fivethirthyeight--2020-12-08--The Mewis Sisters Are Playing Soccer Together Again. This Time, It’s At The Highest Level.

After the U.S. women ’ s national team defeated the Netherlands 2-0 on Nov. 27 , midfielder Kristie Mewis had one important thing to do before she talked to the media .
“ I just had to rewatch it , actually , because I think I blacked out on what actually happened , ” she admitted .
“ It ” was Mewis ’ s goal in the 70th minute , when she received a pass between two defenders from Lynn Williams and placed a low shot into the far corner of the net .
It was Mewis ’ s second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her first since 2013 , setting a team record for the longest time between goals ( 2,722 days ) in a player ’ s career .
One of the first players to congratulate her was her younger sister , Sam , a fellow midfielder who started against the Netherlands and played 28 of her 89 minutes next to Kristie .
Kristie and Sam were born just 20 months apart and grew up in a soccer-loving family in Hanson , Massachusetts , about 25 miles south of Boston .
Both of their parents were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took up the sport at a young age , often in the family ’ s backyard .
“ They played so much , we still can ’ t seem to get the grass to grow , ” their mother , Melissa , told Sports Illustrated in 2010 .
When Kristie and Sam were 8 and 6 years old , respectively , they watched the U.S. women ’ s national team win the 1999 Women ’ s World Cup and were transfixed .
“ That was our dream , ” Sam recalled .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the house.
” The Mewises followed in the footsteps of Hamm and her teammates , making their own history in 2008 as the first sisters to play together on a U.S. World Cup team with the under-17 women ’ s national team .
In their youth careers , they combined for 30 goals in nearly 100 caps , or appearances , and played in five World Cups .
Kristie was called up first to a youth national team , which made Sam realize that she could get there , too .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of reach .
She paved the way in a sense and made me believe that I could do it too , ” she told The Athletic .
Sam has also said that Kristie “ sparked a competitiveness in me by beating me in everything , ” though at times that hurt Sam ’ s confidence as a young player .
As a teenager , Sam decided to continue her soccer career at UCLA in part because she wanted to forge a separate path from Kristie , who was staying local at Boston College @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , their production as college players was remarkably similar : Kristie averaged 1.30 points per game for her career , and her most productive season came as a senior , when she recorded 16 goals and 12 assists for 44 points in 21 games .
As a sophomore , she helped her team advance to the College Cup for the first time in school history , and she still holds school records for the most points ( 19 ) , goals ( 7 ) and assists ( 5 ) in the NCAA Tournament @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assists than Kristie , but she had more game-winning goals ( 11 to 9 ) and — perhaps most importantly — the better winning percentage in the NCAA Tournament ( 0.781 to 0.714 ) , including a national championship in 2013 .
Over one-third of Sam ’ s goals for the Bruins were game-winners , seven of them coming in her senior season alone .
That clutch production earned her the 2015 Honda Sports Award as the national player of the year .
Both sisters debuted for the U.S. senior national team before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her first cap in February 2013 and scored her first goal four months later against South Korea .
That match was played in Foxborough , Massachusetts , with Sam and her parents in the stands — which Sam called “ one of the coolest experiences ever.
” Less than a year later , in March 2014 , Sam got her first national team cap by subbing into a match against Sweden at the same time as Kristie , which seemed symbolic of the long and promising international careers that they both seemed poised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t that simple for either of them .
After just 15 caps and the lone goal against South Korea , Kristie fell out of favor with the national team , in part because coaches weren ’ t sure which position she should play at the international level .
And Sam took a few years to fully break in , making only five appearances between March 2014 and February 2016 and missing out on the 2015 World Cup roster .
In the meantime , Kristie and Sam had both been top-five picks in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going third overall to FC Kansas City in 2013 and Sam going fourth overall to the Western New York Flash ( now the North Carolina Courage ) two years later .
Kristie played for five NWSL teams in her first five seasons before settling in with her current team , the Houston Dash .
Kristie tore her ACL in 2018 , prompting her to reflect on what she still wanted to accomplish in soccer .
She had scored just four NWSL goals in the previous two seasons after a career-high six in 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near the bottom of the standings .
“ I was OK with being average for a couple years , ” she said this year .
“ I had to look within myself and decide where I was going to go with my career .
Am I going to continue being average , or am I going to try and push for my dreams ?
” Sam played with Western New York for her first two NWSL seasons before relocating with the team to North Carolina .
The franchise won NWSL championships in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playing over 3,300 minutes in 43 matches in those three seasons .
Both sisters ’ careers were on the upswing in 2019 , as Kristie recommitted herself to becoming a standout player and Sam was a regular starter in the World Cup and won another NWSL title .
Kristie had four goals and one assist in 22 NWSL matches , and Sam had two goals and four assists to help the Americans win the World Cup .
“ Being a professional soccer player can be difficult and challenging at times , and … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never done this , it is kind of hard to understand all the ups and downs , ” Sam told the media in November .
“ And to have someone in my family that gets it and that we kind of go through the ebbs and flows of this career together … is just really special and it ’ s brought us closer.
” Sam added that it was “ really rewarding ” to watch Kristie recover from her knee injury and become an even better player .
“ I think it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , how much she wants this and how good of a character that she really has.
” Both sisters have said in multiple interviews that they are extremely supportive of each other , and they talk almost daily .
That bond could have been tested with only one Mewis on the World Cup roster , but Kristie didn ’ t hold any hard feelings .
“ I was so , so happy for her , but I obviously wanted to be next to her doing it , ” Kristie said .
“ … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A little bit of her success , I felt it also a little bit , just because she ’ s my sister , she ’ s my blood , we did everything together growing up .
… And it also pushed me even harder to try and play with her again.
” Kristie built on her 2019 season by helping the Houston Dash win the 2020 NWSL Challenge Cup , an eight-team tournament held at a single site in Utah because of the COVID-19 pandemic .
Winning that title “ honestly meant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I obviously haven ’ t had that much success in the league on the teams I ’ ve been on .
Just to win something and to be in first place … was the best feeling in the world.
” She followed that up with two goals and five assists in four games of the Fall Series , which consisted of friendlies against the Courage and the Orlando Pride .
Kristie ’ s success in the Fall Series didn ’ t come at Sam ’ s expense , however , because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Challenge Cup to play in England for Manchester City .
She had always considered playing overseas , and she made the move this summer because of the limited playing opportunities in the United States during the pandemic and her desire to prepare for the 2021 Olympics .
Through her first eight games in England , she had scored two goals and was playing an average of 73 minutes per match .
Just as in college , Kristie and Sam have produced similar statistics in their American and English club careers , including the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For Kristie — who has played 36 more matches and nearly 3,000 more minutes than Sam — that translates to 0.19 goals per 90 minutes .
Sam has produced more goals and slightly more assists per 90 minutes , but she has also accumulated yellow cards at twice the rate Kristie has .
And as Kristie mentioned after winning the Challenge Cup , her teams have struggled at times , earning 0.87 points fewer per match than Sam ’ s teams have , out of a maximum of 3 points .
Kristie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fall Series , as she earned invitations to national team camps in October and November .
The latter was the first camp she had attended with Sam since 2014 .
“ [ For ] her to get called in here just brings me so much joy , ” Sam said during the November camp .
“ … Already today at practice , we were working together a little bit and it ’ s just so fun to have her here.
” When Kristie subbed into the game against the Netherlands , it capped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phenom .
“ I couldn ’ t wipe the smile off my face , ” she said afterward .
“ I was trying to be so serious , but I couldn ’ t .
I just saw Sam and she was smiling at me , and I did feel oddly comfortable .
It was probably because she was on the field and I ’ ve been training with the other players , so I did feel a sense of comfort.
” Her goal , coming just nine minutes after she entered the match @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s belief in her and made his comments during camp look prescient .
Reflecting on her growth since 2013 , when he drafted her as the head coach of FC Kansas City , Andonovski said , “ The 2020 version of Kristie Mewis is almost like a different person , different player .
She ’ s more mature , understands the game , she ’ s more into it , definitely more intense .
Her approach to the game , mentally , is totally different.
” As a result , Kristie doubled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national team and notched her elusive 16th cap : Sam still leads the way in caps , goals and assists on the senior team , but 2020 has given the Mewises hope that both players will add to their totals in the coming years .
If so , they may even have a chance to top the 123 combined caps earned by Lorrie and Ronnie Fair , the only other sisters to play for the U.S. women ’ s national team .
( The Mewises have already bested the Fairs ’ seven goals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of the United States was under stay-at-home orders , Kristie resorted to training in public parks .
ESPN ’ s Graham Hays reported that the setup was less than ideal : “ The grass grew so high … that Kristie Mewis could scarcely see where she was going.
” It had to feel quite different from the backyard battles that whittled the grass down to nothing and grew the Mewis sisters into youth national team stars .
But the match against the Netherlands proved that both types of training in the grass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s highest level .
As The Philadelphia Inquirer ’ s Jonathan Tannenwald wrote on Twitter during the game , “ The plural of ‘ Mewis ’ is ‘ a midfield .
’ ”

