fivethirthyeight--2020-12-17--Split-Ticket Voters Are A Small Group, But They Could Decide The Georgia Runoffs

Contrary to popular belief , there just weren ’ t that many people who voted for different parties in the presidential and Senate races this year .
And where split-ticket voting did occur , it appeared to have more to do with the candidates on the ballot than the voters themselves .
For example , Republican Sen. Susan Collins ran far ahead of President Trump in every corner of Maine , and Republican Sen. Steve Daines ran a bit behind him in almost every county in Montana .
In other words , ticket-splitting didn ’ t vary that much within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases , pretty minimal .
But some counties had more ticket-splitters than others , and those voters could be particularly important in Georgia .
On Jan. 5 , control of the U.S. Senate will be decided by a pair of runoff elections in the Peach State , and Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock will likely need to win some votes from people who didn ’ t vote for them last time , as Democrats got fewer votes than Republicans in both races on Nov. 3 .
Both Democrats in the runoffs also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Georgia 49.5 percent to 49.3 percent .
There weren ’ t too many of these split-ticket voters ( Biden outran Ossoff by only 1.6 percentage points statewide ) , but as you can see in the map below , we have a sense of where Ossoff and Warnock need to make up ground : Suburban or well-educated areas , such as the Atlanta metropolitan area , including Fulton ( where Biden did 2.8 points better than Ossoff ) , Cobb ( 2.4 points better ) and Forsyth ( 2.1 points better ) counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use Ossoff ’ s vote share as the comparison point because multiple Democratic candidates were on the ballot in the other Senate race , so Warnock advanced to the runoff with less than 33 percent of the vote .
However , the numbers are still similar when you compare Biden with the total Democratic vote share in the special election . )
The greater Atlanta area was not the only spot where Biden outperformed Ossoff , though .
He also did so in well-educated Clarke and Oconee counties to the east — perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presence there .
( The pattern also shows up in a handful of rural counties , such as Early County in the southwest , but this is probably less important .
These counties are so small that just a few Biden-but-not-Ossoff voters can produce what looks like a big swing .
So the most efficient strategy for Ossoff and Warnock is probably to focus on squeezing more votes out of metro Atlanta .
The top six counties where Biden outperformed Ossoff the most in terms of raw votes were all located there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as the one done by Lenny Bronner at The Washington Post , reveals that upper-class white neighborhoods in these counties , such as Buckhead , drove Biden ’ s overperformance .
Bronner found that the Atlanta-area precincts where Biden outperformed Ossoff had a median household income that was $ 41,000 higher than the average precinct in the 10 counties he categorized as part of the city ’ s metro area .
The number of adults with a bachelor ’ s degree was also 37 percent higher , and the share of white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And this trend extended far beyond Georgia .
For example , Biden did 1.6 percentage points better than Democratic Senate candidate Cal Cunningham in North Carolina .
But according to analyst J .
Miles Coleman of Sabato ’ s Crystal Ball , he outran Cunningham by 6.1 points in North Carolina state Senate District 37 , which covers a wealthy white neighborhood of Charlotte colloquially referred to as “ the Wedge.
” Or look at Iowa .
Democratic Senate candidate Theresa Greenfield did 0.3 percentage points better than Biden statewide , but Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dallas County , a fast-growing exurban county just to the west of Des Moines that has the state ’ s highest median household income .
That was Biden ’ s best performance relative to Greenfield anywhere in the state ( although , notably , he also outran Greenfield in Des Moines ’ s Polk County and Iowa State University ’ s Story County ) .
Similarly , Biden ’ s vote share was significantly higher than the Democratic Senate candidate ’ s vote share in the counties that contain and surround cities such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minnesota , the Research Triangle in North Carolina , and a host of other metropolitan areas nationwide .
The fact that ticket-splitting was higher in upper-class white communities jibes with research by political scientist Ashley Jardina , who studies the individual voting behavior of white voters ( though not specifically in the suburbs ) .
Jardina told FiveThirtyEight that Trump ’ s culture-war appeals and handling of the COVID-19 pandemic have turned off many wealthy , white , traditionally Republican voters , which led some of them to not vote for Trump but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down-ballot races .
If anti-Trump Republicans were indeed the reason Biden outran Democratic Senate candidates in the nation ’ s suburbs , it could be a bad omen for Democrats in future elections .
If these high-profile new Biden voters are still voting Republican further down the ballot , it suggests they are not yet fully ready to leave the GOP behind — and could return to the fold in the 2022 midterms or in the 2024 presidential election , if Republicans nominate a candidate who ’ s closer to George W. Bush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could move the suburbs , that newfound source of Democratic strength , back to the right .
Or not .
America ’ s suburbs are also getting more racially diverse and better-educated , two traits that correlate with voting Democratic .
And despite all the ink spilled over Biden-Republican ticket-splitters ( perhaps because many members of the media share their well-educated white demographic profile ) , it ’ s important to remember that there simply aren ’ t that many of them : Throughout this article , we ’ ve only been talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The difference between Biden getting 46 percent of the vote and a Democratic Senate candidate getting 44 percent really isn ’ t all that significant — except , of course , in a close election like the Georgia runoffs .
But in a race that close , any bloc , no matter how small , is an important constituency .

Contrary to popular belief, there just weren’t that many people who voted for different parties in the presidential and Senate races this year. And where split-ticket voting did occur, it appeared to have more to do with the candidates on the ballot than the voters themselves. For example, Republican Sen. Susan Collins ran far ahead of President Trump in every corner of Maine, and Republican Sen. Steve Daines ran a bit behind him in almost every county in Montana. In other words, ticket-splitting didn’t vary that much within each state and was, in most cases, pretty minimal.
But some counties had more ticket-splitters than others, and those voters could be particularly important in Georgia. On Jan. 5, control of the U.S. Senate will be decided by a pair of runoff elections in the Peach State, and Democrats Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock will likely need to win some votes from people who didn’t vote for them last time, as Democrats got fewer votes than Republicans in both races on Nov. 3. Both Democrats in the runoffs also ran behind Joe Biden, who won Georgia 49.5 percent to 49.3 percent.
How Trump’s pardons compare to other presidents | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
There weren’t too many of these split-ticket voters (Biden outran Ossoff by only 1.6 percentage points statewide), but as you can see in the map below, we have a sense of where Ossoff and Warnock need to make up ground: Suburban or well-educated areas, such as the Atlanta metropolitan area, including Fulton (where Biden did 2.8 points better than Ossoff), Cobb (2.4 points better) and Forsyth (2.1 points better) counties. (It’s easiest to use Ossoff’s vote share as the comparison point because multiple Democratic candidates were on the ballot in the other Senate race, so Warnock advanced to the runoff with less than 33 percent of the vote. However, the numbers are still similar when you compare Biden with the total Democratic vote share in the special election.)
The greater Atlanta area was not the only spot where Biden outperformed Ossoff, though. He also did so in well-educated Clarke and Oconee counties to the east — perhaps owing to the University of Georgia’s presence there. (The pattern also shows up in a handful of rural counties, such as Early County in the southwest, but this is probably less important. These counties are so small that just a few Biden-but-not-Ossoff voters can produce what looks like a big swing. So the most efficient strategy for Ossoff and Warnock is probably to focus on squeezing more votes out of metro Atlanta. The top six counties where Biden outperformed Ossoff the most in terms of raw votes were all located there.)
Metro Atlanta will be critical The six Georgia counties where Biden outperformed Ossoff the most in terms of total votes on Nov. 3 county Biden Votes Over Ossoff Fulton 16,943 Cobb 10,996 DeKalb 9,683 Gwinnett 8,443 Forsyth 2,979 Cherokee 2,851 Source: ABC News
And a precinct-level analysis, such as the one done by Lenny Bronner at The Washington Post, reveals that upper-class white neighborhoods in these counties, such as Buckhead, drove Biden’s overperformance. Bronner found that the Atlanta-area precincts where Biden outperformed Ossoff had a median household income that was $41,000 higher than the average precinct in the 10 counties he categorized as part of the city’s metro area. The number of adults with a bachelor’s degree was also 37 percent higher, and the share of white people was 21 percentage points higher.
And this trend extended far beyond Georgia. For example, Biden did 1.6 percentage points better than Democratic Senate candidate Cal Cunningham in North Carolina. But according to analyst J. Miles Coleman of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, he outran Cunningham by 6.1 points in North Carolina state Senate District 37, which covers a wealthy white neighborhood of Charlotte colloquially referred to as “the Wedge.”
[Warnock And Ossoff Are Testing A New Strategy For Democrats In The South]
Or look at Iowa. Democratic Senate candidate Theresa Greenfield did 0.3 percentage points better than Biden statewide, but Biden did 2.2 points better than Greenfield in Dallas County, a fast-growing exurban county just to the west of Des Moines that has the state’s highest median household income. That was Biden’s best performance relative to Greenfield anywhere in the state (although, notably, he also outran Greenfield in Des Moines’s Polk County and Iowa State University’s Story County).
Similarly, Biden’s vote share was significantly higher than the Democratic Senate candidate’s vote share in the counties that contain and surround cities such as Chicago, the Twin Cities in Minnesota, the Research Triangle in North Carolina, and a host of other metropolitan areas nationwide.
The fact that ticket-splitting was higher in upper-class white communities jibes with research by political scientist Ashley Jardina, who studies the individual voting behavior of white voters (though not specifically in the suburbs). Jardina told FiveThirtyEight that Trump’s culture-war appeals and handling of the COVID-19 pandemic have turned off many wealthy, white, traditionally Republican voters, which led some of them to not vote for Trump but to continue to support the GOP in down-ballot races.
If anti-Trump Republicans were indeed the reason Biden outran Democratic Senate candidates in the nation’s suburbs, it could be a bad omen for Democrats in future elections. If these high-profile new Biden voters are still voting Republican further down the ballot, it suggests they are not yet fully ready to leave the GOP behind — and could return to the fold in the 2022 midterms or in the 2024 presidential election, if Republicans nominate a candidate who’s closer to George W. Bush than Donald Trump in temperament. This could move the suburbs, that newfound source of Democratic strength, back to the right.
[Related: Why The Suburbs Have Shifted Blue]
Or not. America’s suburbs are also getting more racially diverse and better-educated, two traits that correlate with voting Democratic. And despite all the ink spilled over Biden-Republican ticket-splitters (perhaps because many members of the media share their well-educated white demographic profile), it’s important to remember that there simply aren’t that many of them: Throughout this article, we’ve only been talking about differences of a few percentage points. The difference between Biden getting 46 percent of the vote and a Democratic Senate candidate getting 44 percent really isn’t all that significant — except, of course, in a close election like the Georgia runoffs. But in a race that close, any bloc, no matter how small, is an important constituency.
What the COVID-19 vaccine means for political battles to come


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-17--What Did All Those Books About Trump Accomplish?

