fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--What You Need To Know About Today’s Elections In Minnesota And Georgia

Believe it or not , the 2020 Democratic presidential primary is still going on — but it comes to an end today .
Connecticut ’ s presidential primary is the last of the cycle , and the fact that it ’ s happening so late in the season is rare .
According to presidential primaries expert and FiveThirtyEight contributor Josh Putnam , it marks the latest presidential nominating contest in the modern era .
But it ’ s not the presidential contest that will capture headlines today .
A total of five states will hold their down-ballot primaries or runoffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the radical wings and more moderate factions will continue for both parties .
Will a controversial member of “ the Squad ” — a group of first-term congresswomen of color known for their progressive views — lose her Democratic primary ?
And will Republicans send a believer in the QAnon conspiracy theory ( with a history of racist comments ) to Congress ?
We will ( maybe ) learn the answers today .
Two members of the Squad ( Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib ) have already routed their primary challengers this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pressley ) doesn ’ t even have an opponent .
But Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota ’ s 5th Congressional District might not find it so easy , as she ’ s facing a stiff challenge from attorney Antone Melton-Meaux .
Like Ocasio-Cortez ’ s and Tlaib ’ s challengers , Melton-Meaux has attacked Omar for basking in the spotlight of her national fame rather than attending to the needs of her Minneapolis-based district .
Omar , though , has racked up a long list of controversies .
First , she has made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ linking politicians ’ support for Israel to campaign donations from Jewish advocacy groups , for which she apologized in 2019 .
Omar has also been accused of misusing campaign funds , most notably by paying thousands of dollars to a political consultant whose wife claimed he was having an affair with Omar ( since then , Omar and the consultant have divorced their respective spouses and gotten married themselves ) .
But Melton-Meaux has issues of his own .
Omar ’ s allies recently filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing him of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100,000 in campaign funds through “ mysterious shell companies.
” And of course , the campaign is an ideological fight as well .
Although Melton-Meaux has branded himself as a progressive , his policy positions are much more moderate than Omar ’ s .
For instance , he does not want to defund the police , and he prefers a public option to a single-payer health care system .
It ’ s hard to know how close this primary is .
In early July , the Omar campaign released an internal poll from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 66 percent to 29 percent .
However , the money race implies a much tighter race .
With the help of Omar ’ s well-funded political enemies , Melton-Meaux had raised an impressive $ 4.2 million as of July 22 — almost as much as Omar ’ s $ 4.3 million .
The pro-Israel super PAC Americans for Tomorrow ’ s Future has also spent $ 2.1 million against Omar on attack ads and direct mail .
Omar ’ s recent release of her own negative ad against Melton-Meaux may signal the race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re also monitoring two Republican congressional runoffs in Georgia , and undoubtedly the most combustible contest is the 14th Congressional District race between controversy-laden construction company owner Marjorie Taylor Greene and neurosurgeon Dr. John Cowan .
Today ’ s winner will be all but certain to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Tom Graves , as President Trump won 75 percent of the northwest Georgia district ’ s vote in 2016 .
At first , it seemed as if Greene was the front-runner .
After all , she won 40 percent to Cowan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote June 9 .
However , Greene ’ s conspiratorial and racist views may have undermined her path to victory .
For starters , she has refused to disavow QAnon , an FBI-labeled domestic terror threat that claims there ’ s a deep state conspiracy against Trump .
And just after the June primary , Politico uncovered videos of Greene making racist , Islamophobic and anti-Semitic statements , which prompted many national GOP leaders and Georgia Republicans to oppose her and/or back Cowan .
Koch Industries ’ political action committee even asked for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to her campaign .
Not that Greene needed that contribution to shore up her finances — as of July 22 , she had loaned herself $ 900,000 out of the nearly $ 1.6 million she ’ d raised overall .
But it still meant Cowan , who collected about $ 1.2 million ( of which $ 200,000 was self-funded ) , entered the home stretch with $ 237,000 cash on hand , compared to roughly $ 144,000 for Greene .
Nonetheless , despite public opposition from many Republican leaders , there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greene .
For his part , Cowan has pitched himself as a pro-Trump conservative who doesn ’ t have Greene ’ s baggage .
He ’ s also criticized Greene for accepting coronavirus relief funds for her company even though she ’ s self-funded more than half of her campaign .
He has also tried to get to the right of Greene on immigration , running an ad accusing her company of not using the Department of Homeland Security ’ s E-Verify program to check the immigration status of workers — a contention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called Cowan a “ globalist Never Trumper ” who ’ s “ too afraid to take on China.
” She ’ s also made a play for conservative voters angered by recent protests against the police by attacking Cowan for not speaking out in support of former Atlanta police officer Garrett Rolfe , who faces 11 charges , including murder , for shooting a Black man who had fallen asleep in his car at a Wendy ’ s drive-thru .
Greene ’ s campaign slogan is “ Save America , stop socialism.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough for Greene to win today .
A late July survey from Cowan ’ s campaign found the pair tied at 38 percent , numbers that were actually slightly worse for Cowan than in a late June poll from his campaign that put him ahead 43 percent to 40 percent .
Next door in Georgia ’ s 9th Congressional District , the Republican runoff will also likely decide the November winner in this conservative seat in northeast Georgia , which is open because GOP Rep. Doug Collins is running for the U.S. Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gurtler and gun store owner and veteran Andrew Clyde appears to be wide open , after they finished with 21 percent and 18 percent , respectively , in a crowded primary June 9 .
Gurtler has touted his belief in limited government and has acquired the moniker “ Dr .
No ” for his tendency to vote against bills in the state legislature .
This approach has won him allies — the conservative Club for Growth endorsed his candidacy — but not all of his no votes are popular .
For instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP after he was the only Republican to vote against a resolution commending President Trump for killing an Iranian commander considered a terrorist by the U.S. government .
As for Clyde , he ’ s built a reputation for successfully taking on the Internal Revenue Service after it tried to seize nearly $ 1 million from him .
However , Gurtler has questioned why Clyde ’ s business has continued to sell guns to the agency , as that is seemingly at odds with Clyde ’ s anti-government rhetoric .
We haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Gurtler appears to have the most financial backing , even though Clyde had outraised Gurtler about $ 877,000 to $ 660,000 as of July 22 .
Unlike Gurtler , Clyde has mostly self-funded his campaign , and outside groups have poured in around $ 1.9 million on behalf of Gurtler or against Clyde .
The campaign arm of the Club for Growth has been very active , spending about $ 500,000 boosting Gurtler and $ 653,000 attacking Clyde .
Additionally , Protect Freedom PAC has spent $ 494,000 to help Gurtler while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrown in about $ 414,000 to support him or hit Clyde .
So we ’ ll have to see whether all that money pays off for Gurtler in the end .
The three races we ’ ve highlighted — especially the ones in Minnesota ’ s 5th District and Georgia ’ s 14th District — all take place in districts that are safely in one party ’ s column , but who wins the primary still matters as it will affect the House ’ s ideological composition and each party ’ s internal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see just how these races shape the parties going forward .