After the U.S. women’s national team defeated the Netherlands 2-0 on Nov. 27, midfielder Kristie Mewis had one important thing to do before she talked to the media.
“I just had to rewatch it, actually, because I think I blacked out on what actually happened,” she admitted.
“It” was Mewis’s goal in the 70th minute, when she received a pass between two defenders from Lynn Williams and placed a low shot into the far corner of the net.
A moment of joy. For the Mewis family and also for all of us. #USWNT pic.twitter.com/67pVDjiZrK — Meg Linehan (@itsmeglinehan) November 27, 2020
It was Mewis’s second career goal with the national team and her first since 2013, setting a team record for the longest time between goals (2,722 days) in a player’s career. One of the first players to congratulate her was her younger sister, Sam, a fellow midfielder who started against the Netherlands and played 28 of her 89 minutes next to Kristie.
Kristie and Sam were born just 20 months apart and grew up in a soccer-loving family in Hanson, Massachusetts, about 25 miles south of Boston. Both of their parents were former players, and Kristie and Sam took up the sport at a young age, often in the family’s backyard. “They played so much, we still can’t seem to get the grass to grow,” their mother, Melissa, told Sports Illustrated in 2010.
When Kristie and Sam were 8 and 6 years old, respectively, they watched the U.S. women’s national team win the 1999 Women’s World Cup and were transfixed. “That was our dream,” Sam recalled. “We used to wear Mia Hamm jerseys around the house.”
The Mewises were youth stars Youth U.S. women’s national team statistics for Kristie and Sam Mewis Player Years Caps Goals World Cups Kristie 2008-11 39 14 2 Sam 2008-15 56 16 3 Sources: USSoccer.com, Boston Breakers
The Mewises followed in the footsteps of Hamm and her teammates, making their own history in 2008 as the first sisters to play together on a U.S. World Cup team with the under-17 women’s national team. In their youth careers, they combined for 30 goals in nearly 100 caps, or appearances, and played in five World Cups.
Kristie was called up first to a youth national team, which made Sam realize that she could get there, too. “It made that dream seem less out of reach. She paved the way in a sense and made me believe that I could do it too,” she told The Athletic. Sam has also said that Kristie “sparked a competitiveness in me by beating me in everything,” though at times that hurt Sam’s confidence as a young player. As a teenager, Sam decided to continue her soccer career at UCLA in part because she wanted to forge a separate path from Kristie, who was staying local at Boston College.
Despite the sisters’ divergent paths, their production as college players was remarkably similar:
The Mewises had similar collegiate records College soccer statistics for Kristie and Sam Mewis Player College Years Matches Goals Assists Total Points Kristie Boston College 2009-12 89 39 38 116 Sam UCLA 2011-14 87 31 32 94 Sources: Boston College, UCLA
Kristie averaged 1.30 points per game for her career, and her most productive season came as a senior, when she recorded 16 goals and 12 assists for 44 points in 21 games. As a sophomore, she helped her team advance to the College Cup for the first time in school history, and she still holds school records for the most points (19), goals (7) and assists (5) in the NCAA Tournament.
Sam had slightly fewer goals and assists than Kristie, but she had more game-winning goals (11 to 9) and — perhaps most importantly — the better winning percentage in the NCAA Tournament (0.781 to 0.714), including a national championship in 2013. Over one-third of Sam’s goals for the Bruins were game-winners, seven of them coming in her senior season alone. That clutch production earned her the 2015 Honda Sports Award as the national player of the year.
Both sisters debuted for the U.S. senior national team before playing a professional game. Kristie got her first cap in February 2013 and scored her first goal four months later against South Korea. That match was played in Foxborough, Massachusetts, with Sam and her parents in the stands — which Sam called “one of the coolest experiences ever.”
Less than a year later, in March 2014, Sam got her first national team cap by subbing into a match against Sweden at the same time as Kristie, which seemed symbolic of the long and promising international careers that they both seemed poised to have. But it wasn’t that simple for either of them. After just 15 caps and the lone goal against South Korea, Kristie fell out of favor with the national team, in part because coaches weren’t sure which position she should play at the international level. And Sam took a few years to fully break in, making only five appearances between March 2014 and February 2016 and missing out on the 2015 World Cup roster.
In the meantime, Kristie and Sam had both been top-five picks in the NWSL Draft after college, with Kristie going third overall to FC Kansas City in 2013 and Sam going fourth overall to the Western New York Flash (now the North Carolina Courage) two years later. Kristie played for five NWSL teams in her first five seasons before settling in with her current team, the Houston Dash.
Kristie tore her ACL in 2018, prompting her to reflect on what she still wanted to accomplish in soccer. She had scored just four NWSL goals in the previous two seasons after a career-high six in 2015, and her teams had mostly finished near the bottom of the standings. “I was OK with being average for a couple years,” she said this year. “I had to look within myself and decide where I was going to go with my career. Am I going to continue being average, or am I going to try and push for my dreams?”
Sam played with Western New York for her first two NWSL seasons before relocating with the team to North Carolina. The franchise won NWSL championships in 2016, 2018 and 2019, with Sam playing over 3,300 minutes in 43 matches in those three seasons.
Both sisters’ careers were on the upswing in 2019, as Kristie recommitted herself to becoming a standout player and Sam was a regular starter in the World Cup and won another NWSL title. Kristie had four goals and one assist in 22 NWSL matches, and Sam had two goals and four assists to help the Americans win the World Cup.
“Being a professional soccer player can be difficult and challenging at times, and … for a lot of people who have never done this, it is kind of hard to understand all the ups and downs,” Sam told the media in November. “And to have someone in my family that gets it and that we kind of go through the ebbs and flows of this career together … is just really special and it’s brought us closer.”
Sam added that it was “really rewarding” to watch Kristie recover from her knee injury and become an even better player. “I think it’s just demonstrated how hard she worked, how much she wants this and how good of a character that she really has.”
Both sisters have said in multiple interviews that they are extremely supportive of each other, and they talk almost daily. That bond could have been tested with only one Mewis on the World Cup roster, but Kristie didn’t hold any hard feelings.
“I was so, so happy for her, but I obviously wanted to be next to her doing it,” Kristie said. “… But I was able to separate it. A little bit of her success, I felt it also a little bit, just because she’s my sister, she’s my blood, we did everything together growing up. … And it also pushed me even harder to try and play with her again.”
Kristie built on her 2019 season by helping the Houston Dash win the 2020 NWSL Challenge Cup, an eight-team tournament held at a single site in Utah because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Winning that title “honestly meant everything to me,” she said. “I obviously haven’t had that much success in the league on the teams I’ve been on. Just to win something and to be in first place … was the best feeling in the world.” She followed that up with two goals and five assists in four games of the Fall Series, which consisted of friendlies against the Courage and the Orlando Pride.
Kristie’s success in the Fall Series didn’t come at Sam’s expense, however, because Sam had signed a contract after the Challenge Cup to play in England for Manchester City. She had always considered playing overseas, and she made the move this summer because of the limited playing opportunities in the United States during the pandemic and her desire to prepare for the 2021 Olympics. Through her first eight games in England, she had scored two goals and was playing an average of 73 minutes per match.
Their club careers have been similar, too American and English club soccer statistics for Kristie and Sam Mewis Per 90 Minutes Player Seasons Matches Starts Mins./Match Goals Assists Kristie 2013-20 135 126 81.1 0.19 0.13 Sam 2015-21 100 90 81.0 0.26 0.14 Regular-season stats only except for the NWSL Challenge Cup. Kristie Mewis’s stats do not include time spent playing for clubs in Australia, Japan and Germany. Source: FBref.com
Just as in college, Kristie and Sam have produced similar statistics in their American and English club careers, including the exact same number of goals: 23. For Kristie — who has played 36 more matches and nearly 3,000 more minutes than Sam — that translates to 0.19 goals per 90 minutes. Sam has produced more goals and slightly more assists per 90 minutes, but she has also accumulated yellow cards at twice the rate Kristie has. And as Kristie mentioned after winning the Challenge Cup, her teams have struggled at times, earning 0.87 points fewer per match than Sam’s teams have, out of a maximum of 3 points.
Kristie’s strong 2020 continued after the Fall Series, as she earned invitations to national team camps in October and November. The latter was the first camp she had attended with Sam since 2014.
“[For] her to get called in here just brings me so much joy,” Sam said during the November camp. “… Already today at practice, we were working together a little bit and it’s just so fun to have her here.”
When Kristie subbed into the game against the Netherlands, it capped a storybook return for the onetime youth phenom. “I couldn’t wipe the smile off my face,” she said afterward. “I was trying to be so serious, but I couldn’t. I just saw Sam and she was smiling at me, and I did feel oddly comfortable. It was probably because she was on the field and I’ve been training with the other players, so I did feel a sense of comfort.”
Her goal, coming just nine minutes after she entered the match, validated U.S. head coach Vlatko Andonovski’s belief in her and made his comments during camp look prescient. Reflecting on her growth since 2013, when he drafted her as the head coach of FC Kansas City, Andonovski said, “The 2020 version of Kristie Mewis is almost like a different person, different player. She’s more mature, understands the game, she’s more into it, definitely more intense. Her approach to the game, mentally, is totally different.”
As a result, Kristie doubled her career goals total with the senior national team and notched her elusive 16th cap:
Sam has had more chances on the biggest stage Senior U.S. women’s national team statistics for Kristie and Sam Mewis Player Years Caps Goals Assists World Cups Kristie 2013-20 16 2 2 0 Sam 2014-20 68 18 6 1 Source: USSoccer.com
Sam still leads the way in caps, goals and assists on the senior team, but 2020 has given the Mewises hope that both players will add to their totals in the coming years. If so, they may even have a chance to top the 123 combined caps earned by Lorrie and Ronnie Fair, the only other sisters to play for the U.S. women’s national team. (The Mewises have already bested the Fairs’ seven goals.)
In the spring, when much of the United States was under stay-at-home orders, Kristie resorted to training in public parks. ESPN’s Graham Hays reported that the setup was less than ideal: “The grass grew so high … that Kristie Mewis could scarcely see where she was going.”
It had to feel quite different from the backyard battles that whittled the grass down to nothing and grew the Mewis sisters into youth national team stars. But the match against the Netherlands proved that both types of training in the grass have paid off at the sport’s highest level. As The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Jonathan Tannenwald wrote on Twitter during the game, “The plural of ‘Mewis’ is ‘a midfield.’”


