fivethirthyeight--2020-10-08--How Did Lindsey Graham End Up In Such A Close Race?

Recent polls of the U.S. Senate race in South Carolina have found third-term Sen. Lindsey Graham effectively tied in his contest against Democrat Jaime Harrison , a former top aide to longtime South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn and a one-time South Carolina Democratic Party chair .
This is pretty surprising at first glance — Graham cruised to victory in 2014 , winning by 15 percentage points .
And Harrison isn ’ t some political juggernaut ; in fact , he ’ s never before won any elective office .
So what ’ s going on here ?
Is Graham actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s look at this from both sides : first , the reasons Harrison has a real chance , and then some factors that make Democrats ousting Graham unlikely .
South Carolina is not that Republican-leaning The polls suggest that at least 45 percent of voters in South Carolina back Harrison , and that ’ s not an usually high number for a Democrat running in the Palmetto State .
Forty-five percent of South Carolinians voted for Barack Obama in 2008 , and 44 percent did in 2012 .
In 2018 , the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of the vote , and the Democratic attorney general candidate 45 percent .
Joe Biden seems likely to get at least 45 percent of the state ’ s vote too .
The reason : The makeup of South Carolina ’ s electorate is relatively good for Democrats ( up to a point ) .
The electorate is about 28 percent Black — a higher percentage than every other state save Georgia , Louisiana , Maryland and Mississippi .
( About 28 percent of Alabama ’ s voters are Black too . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of white voters with college degrees ( 27 percent ) than all of those states but Maryland ( 29 percent ) .
Put those two groups together and you have the conditions for a sizable Democratic vote .
Also , President Trump is slightly less popular in South Carolina than he was in 2016 .
His net job approval rating in South Carolina was +7 at the start of his term ( 50 percent approval , 43 disapproval ) compared to +2 now ( 50 percent approval , 48 percent disapproval ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shift , and the unpopularity of the Trump-led GOP with college-educated white people in cities and surrounding suburbs , gives Democrats more of a chance .
Democrat Joe Cunningham won the congressional district in the Charleston area two years ago , becoming the first Democrat to do so since 1978 .
Recent polls show Trump near or above 50 percent in South Carolina , but the state ’ s senior senator only in the mid-to-high 40s .
So there is almost certainly a small bloc of South Carolinians currently backing Trump but not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University poll , the senator has a -8 net negative approval rating in the state ; Trump is at +0 in that poll .
( So an equal number of voters had favorable and unfavorable views . )
A recent Morning Consult survey found that 84 percent of South Carolina Republican voters backed Graham , compared to 93 percent who supported the president .
Similarly , according to a recent Data for Progress poll , 95 percent of South Carolina Republicans supported Trump , compared to 89 percent who backed Graham .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of self-identified conservative voters were backing Trump , compared to 76 percent supporting Graham .
We are talking about fairly small differences here , so I don ’ t think there is a clear and obvious explanation for why Graham is running behind Trump .
But here is some semi-informed speculation about why some Republicans and conservative-leaning independents who like Trump might be wary of Graham .
In the past , Graham has aligned himself with decidedly un-Trumpy causes and people , from Graham ’ s close relationship with the late Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP to adopt more lenient policies toward undocumented immigrants .
Having served in Congress since 1995 , Graham at this point is the definition of a Washington insider .
Also , Graham spent much of the 2016 campaign blasting Trump in very harsh terms , including calling him a “ complete idiot.
” ( Graham ran for president himself , remember . )
So Republican voters might remember those comments and not trust Graham ’ s post-2016 conversion to Trump diehard .
Indeed , Jordan Ragusa , a political science professor at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some voters skeptical of Graham , including Republicans , might view him as an “ opportunist.
” “ The joke in South Carolina is Lindsey Graham can count to six … His voting behavior changes when he is up for reelection , ” Ragusa said .
( Senators are up for reelection every six years . )
“ There are some strong conservatives who are not convinced Graham is a strong conservative , ” Ragusa added .
Graham , as the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee , will have a high-profile role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court .
But it ’ s not clear that will be a big electoral boost .
On the one hand , Graham will likely be defending Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett , perhaps getting praise from the president along the way .
On the other hand , the Supreme Court process could reinforce the idea that Graham isn ’ t particularly consistent in his political beliefs and positions — he was perhaps the Republican most explicit in saying , repeatedly , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a seat on the Supreme Court in the last year of a president ’ s term , a position he has of course now abandoned .
In a recent debate between the two , Harrison aggressively attacked Graham for flip-flopping on this issue , saying Graham should “ just be a man of it and stand up and say , ‘ You know what , I changed my mind.
’ ” According to the YouGov poll , the Supreme Court issue isn ’ t likely to help either candidate much .
In that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in South Carolina said they would be more likely to back Graham if he voted in favor of Trump ’ s nominee ( the poll was conducted before Barrett was announced as the choice ) , 27 percent said they would be less likely but 45 percent said it would not affect their vote .
Finally , Harrison may have more of a chance of winning simply because he doesn ’ t present much of a target for Republicans .
He ’ s never held office before and doesn ’ t have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , his positions are similar to the center-left approach of Biden .
For example , Harrison is not pushing the Green New Deal or Medicare for All .
All that said , Graham is still the favorite to win .
FiveThirtyEight ’ s Senate model gives him about a 3-in-4 chance of winning .
And there are reasons why Democrats often get oh-so-close to winning in the Palmetto State but almost always fall short .
Most white voters in South Carolina don ’ t vote for Democrats … ever We in the political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ write a lot about demographic groups , particularly the education divide : white voters without a college degree increasingly lean Republican and white voters with college degrees lean Democratic .
But those two blocs vote much differently depending on the state and region .
Both groups are more Republican-leaning in the South than in other regions .
That conservatism probably has something to do with religion ( white voters in Southern states are more likely to be evangelical Protestants ) and race ( white voters in Southern states are more likely to express @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
White voters in the South also tend to be consistently Republican .
That is , they don ’ t really swing between the two parties as they do in a state like Iowa , where Biden could do 6 to 9 percentage points better than Hillary Clinton did four years ago .
At FiveThirtyEight , we call this phenomenon “ elasticity ” — basically , how many voters in a state are persuadable vs. always vote for one party or the other .
And South Carolina is one of the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previous Democrats who have run in South Carolina , had a fairly easy path to 45 percent ( combining the state ’ s black voters and its white Democrats ) but has a much , much harder time getting to 50 percent .
In the YouGov poll , Graham leads by 26 percentage points among white voters overall , by 31 points among white voters without a college degree and by 20 points among white voters with degrees .
( Trump leads Biden by even more among these three groups . )
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Democrat in South Carolina or a Black candidate like Harrison .
Similar to Harrison in South Carolina , polls suggest that Mississippi Democrat Mike Espy ( facing Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith ) and Georgia Democrat Jon Ossoff ( facing Sen. David Purdue ) are in competitive races .
( Ossoff is white , Espy is black . )
But Mississippi and Georgia are also fairly inelastic states .
Espy and Hyde-Smith also faced off in 2018 , and the Republican won fairly narrowly by Mississippi standards ( 54-46 ) .
So the closeness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harrison and Ossoff ’ s chances of actually winning .
They may all be running in states where a virtually all-white bloc of more than 50 percent of the electorate will almost never vote for a Democratic candidate .
Maybe Harrison can be defined negatively The Quinnipiac poll suggests that Harrison ’ s unfavorable ratings are fairly low in part because a lot of South Carolina voters don ’ t know much about him .
In that survey , 48 percent of likely South Carolina voters viewed Harrison favorably , 35 percent viewed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hadn ’ t heard enough about him to have an opinion .
I would expect Graham and South Carolina Republicans to spend the next month linking Harrison to Clinton , Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Sen. Bernie Sanders and other figures likely to be unpopular with South Carolina Republicans and independents .
Harrison doesn ’ t have many connections to those figures , but that likely won ’ t stop Republicans from suggesting that he is a socialist and favors very liberal policies .
I wouldn ’ t want to rule out a Harrison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really big margin , carrying states like Georgia and Texas and only loses South Carolina by 3 points .
In that scenario , maybe Graham runs slightly behind Trump and Harrison wins .
But the more likely scenario is that Harrison gets around 45-47 percent of the vote — but comes up a bit short .