In this episode of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Galen Druke speaks with Carlos Lozada , the nonfiction book critic @ @ @ @ @ about what he learned from reading over 150 books written about Trump in the past @ @ @

In this episode of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Galen Druke speaks with Carlos Lozada, the nonfiction book critic at the Washington Post, about what he learned from reading over 150 books written about Trump in the past five years.
What the COVID-19 vaccine means for political battles to come


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-17--The Dolphins Are Making A Name For Themselves With Their No-Name Defense

Last year ’ s Miami Dolphins didn ’ t just have the worst scoring defense in the NFL , they had one of the worst scoring defenses of the past 20 seasons .
So it ’ s no wonder that until cornerback Xavien Howard snagged the Dolphins ’ third interception of Patrick Mahomes on Sunday — and the attention of the football-watching world in the process — many football-watchers had no idea how good this year ’ s Dolphins ’ defense has been .
So far this year , Miami has allowed 12.0 fewer points per game and 35 fewer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its turnover margin has flipped from minus-10 to plus-10 .
In fact , the Dolphins defense has been stingier on points allowed this year than every other team but the Pittsburgh Steelers .
They ’ ve also allowed the lowest third-down conversion rate and generated the sixth-highest pass pressure rate , according to ESPN ’ s Stats & Information Group , and they sit tied with the Steelers for most takeaways .
It ’ s a remarkable turnaround .
In fact , no team in any of the previous 10 seasons gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and no bottom-ranked scoring defense ranked as highly in the following year as the Dolphins do now or improved nearly as much as the Dolphins are on pace to do : Some of this improvement has to be credited to new defensive coordinator Josh Boyer .
In 2019 he left his long-held post as a secondary coach in New England to become the Dolphins ’ defensive passing-game coordinator , under first-time defensive coordinator Patrick Graham .
But after just one season , Graham left Miami for the New York Giants — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first time .
One of the key changes Boyer made was blitzing more aggressively .
Miami ranked 11th in blitz rate under Graham in 2019 , according to Pro-Football-Reference.com , sending five or more pass rushers 31.6 percent of the time .
But under Boyer , the Dolphins have sent extra pressure on 40.1 percent of dropbacks , the third most behind the Steelers ( again ) and the Baltimore Ravens .
[ Related : The Saints And Steelers Hit A Rut At The Worst Time ] Of course , just sending more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good .
The New York Jets rank fourth in blitz rate at 39.8 percent , but they ’ re second-worst in scoring defense .
Those overaggressive tendencies got Jets defensive coordinator Gregg Williams fired midseason .
What ’ s different in Miami ?
They have the players ( even if you ’ ve never heard of them ) to make aggressive blitzing work .
But remarkably , their personnel hasn ’ t changed that much .
Among their rookie defenders , second-round tackle Raekwon Davis is the only one to have logged more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Free-agent signings like edge defenders Kyle Van Noy , Shaq Lawson and Emmanuel Ogbah have borne fruit ; Pro Football Focus has graded all three in the top 40 percent of their position this year .
But none of those players has been transformational , either .
Even the biggest-money signing , cornerback Byron Jones , had made the Pro Bowl only once in five seasons before joining Miami — and after missing two games with a groin injury , nabbing only one interception so far and grading out as the NFL ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not making the Pro Bowl this year either .
But Howard probably will .
Howard was leading all cornerbacks in Pro Bowl fan voting as of Dec. 10 , and he leads the league in interceptions with nine .
That interception of Mahomes extended his streak of games with at least one interception to five — according to Pro-Football-Focus , it ’ s one of just 27 streaks at least that long since the 1970 AFL-NFL merger .
Should Howard pick off at least one pass in each of his next two games @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pick-streak record .
But he ’ s not just jumping routes and snagging picks , and he ’ s not just getting thrown at because he ’ s inconsistent in coverage .
Quarterbacks throwing Howard ’ s way have an NFL passer rating of just 51.4 , third-lowest among qualifying cornerbacks , and he ’ s PFF ’ s best-graded cornerback .
[ Do NFL Teams Really Get A Bounce After Firing Their Coaches ? ]
So where was Howard last year ?
Injured .
He suffered an October knee injury that held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limiting him to just five starts in 2019 after a 2018 season in which he made the Pro Bowl and led the league in interceptions .
This year , he not only picked up where he left off , he ’ s gotten better .
It ’ s this exceptional secondary play ( including safety Bobby McCain , currently PFF ’ s seventh-best at the position ) that allows Boyer to send pressure from everywhere and get away with it .
The result is a no-name defense much like the exalted 1972 unit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ season .
Of course , the 2020 Dolphins are 8-5 , not undefeated .
They couldn ’ t quite manage to beat the Chiefs on Sunday , even with the three picks .
FiveThirtyEight ’ s Elo ratings give the Dolphins just a 25 percent chance to make the playoffs at all .
But if they can get past the 6-7 New England Patriots and 7-6 Las Vegas Raiders over the next two weeks , the Dolphins have better-than-even odds to make the postseason .
And after that , if they can beat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17 , they ’ ll clinch a playoff berth at 11-5 , no matter what else happens .
Maybe the Dolphins won ’ t crack a crowded AFC playoff race .
Maybe most of this no-name defense will continue to toil in obscurity .
But Howard ’ s healthy return and leap in development has catalyzed the biggest defensive improvement in recent NFL history .
He should be a strong candidate for Defensive Player of the Year awards — and if the Dolphins do end up making a deep playoff run , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MVP .
Looking ahead : In terms of playoff odds , the most important game of the week sees the Bears travel to Minnesota to face the Vikings .
( Both teams are currently around 20 percent to make it , and the winner will leap closer to 50 percent . )
But both of those teams are also 6-7 , making it a matchup of mediocrity that is difficult to endorse .
So let ’ s be honest : The real game everyone has circled on the Week 15 calendar is Chiefs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
1 and 3 in the Elo rankings above .
It ’ s still unclear whether New Orleans QB Drew Brees will make his long-awaited return from the rib and lung injuries he suffered in Week 10 , or if Taysom Hill will start for the fifth straight week .
The difference is not merely academic : Our model thinks the Saints ’ win probability would rise by 24 percentage points ( ! )
if Brees started instead of Hill .
But coming off a surprise loss to the Eagles , New Orleans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Patrick Mahomes and a K.C .
passing offense that ranks first in schedule-adjusted expected points added per game this season .
Hill is averaging 52.3 rushing yards per game in his four most recent starts , and the Saints ’ run game could make life difficult for the Chiefs ’ weak rushing defense ( No .
31 in EPA ) .
But our model thinks the Chiefs are favorites , with a 60 percent chance to win on the road .
Elo ’ s spread : Kansas City -2½