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-09--Politics Podcast: The Electoral Challenges Facing The Republican Party

The November election was the seventh time in eight elections that Republicans lost the national popular vote and was a @ @ @ @ @ president .
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew asks why @ @ @ @ @ the challenges facing the Republican Party electorally .
They also check in on FiveThirtyEight ’ @ @ @ @ @ of the Senate runoff elections in Georgia .
You can listen to the episode by @ @ @ @ @ button in the audio player above or by downloading it in iTunes , the ESPN @ @ @ @ @ platform .
If you are new to podcasts , learn how to listen .
The @ @ @ @ @ Mondays and Thursdays .
Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating @ @ @ @ @ Have a comment , question or suggestion for “ good polling vs. bad polling ” @ @ @ @ @ email , on Twitter or in the comments .

The November election was the seventh time in eight presidential elections that Republicans lost the national popular vote, and it was a rare loss for an incumbent president. In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew asks why President Trump lost and considers the challenges facing the GOP electorally. They also check in on FiveThirtyEight’s newly launched polling average of the Senate runoff elections in Georgia.
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--2020-12-08--The Jets’ No-Good, Rotten, Very Bad Play

We start with the NFL — or , more specifically , with the bottom of the NFL .
The New York Jets made a very bad play call that cost them their game last week against the Las Vegas Raiders but kept them in the hunt for the first pick of next year ’ s draft .
It immediately ignited all sorts of theories about tanking .
However , individual players and even coaches don ’ t have big incentives to tank in the NFL .
Case in point : Jets defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was fired after that bizarre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence that the Jets ownership is , in fact , tanking for Trevor is all in the fact that they haven ’ t fired head coach Adam Gase .
Tanking also isn ’ t nearly as effective in the NFL as it is in a league like the NBA .
Trevor Lawrence could well be a generational talent on the order of a Peyton Manning , but if he walks into a dysfunctional team that has been completely cleaned out of talent and lacks a winning culture ?
Well , Joe Burrow learned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so much a quarterback can do .
Next , we catch up with the NBA ’ s abridged offseason .
Giannis Antetokounmpo still may or may not sign a long-term extension with the Milwaukee Bucks , but LeBron James and Anthony Davis are locked in with the Lakers … and the rest of the Western Conference is locked in with a team that appears poised for continued dominance , if not quite the sustained greatness of the Golden State Warriors of the past decade .
But the most interesting move of this short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Washington Wizards exchanging their respective albatrosses at point guard in the trade of Russell Westbrook for John Wall .
It ’ s very hard to say how Wall in particular is going to fit into Houston ’ s team , given that James Harden seems to be anywhere but the practice court .
If he didn ’ t seem so determined to get out of Houston , Harden might have a promising supporting partnership with Wall and new center Christian Wood .
But every member of the Hot Takedown team agrees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case by getting photographed without a mask at big parties .
Brooklyn or Philly might want him , but maybe not if he ’ s bringing COVID-19 .
Finally , in the Rabbit Hole , we ’ re joined by FiveThirtyEight NFL analyst Josh Hermsmeyer , who walks us through the world of football coaches … on film !
Josh categorized nine classic football films ( well , eight classic football films and “ Varsity Blues ” ) on an alignment chart of good/evil and lawful/chaotic .
Obviously , fictional coaches don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be compelling characters , but including the tensions that real coaches have to deal with — balancing analytics and human interaction ; sticking with what you know versus embracing new philosophies — can also make the movies better .
What we ’ re looking at this week : • The Jets are tanking .
The Jets are also bad at football .
• The Wall-Westbrook trade was an act of desperation .

We start with the NFL — or, more specifically, with the bottom of the NFL. The New York Jets made a very bad play call that cost them their game last week against the Las Vegas Raiders but kept them in the hunt for the first pick of next year’s draft. It immediately ignited all sorts of theories about tanking. However, individual players and even coaches don’t have big incentives to tank in the NFL. Case in point: Jets defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was fired after that bizarre blitz against the Raiders. But the evidence that the Jets ownership is, in fact, tanking for Trevor is all in the fact that they haven’t fired head coach Adam Gase. Tanking also isn’t nearly as effective in the NFL as it is in a league like the NBA. Trevor Lawrence could well be a generational talent on the order of a Peyton Manning, but if he walks into a dysfunctional team that has been completely cleaned out of talent and lacks a winning culture? Well, Joe Burrow learned this year that there’s only so much a quarterback can do.
Next, we catch up with the NBA’s abridged offseason. Giannis Antetokounmpo still may or may not sign a long-term extension with the Milwaukee Bucks, but LeBron James and Anthony Davis are locked in with the Lakers … and the rest of the Western Conference is locked in with a team that appears poised for continued dominance, if not quite the sustained greatness of the Golden State Warriors of the past decade. But the most interesting move of this short offseason has to be the Houston Rockets and the Washington Wizards exchanging their respective albatrosses at point guard in the trade of Russell Westbrook for John Wall. It’s very hard to say how Wall in particular is going to fit into Houston’s team, given that James Harden seems to be anywhere but the practice court. If he didn’t seem so determined to get out of Houston, Harden might have a promising supporting partnership with Wall and new center Christian Wood. But every member of the Hot Takedown team agrees that Harden isn’t helping his case by getting photographed without a mask at big parties. Brooklyn or Philly might want him, but maybe not if he’s bringing COVID-19.
Finally, in the Rabbit Hole, we’re joined by FiveThirtyEight NFL analyst Josh Hermsmeyer, who walks us through the world of football coaches … on film! Josh categorized nine classic football films (well, eight classic football films and “Varsity Blues”) on an alignment chart of good/evil and lawful/chaotic. Obviously, fictional coaches don’t have to be effective play-callers to be compelling characters, but including the tensions that real coaches have to deal with — balancing analytics and human interaction; sticking with what you know versus embracing new philosophies — can also make the movies better.
What we’re looking at this week:


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-08--How Coastal Carolina Invaded The Top 15 (And Our Hearts)

The consummate feel-good story of the 2020 college football season can be found in Conway , South Carolina .
It involves a university ( Coastal Carolina ) , a mascot ( Chanticleer ) and a color ( teal ) that are basically never associated with dominance on the gridiron .
It involves a program with three years of Football Bowl Subdivision experience that entered September with a 13-23 all-time record as a Division I football team .
And it involves a roster that celebrates victories with mock WWE matches waged in the locker room , including the opposing mascot being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekend , the green — er , teal — newcomer toppled a Heisman candidacy and one of the nation ’ s most effective offenses on a few days ’ notice after Liberty was forced to cancel its matchup with Coastal Carolina due to COVID-19 issues .
The Coastal Carolina Chanticleers are officially the darlings of this strange , strange college football season .
They don ’ t look the part , seeing as many of the players sport a hairstyle that peaked in popularity more than a decade before they were born .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ unbeaten BYU in what some outlets dubbed “ the game of the year , ” the Chanticleers are a top-15 outfit with sights locked on a New Year ’ s Six bowl .
Seemingly overnight , a team that has never had a winning FBS season sealed the first 10-0 start to a season in Sun Belt Conference history and has a 2 percent probability of reaching the playoff , according to ESPN ’ s model .
One way to measure the team ’ s gargantuan leap is with the help of Sports-Reference.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculates how many points above or below average a team was in a given season .
In each of the previous three seasons , Coastal Carolina was more than a touchdown worse than average .
Leave it to 2020 , then , for the Chanticleers to be 14.99 points better than average .
This is rare air for the Sun Belt , a conference that is in the midst of its best overall season in recent memory , with the same number of wins over AP-ranked opponents in 2020 as in the previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Coastal Carolina is by far the best team to come out of the Sun Belt since at least 2005 and has produced the ninth-best season by a Group of Five team in the College Football Playoff era .
So , how did Teal Nation arrive here ?
It starts with a defense colloquially referred to as the Black Swarm , a reference to the color of the uniform worn by the team ’ s defense during practice and the overall ethos of the unit : to swarm .
Through nine games , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ added per play and 4.09 points per drive , among the highest marks in the nation .
Coastal Carolina held them to 0.01 and 1.55 , among the worst .
As BYU ’ s Zach Wilson learned in by far his worst outing of the season , Coastal Carolina gets after the quarterback .
The Chanticleers rank seventh in sack rate and force opposing quarterbacks into the seventh-highest rate of off-target throws .
The Chanticleers wear opponents down in the second half .
Only six teams have a higher defensive successful play rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opponents by a larger margin over the final 30 minutes .
Any conversation of Coastal Carolina must also include redshirt freshman quarterback Grayson McCall , who ranks 13th in Total Quarterback Rating .
McCall paces an option offense that scores 3.24 points per drive , the 10th-most of any team and a clip higher than notable offenses like Clemson and Notre Dame .
Most of these drives are of the punishing variety , like the team ’ s 13-play , 85-yard backbreaker against BYU .
The average Chanticleer drive lasts three minutes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by only five teams .
Although it does boast wins over two teams ranked in the AP Poll , much of Coastal Carolina ’ s success has come against lesser opponents .
Its strength of schedule ranks 78th out of 127 schools , and its only Power Five win was against the woeful Kansas Jayhawks .
But given the obstacles to finding and playing games this year , that shouldn ’ t be held against them .
In a season in which the playoff appears destined for the usual suspects — Alabama , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — Coastal Carolina injects the sport with the novelty it craves .
A rooster can strike fear into an opponent , and a relative novice can hold the country rapt as it snags the spotlight for what likely won ’ t be the final time .
The Chanticleers showed us so .