Believe it or not, the 2020 Democratic presidential primary is still going on — but it comes to an end today. Connecticut’s presidential primary is the last of the cycle, and the fact that it’s happening so late in the season is rare. According to presidential primaries expert and FiveThirtyEight contributor Josh Putnam, it marks the latest presidential nominating contest in the modern era.
But it’s not the presidential contest that will capture headlines today. A total of five states will hold their down-ballot primaries or runoffs today, in which the fight between the radical wings and more moderate factions will continue for both parties. Will a controversial member of “the Squad” — a group of first-term congresswomen of color known for their progressive views — lose her Democratic primary? And will Republicans send a believer in the QAnon conspiracy theory (with a history of racist comments) to Congress? We will (maybe) learn the answers today.
Minnesota
Two members of the Squad (Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib) have already routed their primary challengers this year, and another (Rep. Ayanna Pressley) doesn’t even have an opponent. But Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District might not find it so easy, as she’s facing a stiff challenge from attorney Antone Melton-Meaux.
Like Ocasio-Cortez’s and Tlaib’s challengers, Melton-Meaux has attacked Omar for basking in the spotlight of her national fame rather than attending to the needs of her Minneapolis-based district. Omar, though, has racked up a long list of controversies. First, she has made a number of anti-Semitic comments, including linking politicians’ support for Israel to campaign donations from Jewish advocacy groups, for which she apologized in 2019. Omar has also been accused of misusing campaign funds, most notably by paying thousands of dollars to a political consultant whose wife claimed he was having an affair with Omar (since then, Omar and the consultant have divorced their respective spouses and gotten married themselves).
But Melton-Meaux has issues of his own. Omar’s allies recently filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing him of concealing the true recipients of almost $100,000 in campaign funds through “mysterious shell companies.” And of course, the campaign is an ideological fight as well. Although Melton-Meaux has branded himself as a progressive, his policy positions are much more moderate than Omar’s. For instance, he does not want to defund the police, and he prefers a public option to a single-payer health care system.
It’s hard to know how close this primary is. In early July, the Omar campaign released an internal poll from Change Research showing the incumbent leading Melton-Meaux 66 percent to 29 percent. However, the money race implies a much tighter race. With the help of Omar’s well-funded political enemies, Melton-Meaux had raised an impressive $4.2 million as of July 22 — almost as much as Omar’s $4.3 million. The pro-Israel super PAC Americans for Tomorrow’s Future has also spent $2.1 million against Omar on attack ads and direct mail. Omar’s recent release of her own negative ad against Melton-Meaux may signal the race is tightening in the final days.
Georgia
We’re also monitoring two Republican congressional runoffs in Georgia, and undoubtedly the most combustible contest is the 14th Congressional District race between controversy-laden construction company owner Marjorie Taylor Greene and neurosurgeon Dr. John Cowan. Today’s winner will be all but certain to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Tom Graves, as President Trump won 75 percent of the northwest Georgia district’s vote in 2016.
At first, it seemed as if Greene was the front-runner. After all, she won 40 percent to Cowan’s 21 percent in the initial vote June 9. However, Greene’s conspiratorial and racist views may have undermined her path to victory. For starters, she has refused to disavow QAnon, an FBI-labeled domestic terror threat that claims there’s a deep state conspiracy against Trump. And just after the June primary, Politico uncovered videos of Greene making racist, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic statements, which prompted many national GOP leaders and Georgia Republicans to oppose her and/or back Cowan. Koch Industries’ political action committee even asked for a refund on its $5,000 donation to her campaign.
Not that Greene needed that contribution to shore up her finances — as of July 22, she had loaned herself $900,000 out of the nearly $1.6 million she’d raised overall. But it still meant Cowan, who collected about $1.2 million (of which $200,000 was self-funded), entered the home stretch with $237,000 cash on hand, compared to roughly $144,000 for Greene. Nonetheless, despite public opposition from many Republican leaders, there’s been very little outside spending aimed at Greene.
For his part, Cowan has pitched himself as a pro-Trump conservative who doesn’t have Greene’s baggage. He’s also criticized Greene for accepting coronavirus relief funds for her company even though she’s self-funded more than half of her campaign. He has also tried to get to the right of Greene on immigration, running an ad accusing her company of not using the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify program to check the immigration status of workers — a contention Greene denies.
Meanwhile, Greene has called Cowan a “globalist Never Trumper” who’s “too afraid to take on China.” She’s also made a play for conservative voters angered by recent protests against the police by attacking Cowan for not speaking out in support of former Atlanta police officer Garrett Rolfe, who faces 11 charges, including murder, for shooting a Black man who had fallen asleep in his car at a Wendy’s drive-thru. Greene’s campaign slogan is “Save America, stop socialism.”
And those sorts of appeals may be enough for Greene to win today. A late July survey from Cowan’s campaign found the pair tied at 38 percent, numbers that were actually slightly worse for Cowan than in a late June poll from his campaign that put him ahead 43 percent to 40 percent.
Next door in Georgia’s 9th Congressional District, the Republican runoff will also likely decide the November winner in this conservative seat in northeast Georgia, which is open because GOP Rep. Doug Collins is running for the U.S. Senate. The clash between state Rep. Matt Gurtler and gun store owner and veteran Andrew Clyde appears to be wide open, after they finished with 21 percent and 18 percent, respectively, in a crowded primary June 9.
Gurtler has touted his belief in limited government and has acquired the moniker “Dr. No” for his tendency to vote against bills in the state legislature. This approach has won him allies — the conservative Club for Growth endorsed his candidacy — but not all of his no votes are popular. For instance, Gurtler has caught flak from some in the GOP after he was the only Republican to vote against a resolution commending President Trump for killing an Iranian commander considered a terrorist by the U.S. government.
As for Clyde, he’s built a reputation for successfully taking on the Internal Revenue Service after it tried to seize nearly $1 million from him. However, Gurtler has questioned why Clyde’s business has continued to sell guns to the agency, as that is seemingly at odds with Clyde’s anti-government rhetoric.
We haven’t seen any polls here, but Gurtler appears to have the most financial backing, even though Clyde had outraised Gurtler about $877,000 to $660,000 as of July 22. Unlike Gurtler, Clyde has mostly self-funded his campaign, and outside groups have poured in around $1.9 million on behalf of Gurtler or against Clyde. The campaign arm of the Club for Growth has been very active, spending about $500,000 boosting Gurtler and $653,000 attacking Clyde. Additionally, Protect Freedom PAC has spent $494,000 to help Gurtler while a single-candidate super PAC backing Gurtler has thrown in about $414,000 to support him or hit Clyde. So we’ll have to see whether all that money pays off for Gurtler in the end.
The three races we’ve highlighted — especially the ones in Minnesota’s 5th District and Georgia’s 14th District — all take place in districts that are safely in one party’s column, but who wins the primary still matters as it will affect the House’s ideological composition and each party’s internal politics. We’ll be watching to see just how these races shape the parties going forward.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--Five Ways Trump And GOP Officials Are Undermining The Election Process