At least , that ’ s what usually happens in South Carolina .

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

Recent polls of the U.S. Senate race in South Carolina have found third-term Sen. Lindsey Graham effectively tied in his contest against Democrat Jaime Harrison, a former top aide to longtime South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn and a one-time South Carolina Democratic Party chair. This is pretty surprising at first glance — Graham cruised to victory in 2014, winning by 15 percentage points. And Harrison isn’t some political juggernaut; in fact, he’s never before won any elective office.
Model Talk: Trump’s position worsens | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
So what’s going on here? Is Graham actually in danger of losing? Let’s look at this from both sides: first, the reasons Harrison has a real chance, and then some factors that make Democrats ousting Graham unlikely.
South Carolina is not that Republican-leaning
The polls suggest that at least 45 percent of voters in South Carolina back Harrison, and that’s not an unusually high number for a Democrat running in the Palmetto State. Forty-five percent of South Carolinians voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and 44 percent did in 2012. In 2018, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in South Carolina received 46 percent of the vote, and the Democratic attorney general candidate 45 percent. Joe Biden seems likely to get at least 45 percent of the state’s vote too.
The reason: The makeup of South Carolina’s electorate is relatively good for Democrats (up to a point). The electorate is about 28 percent Black — a higher percentage than every other state save Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland and Mississippi. (About 28 percent of Alabama’s voters are Black too.) And South Carolina has a higher percentage of white voters with college degrees (27 percent) than all of those states but Maryland (29 percent). Put those two groups together and you have the conditions for a sizable Democratic vote.
Also, President Trump is slightly less popular in South Carolina than he was in 2016. His net job approval rating in South Carolina was +7 at the start of his term (50 percent approval, 43 disapproval) compared to +2 now (50 percent approval, 48 percent disapproval), according to Civiqs data. And that shift, and the unpopularity of the Trump-led GOP with college-educated white people in cities and surrounding suburbs, gives Democrats more of a chance. Democrat Joe Cunningham won the congressional district in the Charleston area two years ago, becoming the first Democrat to do so since 1978.
Graham is running slightly behind Trump
Recent polls show Trump near or above 50 percent in South Carolina, but the state’s senior senator only in the mid-to-high 40s. So there is almost certainly a small bloc of South Carolinians currently backing Trump but not Graham. According to a recent Quinnipiac University poll, the senator has a -8 net negative approval rating in the state; Trump is at +0 in that poll. (So an equal number of voters had favorable and unfavorable views.) A recent Morning Consult survey found that 84 percent of South Carolina Republican voters backed Graham, compared to 93 percent who supported the president. Similarly, according to a recent Data for Progress poll, 95 percent of South Carolina Republicans supported Trump, compared to 89 percent who backed Graham. A recent CBS News/YouGov poll found that 88 percent of self-identified conservative voters were backing Trump, compared to 76 percent supporting Graham.
We are talking about fairly small differences here, so I don’t think there is a clear and obvious explanation for why Graham is running behind Trump. But here is some semi-informed speculation about why some Republicans and conservative-leaning independents who like Trump might be wary of Graham. In the past, Graham has aligned himself with decidedly un-Trumpy causes and people, from Graham’s close relationship with the late Sen. John McCain to his pre-Trump call for the GOP to adopt more lenient policies toward undocumented immigrants. Having served in Congress since 1995, Graham at this point is the definition of a Washington insider. Also, Graham spent much of the 2016 campaign blasting Trump in very harsh terms, including calling him a “complete idiot.” (Graham ran for president himself, remember.) So Republican voters might remember those comments and not trust Graham’s post-2016 conversion to Trump diehard.
Indeed, Jordan Ragusa, a political science professor at the College of Charleston, said that some voters skeptical of Graham, including Republicans, might view him as an “opportunist.”
“The joke in South Carolina is Lindsey Graham can count to six … His voting behavior changes when he is up for reelection,” Ragusa said. (Senators are up for reelection every six years.)
“There are some strong conservatives who are not convinced Graham is a strong conservative,” Ragusa added.
Graham, as the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will have a high-profile role in the process for replacing the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. But it’s not clear that will be a big electoral boost. On the one hand, Graham will likely be defending Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, perhaps getting praise from the president along the way. On the other hand, the Supreme Court process could reinforce the idea that Graham isn’t particularly consistent in his political beliefs and positions — he was perhaps the Republican most explicit in saying, repeatedly, that his party would not try to fill a seat on the Supreme Court in the last year of a president’s term, a position he has of course now abandoned. In a recent debate between the two, Harrison aggressively attacked Graham for flip-flopping on this issue, saying Graham should “just be a man of it and stand up and say, ‘You know what, I changed my mind.’”
According to the YouGov poll, the Supreme Court issue isn’t likely to help either candidate much. In that poll, 28 percent of registered voters in South Carolina said they would be more likely to back Graham if he voted in favor of Trump’s nominee (the poll was conducted before Barrett was announced as the choice), 27 percent said they would be less likely but 45 percent said it would not affect their vote.
Harrison doesn’t give Republicans much to attack
Finally, Harrison may have more of a chance of winning simply because he doesn’t present much of a target for Republicans. He’s never held office before and doesn’t have a record of controversial votes. On policy, his positions are similar to the center-left approach of Biden. For example, Harrison is not pushing the Green New Deal or Medicare for All.
All that said, Graham is still the favorite to win. FiveThirtyEight’s Senate model gives him about a 3-in-4 chance of winning. And there are reasons why Democrats often get oh-so-close to winning in the Palmetto State but almost always fall short.
Most white voters in South Carolina don’t vote for Democrats … ever
We in the political media (myself included) talk and write a lot about demographic groups, particularly the education divide: white voters without a college degree increasingly lean Republican and white voters with college degrees lean Democratic. But those two blocs vote much differently depending on the state and region. Both groups are more Republican-leaning in the South than in other regions. That conservatism probably has something to do with religion (white voters in Southern states are more likely to be evangelical Protestants) and race (white voters in Southern states are more likely to express more negative attitudes towards people of color).
White voters in the South also tend to be consistently Republican. That is, they don’t really swing between the two parties as they do in a state like Iowa, where Biden could do 6 to 9 percentage points better than Hillary Clinton did four years ago. At FiveThirtyEight, we call this phenomenon “elasticity” — basically, how many voters in a state are persuadable vs. always vote for one party or the other. And South Carolina is one of the most inelastic states.
So Harrison, like previous Democrats who have run in South Carolina, had a fairly easy path to 45 percent (combining the state’s black voters and its white Democrats) but has a much, much harder time getting to 50 percent. In the YouGov poll, Graham leads by 26 percentage points among white voters overall, by 31 points among white voters without a college degree and by 20 points among white voters with degrees. (Trump leads Biden by even more among these three groups.)
And this is not a problem just for a Democrat in South Carolina or a Black candidate like Harrison. Similar to Harrison in South Carolina, polls suggest that Mississippi Democrat Mike Espy (facing Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith) and Georgia Democrat Jon Ossoff (facing Sen. David Purdue) are in competitive races. (Ossoff is white, Espy is black.) But Mississippi and Georgia are also fairly inelastic states. Espy and Hyde-Smith also faced off in 2018, and the Republican won fairly narrowly by Mississippi standards (54-46).
So the closeness in the polls may overstate Espy, Harrison and Ossoff’s chances of actually winning. They may all be running in states where a virtually all-white bloc of more than 50 percent of the electorate will almost never vote for a Democratic candidate.
Maybe Harrison can be defined negatively
The Quinnipiac poll suggests that Harrison’s unfavorable ratings are fairly low in part because a lot of South Carolina voters don’t know much about him. In that survey, 48 percent of likely South Carolina voters viewed Harrison favorably, 35 percent viewed him unfavorably and 14 percent said they hadn’t heard enough about him to have an opinion.
I would expect Graham and South Carolina Republicans to spend the next month linking Harrison to Clinton, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Sen. Bernie Sanders and other figures likely to be unpopular with South Carolina Republicans and independents. Harrison doesn’t have many connections to those figures, but that likely won’t stop Republicans from suggesting that he is a socialist and favors very liberal policies.
