eliminated, the next-biggest gains in talent rating were the Celtics (+26), Magic (+18) and Grizzlies (+16).
Whose playoff chances changed?
Although 22 teams will make the trip to Disney World, only 16 will make the playoffs — just like a normal postseason. The remaining eight-game regular-season slate will be used to whittle down the field, with a potential play-in tournament finishing that job if a conference’s No. 9 seed finishes within four games of the No. 8. Most of the remaining teams had already all but locked up their playoff status by March — back then, our model gave 15 teams a playoff probability of 98 percent or higher — but the final spot in the West was still legitimately up for grabs, with the Pelicans (60 percent), Grizzlies (15 percent), Blazers (14 percent), Kings (9 percent) and even Spurs (2 percent) in the mix when play stopped.
[Related: Our NBA Predictions]
The revised schedule changed those odds quite a bit. The biggest winners of the new format are Ja Morant and the Grizzlies, whose playoff chances ticked up by 22 percentage points and now sit at 37 percent. The Wizards also went up 6 percentage points in their long-shot Eastern Conference playoff bid, bringing them up to 8 percent.
That means the biggest postseason downgrades came to the Pelicans (down 15 percentage points), who now have only a 45 percent chance, with the Nets (-5 percentage points), Blazers (-4), Kings (-2), Spurs (-2) and Magic (-1) dropping as well. New Orleans’s entire playoff bid was premised on having enough games with Zion Williamson (and an easy schedule) to chase down the Grizz. That last part is still true, but with 10 fewer games left to play, the Pelicans’ margin for error got much smaller.
What about NBA Finals and — especially! — title odds?
But enough about fringe teams that are battling for the right to be overmatched in the first round. Let’s talk about the contenders.
In terms of Finals odds, the biggest beneficiaries of the new format are the aforementioned Sixers, who gained 7 percentage points compared with their standing in March. That is essentially owed to an easy schedule and Simmons’s return to health. The third-year former No. 1 overall pick is one of the league’s most polarizing players, but RAPTOR still considers him extremely valuable (with the 30th-best per-possession rating of anyone logging at least 1,500 minutes). In turn, that change helped drop the Bucks’ chances of winning the East by 8 percentage points — though they remain conference favorites in our revised model, with a 36 percent Finals probability. When we re-ran the model, the Celtics‘ probability of making the Finals increased by a percentage point with a healthy Kemba Walker and Jaylen Brown.
[Related: The Best NBA Players This Season, According To RAPTOR]
Out West, improved Finals odds belong to the Lakers (up 3 percentage points) and Mavericks (+1). L.A. will be without Avery Bradley for the restart — it signed J.R. Smith to pick up the slack, which should be fun — but the model has some Lakers rated higher than either Bradley or Smith actually gaining the missing minutes. Meanwhile, Dallas is a highly interesting team for its own reasons, led by Luka Dončić’s off-the-charts offensive stats. Both of those gains came at the expense of the Rockets (down 2 percentage points), Clippers (-1) and Nuggets (-1), though L.A.’s other top contender remains the second-most likely team to win the West, with a 38 percent chance to make the Finals.
Finally, we get to the championship probabilities. They changed in similar fashion to the Finals odds — the Sixers (up 4 percentage points) and Lakers (+3) gained, while the Bucks (-5) and Clippers (-1) lost ground.
Which NBA teams’ odds changed? Largest change in championship odds since the league paused play in march, according to the FiveThirtyEight model, for NBA teams that had at least a 1 percent chance to make the Finals (either before or after the pause) Finals Odds Title Odds Team Conf. Pre-Pause Current Change Pre-Pause Current Change 76ers East 26% 33% +7 10% 14% +4 Lakers West 41 44 +3 27 30 +3 Mavericks West <1 1 +1 <1 <1 0 Celtics East 20 21 +1 6 6 0 Raptors East 9 9 0 2 2 0 Nuggets West 4 3 -1 1 1 0 Rockets West 14 12 -2 7 7 0 Clippers West 39 38 -1 26 25 -1 Bucks East 44 36 -8 20 15 -5
But overall, the NBA championship picture looks pretty similar to how it did back in March: The Lakers are still favorites, with the Clippers and Bucks sitting behind them. The Sixers have gained ground; the small-ball Rockets, Celtics, defending-champion Raptors (remember them?) and Nuggets are hanging around the periphery of the title race. We lost a few interesting storylines, though, and there is less certainty that we’ll end up with the true best team as champion.
There’s also no way to predict how the league’s bubble plan will fare when real people get placed into it and are expected to live their lives and play high-level basketball at the same time. But if the logistics work, the finish to this strange NBA campaign should be just as intriguing as promised at the start of the season, long before we knew what 2020 had in store for the world.
Subscribe to our sports podcast, Hot Takedown


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-03--How To Convince People To Stop A Pandemic

How do you convey information about the coronavirus in a way that will compel people to change their behavior ?
@ @ @ @ @ Florida , Texas and Arizona , we look at how psychologists recommend we talk about @ @ @ @ @ t 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 @ @ @ @ @ example , here ’ s where to do it on Apple Podcasts and Spotify .

How do you convey information about the coronavirus in a way that will compel people to change their behavior? As COVID-19 cases rise in Florida, Texas and Arizona, we look at how psychologists recommend we talk about public health.
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.


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-03--Can You Stay In Your Lane?

Can You Stay In Your Lane?