The consummate feel-good story of the 2020 college football season can be found in Conway, South Carolina. It involves a university (Coastal Carolina), a mascot (Chanticleer) and a color (teal) that are basically never associated with dominance on the gridiron. It involves a program with three years of Football Bowl Subdivision experience that entered September with a 13-23 all-time record as a Division I football team. And it involves a roster that celebrates victories with mock WWE matches waged in the locker room, including the opposing mascot being elbow-dropped through a table.
Over the weekend, the green — er, teal — newcomer toppled a Heisman candidacy and one of the nation’s most effective offenses on a few days’ notice after Liberty was forced to cancel its matchup with Coastal Carolina due to COVID-19 issues.
The Coastal Carolina Chanticleers are officially the darlings of this strange, strange college football season. They don’t look the part, seeing as many of the players sport a hairstyle that peaked in popularity more than a decade before they were born. But with a 22-17 victory over previously unbeaten BYU in what some outlets dubbed “the game of the year,” the Chanticleers are a top-15 outfit with sights locked on a New Year’s Six bowl.
Seemingly overnight, a team that has never had a winning FBS season sealed the first 10-0 start to a season in Sun Belt Conference history and has a 2 percent probability of reaching the playoff, according to ESPN’s model.
One way to measure the team’s gargantuan leap is with the help of Sports-Reference.com’s Simple Rating System, which calculates how many points above or below average a team was in a given season. In each of the previous three seasons, Coastal Carolina was more than a touchdown worse than average. Leave it to 2020, then, for the Chanticleers to be 14.99 points better than average.
This is rare air for the Sun Belt, a conference that is in the midst of its best overall season in recent memory, with the same number of wins over AP-ranked opponents in 2020 as in the previous three seasons combined. By total efficiency, Coastal Carolina is by far the best team to come out of the Sun Belt since at least 2005 and has produced the ninth-best season by a Group of Five team in the College Football Playoff era.
So, how did Teal Nation arrive here?
It starts with a defense colloquially referred to as the Black Swarm, a reference to the color of the uniform worn by the team’s defense during practice and the overall ethos of the unit: to swarm. Through nine games, the BYU Cougars averaged 0.36 expected points added per play and 4.09 points per drive, among the highest marks in the nation. Coastal Carolina held them to 0.01 and 1.55, among the worst.
As BYU’s Zach Wilson learned in by far his worst outing of the season, Coastal Carolina gets after the quarterback. The Chanticleers rank seventh in sack rate and force opposing quarterbacks into the seventh-highest rate of off-target throws.
The Chanticleers wear opponents down in the second half. Only six teams have a higher defensive successful play rate, and only four teams have outscored opponents by a larger margin over the final 30 minutes.
Any conversation of Coastal Carolina must also include redshirt freshman quarterback Grayson McCall, who ranks 13th in Total Quarterback Rating. McCall paces an option offense that scores 3.24 points per drive, the 10th-most of any team and a clip higher than notable offenses like Clemson and Notre Dame. Most of these drives are of the punishing variety, like the team’s 13-play, 85-yard backbreaker against BYU. The average Chanticleer drive lasts three minutes and two seconds, a languished stretch bested by only five teams.
Although it does boast wins over two teams ranked in the AP Poll, much of Coastal Carolina’s success has come against lesser opponents. Its strength of schedule ranks 78th out of 127 schools, and its only Power Five win was against the woeful Kansas Jayhawks. But given the obstacles to finding and playing games this year, that shouldn’t be held against them.
In a season in which the playoff appears destined for the usual suspects — Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State and Clemson — Coastal Carolina injects the sport with the novelty it craves. A rooster can strike fear into an opponent, and a relative novice can hold the country rapt as it snags the spotlight for what likely won’t be the final time. The Chanticleers showed us so.


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-07--Exit Polls Came Up Short This Year. Here’s Why.

Since the 2020 election , you may have seen headlines make bold claims about how certain demographic groups voted .
@ @ @ @ @ explains , it ’ s always difficult to figure out trends in voter preferences — @ @ @ @ @ made it harder .
[ Related : Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard ]

Since the 2020 election, you may have seen headlines make bold claims about how certain demographic groups voted. As quantitative editor Laura Bronner explains, it’s always difficult to figure out trends in voter preferences — and a pandemic has only made it harder.
[Related: Why Polling Has Gotten So Hard]
How to make polls better | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-09--Where Are Georgia’s Senate Candidates Getting All That Cash From?

The extremely tight runoff elections for Senate in Georgia could end up being the two most expensive Senate races in U.S. history , and money is already pouring in .
In less than three weeks ( from Nov. 4 through Nov. 23 ) , grassroots fundraising platforms ActBlue and WinRed funneled a combined $ 167.6 million directly to the four candidates ’ campaigns .
And this doesn ’ t even include the money candidates have raised through more traditional means ( e.g.
, large donors writing checks ) , which we won ’ t have data for until Dec. 24 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports are due ) , or money being raised and spent by outside groups like super PACs .
Eventually , that will probably add millions of dollars to these totals ( especially for Republican Sens .
Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue , for whom online donations were a minority of total donations in the first round of voting ) .
That is far more than the same candidates raised on these platforms before the general election .
In fact , from Sept. 1 through Nov. 3 , the four campaigns raised only $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less than a third of the money in more than triple the amount of time .
As you can see in the chart below , donations skyrocketed a few days after Election Day , around the time it became clear that the runoffs would decide which party controls the Senate in 2021 .
The candidates raised a combined $ 46.1 million on Nov. 8 , 9 and 10 alone .
That is , in a word , bonkers .
But will all that money really matter ?
Most political science research has found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that big of a factor in partisan elections .
And while a large number of individual contributions can be a sign of grassroots enthusiasm for a candidate ( which , in turn , can predict electoral success ) , in this case most of those contributions are coming from out of state .
That means those eye-popping numbers might not tell us anything about how voters in Georgia feel about the candidates .
For example , 96 percent of the money Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff have raised for the runoff through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ ve raised a combined $ 4.3 million from Georgians on the platform , which puts the state seventh in cash donated to its own races via ActBlue , behind California ( $ 25.8 million ) , New York ( $ 10.6 million ) , Washington ( $ 6.2 million ) , Massachusetts ( $ 5.8 million ) , Texas ( $ 4.9 million ) and Florida ( $ 4.8 million ) .
Of course , a lot of that is because states like California and Texas simply have a lot more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a per capita basis , Georgians were only the 11th-biggest contributor to Warnock and Ossoff on ActBlue , giving $ 401 per 1,000 people .
In fact , the 10 states with more donations per capita are all known for being Democratic bastions , with Massachusetts ( $ 847 per 1,000 people ) and Washington ( $ 811 per 1,000 people ) leading the way .
But it ’ s not just Democrats who are receiving a lot of out-of-state money .
A full 92 percent of Republicans ’ runoff donations on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too .
And their top source of cash has also been California ( $ 6.8 million ) , followed by Texas ( $ 6.6 million ) , Florida ( $ 6.5 million ) and then Georgia ( $ 4.4 million ) .
But although Loeffler and Perdue have gotten less money overall through these platforms , after you control for population , they have gotten more money from Georgians ( $ 411 per 1,000 people ) than from residents of any other state ( Florida is a distant second , at $ 301 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you rummage through those jaw-dropping receipts , you discover that Warnock and Ossoff have gotten about the same amount in online donations from Georgians as Loeffler and Perdue have ( $ 4.3 million vs. $ 4.4 million ) .
While the Democrats probably aren ’ t disappointed to have so much more out-of-state money at their disposal , it might not be as helpful as you ’ d think for winning votes in Georgia itself .
After all , Democrats consistently trounced Republicans in the fundraising battle in 2020 Senate races but still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races .
It ’ s worth remembering , though , that the data we have so far is incomplete ; ActBlue and WinRed are just two of many sources for campaign cash .
There ’ s also still a long way to go ( 27 days , in fact ) until the finish line in Georgia , so it ’ s still anyone ’ s race — regardless of who is raking in the most money .