There has long been conflict in the United States over who gets to vote and how .
In the years since Barack Obama ’ s election as president , those voting debates have become increasingly partisan , with Republican elected officials often pushing measures like requiring photo IDs that make it harder for people to vote , and Democratic officials advancing provisions like same-day registration that make it easier to vote .
That long-running conflict over voting has reached a new , more critical phase for two reasons .
First , the outbreak of COVID-19 means that people might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote in person .
Secondly , Donald Trump , unlike previous presidents , regularly breaks with democratic norms and values and is now openly suggesting that he might manipulate the electoral system to help him win a second term .
“ Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail , ” was the headline of an article in Politico last weekend ( that was a news article , not an opinion piece ) .
Politico ’ s reporting found that the White House was considering using executive actions to insert itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usually run by states , including finding ways to make it harder for people to vote by mail .
I think it ’ s totally appropriate for people to , well , freak out about the potential undermining of the electoral process by Trump and his allies .
That said , there is now a flurry of lawsuits , judicial rulings , decisions by election officials at the local and state levels , and claims of voter fraud and voter suppression that can be a bit of minefield to wade through .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get confusing .
So to better understand what ’ s a really big deal versus something that might be problematic but perhaps not as important , we broke out the potential ways that Trump and the GOP could limit voting or undermine the electoral process into five general tactics .
These tactics are roughly ordered from least to most alarming .
This is not any kind of formal legal guide , although we consulted with some experts for this piece , and some of those experts have law degrees .
This analysis also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approach to voting rights issues .
But we opted to focus on the Republicans because their approach is more controversial than the Democratic one ( which is largely to make it easier to vote ) and because perhaps the most important figure in the current voting wars is the Republican president .
Here are the tactics : 1 .
Opposing changes to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 A lot of the litigation around voting this year pits groups allied with liberal-leaning parts of the electorate , like the NAACP Legal Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyers affiliated with the Democratic Party , against officials in charge of administering elections ( secretaries of state , for example ) .
In these cases , the litigants are trying to get judges to change or invalidate existing laws and force officials to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted .
The litigants often invoke the pandemic in demanding these changes , but they are changes in the voting process that these litigants would likely prefer outside of the COVID-19 context , too .
For example , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center are trying to get struck down a requirement in Alabama that voters include a copy of their photo ID with their application for an absentee ballot .
Getting a copy of your photo ID does potentially increase your chances of getting COVID-19 , their brief argues .
But the LDF opposed provisions requiring people to present photo IDs as part of the voting process well before the coronavirus pandemic .
Marc Elias , a leading Democratic election attorney , is filing lawsuits in more than two dozen states ( including basically every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his “ four pillars ” for mail-in voting in the 2020 election : • The government prepays the postage for mail-in ballots .
• Ballots postmarked before or on Election Day are counted ( as opposed to counting only ballots received by Election Day ) .
• Signature requirements for mail-in ballots are administered in a voter-friendly way .
( Elias suggests requiring election officials across the country to contact voters before their ballots are ruled invalid because the signature on the ballot does not match the signature election officials have on file @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowed to collect the ballots of people and turn them in ( to ease voting for people who might not have easy access to mail services ) .
Liberal-leaning lawyers like Elias are losing some of these cases in court ( or at least not getting all the accommodations that they want ) , with Republicans — including the Trump campaign — filing briefs opposing changes that might make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted .
It ’ s not ideal that Republicans are taking this tact , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important .
And the GOP often uses false or misleading rhetoric to oppose measures making voting easier , such as dubbing efforts by groups to collect and turn in mail-in ballots “ ballot harvesting ” and suggesting , without evidence , that the process will lead to widespread voter fraud .
That said , we cast this tactic as the least problematic one Republicans are employing because there are instances of Republicans opposing new steps to make voting easier , rather than creating new barriers to voting .
Also , even most blue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four of Elias ’ s pillars in place .
Only seven states ( California , Colorado , Hawaii , Nevada , Oregon , Utah and Washington ) got “ A ” ratings for their vote-by-mail systems in a recent Brookings Institute report .
2 .
Seeking to invalidate laws that make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 During the pandemic , some states , particularly those run by Democrats , are taking affirmative steps to make it much easier to vote .
For example , California and Nevada are planning to send mail-in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their states .
Election officials in Pennsylvania have set up boxes for people to drop off their absentee ballots , as opposed to requiring all voters to send them through the mail .
The Trump campaign is filing lawsuits to stop the moves in Nevada , Pennsylvania and other states .
The Republican National Committee ( which is tightly aligned with the Trump campaign ) is involved in litigation in 17 states , again including virtually every battleground state , to enforce its voting agenda , which includes : • Requiring ballots to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Opposing people or groups being able to turn in mail-in ballots of other voters .
• Opposing newly enacted plans to allow basically all voters in a given state to vote by mail .
You can see why this is more problematic in terms of democratic values than the previous category : Local and state officials are taking affirmative steps to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted amid a pandemic and the sitting president ’ s campaign is trying to reverse those decisions .
For this category @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the U.S. Supreme Court appointed by Republican presidents are likely to be particularly important .
In all four of the most recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights issues , the court ’ s conservative majority rejected attempts by liberal litigants to get existing law changed to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 ( the first category we listed above ) .
Those rulings have infuriated liberals , but I can ’ t say that I ’ m surprised by them — Chief Justice John Roberts regularly votes both to uphold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the judgements of local officials and other branches of government in ways that sometimes align with the more liberal justices and other times with the court ’ s conservatives .
So it would be more surprising ( and alarming ) if Roberts and the high court struck down new laws , like those in California , making it easier to vote .
3 .
Advancing new practices and provisions that make it harder to vote This tactic refers to moves like rolling back the number of early voting days in a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
These are all strategies that Republicans have employed pre-COVID-19 .
Republicans aren ’ t rolling out a lot of new provisions to make it harder to vote in 2020 because they already passed a lot of them from 2011 to 2018 , and they couldn ’ t pass a lot of them in 2019 and 2020 .
( Democrats made a lot of gains at the state level in 2018 , and it would have been controversial to adopt such measures after the virus outbreak . )
But Republicans are trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get each struck down by courts .
First , in Florida specifically , Republicans are complicating the process for ex-felons who have served their sentences to regain their voting rights , despite a 2018 ballot initiative , supported by 65 percent of Florida voters , that was intended to do just that .
And in states around the country , GOP officials are planning to send an unusually large number of people to individual voting locations as “ poll watchers.
” Poll watchers have been used by both parties .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Trump in particular creates the potential for GOP poll watchers to show up at voting places specifically to look for voters they might view as both illegitimate and liberal-leaning ( people of color and people around age 18 in particular ) and push for the officials running those polling locations to more closely scrutinize those voters .
I view this category as particularly problematic , in terms of democratic values , because it raises the specter of people facing increased difficulty voting in large part because they are perceived to likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who would be newly eligible to vote in Florida are disproportionately Black . )
What I ’ m talking about here is largely rhetoric that has no direct impact , but has the potential to undermine confidence in the election system .
Think about Trump ’ s comments about potentially changing the day of the election or the unfounded suggestions by the president , Attorney General William Barr and other conservatives that mail-in voting will lead to fraud .
How this tactic affects the election depends on two factors .
First , do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , echo Trump ’ s rhetoric , thereby creating a situation where one of the country ’ s two major political parties is questioning the electoral system ?
And second , do GOP elected officials start acting on this rhetoric , such as trying to roll back existing vote-by-mail programs or not counting ballots received after Election Day in states where it is legal to count them ?
In other words , this kind of rhetoric presents two potential risks , undermining the public ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and — if the rhetoric leads to action — literally compromising the legitimacy of the election .
5 .
Fundamental changes to the electoral process Speaking of actually compromising the election … The recent changes at the U.S .
Postal Service that are slowing down mail delivery across the country are arguably the biggest threat to the American election system in 2020 .
If mail delivery continues to be slowed down , that creates two very important potential problems .
First , in states where ballots must be received by officials before Election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Conference of State Legislatures ) , a slowed-down mail system could disenfranchise thousands and perhaps even millions of people .
Secondly , a slower system creates the potential for a ton of ballots to arrive either just before , on or after Election Day , meaning that the counting of votes might stretch on for days or weeks and Americans wouldn ’ t know the winner of the presidential election for a long time .
That ’ s not ideal in any circumstances , but particularly with a president like Trump who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for election results before trying to declare himself the winner .
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , a longtime GOP donor who has given more than $ 2 million over the last few years to Trump ’ s campaign and other Republican causes , says the changes he has made since taking his post in June are intended to reduce the USPS ’ s spending and make it more cost-efficient .
I don ’ t have any proof he is lying , but it ’ s also doubtful that DeJoy would be candid about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote-by-mail systems and helping Trump win .
Either way , it ’ s a strange decision to overhaul the mailing system in a way that appears to be making it harder to send things through USPS quickly when the U.S. will be relying on the Postal Service more than ever before as part of the electoral process .
And if Trump followed through on changing the day of the election ( which he can not do on his own ) or limiting vote by mail , those changes would go into this category @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking about these categories both in terms of the horse race and in terms of broader questions of democratic norms and values .
The first three are problematic in terms of democratic norms and values because Republicans seem to be intentionally making it harder for people to vote .
And if this race gets tighter , those moves could prove decisive .
If we reach the later stages of the campaign and polls still show Biden with a clear lead nationally and in most swing states , it ’ s less likely that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Then again , we haven ’ t really faced a situation like this before . )
On the other hand , the last two categories are huge , both in terms of democratic values and electoral repercussions .
If people ’ s mail-in ballots aren ’ t received until way after Election Day , and Trump and his allies are falsely suggesting that mail-in ballots are somewhat fraudulent anyway , that undermines the election results and creates the potential for Trump to try to remain in office even if Biden is @ @ @ @