Welcome to The Riddler .
Every week , I offer up problems related to the things we hold dear around here : math , logic and probability .
Two puzzles are presented each week : the Riddler Express for those of you who want something bite-size and the Riddler Classic for those of you in the slow-puzzle movement .
Submit a correct answer for either , and you may get a shoutout in next week ’ s column .
If you need a hint or have a favorite puzzle collecting dust in your attic , find me on Twitter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ swimming pool , which has exactly five swimming lanes ( and no general swim area ) , may be opening in the coming weeks .
It remains unclear what social distancing practices will be required , but it ’ s quite possible that swimmers will not be allowed to occupy adjacent lanes .
Under these guidelines , the pool could accommodate at most three swimmers — one each in the first , third and fifth lanes .
Suppose a queue of swimmers arrives at the pool when it opens at 9 a.m. One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ picks a lane from among the lanes that are available ( i.e.
, the lane has no swimmer already and is not adjacent to any lanes with swimmers ) , until no more lanes are available .
At this point , what is the expected number of swimmers in the pool ?
Extra credit : Instead of five lanes , suppose there are N lanes .
When no more lanes are available , what is the expected number of swimmers in the pool ?
Just in time for the Fourth of July , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stars on the American flag : The 50 stars on the American flag are arranged in such a way that they form two rectangles .
The larger rectangle is 5 stars wide , 6 stars long ; the smaller rectangle is embedded inside the larger and is 4 stars wide , 5 stars long .
This square-like pattern of stars is possible because the number of states ( 50 ) is twice a square number ( 25 ) .
Now that the House of Representatives has passed legislation that would make the District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and renamed Washington , Douglass Commonwealth , in honor of Frederick Douglass — a natural question is how to aesthetically arrange 51 stars on the flag .
One pleasing design has a star in the middle , surrounded by concentric pentagons of increasing side length , as shown below .
The innermost pentagon has five stars , and subsequent pentagons are made up of 10 , 15 and 20 stars .
All told , that ’ s 51 stars .
It just so happens that when N equals 50 , N is twice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pentagonal number .
After 50 , what is the next integer N with these properties ?
Congratulations to 👏 Josiah Kollmeyer 👏 of Baton Rouge , Louisiana , winner of last week ’ s Riddler Express .
Last week , you were driving north in Riddler City , whose streets run north-south and east-west .
At every intersection , you randomly turned left or right , each with a 50 percent chance .
After driving through 10 intersections , what was the probability that you were still driving north ?
One way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened after the first few intersections .
It wasn ’ t long before a pattern emerged .
After the first intersection , you had a 50 percent chance of turning east and a 50 percent chance of turning west .
In the event you turned east , upon reaching the second intersection , you then had a 50 percent chance of turning north and a 50 percent chance of turning south .
But in the event you turned west , you still had a 50 percent chance of turning north and a 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these possibilities together , that meant that after the second intersection , you were definitely driving north or south , each with a 50 percent chance .
Following this reasoning , solver Lily Koffman realized that after every odd number of intersections , you were driving east or west with equal probability , and after every even number of intersections , you were driving north or south with equal probability .
Since the given number of intersections , 10 , was even , that meant there was a 50 percent chance you were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extra credit , instead of just turning left or right , you now also had the option of driving straight — each with a one-third chance .
After driving through 10 intersections , now what was the probability that you were still driving north ?
This was certainly a trickier scenario .
Mike Bourdaa solved it by looking at what would happen if there were fewer intersections , hoping to find a pattern .
After N intersections , there were a total of 3N equally likely sequences of turns you could make .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ sequences — or , more precisely , the smallest whole number greater than 3N/4 — resulted in you driving north .
But that certainly wasn ’ t the only approach that worked here .
Juan Casaravilla solved it using linear algebra , by first lining up the probabilities of driving north , south , east or west into a vector , which was initially [ 1 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ] .
Each intersection could be modeled as multiplying this vector by the transition matrix [ 1/3 0 1/3 1/3 ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1/3 0 ; 1/3 1/3 0 1/3 ] , where the output of this multiplication was a new probability vector that revealed your updated chances of driving north , south , east or west .
But why would you ever want to go through the hassle of encoding an intersection as a matrix in the first place ?
Well , if each intersection was equivalent to multiplying by a matrix , then driving through 10 intersections was equivalent to multiplying by 10 identical copies of that matrix — or , better yet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10th power , an operation that any computer can do with ease .
It turned out that your chances of driving in each of the four directions rapidly approached 25 percent .
After 10 intersections , your chances of driving north stood at precisely 4,921/19,683 , or about 25.00127 percent .
Just to be extra sure , a few solvers went ahead and checked their work via computer simulation .
Daniel Silva-Inclan ran 1,000 trials and verified that after 10 intersections , the probabilities of driving in all four directions were very close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definitely a life lesson here .
If you ever find yourself approaching an intersection and you really want to come out of it driving in a random direction — but you know that pulling a U-turn is illegal — then don ’ t lose heart .
Instead , randomly drive straight or turn left or right at each intersection for a few minutes .
Before you know it , you ’ ll be driving in a random direction .
Yes , that was definitely an important life lesson .
Congratulations to 👏 Eli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , winner of last week ’ s Riddler Classic .
Last week , Polly Gawn was playing “ connect the dots.
” She specifically wanted to connect six dots so that they formed the vertices of a hexagon .
To her surprise , she found that there were many different hexagons she could draw , each with the same six vertices .
What was the greatest possible number of unique hexagons Polly could draw using six points ?
If the question had ended there , then there would have been some ambiguity around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” If self-intersecting hexagons ( meaning the edges coincided or crossed each other ) were allowed , then all you had to do was count how many ways she could connect the six points , one at a time .
She could pick any starting point and then choose among the remaining five points to connect it to , then pick four points , then three , then two , and finally one .
But wait — each polygon was the same whether she traversed its points in one direction or the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dividing by two , that meant there were 60 total hexagons Polly could have drawn .
But if you read the hint , you saw that Polly was only counting simple hexagons — that is , hexagons whose sides didn ’ t cross .
This was decidedly harder , but was within the realm of possibility if you had a weekend to kill and a bountiful supply of scratch paper .
Many solvers came close , missing a few potential hexagons .
In the end , it was three points that all lay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three points that produced the most polygons .
Solvers Laurent Lessard and Emma Knight both arrived at this arrangement by leaning on the work of Oswin Aichholzer .
They looked at “ untangled ” complete graphs that had the minimal number of intersections , arguing that this would result in the maximal number of polygons .
Without further ado , here is one such arrangement of six points and all the polygons it produces : Polly could draw at most 29 hexagons — a far cry from the upper bound of 60 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find the greatest possible number of unique heptagons Polly could draw using seven points .
In this case , the upper bound was 420 , suggesting this was beyond the realm of pencil , paper and patience .
Indeed , the greatest possible number of heptagons was 92 .
As some solvers noted , there ’ s an OEIS sequence for that — sequence A063546 , to be exact , which lists the “ largest number of crossing-free Hamiltonian cycles of n points in the plane.
” Or as Polly likes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , simple polygons . )
According to the sequence , Polly could draw at most 339 octagons ( drawn below , courtesy of solver Josh Silverman ) , 1,282 nonagons and 4,994 decagons .
While the precise pattern for this sequence remains unknown , it is known to grow exponentially .
Erik Demaine has followed the literature on this problem and tracked the evolution of the upper and lower bounds .
As of 2011 , it was known that as the number of points n increases , the maximal number of polygons is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not overlook that many of the polygons from the above animations would make awesome corporate logos .
If your mountain biking startup is in need of some edgy graphic design , call me .
Well , aren ’ t you lucky ?
There ’ s a whole book full of the best puzzles from this column and some never-before-seen head-scratchers .
It ’ s called “ The Riddler , ” and it ’ s in stores now !