The extremely tight runoff elections for Senate in Georgia could end up being the two most expensive Senate races in U.S. history, and money is already pouring in.
Will Georgia stay blue? | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
In less than three weeks (from Nov. 4 through Nov. 23), grassroots fundraising platforms ActBlue and WinRed funneled a combined $167.6 million directly to the four candidates’ campaigns. And this doesn’t even include the money candidates have raised through more traditional means (e.g., large donors writing checks), which we won’t have data for until Dec. 24 (when the next Federal Election Commission reports are due), or money being raised and spent by outside groups like super PACs. Eventually, that will probably add millions of dollars to these totals (especially for Republican Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, for whom online donations were a minority of total donations in the first round of voting).
An expensive Georgia runoff Money sent to each Georgia Senate runoff candidate via ActBlue or WinRed, Nov. 4-23 Candidate Party Money Raised Raphael Warnock D $57,117,111 Jon Ossoff D 54,886,783 David Perdue R 28,589,916 Kelly Loeffler R 26,995,653 Total 167,589,463 Sources: ActBlue, WinRed
That is far more than the same candidates raised on these platforms before the general election. In fact, from Sept. 1 through Nov. 3, the four campaigns raised only $50.4 million on ActBlue and WinRed — less than a third of the money in more than triple the amount of time. As you can see in the chart below, donations skyrocketed a few days after Election Day, around the time it became clear that the runoffs would decide which party controls the Senate in 2021. The candidates raised a combined $46.1 million on Nov. 8, 9 and 10 alone. That is, in a word, bonkers.
But will all that money really matter? Most political science research has found that campaign spending isn’t actually that big of a factor in partisan elections. And while a large number of individual contributions can be a sign of grassroots enthusiasm for a candidate (which, in turn, can predict electoral success), in this case most of those contributions are coming from out of state. That means those eye-popping numbers might not tell us anything about how voters in Georgia feel about the candidates.
[Related: Why The GOP Isn’t Able To Win The Popular Vote]
For example, 96 percent of the money Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff have raised for the runoff through ActBlue have come from out-of-state donors. They’ve raised a combined $4.3 million from Georgians on the platform, which puts the state seventh in cash donated to its own races via ActBlue, behind California ($25.8 million), New York ($10.6 million), Washington ($6.2 million), Massachusetts ($5.8 million), Texas ($4.9 million) and Florida ($4.8 million).
Of course, a lot of that is because states like California and Texas simply have a lot more people than other states. But even on a per capita basis, Georgians were only the 11th-biggest contributor to Warnock and Ossoff on ActBlue, giving $401 per 1,000 people. In fact, the 10 states with more donations per capita are all known for being Democratic bastions, with Massachusetts ($847 per 1,000 people) and Washington ($811 per 1,000 people) leading the way.
But it’s not just Democrats who are receiving a lot of out-of-state money. A full 92 percent of Republicans’ runoff donations on WinRed have come from outside Georgia, too. And their top source of cash has also been California ($6.8 million), followed by Texas ($6.6 million), Florida ($6.5 million) and then Georgia ($4.4 million ).
But although Loeffler and Perdue have gotten less money overall through these platforms, after you control for population, they have gotten more money from Georgians ($411 per 1,000 people) than from residents of any other state (Florida is a distant second, at $301 per 1,000 people).
[Related: How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map]
So once you rummage through those jaw-dropping receipts, you discover that Warnock and Ossoff have gotten about the same amount in online donations from Georgians as Loeffler and Perdue have ($4.3 million vs. $4.4 million). While the Democrats probably aren’t disappointed to have so much more out-of-state money at their disposal, it might not be as helpful as you’d think for winning votes in Georgia itself. After all, Democrats consistently trounced Republicans in the fundraising battle in 2020 Senate races but still wound up losing most of the competitive races. It’s worth remembering, though, that the data we have so far is incomplete; ActBlue and WinRed are just two of many sources for campaign cash. There’s also still a long way to go (27 days, in fact) until the finish line in Georgia, so it’s still anyone’s race — regardless of who is raking in the most money.


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-09--Why So Many Men Stuck With Trump In 2020

Given how unreliable the exit polls were this year , it will likely be a while before we know exactly how differently men and women voted in 2020 .
But a new survey from the American Enterprise Institute ’ s Survey Center on American Life offers some clues , indicating that once again , gender and sexism may have been a big dividing line , as was the case in 2016 .
That may seem surprising since this year ’ s contest pitted President Trump against another white man instead of a woman , much less the first woman to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It certainly seemed possible heading into this election that the gender gap might be smaller , especially as Joe Biden seemed poised to pick up more support among male voters than Hillary Clinton did .
Only that doesn ’ t appear to have happened , at least not in a widespread way .
Men ’ s and women ’ s voting patterns have been diverging for the past few decades .
But according to research conducted before and after the election , the COVID-19 pandemic may have played a large role in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This split wasn ’ t enough for Trump to win this time , of course , but his attitude toward the coronavirus crisis may actually have been a bonus for some men , which could present a real challenge for Biden moving forward .
Overall , most Americans consistently disapproved of the way Trump handled the pandemic , but the AEI poll found one notable exception — men who identify as “ completely masculine.
” As the table below shows , a majority ( 52 percent ) of men who identified as completely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration has a strategy on COVID-19 — setting them apart from all other men and women .
( Compared with other respondents , completely masculine men were also much more evenly split on the Trump administration ’ s handling of the pandemic , more likely to believe that wearing a mask was more about being politically correct than about preventing the spread of COVID-19 , and more likely to oppose a national mask mandate . )
Of course , the idea that men who identify as more masculine would be more supportive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of a shocker considering they have been among his biggest fans from the beginning .
According to the AEI survey , that was true this year as well : When broken out by how masculine or feminine they identified themselves , completely masculine men were the only group where the majority ( 60 percent ) said they had voted for Trump .
These men may also be more likely to subscribe to a more traditional ideal of masculinity that echoes Trump ’ s “ just shrug it off ” attitude toward the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the election found that these men , or men who fall into a similar category , were less likely to wear masks in the first place or take other precautions to stop the spread of COVID-19 , including social distancing .
One analysis even found that men who were considered more sexist were more likely to report having contracted the virus .
Daniel Cassino , a professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University and the author of one of the studies that found more masculine men dismissing COVID-19 precautions , told us that this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among men to take fewer health precautions period — like wearing seat belts or going to the doctor regularly .
Cassino said that traditional stereotypes around masculinity encourage men to shake off vulnerability , such as hiding a fear of illness and instead projecting strength .
The pandemic , he added , may have sent these tendencies into overdrive , leading some men to oppose public health restrictions and forgo protective health measures like wearing masks .
“ COVID-19 makes men focus more on their masculine identity than they otherwise would have , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and demonstrate , ‘ Yeah , this big scary medical crisis is happening , but it ’ s not going to affect me , ’ ” Cassino said .
It ’ s hard to completely untangle these effects from the impact of partisanship .
Men who identify as completely masculine are disproportionately likely to be Republican , and as we ’ ve written before , Republicans have been consistently less likely to report feeling worried about the pandemic and to support public health restrictions on businesses and individuals .
But arguably , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ views about gender roles have become intertwined with their partisan identity , according to Daniel Cox , director of AEI ’ s Survey Center on American Life and a FiveThirtyEight contributor .
“ Reaffirming that you are traditionally masculine is itself a political statement today — a way to push back on changes to the way society is organized , ” he said .
But there is some evidence from the studies on COVID-19 and masculinity that identifying as more masculine or supporting conventional gender roles has had an independent effect on men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separate from how they identify politically .
In the AEI poll , too , Republican men who identified as completely masculine were somewhat more likely than less-masculine Republican men to approve of the way Trump has handled the pandemic , although the difference wasn ’ t necessarily all that huge ( 79 percent compared with 69 percent ) .
One possible explanation is that the threat of business closures or other restrictions on the economy may have been alarming especially to men who identify as completely masculine .
“ Because employment and working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ job loss is seen as a threat to masculinity , ” said Emily Carian , a professor of sociology at California State University , San Bernardino .
Data shows that women were actually more likely than men to lose their jobs as a result of the pandemic , but the very prospect of being unemployed may have been unsettling particularly to men who have stronger masculine identities , leading them to oppose limitations on how businesses operate .
Responses to the pandemic likely would have been different among different types of men and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president .
And , of course , Trump ’ s response overall wasn ’ t very popular .
But by actively seizing on the spread of COVID-19 as an opportunity to emphasize his own brand of hypermasculinity and portray his opponent as weak and ineffective , Trump may have crafted a tailor-made pitch for men whose own sense of masculinity was threatened by the pandemic .
Those men may have actually appreciated Trump ’ s bravado in rejecting masks and repeatedly calling to reopen the economy over the objections of the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducted in 2016 , Carian found that when men ’ s masculinity was threatened by the prospect of job loss , they were more likely to say they wanted a masculine president — and of the two candidates , Trump was perceived as more masculine .
It ’ s possible that Trump may have managed to use the pandemic to create a similar impression among some voters this year , even though he wasn ’ t running against a woman .
That ’ s because a male candidate like Biden could still be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Biden ’ s choice to wear a mask may have appeared masculine to some , but it was unlikely to resonate with men who were already more likely to see mask-wearing as a sign of weakness .
In other words , even though Trump ’ s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was not a winning electoral strategy overall , it wasn ’ t uniformly unpopular .
In fact , COVID-19 might partially explain why Trump managed to hang onto so many male supporters .
It ’ s also an important reminder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very different vision for how to address the pandemic , these are the very Americans who are among the likeliest to resent — or even resist — his strategy for getting the coronavirus under control .