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

There has long been conflict in the United States over who gets to vote and how. In the years since Barack Obama’s election as president, those voting debates have become increasingly partisan, with Republican elected officials often pushing measures like requiring photo IDs that make it harder for people to vote, and Democratic officials advancing provisions like same-day registration that make it easier to vote.
That long-running conflict over voting has reached a new, more critical phase for two reasons. First, the outbreak of COVID-19 means that people might be risking their health if they opt to vote in person. Secondly, Donald Trump, unlike previous presidents, regularly breaks with democratic norms and values and is now openly suggesting that he might manipulate the electoral system to help him win a second term.
“Trump aides exploring executive actions to curb voting by mail,” was the headline of an article in Politico last weekend (that was a news article, not an opinion piece). Politico’s reporting found that the White House was considering using executive actions to insert itself into the election process, which is usually run by states, including finding ways to make it harder for people to vote by mail.
I think it’s totally appropriate for people to, well, freak out about the potential undermining of the electoral process by Trump and his allies. That said, there is now a flurry of lawsuits, judicial rulings, decisions by election officials at the local and state levels, and claims of voter fraud and voter suppression that can be a bit of minefield to wade through. It’s a lot and it can get confusing.
So to better understand what’s a really big deal versus something that might be problematic but perhaps not as important, we broke out the potential ways that Trump and the GOP could limit voting or undermine the electoral process into five general tactics. These tactics are roughly ordered from least to most alarming. This is not any kind of formal legal guide, although we consulted with some experts for this piece, and some of those experts have law degrees. This analysis also includes some details of the Democrats’ approach to voting rights issues. But we opted to focus on the Republicans because their approach is more controversial than the Democratic one (which is largely to make it easier to vote) and because perhaps the most important figure in the current voting wars is the Republican president.
Here are the tactics:
1. Opposing changes to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19
A lot of the litigation around voting this year pits groups allied with liberal-leaning parts of the electorate, like the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) and lawyers affiliated with the Democratic Party, against officials in charge of administering elections (secretaries of state, for example). In these cases, the litigants are trying to get judges to change or invalidate existing laws and force officials to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted.
The litigants often invoke the pandemic in demanding these changes, but they are changes in the voting process that these litigants would likely prefer outside of the COVID-19 context, too. For example, the LDF and the Southern Poverty Law Center are trying to get struck down a requirement in Alabama that voters include a copy of their photo ID with their application for an absentee ballot. Getting a copy of your photo ID does potentially increase your chances of getting COVID-19, their brief argues. But the LDF opposed provisions requiring people to present photo IDs as part of the voting process well before the coronavirus pandemic.
Marc Elias, a leading Democratic election attorney, is filing lawsuits in more than two dozen states (including basically every key swing state), to enforce his “four pillars” for mail-in voting in the 2020 election:
The government prepays the postage for mail-in ballots. Ballots postmarked before or on Election Day are counted (as opposed to counting only ballots received by Election Day). Signature requirements for mail-in ballots are administered in a voter-friendly way. (Elias suggests requiring election officials across the country to contact voters before their ballots are ruled invalid because the signature on the ballot does not match the signature election officials have on file.) Individuals or groups are allowed to collect the ballots of people and turn them in (to ease voting for people who might not have easy access to mail services).
Liberal-leaning lawyers like Elias are losing some of these cases in court (or at least not getting all the accommodations that they want), with Republicans — including the Trump campaign — filing briefs opposing changes that might make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted. It’s not ideal that Republicans are taking this tack, as the right to vote is so important. And the GOP often uses false or misleading rhetoric to oppose measures making voting easier, such as dubbing efforts by groups to collect and turn in mail-in ballots “ballot harvesting” and suggesting, without evidence, that the process will lead to widespread voter fraud.
That said, we cast this tactic as the least problematic one Republicans are employing because there are instances of Republicans opposing new steps to make voting easier, rather than creating new barriers to voting. Also, even most blue states don’t currently have all four of Elias’s pillars in place. Only seven states (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Washington) got “A” ratings for their vote-by-mail systems in a recent Brookings Institute report.
2. Seeking to invalidate laws that make it easier to vote amid COVID-19
During the pandemic, some states, particularly those run by Democrats, are taking affirmative steps to make it much easier to vote. For example, California and Nevada are planning to send mail-in ballots to all the registered voters in their states. Election officials in Pennsylvania have set up boxes for people to drop off their absentee ballots, as opposed to requiring all voters to send them through the mail.
The Trump campaign is filing lawsuits to stop the moves in Nevada, Pennsylvania and other states. The Republican National Committee (which is tightly aligned with the Trump campaign) is involved in litigation in 17 states, again including virtually every battleground state, to enforce its voting agenda, which includes:
Requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Keeping current photo ID and signature laws in place. Opposing people or groups being able to turn in mail-in ballots of other voters. Opposing newly enacted plans to allow basically all voters in a given state to vote by mail.
You can see why this is more problematic in terms of democratic values than the previous category: Local and state officials are taking affirmative steps to make it easier for Americans to vote and have their vote counted amid a pandemic and the sitting president’s campaign is trying to reverse those decisions.
[newsletter-politics]
For this category, the actions of the five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court appointed by Republican presidents are likely to be particularly important. In all four of the most recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights issues, the court’s conservative majority rejected attempts by liberal litigants to get existing law changed to make it easier to vote amid COVID-19 (the first category we listed above). Those rulings have infuriated liberals, but I can’t say that I’m surprised by them — Chief Justice John Roberts regularly votes both to uphold existing legal precedents and to show deference to the judgements of local officials and other branches of government in ways that sometimes align with the more liberal justices and other times with the court’s conservatives. So it would be more surprising (and alarming) if Roberts and the high court struck down new laws, like those in California, making it easier to vote.
3. Advancing new practices and provisions that make it harder to vote
This tactic refers to moves like rolling back the number of early voting days in a state or making it harder for students to vote. These are all strategies that Republicans have employed pre-COVID-19. Republicans aren’t rolling out a lot of new provisions to make it harder to vote in 2020 because they already passed a lot of them from 2011 to 2018, and they couldn’t pass a lot of them in 2019 and 2020. (Democrats made a lot of gains at the state level in 2018, and it would have been controversial to adopt such measures after the virus outbreak.)
But Republicans are trying two new strategies, with liberals seeking to get each struck down by courts. First, in Florida specifically, Republicans are complicating the process for ex-felons who have served their sentences to regain their voting rights, despite a 2018 ballot initiative, supported by 65 percent of Florida voters, that was intended to do just that. And in states around the country, GOP officials are planning to send an unusually large number of people to individual voting locations as “poll watchers.” Poll watchers have been used by both parties. But the rhetoric about voter fraud from Fox News and Trump in particular creates the potential for GOP poll watchers to show up at voting places specifically to look for voters they might view as both illegitimate and liberal-leaning (people of color and people around age 18 in particular) and push for the officials running those polling locations to more closely scrutinize those voters.
I view this category as particularly problematic, in terms of democratic values, because it raises the specter of people facing increased difficulty voting in large part because they are perceived to likely to oppose Republican candidates. (The ex-felons who would be newly eligible to vote in Florida are disproportionately Black.)
4. Anti-democratic rhetoric
What I’m talking about here is largely rhetoric that has no direct impact, but has the potential to undermine confidence in the election system. Think about Trump’s comments about potentially changing the day of the election or the unfounded suggestions by the president, Attorney General William Barr and other conservatives that mail-in voting will lead to fraud.
How this tactic affects the election depends on two factors. First, do other members of the Republican Party, such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, echo Trump’s rhetoric, thereby creating a situation where one of the country’s two major political parties is questioning the electoral system? And second, do GOP elected officials start acting on this rhetoric, such as trying to roll back existing vote-by-mail programs or not counting ballots received after Election Day in states where it is legal to count them?
In other words, this kind of rhetoric presents two potential risks, undermining the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of the election and — if the rhetoric leads to action — literally compromising the legitimacy of the election.
5. Fundamental changes to the electoral process
Speaking of actually compromising the election … The recent changes at the U.S. Postal Service that are slowing down mail delivery across the country are arguably the biggest threat to the American election system in 2020. If mail delivery continues to be slowed down, that creates two very important potential problems. First, in states where ballots must be received by officials before Election Day (33, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures), a slowed-down mail system could disenfranchise thousands and perhaps even millions of people. Secondly, a slower system creates the potential for a ton of ballots to arrive either just before, on or after Election Day, meaning that the counting of votes might stretch on for days or weeks and Americans wouldn’t know the winner of the presidential election for a long time. That’s not ideal in any circumstances, but particularly with a president like Trump who can’t be expected to wait for election results before trying to declare himself the winner.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a longtime GOP donor who has given more than $2 million over the last few years to Trump’s campaign and other Republican causes, says the changes he has made since taking his post in June are intended to reduce the USPS’s spending and make it more cost-efficient. I don’t have any proof he is lying, but it’s also doubtful that DeJoy would be candid about it if his real goal was complicating vote-by-mail systems and helping Trump win. Either way, it’s a strange decision to overhaul the mailing system in a way that appears to be making it harder to send things through USPS quickly when the U.S. will be relying on the Postal Service more than ever before as part of the electoral process.
And if Trump followed through on changing the day of the election (which he cannot do on his own) or limiting vote by mail, those changes would go into this category as well.
It’s worth thinking about these categories both in terms of the horse race and in terms of broader questions of democratic norms and values. The first three are problematic in terms of democratic norms and values because Republicans seem to be intentionally making it harder for people to vote. And if this race gets tighter, those moves could prove decisive. If we reach the later stages of the campaign and polls still show Biden with a clear lead nationally and in most swing states, it’s less likely that these tactics would literally swing the election. (Then again, we haven’t really faced a situation like this before.)
On the other hand, the last two categories are huge, both in terms of democratic values and electoral repercussions. If people’s mail-in ballots aren’t received until way after Election Day, and Trump and his allies are falsely suggesting that mail-in ballots are somewhat fraudulent anyway, that undermines the election results and creates the potential for Trump to try to remain in office even if Biden is the rightful victor.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--Emergency Politics Podcast: Harris Is Biden’s VP Pick

After months of speculation , Joe Biden announced California Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate on Tuesday .
In @ @ @ @ @ FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , Perry Bacon Jr. and Sarah Frostenson break down what the choice @ @ @ @ @ campaign and the Democratic Party .
You can listen to the episode by clicking the @ @ @ @ @ the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN App or @ @ @ @ @ If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The FiveThirtyEight Politics @ @ @ @ @ Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review @ @ @ @ @ comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” ?
Get @ @ @ @ @ on Twitter or in the comments .

After months of speculation, Joe Biden announced Tuesday that California Sen. Kamala Harris would be his running mate. In this emergency edition of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, Perry Bacon Jr. and Sarah Frostenson discuss what this choice means for Biden’s campaign and the Democratic Party.
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.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--The College Football Layoff

The College Football Layoff

We begin , in fine Hot Takedown tradition , by talking about something that happened shortly after we recorded this week ’ s episode .
The Big Ten and Pac-12 conferences have canceled college football for the fall , with the hopes of trying to play in the spring .
We knew it was coming .
But what ’ s interesting about where college football finds itself is how student-athletes have responded and organized in this moment of crisis .
We don ’ t think they ’ ll get a players union out of it — at least not right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the SEC that want to play as much as the players do , the players have some amount of leverage to influence practices that may become standard going forward .
The Big Ten and Pac-12 cancellations may not spell the end of the season for every conference , but they certainly mean that any football played this fall will look and feel vastly different .
Next we turn to MLB , which is only three weeks into the season but already in the thick of the pennant race — just like normal for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time for us to all go on record and draft the teams we feel have the best chance at winning the World Series .
We ended up drafting way more teams than will even make the playoffs , so we hope at least one of us is right .
But whether it ’ s Geoff with the Dodgers , Sara with the Twins or Neil with the Yankees ( he loves his chalk ) , we now know where all three Hot Takedown hosts stand .
We also talked a little bit about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some teams have played 17 games so far and some teams are the Cardinals , still dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak .
Just because every game in this abbreviated season is worth about 2.7 games in a normal season , that doesn ’ t mean the model will adjust the pace at which we adjust our ratings for each team .
So , we ’ re in the position of still rating the Detroit Tigers as one of the worst teams in baseball , but we give them a 35 percent chance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : This season is strange .
Finally , FiveThirtyEight NFL analyst Josh Hermsmeyer joins us for the Rabbit Hole to talk about building a very cool new metric to measure the amount of separation that receivers create from defenders when going for all different kinds of passes .
While it ’ s not a skeleton key for what makes a good receiver — Julio Jones isn ’ t great at creating separation on intermediate passes and yet no one would call him a slouch — Josh ’ s SOE ( separation over expectation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finding receivers who could better complement a team ’ s quarterback , whether that means creating an easier target to hit or getting higher value out of short passes .
What we ’ re looking at this week : • How the Power Five conferences are approaching the fall football season .
• Joining the ACC could have helped Notre Dame .
• How to measure the separation achieved by NFL receivers .