Last year’s Miami Dolphins didn’t just have the worst scoring defense in the NFL, they had one of the worst scoring defenses of the past 20 seasons. So it’s no wonder that until cornerback Xavien Howard snagged the Dolphins’ third interception of Patrick Mahomes on Sunday — and the attention of the football-watching world in the process — many football-watchers had no idea how good this year’s Dolphins’ defense has been.
So far this year, Miami has allowed 12.0 fewer points per game and 35 fewer yards per game than in 2019, and its turnover margin has flipped from minus-10 to plus-10. In fact, the Dolphins defense has been stingier on points allowed this year than every other team but the Pittsburgh Steelers. They’ve also allowed the lowest third-down conversion rate and generated the sixth-highest pass pressure rate, according to ESPN’s Stats & Information Group, and they sit tied with the Steelers for most takeaways.
Who’s the most chaotic fictional football coach? | FiveThirtyEight
It’s a remarkable turnaround. In fact, no team in any of the previous 10 seasons gave up more points than the Dolphins did, and no bottom-ranked scoring defense ranked as highly in the following year as the Dolphins do now or improved nearly as much as the Dolphins are on pace to do:
Bad defenses don’t usually improve this much The worst NFL defenses per season since 2010, plus their points allowed per game the following year and the difference year over year Next year Year Worst Scoring Defense Points/g Rank points/g diff/g 2019 Miami Dolphins 30.88 2 18.85 -12.03 2018 Oakland Raiders 29.19 24 26.19 -3.00 2017 Houston Texans 27.25 4 19.75 -7.50 2016 San Francisco 49ers 30.00 25 23.94 -6.06 2015 New Orleans Saints 29.75 31 28.38 -1.38 2014 Oakland Raiders 28.25 22 24.94 -3.31 2013 Minnesota Vikings 30.00 11 21.44 -8.56 2012 Tennessee Titans 29.44 16 23.81 -5.63 2011 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 30.88 23 24.63 -6.25 2010 Denver Broncos 29.44 24 24.38 -5.06 2020 Dolphins stats through Week 14. Source: ESPN Stats & Information Group
Some of this improvement has to be credited to new defensive coordinator Josh Boyer. In 2019 he left his long-held post as a secondary coach in New England to become the Dolphins’ defensive passing-game coordinator, under first-time defensive coordinator Patrick Graham. But after just one season, Graham left Miami for the New York Giants — and Boyer became an NFL coordinator for the first time.
One of the key changes Boyer made was blitzing more aggressively. Miami ranked 11th in blitz rate under Graham in 2019, according to Pro-Football-Reference.com, sending five or more pass rushers 31.6 percent of the time. But under Boyer, the Dolphins have sent extra pressure on 40.1 percent of dropbacks, the third most behind the Steelers (again) and the Baltimore Ravens.
[Related: The Saints And Steelers Hit A Rut At The Worst Time]
Of course, just sending more blitzers doesn’t make a defense good. The New York Jets rank fourth in blitz rate at 39.8 percent, but they’re second-worst in scoring defense. Those overaggressive tendencies got Jets defensive coordinator Gregg Williams fired midseason.
What’s different in Miami? They have the players (even if you’ve never heard of them) to make aggressive blitzing work.
But remarkably, their personnel hasn’t changed that much. Among their rookie defenders, second-round tackle Raekwon Davis is the only one to have logged more than 40 percent of the available reps. Free-agent signings like edge defenders Kyle Van Noy, Shaq Lawson and Emmanuel Ogbah have borne fruit; Pro Football Focus has graded all three in the top 40 percent of their position this year. But none of those players has been transformational, either.
Even the biggest-money signing, cornerback Byron Jones, had made the Pro Bowl only once in five seasons before joining Miami — and after missing two games with a groin injury, nabbing only one interception so far and grading out as the NFL’s 59th-best corner, he’s not making the Pro Bowl this year either.
But Howard probably will.
Howard was leading all cornerbacks in Pro Bowl fan voting as of Dec. 10, and he leads the league in interceptions with nine. That interception of Mahomes extended his streak of games with at least one interception to five — according to Pro-Football-Focus, it’s one of just 27 streaks at least that long since the 1970 AFL-NFL merger. Should Howard pick off at least one pass in each of his next two games, he’ll set the modern-era pick-streak record.
But he’s not just jumping routes and snagging picks, and he’s not just getting thrown at because he’s inconsistent in coverage. Quarterbacks throwing Howard’s way have an NFL passer rating of just 51.4, third-lowest among qualifying cornerbacks, and he’s PFF’s best-graded cornerback.
[Do NFL Teams Really Get A Bounce After Firing Their Coaches?]
So where was Howard last year? Injured. He suffered an October knee injury that held him out until a late-season surgery, limiting him to just five starts in 2019 after a 2018 season in which he made the Pro Bowl and led the league in interceptions. This year, he not only picked up where he left off, he’s gotten better.
It’s this exceptional secondary play (including safety Bobby McCain, currently PFF’s seventh-best at the position) that allows Boyer to send pressure from everywhere and get away with it. The result is a no-name defense much like the exalted 1972 unit that backstopped the Dolphins’ famous undefeated season.
Of course, the 2020 Dolphins are 8-5, not undefeated. They couldn’t quite manage to beat the Chiefs on Sunday, even with the three picks. FiveThirtyEight’s Elo ratings give the Dolphins just a 25 percent chance to make the playoffs at all.
But if they can get past the 6-7 New England Patriots and 7-6 Las Vegas Raiders over the next two weeks, the Dolphins have better-than-even odds to make the postseason. And after that, if they can beat AFC East rival Buffalo Bills in Week 17, they’ll clinch a playoff berth at 11-5, no matter what else happens.
Maybe the Dolphins won’t crack a crowded AFC playoff race. Maybe most of this no-name defense will continue to toil in obscurity. But Howard’s healthy return and leap in development has catalyzed the biggest defensive improvement in recent NFL history. He should be a strong candidate for Defensive Player of the Year awards — and if the Dolphins do end up making a deep playoff run, he may even be in the running for MVP.
FiveThirtyEight’s NFL Elo ratings How each team ranks through Week 14 of the 2020 season, according to our quarterback-adjusted predictions Chance To … Rk Team Starting QB QB Rk* Elo Rating Proj. Wins Make Playoffs Win Div. Win SB 1 Chiefs Mahomes 1 1761 14.4 100% 100% 33% 2 Packers Rodgers 2 1661 12.2 100 100 12 3 Saints Brees✚ 3 1657 12.0 100 99 23 4 Bills Allen 6 1657 12.1 >99 99 7 5 Ravens Jackson 5 1636 10.6 88 0 3 6 Steelers R’lisberger 9 1628 13.0 100 98 5 7 Rams Goff 14 1622 11.1 >99 63 5 8 Colts Rivers 15 1612 11.1 89 39 3 9 Bucs Brady 12 1602 10.2 97 1 3 10 Titans Tannehill 10 1590 10.9 94 61 2 11 Seahawks Wilson 8 1575 10.6 99 36 2 12 Browns Mayfield 19 1566 11.0 87 2 1 13 Cardinals Murray 4 1516 8.6 54 1 <1 14 Patriots Newton 23 1516 7.7 2 0 <1 15 Vikings Cousins 17 1515 7.4 21 0 <1 16 Dolphins Tagovailoa 24 1510 9.3 25 1 <1 17 Raiders Carr 11 1493 8.7 15 0 <1 18 Bears Trubisky 20 1493 7.4 20 0 <1 19 Wash. Smith✚ 25 1492 7.6 74 74 <1 20 Broncos Lock 28 1486 6.4 <1 0 <1 21 49ers Mullens† 30 1485 6.4 9 0 <1 22 Falcons Ryan 21 1450 4.7 0 0 0 23 Eagles Hurts 26 1439 5.8 11 11 <1 24 Panthers Bridgewater 13 1439 4.7 <1 0 <1 25 Texans Watson 7 1433 5.3 0 0 0 26 Giants Jones✚ 29 1409 6.1 14 14 <1 27 Chargers Herbert 16 1403 4.9 0 0 0 28 Cowboys Dalton 27 1374 5.3 1 1 <1 29 Jaguars Minshew 22 1300 1.5 0 0 0 30 Lions Stafford✚ 18 1269 5.7 <1 0 <1 31 Jets Darnold 31 1253 0.4 0 0 0 32 Bengals Allen✚ 32 1245 2.9 0 0 0 *Ranking among Week 15 starters, according to our QB Elo ratings. ✚ Starter is currently injured and may not play. †Starter could be replaced for performance reasons. Simulations as of Dec. 16, 2020. Source: ESPN
Looking ahead: In terms of playoff odds, the most important game of the week sees the Bears travel to Minnesota to face the Vikings. (Both teams are currently around 20 percent to make it, and the winner will leap closer to 50 percent.) But both of those teams are also 6-7, making it a matchup of mediocrity that is difficult to endorse. So let’s be honest: The real game everyone has circled on the Week 15 calendar is Chiefs at Saints, a battle of Nos. 1 and 3 in the Elo rankings above. It’s still unclear whether New Orleans QB Drew Brees will make his long-awaited return from the rib and lung injuries he suffered in Week 10, or if Taysom Hill will start for the fifth straight week. The difference is not merely academic: Our model thinks the Saints’ win probability would rise by 24 percentage points (!) if Brees started instead of Hill. But coming off a surprise loss to the Eagles, New Orleans is in for a battle either way against Patrick Mahomes and a K.C. passing offense that ranks first in schedule-adjusted expected points added per game this season. Hill is averaging 52.3 rushing yards per game in his four most recent starts, and the Saints’ run game could make life difficult for the Chiefs’ weak rushing defense (No. 31 in EPA). But our model thinks the Chiefs are favorites, with a 60 percent chance to win on the road. Elo’s spread: Kansas City -2½
Neil Paine contributed research.
Check out our latest NFL predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-17--Politics Podcast: What Do 1,200 Books About Trump Really Tell Us?

President Trump has been the sun around which our political and cultural thinking has orbited for the past five years .
According to one count , more than 1,200 books were written about President Trump during his first term in office , compared to 500 books about President Obama during a similar period .
After all that coverage , what did we actually learn ?
To answer that question , in this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Galen Druke speaks with the nonfiction book critic at the Washington Post , Carlos Lozada .
He read about 150 books @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his book , “ What Were We Thinking : A Brief Intellectual History Of The Trump Era.
” You can listen to the episode by clicking the “ play ” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast is recorded Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes .
Have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get in touch by email , on Twitter or in the comments .

President Trump has been the sun around which our political and cultural thinking has orbited for the past five years. According to one count, more than 1,200 books were written about President Trump during his first term in office, compared to 500 books about President Obama during a similar period. After all that coverage, what did we actually learn? To answer that question, in this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Galen Druke speaks with the nonfiction book critic at the Washington Post, Carlos Lozada. He read about 150 books from the Trump canon and reviewed them in his book, “What Were We Thinking: A Brief Intellectual History Of The Trump Era.”
You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.
The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast is recorded Mondays and Thursdays. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.