I wouldn’t want to rule out a Harrison victory. Perhaps Biden wins by a really big margin, carrying states like Georgia and Texas and only loses South Carolina by 3 points. In that scenario, maybe Graham runs slightly behind Trump and Harrison wins. But the more likely scenario is that Harrison gets around 45-47 percent of the vote — but comes up a bit short. At least, that’s what usually happens in South Carolina.
Trump has 3 big problems heading toward Election Day | FiveThirtyEight


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-07--What Went Down During The Vice Presidential Debate

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


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-08--How Can Miami Get Back Into The NBA Finals?

chris.herring ( Chris Herring , senior sportswriter ) : So almost an entire year after we started this bizarre season , we now potentially head into the final game of it .
The Miami Heat , coming off a desperate Game 3 victory , were within striking distance of tying the series during a pivotal Game 4 .
But the Lakers closed the door late and now are one win away from winning their 17th championship .
I ’ d argue that Game 4 was pretty clearly the best game of the series thus far .
What ultimately stood out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what , if anything , can Miami do to make one last run at this thing and hold off the Lakers ?
tchow ( Tony Chow , video producer ) : The thing that stood out the most for me was watching how hard Miami had to work on both ends of the floor to keep it a close game .
Especially in the first half , I thought they were playing really good defense but was thinking there was no way they could keep it up .
I got tired just from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second half , I found a lot of Miami ’ s shot choices very , um … curious .
It felt like time and time again , they were passing up pretty decent looks for more contested and off-balance shots .
Credit to the Lakers defense , sure , but at times it really felt like the Heat were beating themselves .
dubin ( Jared Dubin , FiveThirtyEight contributor ) : What stood out for me was L.A. ’ s defense .
The Lakers were one of the best defensive teams in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s continued in the playoffs .
But Jimmy Butler tore them up pretty good in Game 3 , and was doing the same early in Game 4 until L.A. changed some things up .
He was 3 of 12 after the first quarter , and that mattered a whole lot .
dre.waters ( Andres Waters , FiveThirtyEight contributor ) : The biggest thing to me throughout this whole series has been 3-point shooting .
When we first found out this was the Finals matchup , I was suspicious of the Lakers ’ shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s .
But L.A. has made more threes in every game .
dubin : As for what they can do to win … call up the folks who digitally de-aged Robert De Niro and Al Pacino for “ The Irishman , ” and ask them about doing the same to Andre Iguodala and hope he can make things more difficult for LeBron James ?
Or maybe cloning .
Two Bam Adebayos would be good , too .
tchow : As for what Miami can do , I don ’ t really know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who can give them similar offensive output as Duncan Robinson but not get picked on while they play defense ?
dubin : I think that ’ s Tyler Herro , who gets picked on , too , but not as much .
“ Duncan Robinson but not get picked on while they play defense ” is basically Klay Thompson , right ?
If you assume that the player is actually a good defender , I mean .
chris.herring : Kentavious Caldwell-Pope wasn ’ t necessarily the MVP of Game 4 .
But I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ game without him tchow : Yeah , in Game 4 , it felt like anytime Miami took the lead or tied it up , a KCP corner three stopped the momentum .
chris.herring : Someone tweeted at me asking whether LeBron had ever had a negative plus/minus in a Finals game , like he did last night , and still managed to win .
Prompted me to look it up .
It ’ s only the second time it ’ s happened in his career .
Only other example was Game 6 against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played with Miami .
dubin : KCP was awesome .
I was shocked to see him pass the ball so well .
He had five assists for only the fifth time in 88 games this season .
Some of the passes were really nifty , too .
chris.herring : To win in the Finals with LeBron being somewhat mortal for large stretches , it requires a role guy to step up .
And KCP did that .
A couple of passes he threw were insane .
I ’ d never seen him do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this postseason when he has 10+ points .
dre.waters : Earlier when we were asking who would be the guy to step up for them , I thought it would have been Danny Green or Kyle Kuzma , but KCP has been consistent for them throughout the Finals .
He ’ s scored double digits in all but one game .
tchow : I forgot who tweeted this last night , but I saw someone say they didn ’ t realize the Lakers had a Big 3 , talking about KCP ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dubin : Speaking of the Lakers ’ record when [ X event ] happens , I saw this wild stat from Nick Wright : chris.herring : The Lakers become Mariano Rivera when they take a lead into the fourth .
dubin : It conveniently cuts out the 2018-19 season , but that season was obviously an outlier in a lot of ways .
chris.herring : Let ’ s get back to something Jared and Tony brought up earlier : Miami ’ s offense , when trying to figure out how to poke holes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has seemingly never had too big a problem finding a rhythm early in these games .
In a couple of them , Games 1 and 3 , they ’ ve even jumped out to quick 13-point leads .
What happened in Game 4 , though , seemed like a bit of a trump card .
Throwing Anthony Davis on Butler had a huge impact on Butler struggling to score .
Does Miami have an answer for that ?
Can they try putting Davis in screens to loosen things up there ?
dubin : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the offense .
It leaves them with really only two guys ( Butler and Herro ) who can create off the dribble and really only one ( Herro ) who consistently gets them out on the break .
Dragić is their best guy in both of those areas .
From our Game 4 story on Wednesday , re : Chris ’ s question about Davis on Butler : Prior to Game 4 , Davis had defended Butler on 16 possessions during this series , according to Second Spectrum , and Butler didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first quarter of Game 4 , things flipped , with Butler scoring 7 points on 11 half-court possessions during which he was defended by Davis .
But L.A. changed its defensive strategy against Butler during the final three quarters — even while still using Davis as his primary defender — and that change worked to great effect .
The Lakers decided that rather than primarily switching Butler ’ s pick and rolls , they would have Davis play things straight up , while also varying whether he fought over the screen or ducked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 9 points on the six opening-period Butler ball-screens that saw Davis switch , L.A. had him switch only twice the rest of the game .
The 11 screen and rolls Davis defended the rest of the way ( only two of which were switched ) yielded just 6 Heat points , while Davis defended Butler on 36 total half-court possessions in the second through fourth quarters and kept him to only 4 points .
chris.herring : In other words , Davis and the Lakers are saying , “ We can damn near taste @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t switching these screens , no matter what.
” dubin : Maybe having Butler attack without a screen ( so there is nothing for Davis to go under ) in isolation would be better , hoping that he can force some help and spray the ball out to shooters .
tchow : I think switching up how the defenders played Butler was visibly frustrating him last night .
He never got comfortable coming off screens because he wasn ’ t sure if the switch was there or if Davis was going over or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lakers to continue throwing different looks at Butler in Game 5 to try to close this out .
But to Jared ’ s point earlier , every time they went to Dragić standing by the sidelines in his mask and polo , I couldn ’ t help but think how this series might be different if he were healthy .
I ’ m not saying they wouldn ’ t be in this 3-1 hole — that could still be the case .
But Miami really missed him on the court , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dre.waters : Dragić ’ s ability to get into the paint would have definitely helped .
chris.herring : I ’ m not even totally , totally convinced Bam is healthy , either .
He ’ s out there , and he was good/impactful enough .
dubin : The video of Dragić wincing on the bench before the game , clearly wanting to play but also clearly not being physically up to it , made my heart hurt .
chris.herring : But Bam is their best passer and arguably their best playmaker , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his lowest total since a game in January .
Herro can create things , but he ’ s also a rookie who understandably makes more mistakes than he does big shots .
Miami took a number of bad shots late in the game , while within a possession or a two .
tchow : If I have to hear another announcer remind me that Herro is 20 years old one more f******* time … chris.herring : But I think some of that is 1 ) having no choice but to rely on Herro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 ) the fear that they aren ’ t going to get better looks against a really tough defense , so Miami ’ s thinking , “ Let me rush this open one that I have at this very moment — even if it ’ s too early.
” dre.waters : Even though they were hanging close through the game , it really never felt like the Heat found their rhythm in the second half .
dubin : Herro took some truly horrendous shots last night .
According to Second Spectrum , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was 44.4 , and it was 38.7 in quarters 2 through 4. dubin : The thing is , though , I ’ m not entirely sure that was his fault .
He was forced into doing way too much creating .
chris.herring : Yeah .
You can ’ t really fault him , or pull him .
There isn ’ t much alternative .
tchow : There are only so many tear-drop rainbow floaters you can make over Anthony Davis before the stats catch up with you , you know ?
chris.herring : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Bam : He ’ s fantastic at creating for other guys .