Given how unreliable the exit polls were this year, it will likely be a while before we know exactly how differently men and women voted in 2020. But a new survey from the American Enterprise Institute’s Survey Center on American Life offers some clues, indicating that once again, gender and sexism may have been a big dividing line, as was the case in 2016.
That may seem surprising since this year’s contest pitted President Trump against another white man instead of a woman, much less the first woman to run for president on a major-party ticket. It certainly seemed possible heading into this election that the gender gap might be smaller, especially as Joe Biden seemed poised to pick up more support among male voters than Hillary Clinton did.
The electoral problems facing Republicans | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
Only that doesn’t appear to have happened, at least not in a widespread way. Men’s and women’s voting patterns have been diverging for the past few decades. But according to research conducted before and after the election, the COVID-19 pandemic may have played a large role in exacerbating gender divisions in the electorate. This split wasn’t enough for Trump to win this time, of course, but his attitude toward the coronavirus crisis may actually have been a bonus for some men, which could present a real challenge for Biden moving forward.
[Related: How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map]
Overall, most Americans consistently disapproved of the way Trump handled the pandemic, but the AEI poll found one notable exception — men who identify as “completely masculine.” As the table below shows, a majority (52 percent) of men who identified as completely masculine on the survey agreed that the Trump administration has a strategy on COVID-19 — setting them apart from all other men and women. (Compared with other respondents, completely masculine men were also much more evenly split on the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic, more likely to believe that wearing a mask was more about being politically correct than about preventing the spread of COVID-19, and more likely to oppose a national mask mandate.)
Trump’s handling of COVID-19 didn’t turn off masculine men Survey responses of men and women according to how completely they identify as masculine or feminine Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling the response to the coronavirus (COVID-19)? Masc. Men Fem. Women Response Total Completely Less Diff Completely Less Diff Approve 38% 47% 31 +16 38% 35% +3 Disapprove 60 52 68 -16 59 64 -5 Do you think the Trump administration has had a strategy for responding to the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) or do you think there has not been a strategy? Masc. Men Fem. Women Response Total Completely Less Diff Completely Less Diff Yes, has a strategy 40% 52% 32 +20 40% 34% +6 No, does not have a strategy 58 47 67 -20 58 64 -6 Source: AEI Survey Center on American Life
Of course, the idea that men who identify as more masculine would be more supportive of the president isn’t that much of a shocker considering they have been among his biggest fans from the beginning. According to the AEI survey, that was true this year as well: When broken out by how masculine or feminine they identified themselves, completely masculine men were the only group where the majority (60 percent) said they had voted for Trump. These men may also be more likely to subscribe to a more traditional ideal of masculinity that echoes Trump’s “just shrug it off” attitude toward the pandemic. In fact, research conducted before the election found that these men, or men who fall into a similar category, were less likely to wear masks in the first place or take other precautions to stop the spread of COVID-19, including social distancing. One analysis even found that men who were considered more sexist were more likely to report having contracted the virus.
Daniel Cassino, a professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University and the author of one of the studies that found more masculine men dismissing COVID-19 precautions, told us that this conclusion lines up with a broader tendency among men to take fewer health precautions period — like wearing seat belts or going to the doctor regularly. Cassino said that traditional stereotypes around masculinity encourage men to shake off vulnerability, such as hiding a fear of illness and instead projecting strength. The pandemic, he added, may have sent these tendencies into overdrive, leading some men to oppose public health restrictions and forgo protective health measures like wearing masks. “COVID-19 makes men focus more on their masculine identity than they otherwise would have, because they feel this pressure to say and demonstrate, ‘Yeah, this big scary medical crisis is happening, but it’s not going to affect me,’” Cassino said.
[How To Make Sure People Come Back For Their Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose]
It’s hard to completely untangle these effects from the impact of partisanship. Men who identify as completely masculine are disproportionately likely to be Republican, and as we’ve written before, Republicans have been consistently less likely to report feeling worried about the pandemic and to support public health restrictions on businesses and individuals. But arguably, this reflects the extent to which Americans’ views about gender roles have become intertwined with their partisan identity, according to Daniel Cox, director of AEI’s Survey Center on American Life and a FiveThirtyEight contributor. “Reaffirming that you are traditionally masculine is itself a political statement today — a way to push back on changes to the way society is organized,” he said.
But there is some evidence from the studies on COVID-19 and masculinity that identifying as more masculine or supporting conventional gender roles has had an independent effect on men’s response to the pandemic, separate from how they identify politically. In the AEI poll, too, Republican men who identified as completely masculine were somewhat more likely than less-masculine Republican men to approve of the way Trump has handled the pandemic, although the difference wasn’t necessarily all that huge (79 percent compared with 69 percent).
One possible explanation is that the threat of business closures or other restrictions on the economy may have been alarming especially to men who identify as completely masculine. “Because employment and working is so central to American masculinity, job loss is seen as a threat to masculinity,” said Emily Carian, a professor of sociology at California State University, San Bernardino. Data shows that women were actually more likely than men to lose their jobs as a result of the pandemic, but the very prospect of being unemployed may have been unsettling particularly to men who have stronger masculine identities, leading them to oppose limitations on how businesses operate.
Responses to the pandemic likely would have been different among different types of men and women even if Trump weren’t the president. And, of course, Trump’s response overall wasn’t very popular. But by actively seizing on the spread of COVID-19 as an opportunity to emphasize his own brand of hypermasculinity and portray his opponent as weak and ineffective, Trump may have crafted a tailor-made pitch for men whose own sense of masculinity was threatened by the pandemic.
[Do You Buy That … Suburban Voters Helped Biden?]
Those men may have actually appreciated Trump’s bravado in rejecting masks and repeatedly calling to reopen the economy over the objections of the public health community. In an experimental study conducted in 2016, Carian found that when men’s masculinity was threatened by the prospect of job loss, they were more likely to say they wanted a masculine president — and of the two candidates, Trump was perceived as more masculine. It’s possible that Trump may have managed to use the pandemic to create a similar impression among some voters this year, even though he wasn’t running against a woman. That’s because a male candidate like Biden could still be perceived as the less-masculine option, Carian said. Biden’s choice to wear a mask may have appeared masculine to some, but it was unlikely to resonate with men who were already more likely to see mask-wearing as a sign of weakness.
In other words, even though Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic was not a winning electoral strategy overall, it wasn’t uniformly unpopular. In fact, COVID-19 might partially explain why Trump managed to hang onto so many male supporters. It’s also an important reminder that as Biden enters office with a very different vision for how to address the pandemic, these are the very Americans who are among the likeliest to resent — or even resist — his strategy for getting the coronavirus under control.
Not all Americans can get a COVID-19 test when they want | FiveThirtyEight


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-09--Why The GOP Isn’t Able To Win The Popular Vote

In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew discusses how an incumbent president lost the 2020 election @ @ @ @ @ facing the Republican Party .
The team also checks in the state of the Senate @ @ @ @ @

In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew discusses how an incumbent president lost the 2020 election and considers the electoral challenges facing the Republican Party. The team also checks in the state of the Senate runoff elections in Georgia.
[Related: How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map]
How Trump’s pardons compare to other presidents | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast


fivethirthyeight--2020-12-09--How Black, Latino And Progressive Democrats Are Forcing Biden To Rethink His Cabinet Picks

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra , who has run the Justice Department for America ’ s largest state since 2017 , seemed like a logical candidate for a top job in the Biden administration .
His name cropped up in connection to one job in particular : U.S. Attorney General .
And in the days before and right after the election , media speculation about who Biden would tap to run the Department of Justice almost always included Becerra .
But over the last week , Becerra seemingly emerged out of nowhere as a potential candidate to run the Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in one of the more interesting and surprising choices for a top appointment made so far by President-elect Joe Biden and his team , Biden ultimately did choose Becerra as his nominee for secretary of HHS .
It ’ s one of Biden ’ s most important choices — Becerra will be running a department heavily involved in helping to manage the COVID-19 pandemic , including hopefully getting millions of Americans vaccinated over the next year .
How did Becerra end up at HHS ?
The gist , according to published reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexico Gov .
Michelle Lujan Grisham , a Latina , for the HHS job , but opted against her for reasons that aren ’ t totally clear .
Biden and his team then considered Rhode Island Gov .
Gina Raimondo , but progressives in the party criticized that potential choice , as they view Raimondo as too conservative .
And Latino Democratic leaders would probably have been annoyed if Biden not only didn ’ t choose Lujan Grisham , who they were pushing hard for HHS , but then chose Raimondo , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is Mexican American and had a fairly progressive record both during his days as a California congressman and as the state A.G. , emerged as an alternative that all sides could live with .
Ideological , racial and ethnic considerations and tensions are normal in the presidential transition and appointment process , particularly for Democrats , who are a much more racially diverse party than the GOP .
But the Biden team ’ s choices in navigating them tell us a lot about the current distribution of power within the party — or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advisers see it .
So far , based on Biden ’ s choices , three trends are clear .
• Both the Black establishment and the Latino establishment within the Democratic Party have real clout , able to essentially force Biden to pick some Black and Latino appointees for key posts and to block some people they don ’ t want .
• The progressive wing of the party doesn ’ t seem to have enough clout to get its people key jobs , but does have enough power to prevent Biden from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And other blocs in the Democratic Party , most notably anti-Trump Republicans or former Republicans who backed Biden , don ’ t have a lot of clout in the appointment process , at least so far .
( We should note that this article refers often to stories first broken by The American Prospect and Politico in particular , as both outlets have done stellar reporting on Biden ’ s transition process . )
Let me unpack those ideas a bit more , starting with the power of the Black and Latino establishments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is not clear that rank-and-file Black or Latino voters particularly care who Biden chooses for these top administration roles , or play a big role in this process .
It is also fairly clear that the people Biden and his team are really trying to placate are more center-left establishment Black and Latino elites in the party , such as Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina , rather than more left-wing Democrats who are also people of color , such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York .
So how is this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reportedly hesitant to name former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota , who is white , as his agriculture secretary , because the Congressional Black Caucus was pushing for its longtime member Rep. Marcia Fudge of Ohio .
( Fudge reportedly will be the nominee to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development . )
After naming white people as his nominees for two of what are considered the four most important Cabinet positions — Antony Blinken at State and Janet Yellen at Treasury — Biden was pushed strongly to choose a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the Pentagon .
Biden eventually chose retired Gen. Lloyd Austin , who is Black , to run the Defense Department .
Similar dynamics are evident among Latino Democrats .
Biden had already named Cuban-born Alejandro Mayorkas as his nominee for secretary of the Department of Homeland Security , and his aides were suggesting that DHS will play as important a role as the traditional “ big four ” ( Defense , Justice , State , Treasury ) .
But Latino leaders in the party were not placated by Mayorkas ’ s appointment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice .
Again , there ’ s nothing new or wrong or improper about racial and ethnic considerations playing a role in Cabinet appointments .
About 40 percent of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters are people of color — mostly Black ( around 20 percent ) and Latino ( 13 percent ) .
So it ’ s perfectly natural that those groups would want to be represented in the administration , since they played a big role in electing Biden .
Secondly , because Biden is white , and so are many in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ initial choices for key jobs are often other white people .
( We can ’ t be totally sure , since much of this process is happening behind closed doors . )
So while it looked like the CBC and Fudge were racializing the debate over the Department of Agriculture job , the racializing could have happened earlier , with Biden and his team initially viewing a fellow white person — Heitkamp — as the most logical person for the post and eventually settling on one-time Obama administration Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you could argue that many selection processes in America , in and outside of politics , are and have always been racialized but this is not acknowledged because picking white people is considered normal and disconnected from racial considerations .
In terms of the progressive left , virtually no one who was a prominent supporter of Sens .
Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren during the primaries has been appointed to a top job yet .
This suggests that the party ’ s progressive wing isn ’ t powerful enough to force Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something like one-third of Democratic voters align with Sanders or Warren .
That said , people who progressives have urged Biden not to appoint , such as Raimondo , also aren ’ t getting major jobs .
So progressives have enough clout to exercise something like a veto .
The best examples of this progressive veto are two people who served in senior roles in both the Clinton and Obama administrations , have been included in speculation for top Biden posts , but have yet to be chosen for anything : Rahm Emanuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s chief of staff in the Obama administration and a top adviser on his 2020 campaign .
I am sure the former vice president will eventually appoint him to some role .
But Reed was a major architect of the Democratic Party ’ s rightward shift in the 1980s and 90s — a shift that many on the left think was a mistake .
So the party ’ s left wing didn ’ t want Reed in a big job like chief of staff or head of the Office of Budget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t appoint him to either .
Emanuel also doesn ’ t seem likely to land a big-time role , despite having strong credentials on paper .
( He was a senior White House adviser under Clinton ; a Democratic congressman on the leadership team in the 2000s ; White House chief of staff under Obama ; and mayor of Chicago . )
But he is drawing criticism from both progressives and Black leaders .
He was involved in the party ’ s Clinton-era move right , and his administration in Chicago made unpopular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public schools in the city and at first refusing to release the video of the police killing of a Black 17-year-old named Laquan McDonald .
What about other blocs in the party ?
Some Asian Americans have been tapped for key jobs , most notably Neera Tanden ( Office of Management and Budget ) and Dr. Vivek Murthy ( surgeon general ) .
Both are Indian American .
But Asian-American Democrats , Jewish Democrats , lesbian , gay and transgender Democrats , Muslim Democrats and other fairly small blocs in the party haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone from getting a key job thus far , so we don ’ t know if they have the clout to veto someone .
We are , however , about to see a test of the power of Native American Democrats .
They are urging Biden to name Rep. Deb Haaland of New Mexico his nominee for secretary of the interior , which could make her the first-ever Native American Cabinet secretary .
Haaland is not a shoe-in for the job , in part because Biden ’ s team is wary of appointing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration , since both chambers are so closely divided between the two parties .
But Biden has chosen Rep. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana , who is Black , as a senior White House adviser and Fudge to run HUD .
So this is not a hard-and-fast rule .
Biden ’ s decision on Haaland will in some ways be a test of how willing he is to annoy Native American activists in the party .
And Haaland endorsed Warren during the Democratic primaries , so bypassing her for the Interior slot would likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slight at them .
Biden doesn ’ t seem to be that concerned about appointing former or current Republicans to top posts , and the “ Never Trump ” bloc in the party isn ’ t pushing him too hard for such appointments .
For example , both Clinton ( William Cohen ) and Obama ( Robert Gates , Chuck Hagel ) appointed people who had previously been aligned with the GOP to run the Defense Department at some point in their presidencies .
But it ’ s clear that Biden was much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to run the Pentagon than a Republican .
Anti-Trump Republicans aren ’ t as big a bloc in the party as Black people , Latinos or progressives ( they are around 10 percent , at most ) .
They don ’ t seem that organized to fight over Cabinet appointments .
And because the Senate is so closely divided and Biden may need Republicans to back some of his picks to get them confirmed , Biden is choosing more moderate figures for his cabinet anyway , so the “ Never Trump ” bloc @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking for it — a not-too-progressive Biden administration .
I think it is still very likely that Biden appoints a prominent conservative or two to some post — keep an eye on California businesswoman Meg Whitman , for example — but it ’ s not likely to be a very powerful one .
Biden ’ s choices for these positions are not determinative — Biden , not his staff , will make the most important decisions .
But these appointments reflect how the Democratic Party is shifting .
In the 1992-93 transition , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough Black people were getting top jobs in the Clinton administration .
In the 2008-09 transition , with Obama newly elected , Black representation wasn ’ t as big of a sticking point , but there was some debate about whether there were enough women in top roles .
Compared to 1992-93 and even 2008-09 , Latino and progressive Democrats have significantly more influence in the party , so they are making demands that they didn ’ t in previous transitions .
Black Democrats were arguably more instrumental in boosting Biden during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so they have outsized clout .
Meanwhile , white moderate women are firmly enmeshed in the party establishment , so Biden can and has already picked a number of white moderate women for key roles , so women ’ s groups in the party aren ’ t having to mobilize to get more women in key posts .
None of this is too surprising .
Remember , even before the election Biden had made a choice that illustrated how he saw power in the party : picking Sen. Kamala Harris as his running @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have criticized an all-white ticket ; women would have slammed an all-male ticket ; progressives would have been really mad if someone like the centrist Sen. Amy Klobuchar was chosen ; and Biden himself probably would have been uncomfortable with a very liberal person like Warren .
Harris was a consensus choice in an ideologically and racially diverse party .
And Xavier Becerra is a similar one .

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

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who has run the Justice Department for America’s largest state since 2017, seemed like a logical candidate for a top job in the Biden administration. His name cropped up in connection to one job in particular: U.S. Attorney General. And in the days before and right after the election, media speculation about who Biden would tap to run the Department of Justice almost always included Becerra.
[Related: What We’ve Learned About The Biden Administration From His Staffing Choices So Far]
But over the last week, Becerra seemingly emerged out of nowhere as a potential candidate to run the Department of Health and Human Services. Then, in one of the more interesting and surprising choices for a top appointment made so far by President-elect Joe Biden and his team, Biden ultimately did choose Becerra as his nominee for secretary of HHS. It’s one of Biden’s most important choices — Becerra will be running a department heavily involved in helping to manage the COVID-19 pandemic, including hopefully getting millions of Americans vaccinated over the next year.
Why did down-ballot Democrats have such a mediocre showing?
How did Becerra end up at HHS? The gist, according to published reports, is that Biden was considering New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Latina, for the HHS job, but opted against her for reasons that aren’t totally clear. Biden and his team then considered Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo, but progressives in the party criticized that potential choice, as they view Raimondo as too conservative. And Latino Democratic leaders would probably have been annoyed if Biden not only didn’t choose Lujan Grisham, who they were pushing hard for HHS, but then chose Raimondo, who is white. So Becerra, who is Mexican American and had a fairly progressive record both during his days as a California congressman and as the state A.G., emerged as an alternative that all sides could live with.
Ideological, racial and ethnic considerations and tensions are normal in the presidential transition and appointment process, particularly for Democrats, who are a much more racially diverse party than the GOP. But the Biden team’s choices in navigating them tell us a lot about the current distribution of power within the party — or at least how Biden and his top advisers see it. So far, based on Biden’s choices, three trends are clear.
Both the Black establishment and the Latino establishment within the Democratic Party have real clout, able to essentially force Biden to pick some Black and Latino appointees for key posts and to block some people they don’t want. The progressive wing of the party doesn’t seem to have enough clout to get its people key jobs, but does have enough power to prevent Biden from picking people they strenuously oppose. And other blocs in the Democratic Party, most notably anti-Trump Republicans or former Republicans who backed Biden, don’t have a lot of clout in the appointment process, at least so far. (We should note that this article refers often to stories first broken by The American Prospect and Politico in particular, as both outlets have done stellar reporting on Biden’s transition process.)
Let me unpack those ideas a bit more, starting with the power of the Black and Latino establishments.
I chose those words carefully. It is not clear that rank-and-file Black or Latino voters particularly care who Biden chooses for these top administration roles, or play a big role in this process. It is also fairly clear that the people Biden and his team are really trying to placate are more center-left establishment Black and Latino elites in the party, such as Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, rather than more left-wing Democrats who are also people of color, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
[How The 2020 Election Changed The Electoral Map]
So how is this playing out? Well, Biden was reportedly hesitant to name former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, who is white, as his agriculture secretary, because the Congressional Black Caucus was pushing for its longtime member Rep. Marcia Fudge of Ohio. (Fudge reportedly will be the nominee to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development.) After naming white people as his nominees for two of what are considered the four most important Cabinet positions — Antony Blinken at State and Janet Yellen at Treasury — Biden was pushed strongly to choose a Black person to run either the DOJ or the Pentagon. Biden eventually chose retired Gen. Lloyd Austin, who is Black, to run the Defense Department.
Similar dynamics are evident among Latino Democrats. Biden had already named Cuban-born Alejandro Mayorkas as his nominee for secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and his aides were suggesting that DHS will play as important a role as the traditional “big four” (Defense, Justice, State, Treasury). But Latino leaders in the party were not placated by Mayorkas’s appointment alone, helping lead to the Becerra choice.
Again, there’s nothing new or wrong or improper about racial and ethnic considerations playing a role in Cabinet appointments. About 40 percent of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters are people of color — mostly Black (around 20 percent) and Latino (13 percent). So it’s perfectly natural that those groups would want to be represented in the administration, since they played a big role in electing Biden. Secondly, because Biden is white, and so are many in his political circle, it appears that his initial choices for key jobs are often other white people. (We can’t be totally sure, since much of this process is happening behind closed doors.) So while it looked like the CBC and Fudge were racializing the debate over the Department of Agriculture job, the racializing could have happened earlier, with Biden and his team initially viewing a fellow white person — Heitkamp — as the most logical person for the post and eventually settling on one-time Obama administration Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who is also white. In fact, you could argue that many selection processes in America, in and outside of politics, are and have always been racialized but this is not acknowledged because picking white people is considered normal and disconnected from racial considerations.
In terms of the progressive left, virtually no one who was a prominent supporter of Sens. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren during the primaries has been appointed to a top job yet. This suggests that the party’s progressive wing isn’t powerful enough to force Biden to choose its people, even though something like one-third of Democratic voters align with Sanders or Warren.
That said, people who progressives have urged Biden not to appoint, such as Raimondo, also aren’t getting major jobs. So progressives have enough clout to exercise something like a veto.
The best examples of this progressive veto are two people who served in senior roles in both the Clinton and Obama administrations, have been included in speculation for top Biden posts, but have yet to be chosen for anything: Rahm Emanuel and Bruce Reed. Reed served as Biden’s chief of staff in the Obama administration and a top adviser on his 2020 campaign. I am sure the former vice president will eventually appoint him to some role. But Reed was a major architect of the Democratic Party’s rightward shift in the 1980s and 90s — a shift that many on the left think was a mistake. So the party’s left wing didn’t want Reed in a big job like chief of staff or head of the Office of Budget and Management, and Biden didn’t appoint him to either.
The electoral problems facing Republicans | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
Emanuel also doesn’t seem likely to land a big-time role, despite having strong credentials on paper. (He was a senior White House adviser under Clinton; a Democratic congressman on the leadership team in the 2000s; White House chief of staff under Obama; and mayor of Chicago.) But he is drawing criticism from both progressives and Black leaders. He was involved in the party’s Clinton-era move right, and his administration in Chicago made unpopular decisions such as closing dozens of majority-Black public schools in the city and at first refusing to release the video of the police killing of a Black 17-year-old named Laquan McDonald.
What about other blocs in the party? Some Asian Americans have been tapped for key jobs, most notably Neera Tanden (Office of Management and Budget) and Dr. Vivek Murthy (surgeon general). Both are Indian American. But Asian-American Democrats, Jewish Democrats, lesbian, gay and transgender Democrats, Muslim Democrats and other fairly small blocs in the party haven’t mobilized to try to stop anyone from getting a key job thus far, so we don’t know if they have the clout to veto someone.
[5 Ways Biden Might Differ From — Or Agree With — Trump On Technology]
We are, however, about to see a test of the power of Native American Democrats. They are urging Biden to name Rep. Deb Haaland of New Mexico his nominee for secretary of the interior, which could make her the first-ever Native American Cabinet secretary. Haaland is not a shoo-in for the job, in part because Biden’s team is wary of appointing current Democratic members of Congress to the administration, since both chambers are so closely divided between the two parties.
But Biden has chosen Rep. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, who is Black, as a senior White House adviser and Fudge to run HUD. So this is not a hard-and-fast rule. Biden’s decision on Haaland will in some ways be a test of how willing he is to annoy Native American activists in the party. And Haaland endorsed Warren during the Democratic primaries, so bypassing her for the Interior slot would likely be interpreted by the progressives as another slight at them.
Biden doesn’t seem to be that concerned about appointing former or current Republicans to top posts, and the “Never Trump” bloc in the party isn’t pushing him too hard for such appointments. For example, both Clinton (William Cohen) and Obama (Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel) appointed people who had previously been aligned with the GOP to run the Defense Department at some point in their presidencies. But it’s clear that Biden was much more focused on finding a Black person to run the Pentagon than a Republican. Anti-Trump Republicans aren’t as big a bloc in the party as Black people, Latinos or progressives (they are around 10 percent, at most). They don’t seem that organized to fight over Cabinet appointments. And because the Senate is so closely divided and Biden may need Republicans to back some of his picks to get them confirmed, Biden is choosing more moderate figures for his cabinet anyway, so the “Never Trump” bloc is getting what it wants without really asking for it — a not-too-progressive Biden administration.
I think it is still very likely that Biden appoints a prominent conservative or two to some post — keep an eye on California businesswoman Meg Whitman, for example — but it’s not likely to be a very powerful one.
Biden’s choices for these positions are not determinative — Biden, not his staff, will make the most important decisions. But these appointments reflect how the Democratic Party is shifting. In the 1992-93 transition, there was a big debate about whether enough Black people were getting top jobs in the Clinton administration. In the 2008-09 transition, with Obama newly elected, Black representation wasn’t as big of a sticking point, but there was some debate about whether there were enough women in top roles.
Compared to 1992-93 and even 2008-09, Latino and progressive Democrats have significantly more influence in the party, so they are making demands that they didn’t in previous transitions. Black Democrats were arguably more instrumental in boosting Biden during the Democratic primaries than Obama in 2008, so they have outsized clout. Meanwhile, white moderate women are firmly enmeshed in the party establishment, so Biden can and has already picked a number of white moderate women for key roles, so women’s groups in the party aren’t having to mobilize to get more women in key posts.
[Related: Do You Buy That … Suburban Voters Helped Biden?]
None of this is too surprising. Remember, even before the election Biden had made a choice that illustrated how he saw power in the party: picking Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate. Black and Latino Democrats would have criticized an all-white ticket; women would have slammed an all-male ticket; progressives would have been really mad if someone like the centrist Sen. Amy Klobuchar was chosen; and Biden himself probably would have been uncomfortable with a very liberal person like Warren. Harris was a consensus choice in an ideologically and racially diverse party. And Xavier Becerra is a similar one.
Don’t believe anything 2020 exit polls tell you | FiveThirtyEight