2020-21 NBA Predictions

Forecast from
Today July 19 July 12 July 5 June 28 June 21 June 14 June 7 May 31 May 24 May 17 May 10 May 3 April 26 April 19 April 12 April 5 March 29 March 22 March 15 March 8 March 1 Feb. 22 Feb. 15 Feb. 8 Feb. 1 Jan. 25 Jan. 18 Jan. 11 Jan. 4 Dec. 28 Dec. 21 Dec. 17


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-17--What To Watch For In The 2020-21 NBA Season

Although it seems like the 2019-20 NBA season just ended — the Los Angeles Lakers lifted the Larry O ’ Brien Trophy a scant 68 days ago — the 2020-21 NBA season is set to begin on Tuesday , with primetime showdowns featuring the rebuilt Brooklyn Nets and Golden State Warriors and another installment of the intracity L.A. rivalry .
In anticipation of tip-off , FiveThirtyEight ’ s RAPTOR projections are back too … and we ’ ve made some adjustments to improve our forecasts going forward .
For those interested only in the predictions , skip a few paragraphs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still with me here , let ’ s talk about what ’ s changed since our projections were , um , not so great in last year ’ s playoffs .
In Year 1 of RAPTOR , we were actually using an alternative version of the stat called “ PREDATOR ” that was intended to down-weight “ lucky ” events , such as opponent 3-point shooting , in order to be more predictive .
With the benefit of an offseason to test , though , we found that standard RAPTOR outperforms PREDATOR in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only be using RAPTOR for both our player evaluations and our team forecasts going forward .
( You can download a fun database of historical regular-season and playoff RAPTOR data here . )
That ’ s the big headline change , but there are some other improvements as well .
In our testing , we found that blending a team ’ s Elo rating with its talent metric ( based on the RAPTOR projections of the players in its rotation , adjusting for injury ) improves the forecasts , particularly if we vary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how much it was built up by players currently on the roster .
We also made slight changes to home-court advantage — it ’ s 75 percent of its usual level in 2020-21 , at least as long as full-capacity crowds aren ’ t allowed in NBA arenas — and made our in-season RAPTOR talent adjustments slightly slower to update when a player has logged fewer than 1,000 regular-season or 750 playoff minutes .
Now that the administrative details are out of the way , let ’ s talk about what RAPTOR sees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Let ’ s start in the Western Conference , home of the defending-champion Lakers : Unsurprisingly , the two L.A. rivals are still easily the most likely teams to emerge from the West , with the Lakers getting a clear preseason edge over the Clippers .
The champs lost a few role players from last year ’ s title team — most notably Danny Green , who went east to the 76ers — but picked up some other interesting names , such as Dennis Schröder , Marc Gasol and Montrezl Harrell .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ devastating duo of LeBron James and Anthony Davis locked in for the long haul doesn ’ t hurt ! )
The Clips are trying to rebound from last year ’ s disappointment with a new coach — Tyronn Lue replaced Doc Rivers — but roughly the same core , spearheaded by Kawhi Leonard and Paul George ( both of whom RAPTOR adores ) .
And the model thinks the Nuggets are sort of in the West ’ s title conversation again as well , thanks to stars Nikola Jokić and Jamal Murray , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Talent-wise , though , it ’ s unclear if Denver has closed the gap enough to avoid a repeat of last season ’ s five-game defeat versus the Lakers in the conference finals .
Below the top three , RAPTOR finds a few compelling teams with intriguing possibilities .
The Rockets will drop like a rock if they trade James Harden , but newcomer Christian Wood — and I guess John Wall ?
— leave them in surprisingly decent shape for now .
And who doesn ’ t love the Suns and Mavericks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last season ’ s breakouts ?
In mostly the same field of playoff contenders , RAPTOR sees Phoenix likely sliding up to replace the Thunder in the postseason , as OKC ’ s strategic rebuild figures to ( temporarily ) land it in the West ’ s basement .
Perhaps the most surprising part of RAPTOR ’ s Western Conference forecast is how little it regards the Warriors , despite Stephen Curry and Draymond Green returning to full strength .
Missing Klay Thompson , with a cast of not-so-highly-rated players mostly surrounding Steph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
On paper , this doesn ’ t look like the recipe for Golden State to have an instant bounceback .
But at the same time , maybe this forecast is too pessimistic for any team that features Curry ’ s ability to shred defenses ( when he ’ s healthy and locked in ) .
Over in the East , our forecast predicts a three-team logjam at the top … and none of the three are the defending conference champions .
According to RAPTOR , the Celtics , Sixers and Bucks each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance of making the Finals ; no other East team is above 10 percent .
Boston lost Gordon Hayward over the offseason but returns an imposing starting lineup when Kemba Walker is back from injury .
Philly still has plenty of questions about how Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons work together , but their talent is undeniable — and new exec Daryl Morey has already improved what Rivers has to work with in his first season as coach .
And Milwaukee overhauled last year ’ s supporting cast enough to convince Giannis Antetokounmpo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ club just this week .
Add it up , and RAPTOR thinks one of those three teams has a 73 percent chance of winning the East .
And what of the Heat — who , you know , actually did that last season ?
Although they ’ re running it back with roughly the same roster that beat both Milwaukee and Boston in the postseason ( give or take an Avery Bradley here and a Jae Crowder there ) , RAPTOR gives Miami just a 9 percent chance of pulling off the feat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fourth-best in the conference with the Raptors , another team returning most of the names we expect to see in that uniform .
( The Pacers might actually have the most continuity of any team , though RAPTOR calls for them to take a step back despite a healthy Victor Oladipo . )
Among the teams that look pretty different , the Nets will finally roll out their long-awaited Kevin Durant-Kyrie Irving pairing , while the Hawks spent the offseason adding a lot of offense around star Trae Young .
For what it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about both teams , seeing Brooklyn as a solid playoff squad but only a long-shot title contender , while Atlanta is right on the edge of the playoffs .
Aside from the Hawks improving to join the conversation , RAPTOR thinks the East ’ s playoff picture will look relatively familiar in 2020-21 .
And in terms of the overall championship picture , our model lists five teams with double-digit title odds : the Lakers ( 21 percent ) , Celtics ( 15 percent ) , Clippers ( 12 percent ) , 76ers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 percent ) .
That means LeBron and AD are favorites to repeat as NBA champs … but a lot can happen between now and the Finals .
Let the games begin !

Although it seems like the 2019-20 NBA season just ended — the Los Angeles Lakers lifted the Larry O’Brien Trophy a scant 68 days ago — the 2020-21 NBA season is set to begin on Tuesday, with primetime showdowns featuring the rebuilt Brooklyn Nets and Golden State Warriors and another installment of the intracity L.A. rivalry. In anticipation of tip-off, FiveThirtyEight’s RAPTOR projections are back too … and we’ve made some adjustments to improve our forecasts going forward.
For those interested only in the predictions, skip a few paragraphs ahead. But if you’re still with me here, let’s talk about what’s changed since our projections were, um, not so great in last year’s playoffs. In Year 1 of RAPTOR, we were actually using an alternative version of the stat called “PREDATOR” that was intended to down-weight “lucky” events, such as opponent 3-point shooting, in order to be more predictive. With the benefit of an offseason to test, though, we found that standard RAPTOR outperforms PREDATOR in essentially every way, so we will only be using RAPTOR for both our player evaluations and our team forecasts going forward. (You can download a fun database of historical regular-season and playoff RAPTOR data here.)
That’s the big headline change, but there are some other improvements as well. In our testing, we found that blending a team’s Elo rating with its talent metric (based on the RAPTOR projections of the players in its rotation, adjusting for injury) improves the forecasts, particularly if we vary the weight given to Elo based on how much it was built up by players currently on the roster. We also made slight changes to home-court advantage — it’s 75 percent of its usual level in 2020-21, at least as long as full-capacity crowds aren’t allowed in NBA arenas — and made our in-season RAPTOR talent adjustments slightly slower to update when a player has logged fewer than 1,000 regular-season or 750 playoff minutes.
[Related: Our 2020-21 NBA Predictions]
Now that the administrative details are out of the way, let’s talk about what RAPTOR sees in store for the 2020-21 NBA season. Let’s start in the Western Conference, home of the defending-champion Lakers:
How RAPTOR is predicting the West Preseason predicted standings for the 2020-21 Western Conference, according to FiveThirtyEight’s RAPTOR forecast Proj. Record Chance to… Rk Team Current Rating Wins Losses Make Playoffs Make Finals Win Title 1 Lakers 1658 48 24 94% 33% 21% 2 Clippers 1637 45 27 89 22 12 3 Nuggets 1613 45 27 86 13 6 4 Rockets 1595 43 29 80 7 3 5 Suns 1604 42 30 75 7 3 6 Mavericks 1584 42 30 72 7 3 7 Jazz 1590 41 31 70 6 2 8 Trail Blazers 1559 40 32 60 2 <1 9 Pelicans 1552 36 36 42 2 <1 10 Timberwolves 1483 35 37 34 1 <1 11 Spurs 1495 35 37 32 <1 <1 12 Grizzlies 1515 34 38 28 <1 <1 13 Warriors 1488 31 41 16 <1 <1 14 Kings 1503 31 41 16 <1 <1 15 Thunder 1466 27 45 5 <1 <1 Simulations as of Dec. 16, 2020.
Unsurprisingly, the two L.A. rivals are still easily the most likely teams to emerge from the West, with the Lakers getting a clear preseason edge over the Clippers. The champs lost a few role players from last year’s title team — most notably Danny Green, who went east to the 76ers — but picked up some other interesting names, such as Dennis Schröder, Marc Gasol and Montrezl Harrell. (And of course, having the devastating duo of LeBron James and Anthony Davis locked in for the long haul doesn’t hurt!) The Clips are trying to rebound from last year’s disappointment with a new coach — Tyronn Lue replaced Doc Rivers — but roughly the same core, spearheaded by Kawhi Leonard and Paul George (both of whom RAPTOR adores). And the model thinks the Nuggets are sort of in the West’s title conversation again as well, thanks to stars Nikola Jokić and Jamal Murray, plus up-and-coming young forward Michael Porter Jr. Talent-wise, though, it’s unclear if Denver has closed the gap enough to avoid a repeat of last season’s five-game defeat versus the Lakers in the conference finals.
Below the top three, RAPTOR finds a few compelling teams with intriguing possibilities. The Rockets will drop like a rock if they trade James Harden, but newcomer Christian Wood — and I guess John Wall? — leave them in surprisingly decent shape for now. And who doesn’t love the Suns and Mavericks as teams further on the rise after last season’s breakouts? In mostly the same field of playoff contenders, RAPTOR sees Phoenix likely sliding up to replace the Thunder in the postseason, as OKC’s strategic rebuild figures to (temporarily) land it in the West’s basement. Perhaps the most surprising part of RAPTOR’s Western Conference forecast is how little it regards the Warriors, despite Stephen Curry and Draymond Green returning to full strength. Missing Klay Thompson, with a cast of not-so-highly-rated players mostly surrounding Steph and Dray, in the difficult West? On paper, this doesn’t look like the recipe for Golden State to have an instant bounceback. But at the same time, maybe this forecast is too pessimistic for any team that features Curry’s ability to shred defenses (when he’s healthy and locked in).
How RAPTOR is predicting the East Preseason predicted standings for the 2020-21 Eastern Conference, according to FiveThirtyEight’s RAPTOR forecast Proj. Record Chance to… Rk Team Current Rating Wins Losses Make Playoffs Make Finals Win Title 1 Celtics 1602 46 26 98% 27% 15% 2 76ers 1603 45 27 97 24 12 3 Bucks 1632 46 26 98 22 10 4 Raptors 1607 41 31 90 10 4 5 Heat 1594 41 31 91 9 4 6 Nets 1578 40 32 84 4 1 7 Pacers 1537 36 36 70 2 <1 8 Hawks 1536 35 37 65 1 <1 9 Magic 1512 36 36 67 <1 <1 10 Wizards 1430 25 47 11 <1 <1 11 Bulls 1421 25 47 10 <1 <1 12 Hornets 1396 24 48 8 <1 <1 13 Knicks 1382 23 49 5 <1 <1 14 Cavaliers 1380 22 50 4 <1 <1 15 Pistons 1354 18 54 1 <1 <1 Simulations as of Dec. 16, 2020.
Over in the East, our forecast predicts a three-team logjam at the top … and none of the three are the defending conference champions. According to RAPTOR, the Celtics, Sixers and Bucks each have between a 20 and 30 percent chance of making the Finals; no other East team is above 10 percent. Boston lost Gordon Hayward over the offseason but returns an imposing starting lineup when Kemba Walker is back from injury. Philly still has plenty of questions about how Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons work together, but their talent is undeniable — and new exec Daryl Morey has already improved what Rivers has to work with in his first season as coach. And Milwaukee overhauled last year’s supporting cast enough to convince Giannis Antetokounmpo to sign a supermax extension with the club just this week. Add it up, and RAPTOR thinks one of those three teams has a 73 percent chance of winning the East.
[Related: Our NBA Player Projections]
And what of the Heat — who, you know, actually did that last season? Although they’re running it back with roughly the same roster that beat both Milwaukee and Boston in the postseason (give or take an Avery Bradley here and a Jae Crowder there), RAPTOR gives Miami just a 9 percent chance of pulling off the feat again. That essentially ties them for fourth-best in the conference with the Raptors, another team returning most of the names we expect to see in that uniform. (The Pacers might actually have the most continuity of any team, though RAPTOR calls for them to take a step back despite a healthy Victor Oladipo.) Among the teams that look pretty different, the Nets will finally roll out their long-awaited Kevin Durant-Kyrie Irving pairing, while the Hawks spent the offseason adding a lot of offense around star Trae Young. For what it’s worth, RAPTOR is skeptical about both teams, seeing Brooklyn as a solid playoff squad but only a long-shot title contender, while Atlanta is right on the edge of the playoffs. Aside from the Hawks improving to join the conversation, RAPTOR thinks the East’s playoff picture will look relatively familiar in 2020-21.
And in terms of the overall championship picture, our model lists five teams with double-digit title odds: the Lakers (21 percent), Celtics (15 percent), Clippers (12 percent), 76ers (12 percent) and Bucks (10 percent). That means LeBron and AD are favorites to repeat as NBA champs … but a lot can happen between now and the Finals. Let the games begin!
Jay Boice contributed research.