But he struggles to create his own looks .
So Herro kind of has to have the ball if Butler is being smothered by the DPOY runner-up tchow : That ’ s why they need Goran !
Sorry , I know .
the point has been made .
dubin : Among 165 players who took at least 500 shots this regular season and postseason combined , the worst expected effective field-goal percentage mark belonged to DeMar DeRozan at … 44.4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those being worst-in-the-league-type numbers .
chris.herring : LOL .
If I ’ m being honest , I knew DeRozan was the guy who ranked worst from previous research I ’ ve done .
I just didn ’ t want him to catch a stray !
dre.waters : I saw people asking why Kendrick Nunn was playing so many minutes last night , even though he was struggling offensively … it was definitely out of necessity .
tchow : LOL , Andres , I ’ ll admit I definitely had that question last night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t an offense designed for folks to try and do as much on their own as they ’ ve had to do .
Miami has really nice depth .
But the injury bug bit them in the spot where they don ’ t have much .
dubin : Dragić ’ s restart performance is a huge part of why Miami is even in the Finals .
It was probably the single biggest differentiator in the quality of the Heat ’ s pre-hiatus and bubble play .
Him going down really was huge .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that for them during the regular season , but he ’ s never really had a chance to get into any type of flow at all through the playoffs .
Then he was thrown in these huge moments and it hasn ’ t worked out so well .
dubin : Dragic provides way more off the bounce than even Nunn did during the regular season , though .
Nunn averaged 12.5 drives per 100 possessions in the regular season compared with 20.6 for Dragic in the playoffs .
Not having someone who bends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an offense .
Dribble penetration from the perimeter just warps coverages differently than post-ups or wing isolations .
chris.herring : It shouldn ’ t totally be surprising this many years in , given what we ’ ve seen them do in the past .
But watching LeBron and Davis take over late was something .
I was kind of confused by how often LeBron was settling for really long 3-pointers .
dubin : He hit two of them when I was saying to myself , “ That ’ s a dumb shot.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was in large part because of how Miami was playing the screens .
chris.herring : But between Davis just wreaking havoc , and Bron scoring 20 of his 28 after halftime , it just seems like they ’ re always destined to find a way .
Speaking of which : I ’ m already a little frustrated by what a Lakers win will do , as far as the narrative .
Particularly as it relates to the idea of destiny .
But it ’ s been pretty awesome seeing Davis do this .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that leave you in awe this late in his career .
tchow : Speaking of late in their careers , BIG shoutout to Sue Bird and the Seattle Storm , who just won their fourth WNBA title .
Bird won the title in her 17th season .
Maybe LeBron will follow suit on Friday ?
dubin : Forget LeBron and MJ , Sue Bird is the GOAT .
I ’ m not going to lie , when I saw that Bron had almost as many turnover as he did points in the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ d get a win last night .
dubin : Re : destiny , everybody making so much effort to find 8s and 24s and 81s everywhere is really making me queasy .
Especially after I saw someone say on Tuesday that Vanessa Bryant has been saying she doesn ’ t want people sending her pictures of Kobe and Gigi all the time and whatnot .
chris.herring : Yep .
I was avoiding specifics , but that ’ s exactly what I meant .
I understand why it ’ s a narrative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his proximity to Kobe .
But on the flip side : If the Lakers were to somehow blow this , no one would be talking about how they somehow dishonored Kobe .
tchow : That ’ s a very good point .
And I ’ m with y ’ all .
It ’ s already been exhausting — and it will be even more so if they win .
chris.herring : And while a lot of people will say a title honors him … I also think we can separate those two things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me if LeBron or members of the organization say he ’ s on their hearts .
dubin : I also feel like it kind of discredits the actual team a bit ?
I don ’ t know .
It makes me feel weird .
Even weirder than the segment of Laker fans who for some reason care a whole lot about whether people feel this ( potential ) title is “ earned.
” chris.herring : Idk .
I ’ ve dealt with some substantial loss in my own life .
I just see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion with it Pivoting for a moment : Is there a debate with regards to Finals MVP , assuming Davis and LeBron play equally well to finish the series ?
Or is it LeBron going away ?
tchow : Oooooooooh , good question .
My knee-jerk reaction was gon na be “ of course it ’ s LeBron , ” but wait a minute … dubin : Oh , this is fun !
I kind of think it should be Davis going away , but that LeBron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Given that we are FiveThirtyEight , wHaT dO tHe StAts SaY ?
dubin : I think it ’ s pretty clear that LeBron is the best player in the series , but I also think it ’ s pretty clear that Davis has had the most impact on this series .
dre.waters : That ’ s why I ’ d say Davis too , Jared .
chris.herring : Yeah .
I don ’ t know who I ’ d go with yet .
But to me , watching Davis shut down Butler , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was handing Butler off on soft switches while dude went off for a 40-point triple-double ?
It ’ s certainly not cut and dry to me .
Davis has absolutely had a bigger impact at times in this series .
Dubin : It ’ s all so intertwined , though , because LeBron being LeBron also allows Davis to do so much of what he does .

chris.herring (Chris Herring, senior sportswriter): So almost an entire year after we started this bizarre season, we now potentially head into the final game of it. The Miami Heat, coming off a desperate Game 3 victory, were within striking distance of tying the series during a pivotal Game 4. But the Lakers closed the door late and now are one win away from winning their 17th championship.
I’d argue that Game 4 was pretty clearly the best game of the series thus far. What ultimately stood out to you all from it? And what, if anything, can Miami do to make one last run at this thing and hold off the Lakers?
tchow (Tony Chow, video producer): The thing that stood out the most for me was watching how hard Miami had to work on both ends of the floor to keep it a close game. Especially in the first half, I thought they were playing really good defense but was thinking there was no way they could keep it up. I got tired just from watching them.
And then in the second half, I found a lot of Miami’s shot choices very, um … curious. It felt like time and time again, they were passing up pretty decent looks for more contested and off-balance shots. Credit to the Lakers defense, sure, but at times it really felt like the Heat were beating themselves.
dubin (Jared Dubin, FiveThirtyEight contributor): What stood out for me was L.A.’s defense. The Lakers were one of the best defensive teams in the league all season, and that’s continued in the playoffs. But Jimmy Butler tore them up pretty good in Game 3, and was doing the same early in Game 4 until L.A. changed some things up. He was 3 of 12 after the first quarter, and that mattered a whole lot.
dre.waters (Andres Waters, FiveThirtyEight contributor): The biggest thing to me throughout this whole series has been 3-point shooting. When we first found out this was the Finals matchup, I was suspicious of the Lakers’ shooting — and I had faith in Miami’s. But L.A. has made more threes in every game.
dubin: As for what they can do to win … call up the folks who digitally de-aged Robert De Niro and Al Pacino for “The Irishman,” and ask them about doing the same to Andre Iguodala and hope he can make things more difficult for LeBron James?
Or maybe cloning. Two Bam Adebayos would be good, too.
tchow: As for what Miami can do, I don’t really know. Is there someone on their roster who can give them similar offensive output as Duncan Robinson but not get picked on while they play defense?
dubin: I think that’s Tyler Herro, who gets picked on, too, but not as much.