We begin, in fine Hot Takedown tradition, by talking about something that happened shortly after we recorded this week’s episode. The Big Ten and Pac-12 conferences have canceled college football for the fall, with the hopes of trying to play in the spring. We knew it was coming. But what’s interesting about where college football finds itself is how student-athletes have responded and organized in this moment of crisis. We don’t think they’ll get a players union out of it — at least not right away — but especially in conferences like the SEC that want to play as much as the players do, the players have some amount of leverage to influence practices that may become standard going forward. The Big Ten and Pac-12 cancellations may not spell the end of the season for every conference, but they certainly mean that any football played this fall will look and feel vastly different.
Next we turn to MLB, which is only three weeks into the season but already in the thick of the pennant race — just like normal for August. That means it’s time for us to all go on record and draft the teams we feel have the best chance at winning the World Series. We ended up drafting way more teams than will even make the playoffs, so we hope at least one of us is right. But whether it’s Geoff with the Dodgers, Sara with the Twins or Neil with the Yankees (he loves his chalk), we now know where all three Hot Takedown hosts stand. We also talked a little bit about where our model stands, given that some teams have played 17 games so far and some teams are the Cardinals, still dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak. Just because every game in this abbreviated season is worth about 2.7 games in a normal season, that doesn’t mean the model will adjust the pace at which we adjust our ratings for each team. So, we’re in the position of still rating the Detroit Tigers as one of the worst teams in baseball, but we give them a 35 percent chance to make the playoffs. Like we said: This season is strange.
Finally, FiveThirtyEight NFL analyst Josh Hermsmeyer joins us for the Rabbit Hole to talk about building a very cool new metric to measure the amount of separation that receivers create from defenders when going for all different kinds of passes. While it’s not a skeleton key for what makes a good receiver — Julio Jones isn’t great at creating separation on intermediate passes and yet no one would call him a slouch — Josh’s SOE (separation over expectation) metric is an exciting tool for finding receivers who could better complement a team’s quarterback, whether that means creating an easier target to hit or getting higher value out of short passes.
What we’re looking at this week:


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--Kamala Harris Is Biden’s VP Pick — Here’s What It Means For The Election And Beyond

Former Vice President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden announced Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate today .
Here ’ s a look at what this choice means and … what it doesn ’ t .
It ’ s a historic choice , with the potential for even more history to be made .
Harris is the first Asian American and the first Black woman in American history to be a general election candidate for president or vice president for either of the two major political parties .
( Harris ’ s mother was born in India , her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ graduate students at the University of California at Berkeley , in the 1960s . )
Harris is just the second Black person ( after Barack Obama ) and the fourth woman ( after Democrats Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Hillary Clinton in 2016 , and Republican Sarah Palin in 2008 ) to be on a presidential ticket for one of the two major parties .
If she and Biden win the November election , she would be the first Asian American , the first woman of any race or ethnicity and the second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice president or president .
Harris ’ s selection is the latest sign of the increasing diversity of the Democratic Party .
Democrats last had an all-white , all-male ticket in 2004 , with then Sens .
John Kerry and John Edwards .
This vice presidential process , with Biden committing to choosing a woman fairly early on and then choosing a Black woman , suggests the Democrats may rarely in the future have a ticket of two white men .
They may also rarely in the future have a ticket of two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton and Tim Kaine ) or two men ( as in 2012 , with Obama and Biden ) .
It ’ s another illustration of the power of Black Americans in the Democratic Party .
A clear plurality of Black voters favored Biden throughout 2019 , helping keep the former vice president near the top of polls through most of the Democratic primary race .
Black voters in South Carolina and then other states , particularly in the South , strongly supported Biden and played a key role in his winning the nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hampshire and Nevada .
After it was clear Biden would be the party ’ s nominee , a lot of prominent Black Democrats — mostly notably Rep. James Clyburn , the highest-ranking Black Democrat in the House — pushed for Biden to pick a Black woman as his running mate .
With Harris ’ s selection , their wish was granted .
It ’ s another defeat for the party ’ s left wing .
With Sens .
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren losing the nomination contest , many liberal activists pushed Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They were unsuccessful .
Harris has a fairly liberal voting record in the Senate , but she ’ s not nearly as far to the left as Warren .
Harris hasn ’ t called for the breakup of Facebook , for example , or supported a wealth tax .
The Democratic Party is moving left ideologically .
But liberal activists may have a hard time getting their main policy goals adopted , even if Democrats control the House , Senate and the presidency next year .
The most important figures in Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer , all of whom have kept some distance from the party ’ s left wing .
Let ’ s pause there for a moment .
I could have made the preceding three points — the history of the selection , the power of Black voters and the loss for the Left — and even used nearly the exact same words in some of those sections if Biden had selected one of the other Black women who was reportedly being considered for vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams , Rep. Karen Bass , Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms , Rep. Val Demings and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice .
The implications of Harris ’ s selection , however , become more complicated when you look at Harris specifically , as opposed to the selection of a Black woman more generally .
So here ’ s what ’ s not clear : We don ’ t know if Harris will help or hurt Biden win the general election .
Research suggests that the electoral impact of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would expect Harris to follow the same pattern .
Harris is a sitting senator who was competent during the debates she participated in during the 2020 Democratic primary process , so she is unlikely to make huge gaffes that raise questions about why Biden selected her ( in the way that Palin became a problem for John McCain in 2008 ) .
At the same time , a senator from California doesn ’ t provide an obvious electoral boost in a key swing state .
Also , overall , Harris wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ran for president last year .
So the most likely outcome is that Harris ’ s selection doesn ’ t change much — either Biden keeps his current lead and wins the presidency or Trump comes back based on factors that don ’ t have a lot to do with Harris .
But politics is dynamic , so I ’ m not sure that prediction will come true .
We don ’ t know if Harris will boost the ticket with Black voters .
I don ’ t want to downplay Harris ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters are expected to account for about 13 percent of the expected 2020 electorate , a much bigger share than Asian Americans ( 5 percent ) .
Black voters are also a particularly sizable and important bloc in key swing states such as Florida ( 13 percent ) , Michigan ( 13 percent ) , North Carolina ( 23 percent ) , Pennsylvania ( 11 percent ) and Wisconsin ( 5 percent . )
I am addressing Harris ’ s potential appeal to Black voters specifically not because I think Black voters are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black woman like Harris , but rather because much of the conversation around the vice presidential selection has implied that picking a Black person will create extra enthusiasm for the ticket with Black voters .
The percentage of Black voting-eligible people who cast ballots was significantly higher in 2008 ( 65 percent ) and 2012 ( 66 percent ) , when there was a Black candidate on the ticket , compared to 2004 and 2016 ( both around 60 percent ) when there was not .
Some political science research shows that Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black candidate is on the ballot , although that finding is somewhat contested , and that research is about voting for a Black candidate at the top of the ticket , not a white candidate with a Black running mate .
So it ’ s not a crazy idea that Harris might boost the ticket with Black voters .
It has some empirical basis .
But I think the stronger case , at least based on what we know right now , is that she won ’ t have much of an effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not ?
First of all , while it happened in 2008 and 2012 , it ’ s just really hard for Democrats to get that much more support from Black voters , who even in elections like 2004 or 2016 vote at fairly high rates ( significantly higher than Asian American or Hispanic voters ) and overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates .
Second , it ’ s not 2008 or 2012 , when Black voters had the chance to elect and then reelect the first Black president .
Third , Harris herself seems unlikely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not a random guess — Harris ran for president for much of last year and was not the preferred candidate of older Black voters in the Democratic primary ( that was Biden ) or younger Black voters ( that was Sanders or Warren in earlier stages of the race ) .
Obama , in contrast , had very strong Black support during his 2008 primary run , previewing what would happen in his two general election campaigns .
We don ’ t know how Harris ’ s selection affects the protest movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of George Floyd .
Another part of the discourse has been that the selection of a Black woman became more necessary in the wake of the national protests around racial inequality over the last several months .
But it ’ s not clear the Black Lives Matter activists organizing these protests view a Black woman being picked as vice president as a major priority in terms of addressing racial inequality in America ( as opposed to , for example , reducing spending on policing . )
And some more liberal Black people are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was too punitive toward people who committed minor crimes like truancy when she was the district attorney in San Francisco and then the attorney general of California .
I would emphasize all of this is a bit unknown .
Maybe Harris ’ s choice will be applauded by BLM activists ; it ’ s just not a given .
We don ’ t know if Harris is now the most-likely Democratic nominee in 2024 .
If Biden and Harris lose , Harris ’ s presidential ambitions are likely over .
( Just ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palin , Paul Ryan and Tim Kaine . )
But if they win , remember that Biden will enter office at age 78 and that in March he described himself as a “ bridge ” figure who will help usher in the Democratic Party ’ s next generation of leaders .
So is Harris being set up to be the Democratic front-runner and likely nominee in 2024 ?
I don ’ t know .
And honestly , Biden and Harris may not know either .
But this matters , for two big reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , expect Trump and his campaign , who have had a hard time casting Biden as an extremist or a radical , to make attacks on Harris with sexist and racist undertones , cast her as an ultra-liberal Californian out of touch with Middle American values and suggest that voting for Biden in November means that Harris will be running the country for 12 years .
Second , if Harris is vice president , she would need to make sure she is ready to run for president in 2024 — in case Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a second term or isn ’ t up to it — while also ensuring she isn ’ t portrayed by the media as constantly planning her 2024 campaign , which would likely irritate Biden and other Democrats .
Biden made the predictable pick ( in fact , we kind of predicted it in March ) .
Harris is more liberal than Biden but not Sanders/Warren-left , and she is an Asian and Black woman in a party that always wants to show it cares about traditionally marginalized groups and probably feels the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more in the wake of the Floyd protests .
So Biden choosing someone with Harris ’ s political , biographical and demographic attributes makes a lot of sense .
The biggest unknowns are around Harris herself and her electoral skills .
Harris is a good politician based on these facts alone : She was elected senator in the nation ’ s most populous state and in a country with a lot of race and gender discrimination , Harris is the second Black woman ever elected to the Senate , and arguably the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That said , it ’ s still not clear if she is a particularly strong politician on the national stage , and therefore if she will be that helpful for Democrats in the No .
2 slot in 2020 or as the main candidate in a future presidential election .

Former Vice President and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden announced Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate today. Here’s a look at what this choice means and … what it doesn’t.
It’s a historic choice, with the potential for even more history to be made.
Harris is the first Asian American and the first Black woman in American history to be a general election candidate for president or vice president for either of the two major political parties. (Harris’s mother was born in India, her father in Jamaica. They met as graduate students at the University of California at Berkeley, in the 1960s.) Harris is just the second Black person (after Barack Obama) and the fourth woman (after Democrats Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Republican Sarah Palin in 2008) to be on a presidential ticket for one of the two major parties. If she and Biden win the November election, she would be the first Asian American, the first woman of any race or ethnicity and the second Black person in U.S. history to be vice president or president.
Harris’s selection is the latest sign of the increasing diversity of the Democratic Party. Democrats last had an all-white, all-male ticket in 2004, with then Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards. This vice presidential process, with Biden committing to choosing a woman fairly early on and then choosing a Black woman, suggests the Democrats may rarely in the future have a ticket of two white men. They may also rarely in the future have a ticket of two white people (as in 2016 with Clinton and Tim Kaine) or two men (as in 2012, with Obama and Biden).
It’s another illustration of the power of Black Americans in the Democratic Party.
A clear plurality of Black voters favored Biden throughout 2019, helping keep the former vice president near the top of polls through most of the Democratic primary race. Black voters in South Carolina and then other states, particularly in the South, strongly supported Biden and played a key role in his winning the nomination despite lackluster showings in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada.
After it was clear Biden would be the party’s nominee, a lot of prominent Black Democrats — mostly notably Rep. James Clyburn, the highest-ranking Black Democrat in the House — pushed for Biden to pick a Black woman as his running mate. With Harris’s selection, their wish was granted.
It’s another defeat for the party’s left wing.
With Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren losing the nomination contest, many liberal activists pushed Biden to pick Warren as his running mate. They were unsuccessful. Harris has a fairly liberal voting record in the Senate, but she’s not nearly as far to the left as Warren. Harris hasn’t called for the breakup of Facebook, for example, or supported a wealth tax.
The Democratic Party is moving left ideologically. But liberal activists may have a hard time getting their main policy goals adopted, even if Democrats control the House, Senate and the presidency next year. The most important figures in Washington in 2021 might be Biden, Harris, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer, all of whom have kept some distance from the party’s left wing.
Let’s pause there for a moment. I could have made the preceding three points — the history of the selection, the power of Black voters and the loss for the Left — and even used nearly the exact same words in some of those sections if Biden had selected one of the other Black women who was reportedly being considered for vice president. That list includes former Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, Rep. Karen Bass, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, Rep. Val Demings and former National Security Adviser Susan Rice.
The implications of Harris’s selection, however, become more complicated when you look at Harris specifically, as opposed to the selection of a Black woman more generally. So here’s what’s not clear:
We don’t know if Harris will help or hurt Biden win the general election.
Research suggests that the electoral impact of vice presidential candidates is fairly limited. I would expect Harris to follow the same pattern. Harris is a sitting senator who was competent during the debates she participated in during the 2020 Democratic primary process, so she is unlikely to make huge gaffes that raise questions about why Biden selected her (in the way that Palin became a problem for John McCain in 2008). At the same time, a senator from California doesn’t provide an obvious electoral boost in a key swing state. Also, overall, Harris wasn’t a particularly effective candidate when she ran for president last year.
So the most likely outcome is that Harris’s selection doesn’t change much — either Biden keeps his current lead and wins the presidency or Trump comes back based on factors that don’t have a lot to do with Harris. But politics is dynamic, so I’m not sure that prediction will come true.
We don’t know if Harris will boost the ticket with Black voters.
I don’t want to downplay Harris’s Indian American roots. But Black voters are expected to account for about 13 percent of the expected 2020 electorate, a much bigger share than Asian Americans (5 percent). Black voters are also a particularly sizable and important bloc in key swing states such as Florida (13 percent), Michigan (13 percent), North Carolina (23 percent), Pennsylvania (11 percent) and Wisconsin (5 percent.) I am addressing Harris’s potential appeal to Black voters specifically not because I think Black voters are likely to be particularly energized by a Black woman like Harris, but rather because much of the conversation around the vice presidential selection has implied that picking a Black person will create extra enthusiasm for the ticket with Black voters.
The percentage of Black voting-eligible people who cast ballots was significantly higher in 2008 (65 percent) and 2012 (66 percent), when there was a Black candidate on the ticket, compared to 2004 and 2016 (both around 60 percent) when there was not. Some political science research shows that Black people vote at higher rates when a Black candidate is on the ballot, although that finding is somewhat contested, and that research is about voting for a Black candidate at the top of the ticket, not a white candidate with a Black running mate.
So it’s not a crazy idea that Harris might boost the ticket with Black voters. It has some empirical basis. But I think the stronger case, at least based on what we know right now, is that she won’t have much of an effect in terms of Black voters.
Why not? First of all, while it happened in 2008 and 2012, it’s just really hard for Democrats to get that much more support from Black voters, who even in elections like 2004 or 2016 vote at fairly high rates (significantly higher than Asian American or Hispanic voters) and overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates.
Second, it’s not 2008 or 2012, when Black voters had the chance to elect and then reelect the first Black president. Third, Harris herself seems unlikely to particularly excite Black voters. This is not a random guess — Harris ran for president for much of last year and was not the preferred candidate of older Black voters in the Democratic primary (that was Biden) or younger Black voters (that was Sanders or Warren in earlier stages of the race). Obama, in contrast, had very strong Black support during his 2008 primary run, previewing what would happen in his two general election campaigns.
We don’t know how Harris’s selection affects the protest movement that has emerged since the police killing of George Floyd.
Another part of the discourse has been that the selection of a Black woman became more necessary in the wake of the national protests around racial inequality over the last several months. But it’s not clear the Black Lives Matter activists organizing these protests view a Black woman being picked as vice president as a major priority in terms of addressing racial inequality in America (as opposed to, for example, reducing spending on policing.) And some more liberal Black people are wary of Harris because they felt she was too punitive toward people who committed minor crimes like truancy when she was the district attorney in San Francisco and then the attorney general of California.
I would emphasize all of this is a bit unknown. Maybe Harris’s choice will be applauded by BLM activists; it’s just not a given.
We don’t know if Harris is now the most-likely Democratic nominee in 2024.
If Biden and Harris lose, Harris’s presidential ambitions are likely over. (Just ask Joe Lieberman, John Edwards, Sarah Palin, Paul Ryan and Tim Kaine.) But if they win, remember that Biden will enter office at age 78 and that in March he described himself as a “bridge” figure who will help usher in the Democratic Party’s next generation of leaders.
So is Harris being set up to be the Democratic front-runner and likely nominee in 2024? I don’t know. And honestly, Biden and Harris may not know either. But this matters, for two big reasons. First, in the 2020 election, expect Trump and his campaign, who have had a hard time casting Biden as an extremist or a radical, to make attacks on Harris with sexist and racist undertones, cast her as an ultra-liberal Californian out of touch with Middle American values and suggest that voting for Biden in November means that Harris will be running the country for 12 years.
Second, if Harris is vice president, she would need to make sure she is ready to run for president in 2024 — in case Biden either doesn’t want to run for a second term or isn’t up to it — while also ensuring she isn’t portrayed by the media as constantly planning her 2024 campaign, which would likely irritate Biden and other Democrats.
Biden made the predictable pick (in fact, we kind of predicted it in March). Harris is more liberal than Biden but not Sanders/Warren-left, and she is an Asian and Black woman in a party that always wants to show it cares about traditionally marginalized groups and probably feels the need to showcase its racial diversity even more in the wake of the Floyd protests. So Biden choosing someone with Harris’s political, biographical and demographic attributes makes a lot of sense.
The biggest unknowns are around Harris herself and her electoral skills. Harris is a good politician based on these facts alone: She was elected senator in the nation’s most populous state and in a country with a lot of race and gender discrimination, Harris is the second Black woman ever elected to the Senate, and arguably the first to be a serious presidential candidate. That said, it’s still not clear if she is a particularly strong politician on the national stage, and therefore if she will be that helpful for Democrats in the No. 2 slot in 2020 or as the main candidate in a future presidential election.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--What Economists Fear Will Happen Without More Unemployment Aid

A sudden uptick in food insecurity .
A wave of evictions .
People spending less money at shops and restaurants .
More job losses .
According to leading economists , that ’ s what ’ s likely in store for the U.S. economy this year if Congress doesn ’ t renew any of the $ 600-per-week supplementary payment for unemployed workers by Sept. 1 .
Lawmakers have known for months that the payment was slated to expire at the end of July , but that deadline came and went .
Now , Republicans and Democrats in Congress are still deadlocked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be receiving .
Over the weekend , President Trump issued an executive order giving unemployed Americans a $ 400-per-week boost , but critics have questioned its legal and logistical viability .
According to the latest installment of our regular survey of quantitative macroeconomic economists , conducted in partnership with the Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business , the 32 economists in our survey collectively thought that not renewing the payment by Sept. 1 would make it 75 percent more likely that there would be a decline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of other bad scenarios are more likely to occur , as well : The economists also said we ’ re more likely to see job losses than workers returning to the workforce if Congress decides not to extend the unemployment supplement in any form .
That might seem counterintuitive — how could a policy that seems likely to encourage more people to return to work actually result in more job losses ?
But recent research has indicated that the $ 600-per-week payment has been allowing jobless workers to continue to spend money as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when hiring still isn ’ t back to normal in many industries .
And if losing the extra money causes millions of people to cut back their spending , businesses could suffer and lay off workers as a result .
“ The net effect on jobs is hard to say — on the one hand , lower spending implies some job losses , but that should be offset to some extent by more people returning to work and finding new jobs , ” said Eric Swanson , a professor at the University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economists about what might cause their worst-case predictions for fourth-quarter GDP to come to life .
We gave them a bunch of different scenarios and asked them to weight which were most likely to bring about their nightmares .
As a group , they said a lack of fiscal stimulus loomed almost as large as a bad second wave of COVID-19 infections .
Notably , a lack of fiscal stimulus was a far greater concern than when we last asked the question in mid-June , although the level of worry about a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Clearly the survey participants see the federal UI supplement as being highly critical to the growth path of the economy for the remainder of 2020 , ” said Allan Timmermann , a professor of finance and economics at the University of California , San Diego , who has been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey .
Overall , the survey indicated that even though the economists think it ’ s likely that the economy will continue to improve over the course of the year , they still don ’ t foresee a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most recent monthly jobs report , released on Friday , suggested the same . )
The economists ’ consensus prediction was that the unemployment rate for August would be 10.1 percent , which would be essentially unchanged from July .
They predicted a similarly minuscule drop for September , to just over 10 percent .
And although the group anticipated that the unemployment rate will dip to 9.6 percent in December , the consensus forecast ’ s 10th percentile prediction was 7.8 percent and its 90th percentile prediction was 12.6 percent — emphasizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount of uncertainty about what will happen over the course of the year , and how that will affect employment .
Remarkably , this bleak picture is more optimistic than the economists ’ predictions in previous surveys .
Back in May , for instance , the economists ’ median estimate of December ’ s unemployment rate was 12 percent .
“ I think that economists have been surprised by the speed of bounce back of the labor market , ” said Jonathan Wright , an economics professor at Johns Hopkins University .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the survey .
But even their revised predictions are still pretty gloomy .
“ Remember that 10 percent used to be the depths of a severe recession , and other measures of the labor market like participation and underemployment are still very bad , ” Wright added .
So while the July jobs report might have seemed , on the surface , to deliver good news , the survey makes clear that there is plenty that could keep us in the economic doldrums for the foreseeable future — particularly if Congress doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Menzie Chinn , an economist at the University of Madison-Wisconsin , said the July jobs report only confirmed his suspicion that the economic recovery was starting to plateau .
Now , he thinks a W-shaped recovery — where the economy improves somewhat , only to crash again — is still possible , and “ a stall is more and more likely .
”

A sudden uptick in food insecurity. A wave of evictions. People spending less money at shops and restaurants. More job losses.
According to leading economists, that’s what’s likely in store for the U.S. economy this year if Congress doesn’t renew any of the $600-per-week supplementary payment for unemployed workers by Sept. 1. Lawmakers have known for months that the payment was slated to expire at the end of July, but that deadline came and went. Now, Republicans and Democrats in Congress are still deadlocked over how much aid jobless workers should be receiving. Over the weekend, President Trump issued an executive order giving unemployed Americans a $400-per-week boost, but critics have questioned its legal and logistical viability.
According to the latest installment of our regular survey of quantitative macroeconomic economists, conducted in partnership with the Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, the 32 economists in our survey collectively thought that not renewing the payment by Sept. 1 would make it 75 percent more likely that there would be a decline in personal consumption. They think plenty of other bad scenarios are more likely to occur, as well:
Economists fear an economic crisis without more aid Average chance that each of the following scenarios will be more likely to occur if federal unemployment aid isn’t at least partially renewed by Sept. 1 Scenario avg. chance Decline in personal consumption 74.8% – Increasing food insecurity 63.4 – A wave of evictions 55.2 – More job losses 53.5 – More workers returning to the workforce 43.2 – A wave of mortgage defaults 42.9 – The survey of 32 economists was conducted Aug. 7-10. Source: FIVETHIRTYEIGHT/IGM COVID-19 ECONOMIC SURVEY
The economists also said we’re more likely to see job losses than workers returning to the workforce if Congress decides not to extend the unemployment supplement in any form. That might seem counterintuitive — how could a policy that seems likely to encourage more people to return to work actually result in more job losses? But recent research has indicated that the $600-per-week payment has been allowing jobless workers to continue to spend money as they would normally, at a moment when hiring still isn’t back to normal in many industries. And if losing the extra money causes millions of people to cut back their spending, businesses could suffer and lay off workers as a result. “The net effect on jobs is hard to say — on the one hand, lower spending implies some job losses, but that should be offset to some extent by more people returning to work and finding new jobs,” said Eric Swanson, a professor at the University of California, Irvine.
We also asked the economists about what might cause their worst-case predictions for fourth-quarter GDP to come to life. We gave them a bunch of different scenarios and asked them to weight which were most likely to bring about their nightmares. As a group, they said a lack of fiscal stimulus loomed almost as large as a bad second wave of COVID-19 infections. Notably, a lack of fiscal stimulus was a far greater concern than when we last asked the question in mid-June, although the level of worry about a second wave of coronavirus barely budged.
Possibility of no stimulus adds to economists’ fears How much weight economists gave various scenarios when setting the lower bound of their GDP predictions for the fourth quarter of 2020 factor weight Bad “second wave” in the fall 39.5% – No further fiscal stimulus 33.4 – Low consumer spending 14.8 – Slow vaccine development 9.4 – Banking or financial system weakness 7.8 – Other 4.4 – Weights are an average of responses in a survey of 32 economists conducted Aug. 7-10. Source: FIVETHIRTYEIGHT/IGM COVID-19 ECONOMIC SURVEY
“Clearly the survey participants see the federal UI supplement as being highly critical to the growth path of the economy for the remainder of 2020,” said Allan Timmermann, a professor of finance and economics at the University of California, San Diego, who has been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey.
Overall, the survey indicated that even though the economists think it’s likely that the economy will continue to improve over the course of the year, they still don’t foresee a swift recovery for 2020. (The most recent monthly jobs report, released on Friday, suggested the same.) The economists’ consensus prediction was that the unemployment rate for August would be 10.1 percent, which would be essentially unchanged from July. They predicted a similarly minuscule drop for September, to just over 10 percent. And although the group anticipated that the unemployment rate will dip to 9.6 percent in December, the consensus forecast’s 10th percentile prediction was 7.8 percent and its 90th percentile prediction was 12.6 percent — emphasizing that there’s still a fair amount of uncertainty about what will happen over the course of the year, and how that will affect employment.
Remarkably, this bleak picture is more optimistic than the economists’ predictions in previous surveys. Back in May, for instance, the economists’ median estimate of December’s unemployment rate was 12 percent. “I think that economists have been surprised by the speed of bounce back of the labor market,” said Jonathan Wright, an economics professor at Johns Hopkins University. He has also been consulting with FiveThirtyEight on the survey.
But even their revised predictions are still pretty gloomy. “Remember that 10 percent used to be the depths of a severe recession, and other measures of the labor market like participation and underemployment are still very bad,” Wright added.
So while the July jobs report might have seemed, on the surface, to deliver good news, the survey makes clear that there is plenty that could keep us in the economic doldrums for the foreseeable future — particularly if Congress doesn’t act at some point soon. Menzie Chinn, an economist at the University of Madison-Wisconsin, said the July jobs report only confirmed his suspicion that the economic recovery was starting to plateau. Now, he thinks a W-shaped recovery — where the economy improves somewhat, only to crash again — is still possible, and “a stall is more and more likely.”
Julia Wolfe contributed research.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--With A Healthy Jusuf Nurkić, The Trail Blazers Are On The Cusp Of The Playoffs

Despite entering the NBA bubble 3.5 games back of the Memphis Grizzlies , the current overwhelming favorite to capture the eighth and final playoff spot in the Western Conference is the Portland Trail Blazers .
The FiveThirtyEight RAPTOR-based forecast gives the Blazers a 76 percent chance of making the postseason , up from just 12 percent prior to the restart .
We projected the Blazers to go just 3-5 at Walt Disney World , yet with just two “ regular-season ” games left , they ’ ve gone 4-2 , with those two losses coming by a combined 9 points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sparkling play from Damian Lillard , strong complementary scoring from CJ McCollum and outrageous sniping from both Carmelo Anthony ( 47.8 percent from three ) and Gary Trent Jr. ( 56.9 percent despite a 1 of 6 performance on Sunday ) , but it ’ s unlikely they ’ d be where they are right now without the contributions of their starting center : Jusuf Nurkić .
Nurk suffered compound fractures to the tibia and fibula of his lower left leg during a double-overtime win over the Nets in March 2019 , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hiatus , he had been out for two weeks shy of a full year .
Nurkić initially made a dramatic return to the fold at halftime of a playoff game last season : As ESPN ’ s Ramona Shelburne wrote , Nurkić was watching the game at home and was frustrated by his inability to help , so he had his girlfriend drive him to the arena .
The Blazers — down by 8 to the Thunder when he joined the bench — stormed back with Nurkić watching from the sidelines instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Damian Lillard ’ s iconic walk-off three .
While it still may have been possible for Nurkić to return had the 2019-20 season continued apace , the coronavirus-induced suspension of play gave him even more time to heal and work himself back into shape .
That extra time has paid off .
Nurkić is averaging 18.8 points , 10.5 rebounds , 4.8 assists , 1.3 steals and 2.5 blocks per game .
He ’ s playing nearly 32 minutes a night , and both his usage rate and true shooting percentage are essentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The sample is obviously tiny , but he is working on career-best figures in win shares per 48 minutes , Box Plus/Minus ( including offensive , defensive and overall ) , player efficiency rating , turnover rate and assist rate .
The Blazers had a quality offense prior to the hiatus , tied for ninth-best in the league .
But inserting Nurkić for Hassan Whiteside ( who started 61 of the team ’ s 66 games ) has kicked things into an even higher gear .
Portland leads the bubble in offensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per 100 possessions — nearly 2 points more than the next-closest team .
Nurkić has picked up right where he left off , showcasing wonderful chemistry with the team ’ s two scoring stars .
Pick and rolls featuring Lillard as the ball-handler and Nurkić as the screener have resumed their rightful place as the foundation of the team ’ s offense .
No duo has run more pick and rolls during the restart than Dame and Nurk , who have paired on 127 screens , per Second Spectrum .
Those pick and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a typical possession including a Lillard-Nurkić ball screen producing 1.243 points — a scoring rate that ranks 25th out of 281 duos who have paired on at least 125 screens on the season as a whole .
McCollum tends to have a higher usage when he plays with the second unit sans Lillard , so he and Nurkić have not connected on as many plays , but the 24 dribble handoffs they have completed so far have yielded 34 points — a spectacular scoring rate .
Nurkić ’ s overall passing performance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 7.2 potential assists per game are fourth-best among bubble centers , per NBA.com , while his 4.8 assists and 11.3 points created off assists each rank third .
There ’ s a little bit of luck involved there , as his Blazer teammates are outperforming their expected effective field-goal percentage off his passes by 7.8 points , but among the 29 centers who have created at least 10 shots with their passes during the restart , he has still created the ninth-highest quantified shot quality — or expected effective field-goal percentage — with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of double-teams in the post as well as on the move in pick-and-roll situations far exceeds that of Whiteside , which opens things up a bit more for his teammates .
Of course , not everything has been rosy .
Like the rest of the Blazers , Nurk is getting absolutely flambéed on the less glamorous end of the court .
Portland ’ s bubble defense has been an outright disaster .
Nurkić himself has some of the worst defensive numbers on the team ( they ’ ve been 6.4 points per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the floor than on the bench ) , and boy does the eye test back them up .
He ’ s always been more of a rim-protector than a guy who can guard in space , and it ’ s not at all surprising that he would struggle with the latter role after missing 16 months with a serious leg injury .
But seemingly all Blazer opponents have needed to generate an easy score during the restart is to involve Nurkić in any kind of action that forces him to move his feet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , off-ball screen , anything .
It ’ s not ideal that Portland has the misfortune of playing its next game against the Dallas Mavericks , who have the most efficient offense in NBA history .
After Luka Dončić and Kristaps Porziņģis sat out the team ’ s Monday afternoon win over the Utah Jazz , it seems likely they ’ ll be back in action tonight .
Given Portland ’ s defensive struggles , it ’ s equally unlikely the Blazers will lock down Dallas ’ s dynamic duo .
They ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ game with their offense .
Lucky for them , Nurkić is there to help .

Despite entering the NBA bubble 3.5 games back of the Memphis Grizzlies, the current overwhelming favorite to capture the eighth and final playoff spot in the Western Conference is the Portland Trail Blazers. The FiveThirtyEight RAPTOR-based forecast gives the Blazers a 76 percent chance of making the postseason, up from just 12 percent prior to the restart.
We projected the Blazers to go just 3-5 at Walt Disney World, yet with just two “regular-season” games left, they’ve gone 4-2, with those two losses coming by a combined 9 points. The Blazers have gotten the usual sparkling play from Damian Lillard, strong complementary scoring from CJ McCollum and outrageous sniping from both Carmelo Anthony (47.8 percent from three) and Gary Trent Jr. (56.9 percent despite a 1 of 6 performance on Sunday), but it’s unlikely they’d be where they are right now without the contributions of their starting center: Jusuf Nurkić.
Nurk suffered compound fractures to the tibia and fibula of his lower left leg during a double-overtime win over the Nets in March 2019, and at the time this season went on hiatus, he had been out for two weeks shy of a full year. Nurkić initially made a dramatic return to the fold at halftime of a playoff game last season: As ESPN’s Ramona Shelburne wrote, Nurkić was watching the game at home and was frustrated by his inability to help, so he had his girlfriend drive him to the arena. The Blazers — down by 8 to the Thunder when he joined the bench — stormed back with Nurkić watching from the sidelines instead of his couch and won the game on Damian Lillard’s iconic walk-off three.
While it still may have been possible for Nurkić to return had the 2019-20 season continued apace, the coronavirus-induced suspension of play gave him even more time to heal and work himself back into shape. That extra time has paid off. Nurkić is averaging 18.8 points, 10.5 rebounds, 4.8 assists, 1.3 steals and 2.5 blocks per game. He’s playing nearly 32 minutes a night, and both his usage rate and true shooting percentage are essentially unchanged from when we last saw him. The sample is obviously tiny, but he is working on career-best figures in win shares per 48 minutes, Box Plus/Minus (including offensive, defensive and overall), player efficiency rating, turnover rate and assist rate.
The Blazers had a quality offense prior to the hiatus, tied for ninth-best in the league. But inserting Nurkić for Hassan Whiteside (who started 61 of the team’s 66 games) has kicked things into an even higher gear. Portland leads the bubble in offensive efficiency, scoring a hilarious 120.9 points per 100 possessions — nearly 2 points more than the next-closest team. Nurkić has picked up right where he left off, showcasing wonderful chemistry with the team’s two scoring stars.
Pick and rolls featuring Lillard as the ball-handler and Nurkić as the screener have resumed their rightful place as the foundation of the team’s offense. No duo has run more pick and rolls during the restart than Dame and Nurk, who have paired on 127 screens, per Second Spectrum. Those pick and rolls have also been wildly profitable, with a typical possession including a Lillard-Nurkić ball screen producing 1.243 points — a scoring rate that ranks 25th out of 281 duos who have paired on at least 125 screens on the season as a whole.
McCollum tends to have a higher usage when he plays with the second unit sans Lillard, so he and Nurkić have not connected on as many plays, but the 24 dribble handoffs they have completed so far have yielded 34 points — a spectacular scoring rate.
Nurkić’s overall passing performance has been wonderful as well — his 7.2 potential assists per game are fourth-best among bubble centers, per NBA.com, while his 4.8 assists and 11.3 points created off assists each rank third. There’s a little bit of luck involved there, as his Blazer teammates are outperforming their expected effective field-goal percentage off his passes by 7.8 points, but among the 29 centers who have created at least 10 shots with their passes during the restart, he has still created the ninth-highest quantified shot quality — or expected effective field-goal percentage — with his dishes. His proficiency at passing out of double-teams in the post as well as on the move in pick-and-roll situations far exceeds that of Whiteside, which opens things up a bit more for his teammates.
Of course, not everything has been rosy. Like the rest of the Blazers, Nurk is getting absolutely flambéed on the less glamorous end of the court. Portland’s bubble defense has been an outright disaster. Nurkić himself has some of the worst defensive numbers on the team (they’ve been 6.4 points per 100 possessions worse defensively with him on the floor than on the bench), and boy does the eye test back them up.
He’s always been more of a rim-protector than a guy who can guard in space, and it’s not at all surprising that he would struggle with the latter role after missing 16 months with a serious leg injury. But seemingly all Blazer opponents have needed to generate an easy score during the restart is to involve Nurkić in any kind of action that forces him to move his feet: pick and roll, dribble handoff, off-ball screen, anything.
Nurkić is struggling mightily on defense Points per possession given up by the Portland Trail Blazers on actions defended by Jusuf Nurkić, and his rank on each type, since July 30, 2020 Type of action defended plays defended Pts/Poss Rank Pick and roll 149 1.29 52nd of 55 Dribble handoff 37 1.47 29th of 29 Off-ball screen 56 1.23 29th of 38 To qualify, defenders must have played 50 pick and rolls, 20 dribble handoffs and 50 off-ball screens. Source: Second Spectrum
It’s not ideal that Portland has the misfortune of playing its next game against the Dallas Mavericks, who have the most efficient offense in NBA history. After Luka Dončić and Kristaps Porziņģis sat out the team’s Monday afternoon win over the Utah Jazz, it seems likely they’ll be back in action tonight. Given Portland’s defensive struggles, it’s equally unlikely the Blazers will lock down Dallas’s dynamic duo. They’re going to have to win the game with their offense. Lucky for them, Nurkić is there to help.
Check out our latest NBA predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-11--How Biden’s Standing In The Polls Compares To Clinton’s At This Point In 2016

In this week ’ s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew compares Joe Biden ’ s standing in the polls @ @ @ @ @ s standing at this time in 2016 — her peak of the overall campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ on who Biden could pick as his running mate .

How Biden’s Standing In The Polls Compares To Clinton’s At This Point In 2016
In this week’s FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew compares Joe Biden’s standing in the polls now with Hillary Clinton’s standing at this time in 2016 — her peak of the overall campaign. They also continue to speculate on who Biden could pick as his running mate.