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-18--Can You (Not) Flip Your Lid?

Can You (Not) Flip Your Lid?

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 the next column .
Please wait until Monday to publicly share your answers !
If you need a hint or have a favorite puzzle collecting dust in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Due to the holidays , the next column will appear on Jan. 8 , 2021 .
See you in the new year !
The other day I was playing around in my kitchen with a tall glass and a smaller disk , when , to my surprise , I was able to balance the disk neatly atop the rim of the glass : First of all , try this at home !
Now suppose you have a disk of radius R and a glass with a circular rim of radius 2R .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that its center lies within the glass ’ s rim , what is the probability that the disk will balance atop the glass ?
( Assume the distribution is uniformly spread across the circular area inside the rim . )
From Keith Wynroe comes an epic power battle that is sure to wear you down : The Game of Attrition has two players , each of whom starts with a whole number of “ power points.
” Players take turns “ attacking ” each other , which involves subtracting their own number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until one of the players is out of points .
For example , suppose Player A ( who goes first ) starts with 5 points and Player B starts with 7 points .
After A ’ s first attack , A still has 5 points , while B has been reduced to 2 points ( i.e.
, 7 minus 5 ) .
Now it ’ s B ’ s turn , who reduces A to 5 minus 2 , or 3 points .
Finally , on A ’ s second turn , B @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( since 2 minus 3 is −1 ) .
Despite starting with fewer points , A wins !
Now suppose A goes first and starts with N points .
In terms of N , what is the greatest number of points B can start with so that A will still emerge victorious ?
Congratulations to 👏 Andrew Young 👏 of Sarasota , Florida , winner of last week ’ s Riddler Express .
Tonight is the last night of Hanukkah , which means millions of Jews have been lighting their menorahs over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start with one candle in the rightmost position , which is lit using a central candle called a shamash .
On the second night , a second candle is added to the left of the first .
On the third night , a third candle is added to the left of the second , and so on , until all eight candles have been added on the final night .
With this system for adding candles , whether you were looking at the menorah from the front ( i.e.
, in your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through a window ) , you could easily determine which of the eight nights of Hanukkah it was by counting the number of candles ( other than the shamash ) .
But what if you wanted to make that same menorah capable of tracking more than eight nights ?
To do that , you had to devise a new system of adding or moving candles ( other than the shamash in the middle , which is always lit ) around the menorah so that it could uniquely indicate as many nights as possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same forward and backward , so that regardless of whether you were looking at the menorah from the front or the back you ’ d still know what night it was .
What was the greatest number of nights that could be indicated using your system ?
Without resorting to methods not stated in the problem ( like playing with the heights or colors of the candles ) , your best bet was to use a binary code .
Lit candles represented a one , and unlit positions on the menorah were zeros @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could theoretically indicate up to 256 nights .
However , since some of these 256 states read the same forward and backward — an ambiguity that was specifically to be avoided — the answer had to be less than 256 .
Realizing that a simple binary code was insufficient , some solvers turned to ternary code .
Alex Vornsand took this approach , looking at pairs of candles on either side of the central shamash — either neither candle was lit , one candle was lit , or both candles were lit .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ meant there were 34 , or 81 distinct states , no two of which read the same forward and backward : But it was possible to do even better !
As solver Francesca Maroney noted , there were 16 symmetric configurations that read the same forward and backward — there were 24 different ways to light the four candles on one side of the shamash , and for each of those there was just one way to light the other four to make the menorah symmetric .
Since 16 of the 256 states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 240 were asymmetric — they read differently forward and backward .
These could be paired up as reflections about the shamash , so that you could see either of the two states depending on which side of the menorah you were on .
In the end , there were 120 paired states and 16 symmetric states , for a total of 136 distinguishable states — the maximum number of nights your menorah could track .
Sign me up for 136 nights of Hanukkah — and the 136 presents that go with it !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lafayette , Colorado , winner of last week ’ s Riddler Classic .
Last week , the Potentate of Puzzles challenged five lucky citizens with a test .
The potentate had countless red hats , green hats and blue hats .
She said to the citizens , “ Tomorrow , you will all be blindfolded as I place one of these hats on each of your heads .
Once all the hats are placed , your blindfolds will be removed .
At this point , there will be no communication between any of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a signal , everyone must guess — at the same time — the color of the hat atop their own head .
To win this challenge , at least one of you must guess correctly !
” The potentate continued : “ The good news is that there ’ s a little more information you ’ ll have .
I will be arranging you into two rows , with two of you in one row and three of you in the other .
Citizens in the same row can not see each other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizens in the other row .
Finally , each citizen will know their placement within their own row — that is , whether they are seated on the left or right or in the middle.
” What strategy could the citizens have devised beforehand so that at least one of them guessed correctly ?
At first blush , this seemed hopeless .
With five hats , each of which could be three colors , there were a total of 35 , or 243 , cases to consider .
How could the five citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that at least one of them guessed correctly ?
Virtually all solvers treated this as the logic problem it was intended to be , experimenting with different rules for the citizens .
But before proceeding down this road , I want to give a tip of the hat ( see what I did there ? )
to the creative approach of solver Josh Silverman , who used a genetic algorithm to computationally find a solution .
But enough with the computers !
The puzzle ’ s submitter , Alex van den Brandhof , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dion Gijswijt for Pythagoras , a Dutch magazine for high school math students .
One solution , courtesy of Alex , is as follows : First , let ’ s slap some labels on the positions and the hat colors .
Let ’ s call the citizens in the row of two A and B , and the citizens in the row of three C , D and E. Let ’ s also convert those colors into numbers — a red hat has a value of 0 , a green hat has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a value of 2 .
We then call the values ( again , representing the colors ) of the respective positions a , b , c , d and e. First off , C guessed a ( the color of A ’ s hat ) , and D guessed b ( the color of B ’ s hat ) .
Meanwhile , E guessed the sum of a and b , modulo 3 .
For example , if A and B both had blue hats — each with a value of 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then E would have guessed green ( which has a value of 1 ) , since 2 + 2 equals 4 , which is congruent to 1 ( mod 3 ) .
Should any one of those three ( C , D and E ) have guessed their own hat color correctly , then the citizens would be victorious .
Therefore , when A and B made their guesses , they might as well have assumed that C , D and E were all wrong .
That meant A shouldn ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ C had the same color hat , then C would already have been correct .
Similarly , B shouldn ’ t have guessed d , because if B and D had the same color hat , then D would already have been correct .
And finally , both A and B should have assumed that the sum of their hat values ( mod 3 ) was different from E ’ s guess — otherwise E would have been correct .
At this point , no matter what colors A and B saw on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ E , it was always possible for at least one of them to be correct — in the event that C , D and E were all wrong .
For example , suppose the color values are as follows : a = 0 , b = 2 , c = 2 , d = 1 and e = 1 .
Here ’ s how this scenario would play out for C , D and E : • Seeing that a = 0 , C guesses 0 — incorrectly .
• Seeing that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ E guesses 0 + 2 ( mod 3 ) , or 2 — incorrectly .
With three incorrect guesses , the pressure is then on A and B .
Looking at the hats of C , D and E , A and B both know that A shouldn ’ t guess 2 , B shouldn ’ t guess 1 , and that the sum of their guesses ( mod 3 ) shouldn ’ t be 1 .
That left just three possible cases to consider : • A guesses 0 and B guesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• A guesses 0 and B guesses 2 , for a sum of 2 .
• A guesses 1 and B guesses 2 , for a sum of 0 .
If A guesses 0 and B guesses 2 , at least one of them is guaranteed to be correct !
This sort of result played out for all 243 combinations of a , b , c , d and e — it was always possible for at least one citizen to guess correctly .