“Duncan Robinson but not get picked on while they play defense” is basically Klay Thompson, right? If you assume that the player is actually a good defender, I mean.
chris.herring: Kentavious Caldwell-Pope wasn’t necessarily the MVP of Game 4. But I don’t think L.A. wins that game without him
tchow: Yeah, in Game 4, it felt like anytime Miami took the lead or tied it up, a KCP corner three stopped the momentum.
chris.herring: Someone tweeted at me asking whether LeBron had ever had a negative plus/minus in a Finals game, like he did last night, and still managed to win. Prompted me to look it up. It’s only the second time it’s happened in his career. Only other example was Game 6 against the Spurs in 2013, when he played with Miami.
dubin: KCP was awesome. I was shocked to see him pass the ball so well. He had five assists for only the fifth time in 88 games this season. Some of the passes were really nifty, too.
chris.herring: To win in the Finals with LeBron being somewhat mortal for large stretches, it requires a role guy to step up. And KCP did that. A couple of passes he threw were insane. I’d never seen him do that! The Lakers are now 12-1 this postseason when he has 10+ points.
dre.waters: Earlier when we were asking who would be the guy to step up for them, I thought it would have been Danny Green or Kyle Kuzma, but KCP has been consistent for them throughout the Finals. He’s scored double digits in all but one game.
tchow: I forgot who tweeted this last night, but I saw someone say they didn’t realize the Lakers had a Big 3, talking about KCP’s performance for them in these playoffs.
dubin: Speaking of the Lakers’ record when [X event] happens, I saw this wild stat from Nick Wright:
The Lakers are now 56-0 when leading after 3 quarters, the best in NBA history. The 2018 Cavs were the 4th best team in NBA history when leading after 3, at 50-1. Which means in LeBron’s last 2 full seasons his teams are an impossible 106-1 when leading after the 3rd quarter. — nick wright (@getnickwright) October 7, 2020
tchow: 106-1!
chris.herring: The Lakers become Mariano Rivera when they take a lead into the fourth.
dre.waters: That’s ridiculous!!
dubin: It conveniently cuts out the 2018-19 season, but that season was obviously an outlier in a lot of ways.
chris.herring: Let’s get back to something Jared and Tony brought up earlier: Miami’s offense, when trying to figure out how to poke holes in L.A.’s defense.
Miami has seemingly never had too big a problem finding a rhythm early in these games. In a couple of them, Games 1 and 3, they’ve even jumped out to quick 13-point leads. What happened in Game 4, though, seemed like a bit of a trump card. Throwing Anthony Davis on Butler had a huge impact on Butler struggling to score. Does Miami have an answer for that? Can they try putting Davis in screens to loosen things up there?
dubin: Not having Goran Dragić has really hampered the offense. It leaves them with really only two guys (Butler and Herro) who can create off the dribble and really only one (Herro) who consistently gets them out on the break. Dragić is their best guy in both of those areas.
From our Game 4 story on Wednesday, re: Chris’s question about Davis on Butler:
Prior to Game 4, Davis had defended Butler on 16 possessions during this series, according to Second Spectrum, and Butler didn’t score at all. In the first quarter of Game 4, things flipped, with Butler scoring 7 points on 11 half-court possessions during which he was defended by Davis.
But L.A. changed its defensive strategy against Butler during the final three quarters — even while still using Davis as his primary defender — and that change worked to great effect.
The Lakers decided that rather than primarily switching Butler’s pick and rolls, they would have Davis play things straight up, while also varying whether he fought over the screen or ducked under it. After the Heat got 9 points on the six opening-period Butler ball-screens that saw Davis switch, L.A. had him switch only twice the rest of the game. The 11 screen and rolls Davis defended the rest of the way (only two of which were switched) yielded just 6 Heat points, while Davis defended Butler on 36 total half-court possessions in the second through fourth quarters and kept him to only 4 points.
chris.herring: In other words, Davis and the Lakers are saying, “We can damn near taste the trophy. So we aren’t switching these screens, no matter what.”
dubin: Maybe having Butler attack without a screen (so there is nothing for Davis to go under) in isolation would be better, hoping that he can force some help and spray the ball out to shooters.
tchow: I think switching up how the defenders played Butler was visibly frustrating him last night. He never got comfortable coming off screens because he wasn’t sure if the switch was there or if Davis was going over or fighting through it. I would expect the Lakers to continue throwing different looks at Butler in Game 5 to try to close this out.
But to Jared’s point earlier, every time they went to Dragić standing by the sidelines in his mask and polo, I couldn’t help but think how this series might be different if he were healthy. I’m not saying they wouldn’t be in this 3-1 hole — that could still be the case. But Miami really missed him on the court, especially now with Bam healthy as well.
chris.herring: Yeah. The injury stuff has sucked.
dre.waters: Dragić’s ability to get into the paint would have definitely helped.
chris.herring: I’m not even totally, totally convinced Bam is healthy, either.
He’s out there, and he was good/impactful enough.
dubin: The video of Dragić wincing on the bench before the game, clearly wanting to play but also clearly not being physically up to it, made my heart hurt.
chris.herring: But Bam is their best passer and arguably their best playmaker, and he finished with only one assist — his lowest total since a game in January.
Herro can create things, but he’s also a rookie who understandably makes more mistakes than he does big shots. Miami took a number of bad shots late in the game, while within a possession or a two.
tchow: If I have to hear another announcer remind me that Herro is 20 years old one more f******* time …
dre.waters: LOL
chris.herring: But I think some of that is 1) having no choice but to rely on Herro, who’s young, and 2) the fear that they aren’t going to get better looks against a really tough defense, so Miami’s thinking, “Let me rush this open one that I have at this very moment — even if it’s too early.”
dre.waters: Even though they were hanging close through the game, it really never felt like the Heat found their rhythm in the second half.
dubin: Herro took some truly horrendous shots last night. According to Second Spectrum, his expected effective field-goal percentage for the game was 44.4, and it was 38.7 in quarters 2 through 4.
chris.herring: Wow, Jared. Those are easily worst-in-the-league-type numbers.
dubin: The thing is, though, I’m not entirely sure that was his fault. He was forced into doing way too much creating.
chris.herring: Yeah. You can’t really fault him, or pull him. There isn’t much alternative.
tchow: There are only so many tear-drop rainbow floaters you can make over Anthony Davis before the stats catch up with you, you know?
chris.herring: That’s part of the challenge with Bam: He’s fantastic at creating for other guys. But he struggles to create his own looks. So Herro kind of has to have the ball if Butler is being smothered by the DPOY runner-up
tchow: That’s why they need Goran! Sorry, I know. the point has been made.
dubin: Among 165 players who took at least 500 shots this regular season and postseason combined, the worst expected effective field-goal percentage mark belonged to DeMar DeRozan at … 44.4! So Chris is absolutely right about those being worst-in-the-league-type numbers.
chris.herring: LOL. If I’m being honest, I knew DeRozan was the guy who ranked worst from previous research I’ve done. I just didn’t want him to catch a stray!
dre.waters: I saw people asking why Kendrick Nunn was playing so many minutes last night, even though he was struggling offensively … it was definitely out of necessity.
chris.herring: Nunn’s offense was a struggle bus, too.
tchow: LOL, Andres, I’ll admit I definitely had that question last night too.
chris.herring: This isn’t an offense designed for folks to try and do as much on their own as they’ve had to do. Miami has really nice depth. But the injury bug bit them in the spot where they don’t have much.
dubin: Dragić’s restart performance is a huge part of why Miami is even in the Finals. It was probably the single biggest differentiator in the quality of the Heat’s pre-hiatus and bubble play. Him going down really was huge.
dre.waters: And Nunn was good at that for them during the regular season, but he’s never really had a chance to get into any type of flow at all through the playoffs. Then he was thrown in these huge moments and it hasn’t worked out so well.
dubin: Dragic provides way more off the bounce than even Nunn did during the regular season, though. Nunn averaged 12.5 drives per 100 possessions in the regular season compared with 20.6 for Dragic in the playoffs. Not having someone who bends the defense like that is so damaging for an offense. Dribble penetration from the perimeter just warps coverages differently than post-ups or wing isolations.
chris.herring: It shouldn’t totally be surprising this many years in, given what we’ve seen them do in the past. But watching LeBron and Davis take over late was something.
I was kind of confused by how often LeBron was settling for really long 3-pointers.
dubin: He hit two of them when I was saying to myself, “That’s a dumb shot.”
tchow: I think that it was in large part because of how Miami was playing the screens.
chris.herring: But between Davis just wreaking havoc, and Bron scoring 20 of his 28 after halftime, it just seems like they’re always destined to find a way.
Speaking of which: I’m already a little frustrated by what a Lakers win will do, as far as the narrative. Particularly as it relates to the idea of destiny. But it’s been pretty awesome seeing Davis do this. And LeBron still has so many moments that leave you in awe this late in his career.
tchow: Speaking of late in their careers, BIG shoutout to Sue Bird and the Seattle Storm, who just won their fourth WNBA title. Bird won the title in her 17th season. Maybe LeBron will follow suit on Friday?
dubin: Forget LeBron and MJ, Sue Bird is the GOAT.
dre.waters: ‼
I’m not going to lie, when I saw that Bron had almost as many turnover as he did points in the first half, I was really questioning if they’d get a win last night.
dubin: Re: destiny, everybody making so much effort to find 8s and 24s and 81s everywhere is really making me queasy. Especially after I saw someone say on Tuesday that Vanessa Bryant has been saying she doesn’t want people sending her pictures of Kobe and Gigi all the time and whatnot.
chris.herring: Yep. I was avoiding specifics, but that’s exactly what I meant. I understand why it’s a narrative. I also understand LeBron, and his proximity to Kobe. But on the flip side: If the Lakers were to somehow blow this, no one would be talking about how they somehow dishonored Kobe.
tchow: That’s a very good point. And I’m with y’all. It’s already been exhausting — and it will be even more so if they win.
chris.herring: And while a lot of people will say a title honors him … I also think we can separate those two things. Though it wouldn’t surprise me if LeBron or members of the organization say he’s on their hearts.
dubin: I also feel like it kind of discredits the actual team a bit? I don’t know. It makes me feel weird.
Even weirder than the segment of Laker fans who for some reason care a whole lot about whether people feel this (potential) title is “earned.”
chris.herring: Idk. I’ve dealt with some substantial loss in my own life. I just see it as an unnecessary narrative. But certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion with it
Pivoting for a moment: Is there a debate with regards to Finals MVP, assuming Davis and LeBron play equally well to finish the series? Or is it LeBron going away?
tchow: Oooooooooh, good question. My knee-jerk reaction was gonna be “of course it’s LeBron,” but wait a minute …
dubin: Oh, this is fun! I kind of think it should be Davis going away, but that LeBron might win it anyway.
dre.waters: Personally, I’d lean Davis
tchow: Given that we are FiveThirtyEight, wHaT dO tHe StAts SaY?
dubin: I think it’s pretty clear that LeBron is the best player in the series, but I also think it’s pretty clear that Davis has had the most impact on this series.
dre.waters: That’s why I’d say Davis too, Jared.
chris.herring: Yeah. I don’t know who I’d go with yet. But to me, watching Davis shut down Butler, while just one game earlier, LeBron was handing Butler off on soft switches while dude went off for a 40-point triple-double? It’s certainly not cut and dry to me. Davis has absolutely had a bigger impact at times in this series.
Dubin: It’s all so intertwined, though, because LeBron being LeBron also allows Davis to do so much of what he does.
tchow: I’m gonna go with Tyler Herro.
Check out our latest NBA predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-08--Does Trump Need The Next Debate?

Does Trump Need The Next Debate?

UPDATE ( Oct. 8 , 2020 , 12:45 p.m. ) : President Trump has now agreed to participate in an in-person presidential debate on Oct. 22 , an idea that the Biden campaign had initially proposed after Trump said he would not participate in the virtual debate scheduled for Oct. 15 .
The third presidential debate will take place Oct. 29 , according to Trump ’ s campaign manager , Bill Stepien .
Welcome to FiveThirtyEight ’ s politics chat .
The transcript below has been lightly edited .
sarah ( Sarah Frostenson , politics editor ) : On Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that next week ’ s presidential debate would be held virtually .
President Trump , however , has said that he isn ’ t going to waste his time with a virtual debate , promising instead to hold a rally .
Trump is down 9.8 points in national polls and is steadily losing ground each day in our forecast to Biden , as we inch ever closer to the election .
Refusing then to participate in the debate when he could use it as an opportunity to mount a comeback against former vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Doesn ’ t Trump need the debates to mount a comeback ?
Let ’ s talk Trump ’ s case for — and the case against — needing the debates .
OK , what ’ s the case for him needing them ?
geoffrey.skelley ( Geoffrey Skelley , elections analyst ) : He needs something .
# analysis But seriously , the debates are among the few , regularly scheduled major moments in the fall campaign , so they do present an opportunity to shake things up , even if they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natesilver ( Nate Silver , editor in chief ) : To a first approximation , I agree with that , although it ’ s overstated .
Our research on primary debates suggested that a debate is equivalent to something like six to 10 days of normal campaigning and news , in terms of how much they move the polls .
So it ’ s as if Trump is taking a week off the clock in an election in which he trails by 10 points .
With that said , maybe this ups the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is one .
geoffrey.skelley : But we also can ’ t know given Trump ’ s COVID-19 diagnosis whetherif Trump is really up for a two-hour debate right now , so perhaps he ’ s avoiding something that could be even more damaging .
sarah : One thing we talked about a lot going into the first presidential debate , is how much that first debate ( more than the others ) can really shake things up , but as former FiveThirtyEighter Harry Enten has also written , the second debate is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s no reason to believe that the person who didn ’ t do well in the first debate rebounds in the second .
Isn ’ t it possible then , that Trump , holding his own rally in which he doesn ’ t have to play by any moderator rules , isn ’ t necessarily a terrible move ?
nrakich ( Nathaniel Rakich , elections analyst ) : The problem is that he ’ s been holding campaign rallies all year long , and they haven ’ t helped him overtake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when cable news would air his rallies nationally are over .
Maybe they get some nice local earned media , but that simply isn ’ t gon na measure up to a debate , as Nate mentioned .
geoffrey.skelley : It depends on the coverage .
If it ’ s “ Trump hasn ’ t recovered from COVID-19 and it ’ s irresponsible to be holding rallies , ” I can ’ t imagine that helps him when 60 percent of the country said Trump was wrong to say we shouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said if he ’ d taken the coronavirus more seriously , he probably wouldn ’ t have gotten sick .
natesilver : Yeah , Trump is a fairly bad debater to begin with and it ’ s fairly likely that he would still be experiencing physical or mental ailments by next week thanks to his COVID-19 diagnosis .
So the CPD gives him an excuse to pull out rather than him looking like a 🐔 .
geoffrey.skelley : And what if his rally is sparsely attended or looks that way in pictures ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ over again .
natesilver : Nobody will give a shit about the rally either way , I don ’ t think .
Unless , again , Trump appears sick or something .
sarah : OK , but from Biden ’ s POV , a skipped second debate is … fine by him ?
If anything , he would have more to lose than Trump in the second debate ?
nrakich : Right .
Traditionally , the front-runner wants fewer debates and the underdog wants more .
That ’ s why you always see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 Lincoln-Douglas-style debates or whatever .
natesilver : Unless Biden thinks Trump would be so bad that it would be worth debating him even if he ’ s being risk averse .
Like if Biden ’ s up by 10 points now , and on average he ’ d gain 2 points by debating Trump , you might do that even if there ’ s a chance you ’ d decline instead .
It depends on what the variance is .
geoffrey.skelley : A town-hall format would probably play better to Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly , etc .
But the debate wouldn ’ t be in-person , so maybe that ’ s less relevant .
nrakich : That strikes me as overconfident , Nate .
Biden could screw up too .
I don ’ t think you can just assume he ’ d gain an average of 2 points by debating Trump .
natesilver : I ’ m not assuming he ’ d gain 2 points , I ’ m saying conditional on that assumption , it might be worth debating .
But also : Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s conducted , per post-debate polling .
And he has COVID-19 and is on steroids and is acting erratically , even for him .
geoffrey.skelley : Who knows how a virtual town hall debate would go , but Trump was seen as the main cause of the disruption and chaos at the first debate , so it wouldn ’ t shock me if he did the same thing in that format — if the debate were held .
nrakich : That would be so awkward with the potential lag .
Imagine all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you thought the interruptions were bad when they were in the same room !
sarah : Yeah , Trump really doesn ’ t seem to like debates , he skipped some in the primaries in 2016 , too .
But this brings us back to the original question : Trump is really far behind Biden in the polls , and Biden just got some of his best polls of the campaign this week .
His margin over Trump is growing .
What — if not a debate –- is going to shake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If Trump is going to shake up the race without the debates , he needs something external to happen — for example , a major Biden gaffe or crisis .
There is some evidence that politicians in trouble try to stir up international conflict to create a rally-around-the-flag effect .
Or there could be a Comey letter redux ; the Department of Justice just changed its policies to allow prosecutors to continue their investigations even close to an election .
sarah : Nate , Trump is losing a little ground each day in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls doesn ’ t improve , right ?
Tell us more about that , and what that means for Trump ’ s ability to close the gap between him and Biden at this point .
natesilver : Trump ’ s chances are at 15 percent in our forecast now , but my guess is that he ’ d be at something like 5 percent if the election were held today .
He ’ d need a VERY large polling error to win if Biden is up 10 points nationally and 7 points or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most of his comeback chances still stem from being able to turn the race around somehow , and debates are one way to do that … maybe the best way at this stage .
geoffrey.skelley : Right , in terms of predictable events , things you know are coming , the debates are really it .
sarah : On that note , in the unpredictableness that is 2020 , do we actually think Trump actually pulls out or is this just a publicity stunt ?
Something our colleague Perry Bacon Jr. had mentioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate , was how he was skeptical that the CPD could stop Trump from participating in a debate if he wanted to .
Do you think Trump is just trying to negotiate the terms of the second debate ?
nrakich : I think he ’ d actually pull out .
Our colleague Kaleigh Rogers said something smart in our office Slack this morning , so I ’ ll just quote her : “ Trump knows the last debate didn ’ t go well for him and this is a way for him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ base.
” geoffrey.skelley : Well , there is a little bit of precedent for presidents threatening to withdraw from a debate in order to change their terms .
President George H.W .
Bush refused to debate under the commission ’ s plans in 1992 .
But he eventually agreed to some debates .
And Jimmy Carter refused to participate in the first debate in 1980 because it included independent John Anderson .
I would say , though , in both the 1980 and 1992 cases , neither incumbent was rewarded for their intransigence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go for Jimmy Carter ?
nrakich : Either way , I don ’ t think we will get an in-person debate .
I think if Trump successfully negotiates them back to an in-person debate , I think Biden will be the one to say he won ’ t attend .
geoffrey.skelley : The commission is in danger of losing face in any of these situations , but I ’ d think holding an in-person event with Trump fresh off of COVID-19 ( or still suffering lingering effects ) would be pretty terrible .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ debated just Anderson at the first debate .
Does Biden get to hold a solo “ debate ” with Trump not participating ?
I assume it would just be canceled .
nrakich : Interesting .
The town-hall style does make that easier .
… sarah : What do Americans think about holding the debate next week ?
As we ’ ve said before , there just aren ’ t that many undecided voters this year , so is it possible that many Americans don ’ t need the debates to help them make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to vote ?
nrakich : Two polls conducted before today ’ s announcement actually had contradictory findings about whether Americans think the rest of the debates should go forward .
Reuters/Ipsos found that 59 percent of Americans thought that the debates should be postponed until Trump recovers .
But Americans told CNN/SSRS , 59 percent to 36 percent , that the debates should be held .
But regardless of whether people want to see more debates , I agree that it ’ s unlikely to change their votes .
Our polling with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either absolutely positive they ’ re going to vote for Trump or absolutely positive they ’ re going to vote for Biden .
geoffrey.skelley : What format the debate should take seemed to really affect how people responded , too .
Pluralities have told pollsters that they wanted the next debate if it was virtual .
sarah : Yeah , and with a split screen … it wouldn ’ t necessarily feel all that different than if Biden and Trump were in the same room .
geoffrey.skelley : 100 percent .
Look , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before .
John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon ’ s third debate in 1960 took place with the candidates in different studios .
Kennedy was in New York City , Nixon was in Los Angeles .
natesilver : I don ’ t know about that .
The conventions produced very little in the way of bounces this year , which could be evidence that virtual vs. in-person matters .
nrakich : How do we tease that out from polarization , though , Nate ?
To be honest , I feel like if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been virtual , they ’ d have still produced pretty big bounces .
Maybe just not as big as they were .
natesilver : Well , we got a decent-sized bounce from the Democratic convention four years ago .
McCain/Palin got a pretty big one in 2008 .
They can still happen .
nrakich : But there were also more undecided voters in 2016 .
Everyone already has an opinion of Trump and Biden this year .
natesilver : The virtual conventions were well-produced , but fairly boring and I ’ m not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
nrakich : “ Well-produced but fairly boring ” kind of applies to every political convention , though !
At least if you ’ re watching from home .
natesilver : Ratings were down .
The polls didn ’ t move .
In person matters .
nrakich : Eh .
I ’ m not convinced .
( There are other reasons the ratings might have been down , like people switching their viewing habits from network TV to online streaming . )
natesilver : The thing , though , is that you like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite covering it for a living .
So I ’ m more like a typical American in those ways .
🇺🇸 sarah : OK , final thoughts — it sounds as if we all agree on this one — the case for Trump skipping the debate next week … doesn ’ t hold a lot of upside for him ?
geoffrey.skelley : Skipping the debate isn ’ t likely to help Trump , although it ’ s unclear if it will hurt him .
At the same time , not knowing Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his COVID-19 diagnosis , means it ’ s possible he ’ d have had a bad showing at the virtual debate and hurt his standing more .
In other words , the move to a virtual debate may have given him the out he was seeking because of that — or he just doesn ’ t want to debate anymore .
But I do think if he skips the debate and holds a rally instead , it could end up damaging him , considering how many voters don ’ t think he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Such an event would seem to play right into that narrative .
nrakich : Yeah , Sarah , I think skipping the debate would be the latest in a long line of poor political decisions by Trump .
Although to Nate ’ s point , I ’ m not sure he would be able to take advantage of the debate to turn his numbers around anyway .
It ’ s just increasingly hard to find any political upside for Trump .

UPDATE (Oct. 8, 2020, 12:45 p.m.): President Trump has now agreed to participate in an in-person presidential debate on Oct. 22, an idea that the Biden campaign had initially proposed after Trump said he would not participate in the virtual debate scheduled for Oct. 15. The third presidential debate will take place Oct. 29, according to Trump’s campaign manager, Bill Stepien.
Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.
sarah (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): On Thursday, the Commission on Presidential Debates announced that next week’s presidential debate would be held virtually. President Trump, however, has said that he isn’t going to waste his time with a virtual debate, promising instead to hold a rally.
Trump is down 9.8 points in national polls and is steadily losing ground each day in our forecast to Biden, as we inch ever closer to the election. Refusing then to participate in the debate when he could use it as an opportunity to mount a comeback against former vice president Joe Biden is a curious choice. Doesn’t Trump need the debates to mount a comeback?
Let’s talk Trump’s case for — and the case against — needing the debates.
OK, what’s the case for him needing them?
geoffrey.skelley (Geoffrey Skelley, elections analyst): He needs something. #analysis
But seriously, the debates are among the few, regularly scheduled major moments in the fall campaign, so they do present an opportunity to shake things up, even if they’re not certain to do so.
natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): To a first approximation, I agree with that, although it’s overstated. Our research on primary debates suggested that a debate is equivalent to something like six to 10 days of normal campaigning and news, in terms of how much they move the polls. So it’s as if Trump is taking a week off the clock in an election in which he trails by 10 points.
With that said, maybe this ups the importance of the third debate — if there is one.
geoffrey.skelley: But we also can’t know given Trump’s COVID-19 diagnosis whetherif Trump is really up for a two-hour debate right now, so perhaps he’s avoiding something that could be even more damaging.
sarah: One thing we talked about a lot going into the first presidential debate, is how much that first debate (more than the others) can really shake things up, but as former FiveThirtyEighter Harry Enten has also written, the second debate is not necessarily a game changer, and there’s no reason to believe that the person who didn’t do well in the first debate rebounds in the second.
Isn’t it possible then, that Trump, holding his own rally in which he doesn’t have to play by any moderator rules, isn’t necessarily a terrible move?
nrakich (Nathaniel Rakich, elections analyst): The problem is that he’s been holding campaign rallies all year long, and they haven’t helped him overtake Biden in the polls.
The days when cable news would air his rallies nationally are over. Maybe they get some nice local earned media, but that simply isn’t gonna measure up to a debate, as Nate mentioned.
geoffrey.skelley: It depends on the coverage. If it’s “Trump hasn’t recovered from COVID-19 and it’s irresponsible to be holding rallies,” I can’t imagine that helps him when 60 percent of the country said Trump was wrong to say we shouldn’t be afraid of COVID-19, and two-thirds said if he’d taken the coronavirus more seriously, he probably wouldn’t have gotten sick.
natesilver: Yeah, Trump is a fairly bad debater to begin with and it’s fairly likely that he would still be experiencing physical or mental ailments by next week thanks to his COVID-19 diagnosis. So the CPD gives him an excuse to pull out rather than him looking like a 🐔.
geoffrey.skelley: And what if his rally is sparsely attended or looks that way in pictures? It’s his Tulsa rally all over again.
natesilver: Nobody will give a shit about the rally either way, I don’t think.
Unless, again, Trump appears sick or something.
sarah: OK, but from Biden’s POV, a skipped second debate is … fine by him? If anything, he would have more to lose than Trump in the second debate?
nrakich: Right. Traditionally, the front-runner wants fewer debates and the underdog wants more. That’s why you always see hopeless Senate candidates challenging their opponent to 10 Lincoln-Douglas-style debates or whatever.
natesilver: Unless Biden thinks Trump would be so bad that it would be worth debating him even if he’s being risk averse. Like if Biden’s up by 10 points now, and on average he’d gain 2 points by debating Trump, you might do that even if there’s a chance you’d decline instead. It depends on what the variance is.
geoffrey.skelley: A town-hall format would probably play better to Biden’s style, too, answering people directly, etc.
But the debate wouldn’t be in-person, so maybe that’s less relevant.
nrakich: That strikes me as overconfident, Nate. Biden could screw up too. I don’t think you can just assume he’d gain an average of 2 points by debating Trump.
natesilver: I’m not assuming he’d gain 2 points, I’m saying conditional on that assumption, it might be worth debating.
But also: Trump has lost every general election debate he’s conducted, per post-debate polling.
And he has COVID-19 and is on steroids and is acting erratically, even for him.
geoffrey.skelley: Who knows how a virtual town hall debate would go, but Trump was seen as the main cause of the disruption and chaos at the first debate, so it wouldn’t shock me if he did the same thing in that format — if the debate were held.
nrakich: That would be so awkward with the potential lag. Imagine all the stops and starts!
geoffrey.skelley: Yeah, you thought the interruptions were bad when they were in the same room!
sarah: Yeah, Trump really doesn’t seem to like debates, he skipped some in the primaries in 2016, too. But this brings us back to the original question: Trump is really far behind Biden in the polls, and Biden just got some of his best polls of the campaign this week. His margin over Trump is growing. What — if not a debate –- is going to shake things up for Trump?
nrakich: If Trump is going to shake up the race without the debates, he needs something external to happen — for example, a major Biden gaffe or crisis. There is some evidence that politicians in trouble try to stir up international conflict to create a rally-around-the-flag effect. Or there could be a Comey letter redux; the Department of Justice just changed its policies to allow prosecutors to continue their investigations even close to an election.
sarah: Nate, Trump is losing a little ground each day in our forecast if his standing in the polls doesn’t improve, right? Tell us more about that, and what that means for Trump’s ability to close the gap between him and Biden at this point.
natesilver: Trump’s chances are at 15 percent in our forecast now, but my guess is that he’d be at something like 5 percent if the election were held today.
He’d need a VERY large polling error to win if Biden is up 10 points nationally and 7 points or so in the tipping-point states. So most of his comeback chances still stem from being able to turn the race around somehow, and debates are one way to do that … maybe the best way at this stage.
geoffrey.skelley: Right, in terms of predictable events, things you know are coming, the debates are really it.
sarah: On that note, in the unpredictableness that is 2020, do we actually think Trump actually pulls out or is this just a publicity stunt? Something our colleague Perry Bacon Jr. had mentioned in our chat Wednesday before the VP debate, was how he was skeptical that the CPD could stop Trump from participating in a debate if he wanted to. Do you think Trump is just trying to negotiate the terms of the second debate?
nrakich: I think he’d actually pull out. Our colleague Kaleigh Rogers said something smart in our office Slack this morning, so I’ll just quote her: “Trump knows the last debate didn’t go well for him and this is a way for him to not participate while saving face with his base.”
geoffrey.skelley: Well, there is a little bit of precedent for presidents threatening to withdraw from a debate in order to change their terms.
President George H.W. Bush refused to debate under the commission’s plans in 1992. But he eventually agreed to some debates.
In September 1992, the first scheduled debate was canceled when President Bush rejected the commission’s plans. Hecklers dressed as chickens began showing up at his rallies, and Bush would occasionally engage them: pic.twitter.com/kAhK1Vj9DW — Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) October 8, 2020
And Jimmy Carter refused to participate in the first debate in 1980 because it included independent John Anderson. I would say, though, in both the 1980 and 1992 cases, neither incumbent was rewarded for their intransigence.
natesilver: How’d that go for Jimmy Carter?
geoffrey.skelley: Exactly.
nrakich: Either way, I don’t think we will get an in-person debate. I think if Trump successfully negotiates them back to an in-person debate, I think Biden will be the one to say he won’t attend.
geoffrey.skelley: The commission is in danger of losing face in any of these situations, but I’d think holding an in-person event with Trump fresh off of COVID-19 (or still suffering lingering effects) would be pretty terrible.
Now, in 1980, Ronald Reagan debated just Anderson at the first debate. Does Biden get to hold a solo “debate” with Trump not participating? I assume it would just be canceled.
nrakich: Interesting. The town-hall style does make that easier. …
sarah: What do Americans think about holding the debate next week? As we’ve said before, there just aren’t that many undecided voters this year, so is it possible that many Americans don’t need the debates to help them make their decision on how they’re going to vote?
nrakich: Two polls conducted before today’s announcement actually had contradictory findings about whether Americans think the rest of the debates should go forward. Reuters/Ipsos found that 59 percent of Americans thought that the debates should be postponed until Trump recovers. But Americans told CNN/SSRS, 59 percent to 36 percent, that the debates should be held.
But regardless of whether people want to see more debates, I agree that it’s unlikely to change their votes. Our polling with Ipsos has shown that most voters are either absolutely positive they’re going to vote for Trump or absolutely positive they’re going to vote for Biden.
geoffrey.skelley: What format the debate should take seemed to really affect how people responded, too. Pluralities have told pollsters that they wanted the next debate if it was virtual.
sarah: Yeah, and with a split screen … it wouldn’t necessarily feel all that different than if Biden and Trump were in the same room.
geoffrey.skelley: 100 percent. Look, a presidential debate has been held remotely before. John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon’s third debate in 1960 took place with the candidates in different studios. Kennedy was in New York City, Nixon was in Los Angeles.
natesilver: I don’t know about that. The conventions produced very little in the way of bounces this year, which could be evidence that virtual vs. in-person matters.
nrakich: How do we tease that out from polarization, though, Nate?
To be honest, I feel like if the conventions in, say, 1988 had been virtual, they’d have still produced pretty big bounces.
Maybe just not as big as they were.
natesilver: Well, we got a decent-sized bounce from the Democratic convention four years ago. McCain/Palin got a pretty big one in 2008. They can still happen.
nrakich: But there were also more undecided voters in 2016. Everyone already has an opinion of Trump and Biden this year.
natesilver: The virtual conventions were well-produced, but fairly boring and I’m not sure why people tried to pretend otherwise.
nrakich: “Well-produced but fairly boring” kind of applies to every political convention, though!
At least if you’re watching from home.
natesilver: More boring than usual.
natesilver: Ratings were down. The polls didn’t move. In person matters.
nrakich: Eh. I’m not convinced. (There are other reasons the ratings might have been down, like people switching their viewing habits from network TV to online streaming.)
natesilver: The thing, though, is that you like politics and I don’t, despite covering it for a living. So I’m more like a typical American in those ways. 🇺🇸
nrakich: 😂
sarah: OK, final thoughts — it sounds as if we all agree on this one — the case for Trump skipping the debate next week … doesn’t hold a lot of upside for him?
geoffrey.skelley: Skipping the debate isn’t likely to help Trump, although it’s unclear if it will hurt him. At the same time, not knowing Trump’s current health condition in the wake of his COVID-19 diagnosis, means it’s possible he’d have had a bad showing at the virtual debate and hurt his standing more. In other words, the move to a virtual debate may have given him the out he was seeking because of that — or he just doesn’t want to debate anymore.
But I do think if he skips the debate and holds a rally instead, it could end up damaging him, considering how many voters don’t think he’s taken the coronavirus seriously enough. Such an event would seem to play right into that narrative.
nrakich: Yeah, Sarah, I think skipping the debate would be the latest in a long line of poor political decisions by Trump. Although to Nate’s point, I’m not sure he would be able to take advantage of the debate to turn his numbers around anyway.
It’s just increasingly hard to find any political upside for Trump.