Welcome to The Riddler. Every week, I offer up problems related to the things we hold dear around here: math, logic and probability. Two puzzles are presented each week: the Riddler Express for those of you who want something bite-size and the Riddler Classic for those of you in the slow-puzzle movement. Submit a correct answer for either, and you may get a shoutout in next week’s column. If you need a hint or have a favorite puzzle collecting dust in your attic, find me on Twitter.
Riddler Express
It’s summertime and my local swimming pool, which has exactly five swimming lanes (and no general swim area), may be opening in the coming weeks. It remains unclear what social distancing practices will be required, but it’s quite possible that swimmers will not be allowed to occupy adjacent lanes.
Under these guidelines, the pool could accommodate at most three swimmers — one each in the first, third and fifth lanes.
Suppose a queue of swimmers arrives at the pool when it opens at 9 a.m. One at a time, each person randomly picks a lane from among the lanes that are available (i.e., the lane has no swimmer already and is not adjacent to any lanes with swimmers), until no more lanes are available.
At this point, what is the expected number of swimmers in the pool?
Extra credit: Instead of five lanes, suppose there are N lanes. When no more lanes are available, what is the expected number of swimmers in the pool?
The solution to this Riddler Express can be found in the following week’s column.
Riddler Classic
Just in time for the Fourth of July, this week’s Classic is about stars on the American flag:
The 50 stars on the American flag are arranged in such a way that they form two rectangles. The larger rectangle is 5 stars wide, 6 stars long; the smaller rectangle is embedded inside the larger and is 4 stars wide, 5 stars long. This square-like pattern of stars is possible because the number of states (50) is twice a square number (25).
Now that the House of Representatives has passed legislation that would make the District of Columbia the fifty-first US state — and renamed Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, in honor of Frederick Douglass — a natural question is how to aesthetically arrange 51 stars on the flag.
One pleasing design has a star in the middle, surrounded by concentric pentagons of increasing side length, as shown below. The innermost pentagon has five stars, and subsequent pentagons are made up of 10, 15 and 20 stars. All told, that’s 51 stars.
Granting statehood to D.C. is the right thing to do and it would also give us this bomb-ass flag. pic.twitter.com/9zQVBRYv37 — Scott Bixby (@scottbix) June 26, 2020
It just so happens that when N equals 50, N is twice a square and N+1 is a centered pentagonal number. After 50, what is the next integer N with these properties?
The solution to this Riddler Classic can be found in the following week’s column.
Solution to last week’s Riddler Express
Congratulations to 👏 Josiah Kollmeyer 👏 of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, winner of last week’s Riddler Express.
Last week, you were driving north in Riddler City, whose streets run north-south and east-west. At every intersection, you randomly turned left or right, each with a 50 percent chance.
After driving through 10 intersections, what was the probability that you were still driving north?
One way to solve this was to look at what happened after the first few intersections. It wasn’t long before a pattern emerged.
After the first intersection, you had a 50 percent chance of turning east and a 50 percent chance of turning west. In the event you turned east, upon reaching the second intersection, you then had a 50 percent chance of turning north and a 50 percent chance of turning south. But in the event you turned west, you still had a 50 percent chance of turning north and a 50 percent chance of turning south. Putting these possibilities together, that meant that after the second intersection, you were definitely driving north or south, each with a 50 percent chance.
Following this reasoning, solver Lily Koffman realized that after every odd number of intersections, you were driving east or west with equal probability, and after every even number of intersections, you were driving north or south with equal probability. Since the given number of intersections, 10, was even, that meant there was a 50 percent chance you were driving north in the end.
For extra credit, instead of just turning left or right, you now also had the option of driving straight — each with a one-third chance. After driving through 10 intersections, now what was the probability that you were still driving north?
This was certainly a trickier scenario. Mike Bourdaa solved it by looking at what would happen if there were fewer intersections, hoping to find a pattern. After N intersections, there were a total of 3N equally likely sequences of turns you could make. Mike found that approximately 3N/4 of these sequences — or, more precisely, the smallest whole number greater than 3N/4 — resulted in you driving north.
But that certainly wasn’t the only approach that worked here. Juan Casaravilla solved it using linear algebra, by first lining up the probabilities of driving north, south, east or west into a vector, which was initially [1; 0; 0; 0]. Each intersection could be modeled as multiplying this vector by the transition matrix [1/3 0 1/3 1/3; 0 1/3 1/3 1/3; 1/3 1/3 1/3 0; 1/3 1/3 0 1/3], where the output of this multiplication was a new probability vector that revealed your updated chances of driving north, south, east or west.
But why would you ever want to go through the hassle of encoding an intersection as a matrix in the first place? Well, if each intersection was equivalent to multiplying by a matrix, then driving through 10 intersections was equivalent to multiplying by 10 identical copies of that matrix — or, better yet, multiplying by the matrix raised to the 10th power, an operation that any computer can do with ease.
It turned out that your chances of driving in each of the four directions rapidly approached 25 percent. After 10 intersections, your chances of driving north stood at precisely 4,921/19,683, or about 25.00127 percent.
Just to be extra sure, a few solvers went ahead and checked their work via computer simulation. Daniel Silva-Inclan ran 1,000 trials and verified that after 10 intersections, the probabilities of driving in all four directions were very close to 25 percent.
There’s definitely a life lesson here. If you ever find yourself approaching an intersection and you really want to come out of it driving in a random direction — but you know that pulling a U-turn is illegal — then don’t lose heart. Instead, randomly drive straight or turn left or right at each intersection for a few minutes. Before you know it, you’ll be driving in a random direction.
Yes, that was definitely an important life lesson.
Solution to last week’s Riddler Classic
Congratulations to 👏 Eli Wolfhagen 👏 of Brooklyn, New York, winner of last week’s Riddler Classic.
Last week, Polly Gawn was playing “connect the dots.” She specifically wanted to connect six dots so that they formed the vertices of a hexagon. To her surprise, she found that there were many different hexagons she could draw, each with the same six vertices.
What was the greatest possible number of unique hexagons Polly could draw using six points?
If the question had ended there, then there would have been some ambiguity around the use of the word “hexagon.” If self-intersecting hexagons (meaning the edges coincided or crossed each other) were allowed, then all you had to do was count how many ways she could connect the six points, one at a time. She could pick any starting point and then choose among the remaining five points to connect it to, then pick four points, then three, then two, and finally one. But wait — each polygon was the same whether she traversed its points in one direction or the other, so she had double counted. Dividing by two, that meant there were 60 total hexagons Polly could have drawn.
But if you read the hint, you saw that Polly was only counting simple hexagons — that is, hexagons whose sides didn’t cross. This was decidedly harder, but was within the realm of possibility if you had a weekend to kill and a bountiful supply of scratch paper.
Many solvers came close, missing a few potential hexagons. In the end, it was three points that all lay within the triangle formed by the other three points that produced the most polygons. Solvers Laurent Lessard and Emma Knight both arrived at this arrangement by leaning on the work of Oswin Aichholzer. They looked at “untangled” complete graphs that had the minimal number of intersections, arguing that this would result in the maximal number of polygons.
Without further ado, here is one such arrangement of six points and all the polygons it produces:
Polly could draw at most 29 hexagons — a far cry from the upper bound of 60.
For extra credit, you were asked to find the greatest possible number of unique heptagons Polly could draw using seven points. In this case, the upper bound was 420, suggesting this was beyond the realm of pencil, paper and patience. Indeed, the greatest possible number of heptagons was 92.
As some solvers noted, there’s an OEIS sequence for that — sequence A063546, to be exact, which lists the “largest number of crossing-free Hamiltonian cycles of n points in the plane.” Or as Polly likes to call them, polygons. (Yes, simple polygons.)
According to the sequence, Polly could draw at most 339 octagons (drawn below, courtesy of solver Josh Silverman), 1,282 nonagons and 4,994 decagons.
While the precise pattern for this sequence remains unknown, it is known to grow exponentially. Erik Demaine has followed the literature on this problem and tracked the evolution of the upper and lower bounds. As of 2011, it was known that as the number of points n increases, the maximal number of polygons is somewhere between 4.642n and 56n.
Let’s not overlook that many of the polygons from the above animations would make awesome corporate logos. If your mountain biking startup is in need of some edgy graphic design, call me.
Want more riddles?
Well, aren’t you lucky? There’s a whole book full of the best puzzles from this column and some never-before-seen head-scratchers. It’s called “The Riddler,” and it’s in stores now!
Want to submit a riddle?
Email Zach Wissner-Gross at riddlercolumn@gmail.com.


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-06--Why Counting On A Convention Bounce This Year Is Risky

If President Trump ’ s Tulsa , Okla. , rally in late June or his Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore are any indication , he wants a pageantry-filled convention with a big in-person audience when he accepts the Republican nomination in late August .
But the likelihood of that happening may be slim .
The 2020 election is taking place in the midst of an unprecedented public health crisis , and it is especially difficult to slow the spread of the coronavirus in large indoor spaces such as an arena , which is the type of space in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s certainly what Trump had envisioned doing this year in Jacksonville , Fla. , although some Republicans think the in-person convention may be canceled .
And on the one hand , Trump ’ s obsession with packing an arena makes some sense .
Party conventions do traditionally boost a candidate ’ s standing in the polls .
Since 1968 , candidates ’ vote share in national polls have increased , on average , by 5 percentage points after conventions .
And considering Trump is currently at 41.5 percent in FiveThirtyEight ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden — a boost in his numbers would be welcome news .
But on the other hand , there ’ s a real question of how much the convention bounce matters anymore .
As you can see in the table above , convention bounces have been getting smaller , which is likely a byproduct of how polarized our politics have become .
There are just fewer swing voters , so it ’ s harder for a candidate to attract support outside of his or her core base of supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter , as once you get past the volatile post-convention period , one party tends to have a lasting lead in the national polls ( though not necessarily the party whose candidate received the biggest post-convention bounce ) .
This year , though , there ’ s a real question about what kind of bounce a virtual convention will produce .
Democrats worry that their mostly virtual event may be unable to replicate the energizing spectacle of a traditional convention .
And although Trump is pushing for a large in-person convention , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the desired effect , either .
The president ’ s Tulsa rally serves as a cautionary tale .
The Trump campaign held it despite calls from public health officials to cancel it or hold it outside because of concerns about exacerbating the spread of the coronavirus in Oklahoma .
Yet only a fraction — 6,200 people — filled the 19,000-seat arena , dashing the campaign ’ s hopes of a full house and prompting it to cancel a speech to supporters in an overflow area .
The rally also resulted in underwhelming news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a half-empty venue , which is not the kind of coverage a candidate in search of a post-convention polling bump wants .
Looking ahead to Jacksonville , it ’ s not hard to imagine similar problems arising .
Florida ’ s coronavirus case load has spiked in recent days , prompting Jacksonville ’ s mayor to implement an indoor mask requirement — a move that is sure to frustrate the president , since he ’ s spoken out against wearing masks at the convention .
We don ’ t know what the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late August , but even if Florida ’ s numbers have improved some , holding a potential “ superspreader ” event probably won ’ t be received very positively .
Just last week , Biden slammed the president for ignoring the crisis , and a sizable in-person crowd might play right into that attack if we find out that some attendees contracted the coronavirus at the convention .
There ’ s also the possibility convention delegates might be particularly high-risk as they tend to be on the older side , and COVID-19 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ line : The coveted post-convention polling bounce may not unfold as in previous years .
The Trump campaign might be putting itself between a rock and a hard place .
Smaller-than-expected attendance because of fears around the coronavirus could produce the sort of negative coverage the president saw after the Tulsa rally — pictures of empty seats and excuses for the small crowd , not to mention questions about why the campaign tried to host a big event in the first place .
But if a large crowd materializes , it could still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the convention turns into a dreaded superspreader event .
We don ’ t know how this will play out , but the potential for blowback is high .

If President Trump’s Tulsa, Okla., rally in late June or his Independence Day celebration at Mount Rushmore are any indication, he wants a pageantry-filled convention with a big in-person audience when he accepts the Republican nomination in late August.
But the likelihood of that happening may be slim. The 2020 election is taking place in the midst of an unprecedented public health crisis, and it is especially difficult to slow the spread of the coronavirus in large indoor spaces such as an arena, which is the type of space in which party conventions are usually held. It’s certainly what Trump had envisioned doing this year in Jacksonville, Fla., although some Republicans think the in-person convention may be canceled.
And on the one hand, Trump’s obsession with packing an arena makes some sense. Party conventions do traditionally boost a candidate’s standing in the polls. Since 1968, candidates’ vote share in national polls have increased, on average, by 5 percentage points after conventions. And considering Trump is currently at 41.5 percent in FiveThirtyEight’s national polling average — 9.6 points behind presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden — a boost in his numbers would be welcome news.
Convention bounces still count, but they’ve gotten smaller Post-convention bounce in voter preferences in polls, 1968 to 2016 Year Party Dates Nominee Bounce 2016 R July 18-21 Donald Trump +3 2016 D July 25-28 Hillary Clinton +2 2012 R Aug. 27-30 Mitt Romney -1 2012 D Sept. 3-6 Barack Obama +2 2008 D Aug. 25-28 Barack Obama +4 2008 R Sept. 1-4 John McCain +6 2004 D July 26-29 John Kerry -1 2004 R Aug. 30-Sept. 2 George W. Bush +2 2000 R July 31-Aug. 3 George W. Bush +8 2000 D Aug. 14-17 Al Gore +8 1996 R Aug. 12-15 Bob Dole +3 1996 D Aug. 26-29 Bill Clinton +5 1992 D July 13-16 Bill Clinton +16 1992 R Aug. 17-20 George H.W. Bush +5 1988 D July 18-21 Michael Dukakis +7 1988 R Aug. 15-18 George H.W. Bush +6 1984 D July 16-19 Walter Mondale +9 1984 R Aug. 20-23 Ronald Reagan +4 1980 R July 14-17 Ronald Reagan +8 1980 D Aug. 11-14 Jimmy Carter +10 1976 D July 12-15 Jimmy Carter +9 1976 R Aug. 16-19 Gerald Ford +5 1972 D July 10-13 George McGovern 0 1972 R Aug. 21-23 Richard Nixon +7 1968 R Aug. 5-8 Richard Nixon +5 1968 D Aug. 26-29 Hubert Humphrey +2 Average +5 A post-convention bounce is the change in a candidate’s polling average one week before the party’s convention and one week after. Source: The American Presidency Project
But on the other hand, there’s a real question of how much the convention bounce matters anymore. As you can see in the table above, convention bounces have been getting smaller, which is likely a byproduct of how polarized our politics have become. There are just fewer swing voters, so it’s harder for a candidate to attract support outside of his or her core base of supporters. That said, conventions can still matter, as once you get past the volatile post-convention period, one party tends to have a lasting lead in the national polls (though not necessarily the party whose candidate received the biggest post-convention bounce).
This year, though, there’s a real question about what kind of bounce a virtual convention will produce. Democrats worry that their mostly virtual event may be unable to replicate the energizing spectacle of a traditional convention. And although Trump is pushing for a large in-person convention, there’s no guarantee this will have the desired effect, either.
[Related: Our 2020 National Polling Averages]
The president’s Tulsa rally serves as a cautionary tale. The Trump campaign held it despite calls from public health officials to cancel it or hold it outside because of concerns about exacerbating the spread of the coronavirus in Oklahoma. Yet only a fraction — 6,200 people — filled the 19,000-seat arena, dashing the campaign’s hopes of a full house and prompting it to cancel a speech to supporters in an overflow area. The rally also resulted in underwhelming news coverage featuring images of listless attendees in a half-empty venue, which is not the kind of coverage a candidate in search of a post-convention polling bump wants.
Looking ahead to Jacksonville, it’s not hard to imagine similar problems arising. Florida’s coronavirus case load has spiked in recent days, prompting Jacksonville’s mayor to implement an indoor mask requirement — a move that is sure to frustrate the president, since he’s spoken out against wearing masks at the convention. We don’t know what the state of the health crisis will be in late August, but even if Florida’s numbers have improved some, holding a potential “superspreader” event probably won’t be received very positively. Just last week, Biden slammed the president for ignoring the crisis, and a sizable in-person crowd might play right into that attack if we find out that some attendees contracted the coronavirus at the convention. There’s also the possibility convention delegates might be particularly high-risk as they tend to be on the older side, and COVID-19 is more dangerous for older people.
[Related: How Popular Is President Donald Trump?]
Bottom line: The coveted post-convention polling bounce may not unfold as in previous years. The Trump campaign might be putting itself between a rock and a hard place. Smaller-than-expected attendance because of fears around the coronavirus could produce the sort of negative coverage the president saw after the Tulsa rally — pictures of empty seats and excuses for the small crowd, not to mention questions about why the campaign tried to host a big event in the first place. But if a large crowd materializes, it could still earn Trump negative headlines, especially if the convention turns into a dreaded superspreader event. We don’t know how this will play out, but the potential for blowback is high.
‘(Masks) might wind up helping Trump’s poll numbers’: Nate Silver


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-06--Voters Who Think The Economy Is The Country’s Biggest Problem Are Pretty Trumpy. That Might Not Help

President Trump could be in trouble .
A lot could still change between now and November , but historically , the strength of the economy is correlated with the electoral strength of the incumbent president , and right now , the economy doesn ’ t look especially good .
Between mid-March and the end of May , more than 38 million Americans applied for unemployment insurance .
And even though the job market has shown some signs of improvement , many Americans are still out of work , and in June more of the people who lost their jobs were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic recovery progresses slowly — or halts and starts backsliding — it ’ s likely to drag down Trump ’ s reelection chances .
At the very least , the downturn takes away what had been perhaps his strongest re-election argument .
Even in more normal election years , many voters still worry about the economy .
The American National Election Studies , which has tracked public opinion since 1948 , has for many years now asked voters what they think is the most important problem facing the country .
And in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have named the economy as their top concern , making it the most frequently cited issue .
In 2008 ( the last time we had a presidential election amid an economic crisis ) , 42 percent of Americans said the economy was the most important political problem .
Since then , the share citing the economy as their top issue has dropped — it was 32 percent in 2012 and just 11 percent in 2016 .
So far in 2020 , polls show that anywhere from 1 in 5 to 1 in 3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concern .
But let ’ s return to 2020 in a moment .
So what do we know about these voters ?
To be clear , everyone is an economic voter to some extent , according to Michael Lewis-Beck , a professor of political science at the University of Iowa who studies economic voting and comparative politics .
His research has found that the economy frequently ranks as the country ’ s most important problem unless there ’ s a big war going on .
“ It ’ s always at or near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s agenda , ” Lewis-Beck told me .
Many voters factor the state of the national economy into their vote even if it ’ s not the most important issue to them .
But that doesn ’ t mean all voters prioritize the economy equally .
In fact , according to our analysis of ANES data , there are two key traits that tend to correspond with being an economy-minded voter : higher income or a college education .
These voters are also more likely to identify as Republican than as Democratic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hispanic than Black .
First up , as the table below shows , those with household incomes of $ 100,000 or more have consistently said the economy is the most important problem facing the country at higher rates than those in households making less .
In 2008 , for instance , only 36 percent of households making less than $ 50,000 said the economy was the top problem , whereas 51 percent of households making $ 100,000 or more said the same .
In 2016 , when all groups were less likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that pattern wasn ’ t as stark , but it was still there .
Next , education .
These differences are less pronounced than differences by income level — education levels produce at most an 11-point gap in the last three presidential election cycles .
But as you can see in the table below , those with at least a bachelor ’ s degree or some college education have consistently been more likely to name the economy as their top concern than those with a high school diploma or less .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 .
And though the pattern here is a little less consistent here than with either income or education , race and ethnicity also reveal something about which voters care most about the economy .
White and Hispanic voters are consistently more likely to put the economy at the top of their list than Black voters .
And in 2016 , a slightly higher percentage of Hispanic voters than white voters said the economy was their No .
1 issue .
Lewis-Beck has found similar trends in his own research , too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single-issue voters on the economy .
There are also meaningful differences between Democrats and Republicans .
Larger shares of Republicans than Democrats have rated the economy as the most important issue facing the U.S. , although as you can see in the table below , partisan differences were never huge and were much less pronounced in 2012 .
Ultimately , what we know is this : The group of voters who prioritize the economy tends to skew wealthier and more educated — and , often , white or Hispanic and Republican .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makeup changes from election to election .
For instance , in 2016 , just 11 percent of voters said the economy was the most important issue , and that small group overwhelmingly broke for Trump — 60 percent backed him , while only 32 percent backed Hillary Clinton .
Whereas in 2008 and 2012 , more voters thought the economy was the most pressing issue ( 42 percent and 32 percent , respectively ) , but they broke for the Democratic candidate , Barack Obama — 51 percent to 46 percent in 2008 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2012 .
So what do we know about these economy-minded voters and which way they may be leaning in 2020 ?
First , it ’ s hard to know exactly how many voters think the economy is the top issue this year , as we don ’ t have a ton of recent polls .
But in three polls from June that asked people about the most important issue affecting their vote , we know that : ( i ) roughly a quarter of Americans are are naming the economy as the top @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still has an advantage with these voters , leading Joe Biden by varying degrees : • In a Reuters/Ipsos poll , 20 percent of voters chose the economy as the most important problem facing the country , and these voters narrowly backed Trump , 44 percent to 41 percent .
• An Economist/YouGov poll found 22 percent of voters rated “ the economy and jobs ” as the most important issue to them , but this survey had Trump with a 44-point lead over Biden ( 70 percent to 26 percent ) with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Axios/SurveyMonkey poll , Trump had a 27-point lead over Biden ( 56 percent to 29 percent ) among the 33 percent of adults who said that jobs and the economy mattered most to them .
More respondents named the economy than any other issue .
Trump ’ s advantage with this group of voters makes sense , as polls show they are more likely to be white , higher income and Republican-leaning ( just as the ANES survey found in past years ) ; they ’ re also far more likely to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least according to the SurveyMonkey poll .
“ Fully 50 % of Trump voters single out jobs and the economy as the most critical set of issues right now , more than double the proportion of Biden voters so focused on these concerns , ” the pollster wrote of its results .
“ For Trump voters , no other issue reaches into double-digits.
” But it ’ s not clear how much this advantage among economy-minded voters actually helps Trump .
That ’ s because these voters are already likely to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Alan Abramowitz , a professor of political science at Emory University .
“ Voters who prioritize the economy tend to be Republicans , so they ’ re already inclined to support the president , ” said Abramowitz .
The economy might also be a less powerful influence on people ’ s vote choice now than it has been in the past due to increased partisanship and the fact that opinions of Trump are pretty baked in at this point , so the state of the economy might not change many minds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re supporting may say more about whether you rate the economy as your top concern rather than the other way around .
Abramowitz was also skeptical that this “ economy-minded ” group of voters will expand into a broader coalition because some voters will consider other issues — like the pandemic — more pressing than the economy this year .
Voters ’ concern about this issue may already be reflected in the fact that health care was either the first or second most popular choice in all three of these recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , current events may increase the salience of issues that weren ’ t on as many voters ’ radar in past elections , such as racism and police brutality .
As Ipsos wrote about their findings , “ Similar to the first two weeks in June , the percentage of respondents who say ‘ other ’ remains higher than average at 17 % .
When asked to specify , racism , police brutality , partisanship and the current administration are common themes being reported.
” In fact , Abramowitz told me , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump could even lose some ground among economy-minded voters .
For instance , voters already disinclined to support Trump likely didn ’ t need an economic downturn to sour on the president — the economy was just one of many factors that shaped their opinion .
Take Trump ’ s overall job approval rating : It continues to hover in the low 40s , and his deficit against Biden in national polls is bigger than ever .
So if the coronavirus pandemic worsens — cases and deaths are rising in some places right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this will hurt Trump ’ s perceived handling of the crisis and drive away some economy-minded voters who were open to voting for him .
Bottom line : It ’ s not clear what role the economy might play in 2020 .
In the last three presidential elections , the economy has been the most commonly named top issue for voters ( although the share of voters saying its the country ’ s biggest problem has changed from cycle to cycle ) .
Historically , white voters and voters with higher incomes or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rank the economy higher than any other issue .
But there ’ s no reason to think the size and makeup of the economy-minded voters group will look like it has in recent general elections .
College-educated white voters have moved dramatically toward Democrats in recent years , and many Americans disapproved of Trump even when the economy was booming .
Which means that while this group looks a lot like Trump ’ s base right now , that could be because non-Trump voters are prioritizing other issues , rather than because Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focused on the economy .
So it ’ s still possible that Trump wins these voters but loses the general election .
The questions now are : If economic conditions are still bad come November , how much does that actually hurt Trump ?
And , of course , how many voters will prioritize the economy over other issues , like police brutality and systemic racism , the COVID-19 pandemic or other major issues ?

Voters Who Think The Economy Is The Country’s Biggest Problem Are Pretty Trumpy. That Might Not Help Him Much.
President Trump could be in trouble. A lot could still change between now and November, but historically, the strength of the economy is correlated with the electoral strength of the incumbent president, and right now, the economy doesn’t look especially good.
Between mid-March and the end of May, more than 38 million Americans applied for unemployment insurance. And even though the job market has shown some signs of improvement, many Americans are still out of work, and in June more of the people who lost their jobs were laid off permanently. And if the economic recovery progresses slowly — or halts and starts backsliding — it’s likely to drag down Trump’s reelection chances. At the very least, the downturn takes away what had been perhaps his strongest re-election argument.
[Related: Which Economic Indicators Best Predict Presidential Elections?]
Even in more normal election years, many voters still worry about the economy. The American National Election Studies, which has tracked public opinion since 1948, has for many years now asked voters what they think is the most important problem facing the country. And in the last three presidential election cycles, Americans have named the economy as their top concern, making it the most frequently cited issue. In 2008 (the last time we had a presidential election amid an economic crisis), 42 percent of Americans said the economy was the most important political problem. Since then, the share citing the economy as their top issue has dropped — it was 32 percent in 2012 and just 11 percent in 2016.
So far in 2020, polls show that anywhere from 1 in 5 to 1 in 3 voters rate the economy as their top concern. But let’s return to 2020 in a moment. So what do we know about these voters?
[Related: Our 2020 National Polling Averages]
To be clear, everyone is an economic voter to some extent, according to Michael Lewis-Beck, a professor of political science at the University of Iowa who studies economic voting and comparative politics. His research has found that the economy frequently ranks as the country’s most important problem unless there’s a big war going on. “It’s always at or near the top of the average voter’s agenda,” Lewis-Beck told me. Many voters factor the state of the national economy into their vote even if it’s not the most important issue to them.
But that doesn’t mean all voters prioritize the economy equally. In fact, according to our analysis of ANES data, there are two key traits that tend to correspond with being an economy-minded voter: higher income or a college education. These voters are also more likely to identify as Republican than as Democratic and are more likely to be white or Hispanic than Black.
[Related: How Popular Is President Donald Trump?]
First up, as the table below shows, those with household incomes of $100,000 or more have consistently said the economy is the most important problem facing the country at higher rates than those in households making less. In 2008, for instance, only 36 percent of households making less than $50,000 said the economy was the top problem, whereas 51 percent of households making $100,000 or more said the same. In 2016, when all groups were less likely to say the economy was their top concern, that pattern wasn’t as stark, but it was still there.
Wealthier voters tend to prioritize the economy Percentage of voters who said the economy was the most important problem facing the country Household Income 2008 2012 2016 $100,000+ 51.1% 37.4% 13.4% $50,000 to $99,999 47.0 35.9 11.3 Less than $50k 35.9 27.7 9.7 Source: American National Election Studies
Next, education. These differences are less pronounced than differences by income level — education levels produce at most an 11-point gap in the last three presidential election cycles. But as you can see in the table below, those with at least a bachelor’s degree or some college education have consistently been more likely to name the economy as their top concern than those with a high school diploma or less. The gap here also narrowed quite a bit in 2016.
More educated voters say the economy is the top problem Percentage of voters who said the economy was the most important problem facing the country Level of education 2008 2012 2016 At least a bachelor’s degree 47.3% 37.2% 12.5% Some college or an associate’s degree 44.0 31.3 11.7 High school graduate or less 36.6 28.0 9.1 Source: American National Election Studies
And though the pattern here is a little less consistent here than with either income or education, race and ethnicity also reveal something about which voters care most about the economy. White and Hispanic voters are consistently more likely to put the economy at the top of their list than Black voters. And in 2016, a slightly higher percentage of Hispanic voters than white voters said the economy was their No. 1 issue. Lewis-Beck has found similar trends in his own research, too, describing Hispanics as close to being single-issue voters on the economy.
More white and Hispanic voters worry about the economy Percentage of voters who said the economy was the most important problem facing the country Race 2008 2012 2016 White 44.1% 32.3% 11.5% Hispanic 43.1 37.6 12.3 Black 31.9 24.2 6.4 Source: American National Election Studies
There are also meaningful differences between Democrats and Republicans. Larger shares of Republicans than Democrats have rated the economy as the most important issue facing the U.S., although as you can see in the table below, partisan differences were never huge and were much less pronounced in 2012.
Republican voters tend to put the economy first Percentage of voters who said the economy was the most important problem facing the country Party 2008 2012 2016 Republicans/lean Republican 45.6% 33.4% 14.5% Pure independents 35.5 29.3 10.8 Democrats/lean Democratic 40.3 31.0 8.0 Pure independents are those who didn’t lean toward either party. Source: American National Election Studies
Ultimately, what we know is this: The group of voters who prioritize the economy tends to skew wealthier and more educated — and, often, white or Hispanic and Republican. But the group’s exact size and makeup changes from election to election. For instance, in 2016, just 11 percent of voters said the economy was the most important issue, and that small group overwhelmingly broke for Trump — 60 percent backed him, while only 32 percent backed Hillary Clinton. Whereas in 2008 and 2012, more voters thought the economy was the most pressing issue (42 percent and 32 percent, respectively), but they broke for the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama — 51 percent to 46 percent in 2008 and 51 percent to 47 percent in 2012.
So what do we know about these economy-minded voters and which way they may be leaning in 2020?
[Related: How Americans View The Coronavirus Crisis And Trump’s Response]
First, it’s hard to know exactly how many voters think the economy is the top issue this year, as we don’t have a ton of recent polls. But in three polls from June that asked people about the most important issue affecting their vote, we know that: (i) roughly a quarter of Americans are are naming the economy as the top issue, and (ii) Trump still has an advantage with these voters, leading Joe Biden by varying degrees:
In a Reuters/Ipsos poll, 20 percent of voters chose the economy as the most important problem facing the country, and these voters narrowly backed Trump, 44 percent to 41 percent.
An Economist/YouGov poll found 22 percent of voters rated “the economy and jobs” as the most important issue to them, but this survey had Trump with a 44-point lead over Biden (70 percent to 26 percent) with this group.
lead over Biden (70 percent to 26 percent) with this group. And in an Axios/SurveyMonkey poll, Trump had a 27-point lead over Biden (56 percent to 29 percent) among the 33 percent of adults who said that jobs and the economy mattered most to them. More respondents named the economy than any other issue.
Trump’s advantage with this group of voters makes sense, as polls show they are more likely to be white, higher income and Republican-leaning (just as the ANES survey found in past years); they’re also far more likely to have voted for Trump in 2016, at least according to the SurveyMonkey poll. “Fully 50% of Trump voters single out jobs and the economy as the most critical set of issues right now, more than double the proportion of Biden voters so focused on these concerns,” the pollster wrote of its results. “For Trump voters, no other issue reaches into double-digits.”
But it’s not clear how much this advantage among economy-minded voters actually helps Trump. That’s because these voters are already likely to be a part of Trump’s base, according to Alan Abramowitz, a professor of political science at Emory University. “Voters who prioritize the economy tend to be Republicans, so they’re already inclined to support the president,” said Abramowitz.
The economy might also be a less powerful influence on people’s vote choice now than it has been in the past due to increased partisanship and the fact that opinions of Trump are pretty baked in at this point, so the state of the economy might not change many minds. All of which means that who you’re supporting may say more about whether you rate the economy as your top concern rather than the other way around.
[Related: Why Counting On A Convention Bounce This Year Is Risky]
Abramowitz was also skeptical that this “economy-minded” group of voters will expand into a broader coalition because some voters will consider other issues — like the pandemic — more pressing than the economy this year. Voters’ concern about this issue may already be reflected in the fact that health care was either the first or second most popular choice in all three of these recent polls.
As we are already seeing, current events may increase the salience of issues that weren’t on as many voters’ radar in past elections, such as racism and police brutality. As Ipsos wrote about their findings, “Similar to the first two weeks in June, the percentage of respondents who say ‘other’ remains higher than average at 17%. When asked to specify, racism, police brutality, partisanship and the current administration are common themes being reported.”
In fact, Abramowitz told me, he thinks there’s a chance that Trump could even lose some ground among economy-minded voters. For instance, voters already disinclined to support Trump likely didn’t need an economic downturn to sour on the president — the economy was just one of many factors that shaped their opinion. Take Trump’s overall job approval rating: It continues to hover in the low 40s, and his deficit against Biden in national polls is bigger than ever. So if the coronavirus pandemic worsens — cases and deaths are rising in some places right now — it’s possible that this will hurt Trump’s perceived handling of the crisis and drive away some economy-minded voters who were open to voting for him.
[Related: The Unemployment Rate Is Falling, But More People Are Losing Their Jobs Permanently]
Bottom line: It’s not clear what role the economy might play in 2020. In the last three presidential elections, the economy has been the most commonly named top issue for voters (although the share of voters saying its the country’s biggest problem has changed from cycle to cycle). Historically, white voters and voters with higher incomes or more education have been more likely to rank the economy higher than any other issue.
But there’s no reason to think the size and makeup of the economy-minded voters group will look like it has in recent general elections. College-educated white voters have moved dramatically toward Democrats in recent years, and many Americans disapproved of Trump even when the economy was booming. Which means that while this group looks a lot like Trump’s base right now, that could be because non-Trump voters are prioritizing other issues, rather than because Trump is gaining supporters among people who are focused on the economy. So it’s still possible that Trump wins these voters but loses the general election. The questions now are: If economic conditions are still bad come November, how much does that actually hurt Trump? And, of course, how many voters will prioritize the economy over other issues, like police brutality and systemic racism, the COVID-19 pandemic or other major issues?
‘(Masks) might wind up helping Trump’s poll numbers’: Nate Silver


fivethirthyeight--2020-07-06--We’re Hiring A Part-Time Social Media Producer

FiveThirtyEight is hiring a part-time social media producer to join our team .
The ideal candidate is someone who is interested in connecting our wonky , data-driven approach to sports and political journalism with audiences across platforms .
This position , along with the head of social , is FiveThirtyEight ’ s voice across social platforms , including Twitter and Facebook .
This team writes engaging and accessible headlines , creates social posts for FiveThirtyEight ’ s main branded accounts and is responsible for growing FiveThirtyEight ’ s audience while increasing engagement and loyalty .
This position involves working with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as audio and video producers , story editors and copy editors to execute strong social campaigns around short- and long-form analyses , videos , podcasts , live coverage and our signature dashboards and forecasts .
This role will require working some evenings .
We ’ re looking for someone with : • Demonstrated experience crafting social copy for a news organization , managing a news organization ’ s social accounts during live events or promoting journalistic work using social media • Experience monitoring analytics tools , such as Chartbeat , to make decisions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to work non-traditional hours during elections , debates and other live news events Interested applicants should send a resume and cover letter to meena.ganesan @ fivethirtyeight.com with “ 538 Social ” in the subject line .

FiveThirtyEight is hiring a part-time social media producer to join our team. The ideal candidate is someone who is interested in connecting our wonky, data-driven approach to sports and political journalism with audiences across platforms.
This position, along with the head of social, is FiveThirtyEight’s voice across social platforms, including Twitter and Facebook. This team writes engaging and accessible headlines, creates social posts for FiveThirtyEight’s main branded accounts and is responsible for growing FiveThirtyEight’s audience while increasing engagement and loyalty.
This position involves working with writers, graphics editors, as well as audio and video producers, story editors and copy editors to execute strong social campaigns around short- and long-form analyses, videos, podcasts, live coverage and our signature dashboards and forecasts.
This role will require working some evenings.
We’re looking for someone with:
Experience working in a newsroom environment and solid news judgement
Demonstrated experience crafting social copy for a news organization, managing a news organization’s social accounts during live events or promoting journalistic work using social media
Strong writing and editing skills
Experience monitoring analytics tools, such as Chartbeat, to make decisions
A deep interest in data journalism
General knowledge of U.S. politics
Ability to work non-traditional hours during elections, debates and other live news events
Interested applicants should send a resume and cover letter to meena.ganesan@fivethirtyeight.com with “538 Social” in the subject line.