Next time , the potentate will be sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hats as well , in which case it will surely take more than five citizens working together to complete the challenge … 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 the next column. Please wait until Monday to publicly share your answers! If you need a hint or have a favorite puzzle collecting dust in your attic, find me on Twitter.
Due to the holidays, the next column will appear on Jan. 8, 2021. See you in the new year!
Riddler Express
The other day I was playing around in my kitchen with a tall glass and a smaller disk, when, to my surprise, I was able to balance the disk neatly atop the rim of the glass:
First of all, try this at home!
Now suppose you have a disk of radius R and a glass with a circular rim of radius 2R. If you randomly place the disk so that its center lies within the glass’s rim, what is the probability that the disk will balance atop the glass? (Assume the distribution is uniformly spread across the circular area inside the rim.)
Submit your answer
Riddler Classic
From Keith Wynroe comes an epic power battle that is sure to wear you down:
The Game of Attrition has two players, each of whom starts with a whole number of “power points.” Players take turns “attacking” each other, which involves subtracting their own number of power points from their opponent’s until one of the players is out of points.
For example, suppose Player A (who goes first) starts with 5 points and Player B starts with 7 points. After A’s first attack, A still has 5 points, while B has been reduced to 2 points (i.e., 7 minus 5). Now it’s B’s turn, who reduces A to 5 minus 2, or 3 points. Finally, on A’s second turn, B is reduced from 2 points to nothing (since 2 minus 3 is −1). Despite starting with fewer points, A wins!
Now suppose A goes first and starts with N points. In terms of N, what is the greatest number of points B can start with so that A will still emerge victorious?
Submit your answer
Solution to last week’s Riddler Express
Congratulations to 👏 Andrew Young 👏 of Sarasota, Florida, winner of last week’s Riddler Express.
Tonight is the last night of Hanukkah, which means millions of Jews have been lighting their menorahs over the last eight nights. It is traditional to start with one candle in the rightmost position, which is lit using a central candle called a shamash. On the second night, a second candle is added to the left of the first. On the third night, a third candle is added to the left of the second, and so on, until all eight candles have been added on the final night.
With this system for adding candles, whether you were looking at the menorah from the front (i.e., in your home) or back (i.e., through a window), you could easily determine which of the eight nights of Hanukkah it was by counting the number of candles (other than the shamash). But what if you wanted to make that same menorah capable of tracking more than eight nights?
To do that, you had to devise a new system of adding or moving candles (other than the shamash in the middle, which is always lit) around the menorah so that it could uniquely indicate as many nights as possible. Your system had to read the same forward and backward, so that regardless of whether you were looking at the menorah from the front or the back you’d still know what night it was. What was the greatest number of nights that could be indicated using your system?
Without resorting to methods not stated in the problem (like playing with the heights or colors of the candles), your best bet was to use a binary code. Lit candles represented a one, and unlit positions on the menorah were zeros. With this strategy, the menorah could theoretically indicate up to 256 nights. However, since some of these 256 states read the same forward and backward — an ambiguity that was specifically to be avoided — the answer had to be less than 256.
Realizing that a simple binary code was insufficient, some solvers turned to ternary code. Alex Vornsand took this approach, looking at pairs of candles on either side of the central shamash — either neither candle was lit, one candle was lit, or both candles were lit. With four pairs of candles, this meant there were 34, or 81 distinct states, no two of which read the same forward and backward:
But it was possible to do even better! As solver Francesca Maroney noted, there were 16 symmetric configurations that read the same forward and backward — there were 24 different ways to light the four candles on one side of the shamash, and for each of those there was just one way to light the other four to make the menorah symmetric.
Since 16 of the 256 states were symmetric, that meant the remaining 240 were asymmetric — they read differently forward and backward. These could be paired up as reflections about the shamash, so that you could see either of the two states depending on which side of the menorah you were on. In the end, there were 120 paired states and 16 symmetric states, for a total of 136 distinguishable states — the maximum number of nights your menorah could track.
Sign me up for 136 nights of Hanukkah — and the 136 presents that go with it!
Solution to last week’s Riddler Classic
Congratulations to 👏 Jack Stade 👏 of Lafayette, Colorado, winner of last week’s Riddler Classic.
Last week, the Potentate of Puzzles challenged five lucky citizens with a test. The potentate had countless red hats, green hats and blue hats. She said to the citizens, “Tomorrow, you will all be blindfolded as I place one of these hats on each of your heads. Once all the hats are placed, your blindfolds will be removed. At this point, there will be no communication between any of you! As soon as I give a signal, everyone must guess — at the same time — the color of the hat atop their own head. To win this challenge, at least one of you must guess correctly!”
The potentate continued: “The good news is that there’s a little more information you’ll have. I will be arranging you into two rows, with two of you in one row and three of you in the other. Citizens in the same row cannot see each other, but they can see all the citizens in the other row. Finally, each citizen will know their placement within their own row — that is, whether they are seated on the left or right or in the middle.”
What strategy could the citizens have devised beforehand so that at least one of them guessed correctly?
At first blush, this seemed hopeless. With five hats, each of which could be three colors, there were a total of 35, or 243, cases to consider. How could the five citizens possibly cobble together enough information to ensure that at least one of them guessed correctly?
Virtually all solvers treated this as the logic problem it was intended to be, experimenting with different rules for the citizens. But before proceeding down this road, I want to give a tip of the hat (see what I did there?) to the creative approach of solver Josh Silverman, who used a genetic algorithm to computationally find a solution. But enough with the computers!
The puzzle’s submitter, Alex van den Brandhof, originally penned this puzzle with fellow Dutchman Dion Gijswijt for Pythagoras, a Dutch magazine for high school math students. One solution, courtesy of Alex, is as follows:
First, let’s slap some labels on the positions and the hat colors. Let’s call the citizens in the row of two A and B, and the citizens in the row of three C, D and E. Let’s also convert those colors into numbers — a red hat has a value of 0, a green hat has a value of 1 and a blue hat has a value of 2. We then call the values (again, representing the colors) of the respective positions a, b, c, d and e.
First off, C guessed a (the color of A’s hat), and D guessed b (the color of B’s hat). Meanwhile, E guessed the sum of a and b, modulo 3. For example, if A and B both had blue hats — each with a value of 2, according to the aforementioned scheme — then E would have guessed green (which has a value of 1), since 2 + 2 equals 4, which is congruent to 1 (mod 3).
Should any one of those three (C, D and E) have guessed their own hat color correctly, then the citizens would be victorious. Therefore, when A and B made their guesses, they might as well have assumed that C, D and E were all wrong. That meant A shouldn’t have guessed c, because if A and C had the same color hat, then C would already have been correct. Similarly, B shouldn’t have guessed d, because if B and D had the same color hat, then D would already have been correct. And finally, both A and B should have assumed that the sum of their hat values (mod 3) was different from E’s guess — otherwise E would have been correct.
At this point, no matter what colors A and B saw on the hats of C, D and E, it was always possible for at least one of them to be correct — in the event that C, D and E were all wrong.
For example, suppose the color values are as follows: a = 0, b = 2, c = 2, d = 1 and e = 1. Here’s how this scenario would play out for C, D and E:
Seeing that a = 0, C guesses 0 — incorrectly.
= 0, guesses 0 — incorrectly. Seeing that b = 2, D guesses 2 — incorrectly.
= 2, guesses 2 — incorrectly. Seeing that a = 0 and b = 2, E guesses 0 + 2 (mod 3), or 2 — incorrectly.
With three incorrect guesses, the pressure is then on A and B. Looking at the hats of C, D and E, A and B both know that A shouldn’t guess 2, B shouldn’t guess 1, and that the sum of their guesses (mod 3) shouldn’t be 1. That left just three possible cases to consider:
A guesses 0 and B guesses 0, for a sum of 0.
guesses 0 and guesses 0, for a sum of 0. A guesses 0 and B guesses 2, for a sum of 2.
guesses 0 and guesses 2, for a sum of 2. A guesses 1 and B guesses 2, for a sum of 0.
If A guesses 0 and B guesses 2, at least one of them is guaranteed to be correct! This sort of result played out for all 243 combinations of a, b, c, d and e — it was always possible for at least one citizen to guess correctly.
Next time, the potentate will be sure to make use of her countless yellow hats as well, in which case it will surely take more than five citizens working together to complete the challenge …
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--2020-12-18--Does It Matter Which COVID-19 Vaccine I Take?

By the end of this week , the United States could have not one , but two COVID-19 vaccines authorized for emergency use .
After nine months of isolation and lockdowns and more than 300,000 deaths , it is difficult to find superlatives to fit this moment .
Any I come up with feel like they still understate how fantastic the news truly is .
What ’ s more , there are even more vaccines waiting in the wings .
Within a few months , we will likely have access to vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna … and Johnson & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re going to go from desperately wishing for a vaccine , any vaccine , to having a cornucopia of choices .
But that doesn ’ t necessarily mean you ’ re going to have much ability to choose between them .
At least , not anytime soon .
While people at the tail end of the vaccination priority list will likely be able to browse a veritable vaccine buffet , anyone getting vaccinated in the next few months is probably just going to have to take what ’ s available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially true in the immediate short term , as limited supplies begin to circulate but the biggest issue remains whether any vaccine is available — not which one you want .
This is not , however , bad news .
That ’ s because the first two vaccines available are far more effective than anyone expected they would be , and experts say either one would be great to take .
It ’ s also not totally unprecedented .
There are multiple versions of many of the vaccines we already take .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available every year .
What ’ s different is the public ’ s awareness of the many potential vaccine options , said Dr. Rebecca Weintraub , a professor of medicine and global health at Harvard Medical School .
Our need for all those options is also a bit different , she and other experts told me .
The variety of flu shots helps serve different populations — seniors need one with a higher dosage , for example , and people who are allergic to eggs need one produced without those triggers .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least , the main reason we want lots of COVID-19 vaccines is because we need the extra manufacturing capacity that provides .
“ If we ’ re going to vaccinate more than 300 million people in this country , in the end we ’ re going to need more than two vaccines , ” said Dr. Paul Offit , director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children ’ s Hospital of Philadelphia .
“ You want to get on top of this as quickly as you can .
You want to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can , so the more manufacturers the better.
” And right now , the differences between the two vaccines that will be ready soonest are basically negligible , experts told me .
Both Pfizer and Moderna have short-term efficacy rates near 95 percent .
Both have low rates of severe side effects — though , based on analysis of clinical trial data , Pfizer ’ s appear to be a little lower than Moderna ’ s .
Pfizer was also tested on a different age range and is authorized for people as young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeking authorization for those age 18 and older .
But that ’ s about it .
You won ’ t be able to choose if you get Pfizer or Moderna … but it also really doesn ’ t matter at this point , experts said .
You should feel confident with either .
Eventually , we will get to the point where we know more about how different vaccines better serve this or that niche population .
Maybe one turns out to provide better protection for elderly people .
Maybe another produces fewer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened this week in Alaska during the Pfizer rollout .
It may even turn out that one or another vaccine lasts longer and requires fewer booster shots .
But that data isn ’ t currently available , Weintraub said , because the clinical trials weren ’ t designed with cross comparison of the vaccines in mind .
“ The endpoints are slightly different .
The study populations are slightly different .
So we ’ re not on the same field with the same exact rules when we ’ re comparing these clinical trials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That lack of cross comparison matters , as does the lack of information we currently have about things like how different vaccines interact with one another .
“ We see now that , for example , AstraZeneca is thinking about combining their vaccine with Sputnik V , the Russian vaccine , to try and gain even greater potency and breadth of coverage , ” said Dr. Warner Greene , senior investigator at Gladstone Institutes , an independent , nonprofit biomedical research center in San Francisco .
But currently , it wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one vaccine and then decide you want to try another , because we don ’ t know how the two vaccines would interact ( even though it ’ s completely possible some of those interactions could be beneficial ) .
Right now , though , you would not want to get one dose of Pfizer and your second dose of Moderna , said Dr. Purvi Parikh , a professor at New York University ’ s Grossman School of Medicine and a co-investigator on the Pfizer vaccine trials .
The two are both mRNA-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough that you can ’ t assume they ’ re interchangeable without research to prove it .
In fact , she told me , people who get vaccines will be getting cards to document both when they are due for their second shot — and which vaccine they should get when they go back for it .
All of this is why Weintraub says it ’ s critical that funding and volunteering for Phase 3 clinical trials continue , even after we have two vaccines on the market .
We need to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Moderna , and we need to know how all the authorized vaccines compare to one another .
If we ever want multiple vaccines to really mean multiple options , we have to keep learning about them .
Otherwise , no matter how many vaccines we have , we won ’ t be able to make an informed choice between them .

By the end of this week, the United States could have not one, but two COVID-19 vaccines authorized for emergency use. After nine months of isolation and lockdowns and more than 300,000 deaths, it is difficult to find superlatives to fit this moment. Any I come up with feel like they still understate how fantastic the news truly is. What’s more, there are even more vaccines waiting in the wings. Within a few months, we will likely have access to vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna … and Johnson & Johnson, and Novavax, and AstraZeneca. We’re going to go from desperately wishing for a vaccine, any vaccine, to having a cornucopia of choices.
[How To Make Sure People Come Back For Their Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose]
But that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re going to have much ability to choose between them. At least, not anytime soon.
Why are people hesitant to trust a COVID-19 vaccine?
While people at the tail end of the vaccination priority list will likely be able to browse a veritable vaccine buffet, anyone getting vaccinated in the next few months is probably just going to have to take what’s available. That’s going to be especially true in the immediate short term, as limited supplies begin to circulate but the biggest issue remains whether any vaccine is available — not which one you want.
This is not, however, bad news. That’s because the first two vaccines available are far more effective than anyone expected they would be, and experts say either one would be great to take. It’s also not totally unprecedented. There are multiple versions of many of the vaccines we already take. For instance, there are multiple flu vaccines available every year. What’s different is the public’s awareness of the many potential vaccine options, said Dr. Rebecca Weintraub, a professor of medicine and global health at Harvard Medical School.
Our need for all those options is also a bit different, she and other experts told me. The variety of flu shots helps serve different populations — seniors need one with a higher dosage, for example, and people who are allergic to eggs need one produced without those triggers. But, in the short term, at least, the main reason we want lots of COVID-19 vaccines is because we need the extra manufacturing capacity that provides. “If we’re going to vaccinate more than 300 million people in this country, in the end we’re going to need more than two vaccines,” said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “You want to get on top of this as quickly as you can. You want to get back to normal as quickly as you can, so the more manufacturers the better.”
[The Federal Government Wasn’t Tracking COVID-19 Cases In Schools, So Emily Oster Decided To Do It Herself]
And right now, the differences between the two vaccines that will be ready soonest are basically negligible, experts told me. Both Pfizer and Moderna have short-term efficacy rates near 95 percent. Both have low rates of severe side effects — though, based on analysis of clinical trial data, Pfizer’s appear to be a little lower than Moderna’s. Pfizer was also tested on a different age range and is authorized for people as young as 16, while Moderna is only seeking authorization for those age 18 and older. But that’s about it. You won’t be able to choose if you get Pfizer or Moderna … but it also really doesn’t matter at this point, experts said. You should feel confident with either.
Eventually, we will get to the point where we know more about how different vaccines better serve this or that niche population. Maybe one turns out to provide better protection for elderly people. Maybe another produces fewer allergic reactions, like the kind that happened this week in Alaska during the Pfizer rollout. It may even turn out that one or another vaccine lasts longer and requires fewer booster shots. But that data isn’t currently available, Weintraub said, because the clinical trials weren’t designed with cross comparison of the vaccines in mind.
“The endpoints are slightly different. The study populations are slightly different. So we’re not on the same field with the same exact rules when we’re comparing these clinical trials, unfortunately,” she told me.
That lack of cross comparison matters, as does the lack of information we currently have about things like how different vaccines interact with one another. “We see now that, for example, AstraZeneca is thinking about combining their vaccine with Sputnik V, the Russian vaccine, to try and gain even greater potency and breadth of coverage,” said Dr. Warner Greene, senior investigator at Gladstone Institutes, an independent, nonprofit biomedical research center in San Francisco. But currently, it wouldn’t be a good idea to get one vaccine and then decide you want to try another, because we don’t know how the two vaccines would interact (even though it’s completely possible some of those interactions could be beneficial).
[What We Know About ‘Long COVID’]
Right now, though, you would not want to get one dose of Pfizer and your second dose of Moderna, said Dr. Purvi Parikh, a professor at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine and a co-investigator on the Pfizer vaccine trials. The two are both mRNA-based vaccines, but they’re different enough that you can’t assume they’re interchangeable without research to prove it. In fact, she told me, people who get vaccines will be getting cards to document both when they are due for their second shot — and which vaccine they should get when they go back for it.
All of this is why Weintraub says it’s critical that funding and volunteering for Phase 3 clinical trials continue, even after we have two vaccines on the market. We need to have more vaccines reach authorization than just Pfizer and Moderna, and we need to know how all the authorized vaccines compare to one another. If we ever want multiple vaccines to really mean multiple options, we have to keep learning about them. Otherwise, no matter how many vaccines we have, we won’t be able to make an informed choice between them.
What the COVID-19 vaccine means for political battles to come


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-18--Both Republicans And Democrats Want Congress To Approve A New Coronavirus Stimulus Package

Welcome to Pollapalooza , our weekly polling roundup .
All eyes have been on Congress this week as Republicans and Democrats have worked feverishly to hammer out another COVID-19 economic relief bill .
As of Thursday afternoon , it looked like the sides were coming together on a roughly $ 900 billion package that would provide funding to struggling businesses , extend unemployment benefits and send checks to individual Americans — but not protect businesses from coronavirus-related lawsuits or bail out local governments .
If and when the stimulus bill passes , it should be popular with the American public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducted Dec. 8-11 , 86 percent of registered voters approved of Congress “ passing an additional economic relief package that would provide funds to people and businesses impacted by the coronavirus outbreak.
” That support cut across party lines , too : 94 percent of Democrats , 85 percent of independents and 79 percent of Republicans all said they approved of such a package .
In fact , Americans are so desperate for congressional action on the coronavirus that they would support a relief package that doesn ’ t send them each a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have found extremely popular .
However , support for such a bill was significantly lower than for the one described by YouGov/CBS News : Registered voters supported it 63 percent to 37 percent , according to a Dec. 3-7 poll from HarrisX/The Hill .
That ’ s looking pretty hypothetical at this point , though : Congress is likely to pass some form of stimulus payments this time around ( though they are likely to be only $ 600 per person , not $ 1,200 as in the spring ) .
Unsurprisingly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic .
According to FiveThirtyEight ’ s tracker of such polls , 53.1 percent of Americans say they are very concerned about the coronavirus ’ s effect on the economy , and 32.6 percent say they are somewhat concerned .
But recent news — not just the likely passage of another stimulus bill , but also the rollout of what looks like a safe and effective coronavirus vaccine — may lessen the intensity of their concern .
Some Americans seem to have switched from the “ very concerned ” camp to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our tracker over the past couple weeks , driven largely by this week ’ s Ipsos/Axios poll in which “ only ” 48 percent of adults said they were either extremely or very concerned about an economic collapse .
The country may also be feeling more optimistic given the upcoming presidential transition .
Morning Consult/Politico ’ s poll this week asked registered voters whom they trusted more to handle the economic recovery following the coronavirus : 52 percent said President-elect Biden , while 38 percent said President Trump .
And other polls this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the current stimulus bill to be the government ’ s last action to address the crisis .
For example , in the latest installment of Navigator Research ’ s regular tracking poll on the coronavirus , 65 percent of registered voters chose the pandemic as one of the top four issues they want Biden and the new Congress to focus on in January — by far the highest share of any issue .
In second place , with 48 percent , is “ jobs and the economy.
” • The Kaiser Family Foundation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor , which uses polls and focus groups to track Americans ’ feelings about getting a COVID-19 vaccine .
Its initial findings are that 71 percent of Americans would get the vaccine if it is available at no cost and if scientists deem it safe — but that Republicans and Black adults are especially skeptical of getting vaccinated .
That jibes with other recent polling on the topic , as FiveThirtyEight ’ s Perry Bacon Jr. wrote in this space last week .
• Having served just one term as president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comeback attempt in 2024 .
A new Fox News poll this week , however , finds little appetite for this idea : Only 37 percent of registered voters said they ’ d like him to run for president again , while 57 percent said they would not .
However , 79 percent of Trump voters and 71 percent of Republicans did want him to run again , suggesting he may not encounter much resistance within his own party .
• Political engagement was through the roof this year , as shown not only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by this new poll from the Pew Research Center .
Pew found that , over the past six months , 53 percent of 2020 voters also engaged in one of six political activities listed , such as expressing support for a candidate on social media ( 36 percent ) , donating money to a candidate or outside group ( 25 percent ) or working or volunteering for a political campaign ( 5 percent ) .
• A different Pew poll quantifies what we ’ ve all long suspected : People almost never pick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers .
Only 19 percent of adults told Pew they did so , while 80 percent let it go to voicemail .
• After 105 years as the “ Indians , ” Cleveland ’ s Major League Baseball team announced on Monday it would retire the controversial moniker after the 2021 season .
A YouGov poll conducted quickly thereafter found that 49 percent of MLB fans supported the name change , while 45 percent opposed it .
In addition , Republican adults ( not just MLB fans ) said 59 percent to 21 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name to be changed , perhaps explaining why Trump seized on the renaming as an example of “ cancel culture ” in a tweet .
• ’ Tis the season for holiday-themed surveys .
In YouGov ’ s latest “ North Poll ” ( please direct all hate mail to YouGov ; we didn ’ t come up with the name ! )
, 75 percent of Americans said they had been nice this year , while 13 percent said they had been naughty .
A full 73 percent also approved of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while only 10 percent disapproved .
According to FiveThirtyEight ’ s presidential approval tracker , 43.6 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president , while 52.5 percent disapprove ( a net approval rating of -8.9 points ) .
At this time last week , 43.3 percent approved and 52.4 percent disapproved ( a net approval rating of -9.1 points ) .
One month ago , Trump had an approval rating of 44.8 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.0 percent , for a net approval rating of @ @ @

Welcome to Pollapalooza, our weekly polling roundup.
Poll(s) of the week
All eyes have been on Congress this week as Republicans and Democrats have worked feverishly to hammer out another COVID-19 economic relief bill. As of Thursday afternoon, it looked like the sides were coming together on a roughly $900 billion package that would provide funding to struggling businesses, extend unemployment benefits and send checks to individual Americans — but not protect businesses from coronavirus-related lawsuits or bail out local governments.
What the COVID-19 vaccine means for political battles to come
If and when the stimulus bill passes, it should be popular with the American public. According to a YouGov/CBS News poll conducted Dec. 8-11, 86 percent of registered voters approved of Congress “passing an additional economic relief package that would provide funds to people and businesses impacted by the coronavirus outbreak.” That support cut across party lines, too: 94 percent of Democrats, 85 percent of independents and 79 percent of Republicans all said they approved of such a package.
[What We Know About ‘Long COVID’]
In fact, Americans are so desperate for congressional action on the coronavirus that they would support a relief package that doesn’t send them each a personal stimulus payment — something past polls have found extremely popular. However, support for such a bill was significantly lower than for the one described by YouGov/CBS News: Registered voters supported it 63 percent to 37 percent, according to a Dec. 3-7 poll from HarrisX/The Hill. That’s looking pretty hypothetical at this point, though: Congress is likely to pass some form of stimulus payments this time around (though they are likely to be only $600 per person, not $1,200 as in the spring).
Unsurprisingly, Americans remain worried about the economic impact of the pandemic. According to FiveThirtyEight’s tracker of such polls, 53.1 percent of Americans say they are very concerned about the coronavirus’s effect on the economy, and 32.6 percent say they are somewhat concerned.
But recent news — not just the likely passage of another stimulus bill, but also the rollout of what looks like a safe and effective coronavirus vaccine — may lessen the intensity of their concern. Some Americans seem to have switched from the “very concerned” camp to the “somewhat concerned” camp in our tracker over the past couple weeks, driven largely by this week’s Ipsos/Axios poll in which “only” 48 percent of adults said they were either extremely or very concerned about an economic collapse.
[Related: Does It Matter Which COVID-19 Vaccine You Get?]
The country may also be feeling more optimistic given the upcoming presidential transition. Morning Consult/Politico’s poll this week asked registered voters whom they trusted more to handle the economic recovery following the coronavirus: 52 percent said President-elect Biden, while 38 percent said President Trump.
And other polls this week suggest that Americans do not want the current stimulus bill to be the government’s last action to address the crisis. For example, in the latest installment of Navigator Research’s regular tracking poll on the coronavirus, 65 percent of registered voters chose the pandemic as one of the top four issues they want Biden and the new Congress to focus on in January — by far the highest share of any issue. In second place, with 48 percent, is “jobs and the economy.”
Other polling bites
The Kaiser Family Foundation has launched an ongoing project, the COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor, which uses polls and focus groups to track Americans’ feelings about getting a COVID-19 vaccine. Its initial findings are that 71 percent of Americans would get the vaccine if it is available at no cost and if scientists deem it safe — but that Republicans and Black adults are especially skeptical of getting vaccinated. That jibes with other recent polling on the topic, as FiveThirtyEight’s Perry Bacon Jr. wrote in this space last week.
Having served just one term as president, Trump is reportedly flirting with a comeback attempt in 2024. A new Fox News poll this week, however, finds little appetite for this idea: Only 37 percent of registered voters said they’d like him to run for president again, while 57 percent said they would not. However, 79 percent of Trump voters and 71 percent of Republicans did want him to run again, suggesting he may not encounter much resistance within his own party.
want him to run again, suggesting he may not encounter much resistance within his own party. Political engagement was through the roof this year, as shown not only by the record-setting turnout numbers but also by this new poll from the Pew Research Center. Pew found that, over the past six months, 53 percent of 2020 voters also engaged in one of six political activities listed, such as expressing support for a candidate on social media (36 percent), donating money to a candidate or outside group (25 percent) or working or volunteering for a political campaign (5 percent).
A different Pew poll quantifies what we’ve all long suspected: People almost never pick up calls on their cellphones from unknown numbers. Only 19 percent of adults told Pew they did so, while 80 percent let it go to voicemail.
After 105 years as the “Indians,” Cleveland’s Major League Baseball team announced on Monday it would retire the controversial moniker after the 2021 season. A YouGov poll conducted quickly thereafter found that 49 percent of MLB fans supported the name change, while 45 percent opposed it. In addition, Republican adults (not just MLB fans) said 59 percent to 21 percent that they did not want the name to be changed, perhaps explaining why Trump seized on the renaming as an example of “cancel culture” in a tweet.
’Tis the season for holiday-themed surveys. In YouGov’s latest “North Poll” (please direct all hate mail to YouGov; we didn’t come up with the name!), 75 percent of Americans said they had been nice this year, while 13 percent said they had been naughty. A full 73 percent also approved of the way Santa Claus was handling his job, while only 10 percent disapproved.
Trump approval
According to FiveThirtyEight’s presidential approval tracker, 43.6 percent of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing as president, while 52.5 percent disapprove (a net approval rating of -8.9 points). At this time last week, 43.3 percent approved and 52.4 percent disapproved (a net approval rating of -9.1 points). One month ago, Trump had an approval rating of 44.8 percent and a disapproval rating of 52.0 percent, for a net approval rating of -7.2 points.
How Trump’s pardons compare to other presidents | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast