I have to stipulate for the sake of this package that I'm high on cold medicine right now, looking back to like the common cold, literally a cold open, yeah, hello, and welcome to the five three politics plied cast Iron Galen, droop first world. Thanks to my for filling in for me last week, I was vacation. Now I'm a little sick, so bear with me if I'm a little raspy today, but anyway last week. over a hundred Republicans signed a letter threatening to split from the republican Party. If the party does not make changes, this change. Largely having to do with breaking with trumpet the list included.

Former elected officials, like former Virginia representative, Barbara Comstock, form an adjoining governor, Christine TAT, women and other outspoken critics of President Trump as we on this planet cast a viable third parties seems like a stretch, but today we're going to talk about what would actually have to happen for the GEO p to split and have a third party emerged in american politics. So not will this effort work as much as what we have to happen in order for any effort towards then later on. In the shower signs team is gonna joined to discuss the CDC new guidance that vaccinated people, dont need to wear, masks or socially distance endorse. The cdc doesn't sought the law, of course, so that guidance will interact with politics and perceptions of the CDC that have evolved over the past year and a half

also take a look at how that's a nation efforts are going and how Americans are thinking about the risks of the corona virus at this point in the pandemic and we're gonna ask our favorite question goodies and pulling or bad use of pulling. So, let's get to it here with me. Are politics? Editors are frost since and Color Sarah aching welcome back. Thank you. Thank you also at us as elections, analysed Jeffrey Scully, hey just a game Welcome back, thank you, but you know I feel it getting just a common chest. Cold is true returned to normal sea, but also being on vacation. I left the country for the first time since the pandemic, so it was very interesting and very normal. Feeling too, like the pact J, F, K, airport we went to Mexico is lovely, beautiful country, etc, and on that topic, transparency sake make. I did a lot of the practice for today's pod Caspian,

I was still on vacation over the weekend and he left us with two options for good use of falling or bad use of pulling, both of which we heard from listeners about the first one was a: U Gov, Paw about the ant. Does that Americans feel most like they could take on in a fight? The second was a conclusion from a tree group of pollsters that the pulling error in the twenty twenty election was the worst in forty years. I still have occasion brain so we are going to tackle the first use of pulling today and then maybe another day we'll talk about that trigger preposterous and their conclusions about pulling and twenty twenty south. Let's get her Sir Jeff areas ready for this good use, our bad use of pulling let's die. Then Yeltsin, Ok, so you go asked Americans which animals they thought they could be in a fight if they were unarmed, broke out their responses by men and women.

Kinds of animals they asked Americans about were grizzly, bear, Lion Elephant Guerrilla Crocodile Wolf Kangaroo Chimpanzee King COBRA, large dog, Eagle, Medium sized dog, goose house, tat rat that actually goes in order from the animals. The Americans, these comfortable beating in a fight to most comfortable beating and fight, and so they all this data and the concrete they headline the survey web was compared to women, men feel most able to take on medium sized dogs and geeks at the numbers a company that conclusion are when it comes to beating a medium sized dog in a fight. Thirty, percent of women felt comfortable that they could beat a medium sized dog and sixty percent of men and then, when it came to a goose fifty one percent of women seventy one percent of men. So is this good use of pulling or bad use of pulling in the sensibly

What does this tell us? Does this tell us something substantive other than being click me? It tells us that women have a better sense of how bad geese are. So now I'd have to say good use, appalling, geese or vile creatures, and I think this pole captures that women are a lot more realistic about what a goose encounter would entail. we fly shot out you're saying that, like a human being cut actually take on a goose, unarmed and win. and are more level headed about. That fact, that's exactly what I am saying: Geese Agitated that as a no good situation, they go after they fight, they would go after your ankles. I think it would be more of a a flight, not fight situate, and I think this poor capture is that women are more realistically coming to terms with that than men. I would see broadly that this is a good use of pulling for showing that there are a lot of men with

really unrealistic expectations about their fighting ability, and I say that because even like twenty three percent said they could fight a king cobra. How are you fighting Crowborough when it's like snapping super fast? You know inviting you, I think, there's two parts of this one, Is that some of these answers surely are a little ingest like us, a small number of them. You always get like three per cent of people saying something ridiculous and hard to know just how serious they are. So case. It's like well, you know, for a Grizzly Bear Lion elephant guerrilla crocodile. Yet two percent or fewer people saying yeah ran men and women really agree on were not really gonna fight those, so I think Many people are saying yes, decimated. Small number are being a little and serious with this question. is also a somewhat and serious question to be frank with you sorry to see this gender gap girl- and I do think it says something about men.

Having a super super unrealistic expectations about their fighting ability. I mean I would say personally that I think a rat in a house cat The only thing on this list that I would we think about answered. Yes, you do. Are mean, as hell mediums His dogs are practically like small, wolves and sixteen percent of men said yes to a wolf, and sixty percent said yes to medium sized dog, like dogs have teeth to bite the hell out of you, it's just crazy. So as you suggested, the extreme and men and women mostly agree so like when it comes for House TAT, a rat most men and women are not that far apart on their feeling, vacant both beat them, and the same goes for you know like a grizzly bear in a lion. Many women generally don't feel like they can beat one of those animals. It's the no part where we get a lot of division, and I guess my question here is a lot of the commentary on the internet that are catching up on this morning was like

Well, like men, just don't really understand how dangerous geese are, but why this question getting at? We liked to be specific when it comes to Poland, about the question being asked, and is it do you think you could beat in a fight? If you were on our so is this situation where, like one the two animals is dying. It's either you or the goose because, like if your true, we confer and with the idea that a goose is gonna, kill you? I don't know that I would say that I'm just gonna lay down and let a goose kill me like what this question actually asking, because they use These are mean but like what, if you decide to be mean back, I can factored in death like to give an example here personally very sad, not see a jackal listed on this survey as when I was once camping in South Africa. May my tent mate huge animal, enthuse have gone down to the watering hole left open, the tent flap and a jackal came in and I kicked it.

So I say I won that fight, because the Jackal left impotent did not die to be clear, but I won the fight. I don't think I could be the goose, though so I mean like the death question, raises interesting galen, but if it's just like carving out your space, your territory, like Sarah, defeated the Jackal Sir, I'm not going to defeat a goose, but that's because the videos that you see of geese fight on line are videos where the goose is being the aggressor and a human just trying to get away from the situation. But if in a situation where it's like a goose, inhuman, you are both fighting each other. I do like you might be able to speak, sounds like women are under estimating their abilities in that situation most men are overestimating our abilities because gives encounters you're. Just like get me away from this agitated goose, that's trying to protect its kids or whatever, not like ok, you're, fighting vergoose, ok, maybe maybe a human can take on a goose. Maybe maybe I don't know about the specifics on

goose feet, but I could imagine that those could hurt when their flapping around by you and attacking, but the rest of these creatures above goose in terms of danger. They provocateur I'll, kill you without too struggle leg. An eagle, a large at all levels have like serious towns. The rip you are wanting excited about the beak cyclist. Terrio part. You no interest we should have invited on an animal expert actually for the maintenance, and now there is a great lake murders story. Awhile ago is like an was an owl involved like birds and their talents, serious thing deadness around. So, we have any animal exports. Listening, please bills two way and on those goose question, I am genuinely curious so majorities of both men and women say they could take on a goose it's fifty one percent of men and seventy one percent of man. I feel like that.

nine percent of women or whatever it was out of their any undecided than this pole. Might these short selling themselves, as opposed to the car take. That was like men are too confident that they can take on a goose by. Let's maybe ask the other question here, which is in the good use, appalling or bad user pulling universe do these seemingly silly you surveys actually teach us interesting stuff about humans. Or is this just click me and if so, what kinds of extra they teach us? And I do think that this all, is a weirdly good use appalling. I think a lot of these types of poles would normally would not fall into that category. But for me it system like an amusing reminder of men overestimating themselves and frankly, as a fellow man, I'm just like allowed by the people Who would have the thirty eight percent who say they could beat an eagle yeah, like maybe a handful of people responding? Yes, this question were doing a sort of deliberately, but I feel sick

as you said yes seriously, and that's just I think telling is like now you're you're not taking an eagle on. Maybe you don't realize how big eagles oh yeah is a deficiency of knowledge of animals. Maybe that's an aspect of this is just not. Full understanding is like? Oh, I get it. A grizzly bear super dangerous, a very few people to say yes to this, but Oh, I can take on a wolf. Sixty percent of men, said they could take on a wolf like if human meets a wolf on armed in them that's experience can be because of it actually tax. You there's no way to defend yourself successfully, grab a big stick for these kind of fools. I normally and more of a wet blanket where I'm like. What is this actually telling me, and I kind of do feel like that about this That said, though, I mean what is it trying to capture in particular as it is. placing it by how women and men responded, is gender gaps, and that often

in and of itself in more traditional polling, can yield an where people are necessarily tuning into it like this is a cross section that appeal to all different corners of the internet. So if it does speak to false mail, bravado or over confidence, and in a way that, outside of the normal circles that would talk about this could be supporting Verna? What kinds of non political questions would you like to see? Pollsters ask Americans to get a sense of divides nuances or whatever in american culture like. If you could design. Your own survey put it to Americans. Maybe something is silly. Is this? What would you ask them minds that silly, on the men, women gender gap thing I thought the times recently. They did a really good one, unlike what you think household chores like either, whose doing then, how long you

the task with take because, again like it, exposed a lot of real gender divides where, like men, just didn't factor the amount of time it took to make like a grocery list or something and so bright. I think this is a much more fun way to show that two people and steal something that political science his lips fabric did for the times back in the primaries. I thought was really cool. Was they asked voters what their preference was for food like indian food or chinese food and italian food. What they were trying to do is use that as a proxy for suburban educated elite, which can often be amorphous and hard to define from Sir Radiation they and it was concentrated in Iowa and some of the other early stage? So again it was supposed to be now here we are in a state that may be doesn't have a huge indian population in the. Wes and what percentage was in their familiar

the indian food or liked indian food, was Sanders and worn supporters, whereas, like Biden, supporters were towards the bottom for that for the democratic primary again, that kind of a proxy to show political beliefs and where they fall in the act. I'm stratum so there you know like that. You got Paul. I think there are ways to kind of asked questions that dont prying people politically, as we expect that can still show either gender perhaps were political preferences that are masked, maybe there that's interesting, ok, suit me, we can be on the lookout for some less obviously, political questions that might tell us something about America in our good use, applying or bad use. Appoint segments like this one, but let's move on and talk about the possibility of a third party in the? U S, but first today's podcast is brought to bear better help life is full of stressors. It doesn't matter who you are. Your life is probably stressful. You may not be

going down and out or depressed, but if your stress hi your temper? A shorter than usual revenue starting to feel strain in any of your relationships. You could probably use that to unload, better help is caused. eyes online therapy that offers videophone and even live chat sessions with your fair pest Ciera, see anyone on camera, if you don't want to its much more affordable than person therapy and you can start communicating with their therapist in under forty eight hours unload. stressors and get some unbiased feedback you'd be pretty surprised at what you might gain from it see if it's four year commercial support for the five thirty politics podcast is by better health, and our listeners get ten percent of their first month at better help. Dot com, slash five, three eight! The number is not the letters. That's better help b e t, T r, HD, lp dot com, slash five, three eight, as I mentioned at the top, a group of Republicans launched an effort. Last we called

call for american renewal and they lay out thirteen principles like democracy, constitutional order, truth, pluralism, free speech, the rule of law, and they wrote that nations future should not be dictated by a single person, but by principles that bind us together. That's why we believe in pushing for the Republican Party to re dedicated, of two founding ideals, or else he's in the creation of an alternative. So, essentially, in the wake of house Republicans ousting the change from leadership. Last week there saying listen to our priorities and our vision for a republican Party or we're going to create a third party. We ve taught on the spot, cast in the past about how that part of the Republican Party, the part of the public and party that is behind this letter. This initiative may not be particularly large ads, clear whether or not they could successfully form of a third party, given that that's their threat, but in

this segment today I want to be a little more abstract, maybe a little more political science and talk about what conditions would be required for an actual break in the Republican Party to happen and for a third party to a march. So let's lay the groundwork here. Jim what do you think we'd have to see in terms of how voters are identifying or what their views of the parties are in order to create a real division that could plausibly create a third party. I think a starting place for a third party movement to have any sort of legs is just a simple, strong dissatisfaction with the two parties. Now, on the face of it, you would think we have that you see numbers and poles from like galloped. It's been tracking it four years of the percentage of people who say we need a third

already is reasonably high by if you actually look at the favour Billowy Democrats had for the Democratic Party and Republicans have towards the Republican Party and the people who lean towards either party, so most people at dinner. If I was one part of the other one where or another, even if they initially dignified independent, most people have a favourable, of their own party, and I think you would need that number to drop a lot. You would need a much larger segment of say the GNP in June. leaders to say I'm not happy with the current above the party and to see something level received from some eighty Trump Republicans right now to have any any legs and the same would go for maybe it broader, like centrist or conservative pro democratic, small tea party or something to get off the ground

frank support. I beg you just need to see more dissatisfaction with the state of the parties from the people within those parties themselves. So, where is the satisfaction level now, and what do you think of any to be an irish something couple months ago? about this, and it was like the seventy is around. Eighty percent of Republicans had a fair review. The republican party I mean did those numbers are gonna vary from Poland Paul, but the point is it's like. I think you would need to see that number a lot lower in order to actually have people entertain the idea of voting for another party and basically for there to be an of juice at the grass roots for people who want to create some sort of third party option to find people willing to take the time put in the energy to organise and fun raise for that vehicle. This is another real big challenge, or is the organisation of a third party movement top down It is nice and all, but you need to find people, just

voters are gonna, actually back your movement and that's really the problem for being trump organs. Is there's not a lot of people out there so in a more broad sense, thereby move. It needs those kinds of voters to flock to there. I guess you'd, say yeah and if you were getting it at the outset, there Galen. You know this is something that little cool science has tried to figure eyes for a while here and from what I can tell there's two steps for when the parties could possibly splinter the first. is a major issue that slightly to divide the country along geographic and ideological lines, to big examples, and when the parties, in one case split in the other case, there was a realignment, the first being the civil war. The whigs per at that point were divided on slavery, tried not to take a stance on it with the Kansas Nebraska ACT, which allowed new states in territories, decide whether they would be slaver for free, so a compromise, but then that pitted nor in southern wigs against each other

and so created a space, for the Republican Party to emerge second, you know in the nineteen sixties, we talk about the urban rural, sorting that we now see in the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, and that came out of pro civil rights legislation pushed by the Democratic Party and southern Democrats abandoning mad, as they had largely been pro segregation and moving into the republican Party. So again, I think what we see in history, at least in the? U S is a really divisive issue that needs to also then have geographical splits, and I think, right now, we do see in our politics. The two big divides are education level, and then urban rural, I think, was miss sing right now in terms of. Why isn't this, like third party fracture is Trump himself doesn't seem to be enough of an issue a third party, and so I think you really need. Maybe it's something about the economy, but one point we refer

In over silver and gold, maybe there's something now with economic populism that takes off. But at this point I think that's the peace that seems to be missing, and you say that it has to be a geographic split, which I think that's in some ways. The fact that we have winner takes all elections right, like winning thirty percent of the vote across a bunch of different districts or states, doesn't get you anything. You actually have to have some sort of concentrated support in certain discreet districts or states, or whatever it actually start gaining power and representation in Congress or at the executive level, as state governors or the president. How much of-

What's preventing a third party is systemic based on the american political system, verses. We don't actually have the diversity of opinion that would require a third party in America, because enough people are happy with the two parties right will, as you pointed out, given the winning thirty percent, doesn't really get you very much use politics in us, because most elections United States operate on one or take all in the sense that if you do have a third party and they went like twenty eight percent or something you don't get anything out of that, you know

country that has a proportional representation system. He would get seeds from that, but we don't have that in the? U S. Generally speaking, so it's not possible, especially at the federal level. In particular. Another thing that we have to keep in mind is not only does that situation just in general elections push towards two big tent parties. We also have the electoral college, and this is something that most other countries do not have Today, at least as this indirect electoral system, where too, when you, four votes and basically every state outside Nebraska made when all them you just have to have the most votes, and so

That's just like another force on top of just our baseline winner takes all just dinner, had had election set up. That makes it even harder for third parties develop, because the incentive to coalesce into two large groups you give yourself the best chance of winning is exacerbated or magnified by the electoral college being there as well as obviously one when the presidency is the most important office in terms of power, and it's obviously the one that gets the most attention. You, Sir reason we have the highest. Voter turnout presidential election. So those are systemic factors that make it really tough. I think Jeffreys right. There are a lot of long standing reasons for why, even when there have been political realignments, why we end up with two parties. Again, you know a period of many were sorting out the. U s returns to the two party system. That said, though, you can.

Imagine a very strong personality, so say Trump running again and twenty twenty four doesn't mean he would win under a third party banner, but that could happen right. It's happened before President Theodore Roosevelt at that back and then One thousand eight hundred, you could also imagine it around an issue. I'd mentioned economic populism earlier, but what about racial justice? We saw in the way that protests and the summer really captured a slice of the american population it hadn't before. If that remains pressing issue to the parties divide along that way. Is there a third party that emerges in that gap? Theirs of reasons for why that doesn't make sense further reasons Jeffrey outlined, but I still think the right issue and the two parties failing to take an authoritative stance on it, could create the right opportunity for a third party, because it happened before its ongoing ends. Up happening is a third party jobs created

what that really leads to is a realignment where again, we just get to parties. What would in today's environment that third parties platform be used suggested some possibilities. It looks like in this case, where the call for american renewal, it's something of maybe a George W Bush Republican Party with a little more talk about welfare, and things like that is that where a third party could potentially emerge that shakes things up, what is the gap where people are finding? What they want with the two parties in this moment, but I see it as a kind of a disconnect you're right that that never tramper if ye well, is kind of what is seen as dissatisfied right now and the Republican Party, and I dont think that matches up to where there is pressure, dissatisfaction among Democrats, for instance,

even though the number of Democrats who are liberal, has been increasing astronomically in the last decade, over half of democratic, borders either identifies moderate or conservative, and so you could. a world in which a more centrist, Canada, if they survive. Our primary system does emerge and tries to make a big umbrella camp that appeals to both some the moderate republican voters and some of them democratic voters. The problem is Cheney and some of her support Matters are not moderates, and so I do think while we have seen some economic populism crossover, for instance, I'm thinking about the twenty. Sixteen primary in granite was only twelve. percent of Sanders supporters, but still twelve percent backed Trump and the general election. That says to me that there is something there about economic populism. I do not see it on the fiscal conservative axis, though

don't know what that coalition looks like, and that's why. I think, when we talk about this, it's hard to see how the never tramper group gains enough of a robust body to form a third party. I think this is another place where it is difficult to see the path for earlier, a third party to develop because I'm not really sure that gap between the Democrats in Falcons trill exists in the sense of there being a very large percentage of people there. I just don't know if that's really true, there was a peace that we drop Monroe for five thirty, eight twenty nineteen, where he looked at people's partisan identity, how they affiliated, but then also their ideology, and it turned out that there wasn't necessarily a ton of overlap between people who might say they were independent and them saying they were ideologically moderate and other studies have shown but you know you might have someone who works out on average to be ideologically moderate, but it turns out, they have very left. Views on certain things, very right wing views and something else, and so in terms of actually appealing to.

a large swathes of the public, to make a third party realistic. That's just another challenge and again I'm not really sure at the moment there exists an issue where you could grab hold it. That of service talk about like you might need one or two really big issues: the sort of break up, are the norm right now, but I dont know what that actually would would be. I would say that like in the absence of, We are seeing a political realignment of sorts in the sense that right now, white voters without a college degree they vote Republican, that true as recent as the two thousands that kind of shift has happened, and I think it's real hard about realignment and wide. So controversial is cause. It happens racially- it doesn't happen overnight in others, this will be something were studying fifty years from now to kind of understand how the parties sort and Wilson

Two and twenty twenty two, you know: do the suburbs continue to be good fertile ground for Democrats, that would be one point in favour: every enlightenment or if they flew back to Republicans, maybe everything I've told you is. untrue. You know it's just it's always like given pool, and it happens very slowly. Yeah we're talking about the conditions that would be necessary, so maybe blue sky for a minute. What's something that What happened in american politics that would allow a viable third party to be created. Would it just mean that, like the Democratic Party has to move further left to place them, thought might be out of the mainstream in a way that Trump took aspects of the Republican Party. What could create an environment where a third party is created? My thighs

You would need to have some outside issue that the two parties are not seen is adequately or even remotely adequately addressing that is causing like a crisis of sorts. The populace in the late nineteenth century really broke open because farmers were struggling at the MID west in West. There are multiple economic this is in the late nineteenth century that happened and there was a push to basic, bring sovereign as a form of species. Currency use gold tat was like everything is based on the gold standard, but wanted silver to be an option for exchange, so that things were his reliant on board because it was killing. Farmers will have to pay off debts and Survivors Party, really blows up, really gains ground in parts of the country and so you have a moment. There is one of the two and a half party system, but eventually got swallowed up by the Democrats, or at least the anti gold standard view and William Jennings Brine in eighteen, eighty six election so

I think it's. That kind of thing were the two parties are not a nation. Not seen as addressing it at all. That would maybe The issue, maybe there's something in technology since that obviously something where it s going to enforce. allies going forward, maybe something with social media having that sounds crazy, but some technological thing that I can't name yet deck prompt some sort of breakage with what the current system is. Yeah, it's hard for me not to see a cleavage along economic lines previous getting at their. I do think there is some overlap and were ripe for that. I also think, though you know looking at them, last two times american parties splintered. It was on shall issue right is on the question of slavery and it was on the question of civil rights. You could see a third race issue here, maybe now its police brutality. You know it could be something I'm not thinking of, but how the two parties, continue to sort along those lines? One thing we ve seen, for instance, from the twenty twond

election was yes Trump made. You know marginal gains with hispanic and black voters, but when you look at how they voted and thought about, race was actually very similar to some of the White bird without a college degree and so that sorting along class lines does that continue. How does race play into that? The left seen as you were saying at the top there Galen going too far on some issues is that causes can stir sort along those lines, I think it really will take a egg flashpoint. you more so than this overall, like culture war that were kind of in at the moment. I think that leads to minor atrophied, and realignment, but for the waters said moment. You need, I think, a big issue and mexican history is any indication. I think there is a good chance that does fall Longo racial line or a wall. That sounds like a good place to leave things and

some, our science team is going to be joining me. So Sarah and Geoffrey thanks so much for joining the pot today, and that was a good discussion thanks Galen thanks Let's discuss the latest cdc guidance on masking and social distancing indoors for vaccinated people, but first today's podcast is brought to you by rumble on dot com. Do you have a motorcycle, ATV, or even a truck that sitting in your garage that you ve been waiting to sell with rumble on dot com. You can either turn. Your unused vehicle into cash in merit rumble on dot com will give you a cash offer for your vehicle and pick it up for free anytime anywhere they can even financer next Harley Polaris Yamaha and even more, if you're, just looking to upgrade, see what rumble on can do for you by visiting rumble on dot com that are you and be out. E o and dot com fast breaks, faster cash. Today's podcasting,

brought you by another five: thirty, eight podcast hot takedown, each Tuesday check out five. Thirty eight sports podcast hot takedown, where the hot takes up the sports world meet the numbers that proved them right or terror. down the crew digs into fiery opinions from the week in sports and measures them according to the analytics behind the issue. They end each week show by having into a rabbit whole data from the strangest fifty point games in the NBA to the ever larger gullies of the end H out, don't mess hot takedown available every Tuesday. Wherever you find, your pot casts. last Thursday, the CDC updated its guidelines, saying that quote fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a mask or physically distance in any setting at quite so of course, that also means indoors, and that was they originally published guidelines for vaccinated people, saying they should continue wearing mass inside we're gunshot wound,

This intersects with politics and public opinion, and share with me to do that is senior science writer, Maggie Kurth, hello, Maggie and welcome. I, and also with us, is the host of Pakistan, eighteen and science journalist Anna Rothschild hello, and welcome to the past thinking thanks for having me thanks for being here and listeners, have heard this from me plenty, but if any one other still doesn't listen to pack has nineteen certainly go subscribe, where ever you listen to your pot casts. So first and foremost, why did the CDC make this change that I came somewhat as a surprise to a lot of people have been watching the news coming out The CDC urges watching news generally, I'm not that it's a surprise, because it's not in line with the science, but just in surprise, in the sense that didn't expect to see the sea to make. This call at this moment then a surprise, also in that the CDC gave no one, no warning that this was come kings.

Was that element of it also right. So there is science that backs up the cities the decision? We have very good. and now that our vaccines prevent infection and prevent asymptomatic infection and also prevent transmission? There was this one? study done in the? U S among close to four thousand healthcare workers where they compared healthcare. Workers who'd been vaccinated with an emigrant vaccine to those who had not been vaccinated yet at all, and the ones who had been vaccinated were ninety percent less likely to test positive for covered in weekly screenings that they were getting. So the evidence is really Would the vaccination works and it's really effective, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the way the CDC did it or the timing of it makes a ton of sense or what other people have done with it, since he afraid libraries that level of Yad there was really good scientific,

evidence for why the CDC would do this, but there is not really good Scientific evidence for instance, why my Data Minnesota is now having no masking mandates whatsoever endorse. Like there's like this, extrapolation between what the CDC sad and these political moves that aren't as evidence, based as what the CDC was saying. But we're done because of what the easy said. Morgan me Mary. So this is guidance for people who are vaccinated, bite the necessarily mean it should be applied to all people vaccinated or non vaccinated, and there are still enough people not vaccinated that they would questioner ain't. It move right the CDC as saying that you as an impact needed individual, can oh inside the building, without your mask on and the chances of you can try.

The virus spreading. The virus are so low that you can just basically go back to normal and like live your life, but as a population we don't have enough. People believe that, needed that it makes good sense for us to be just telling everyone as a whole, hey go out there and start living your life like normal, don't wear, masks inside that's fine! Those are too completely separate things, but they ve been conflated politically largely just because there's no way to actually like do what the CDC said as a political move, wiser well, because what you gonna do even like czech people There's no federal vaccine database like no one actually knows whether you been vaccinated or not, and theirs, but what a clean, socially economic

quickly functionally in terms of what we have the infrastructure, for? There is literally no way that anyone is ever going to do some kind of vaccine passport system in the United States, so really Only options are slipping. switch honour, flipping it off and a bunch of governors looked at what the city saddened flip light switch on. I think that in an eye deal world the seed. he's guidance makes a lot of sense, but we don't live an ideal world where everyone is following the letter of the law perfectly and in this case is not even a lives, just the red men. Do you think it's out there I mean we ve already had a lot of trouble, getting people to comply with mask mandate when they exist, and I that a lot of people and a lot of quality We have seen this as an incentive to just lift mask mandates which are hard to enforce anyway and just throw caution the wind and say: ok, you're on your own, make the best traces for yourself. You mentioned a couple aspects that are at play here, which is

the political reality on the ground, the science itself that the CDC is working well. What about public opinion here, it seems like part of this- might just be a response to ok. It's been sixteen months p. well done, like is: does the data back that up their data does back that we're still but these big partisan divides between who is most comfortable returning to their normal routine. Like I mean there's, I think a like twenty point spread between begins and Democrats, but even among Democrats, forty nine, percent of them, as of May first, are comfortable returning to their normal routine. That's extremely high! That's gone up a time and most of that changes happened just since February. So there is no, finally, I think the sense of the vaccine is out there I'm getting.

Exceeded I'm gonna go to normal and lived my life again and again in That should be fine, except that there are these large swathes of the population who are not yet backdated and when We talk about that. We're not just talking about Anti boxers, no we're not all I mean there are thirty million american adults who are open to getting. A Cronan varies vaccine, who have not actually manage to do that. Yet there was a big story times a couple of weeks ago that was looking at this data and That's a lot of people and the majority of them are coming from households with incomes of less than fifty thousand dollars a year, and that makes complete an utter sounds to me like if you look at how Maxine roll out have been set up,

I am most familiar with what happened in Minnesota: what's been going on in Minnesota, and what we had here initially was that like, if you didn't, have high speed internet and the ability to sit at home all day at random times, is refreshing. Five or six different websites trying to find out where the next scheduled appointments were available. You had basically no chance of getting a vaccine for a month. At least it was like that and it's starting to get down to the point. That's easier to access, but it's still a thing. We're, like you, have to take the time out of your data, be able to go and show up somewhere the scheduled time and not everybody. as the ability to do that that something that is easiest if you are working a white collar job, if you have the ability to take time off, if you have the ability to oh, that your evenings are free, if you don't have all of this cognitive lodestar,

on your life. That makes it harder to jump in. Make a change in your schedule and yet The thing is many of these people also canker time off work if they actually experience any side effects of getting the vaccines, wondering was really sort of striking to me from the New York Times. Article was that they looked at the disparity between vaccination rates, young people who were low and high on what's called the social vulnerability index. Basically, it's this measure of how well community can bounced back after a disaster. So in the past we used to think of it as lake and natural disasters, the hurricane now were sort of using it for covert and a measure stuff like that, how much power DE there is in particular, community access to transportation. Things like that and basically higher you are on the social vulnerability index, the lower chances of being vaccinated and parties only getting wider as time goes on. How does the? U S go about?

negotiating this question, because we know that Not everyone in the United States is going to be vaccinated because people by and large are going to be forced to be vaccinated so, to a certain extent, some people want you back to me, because I don't want you and maybe, as part of our souls contract were ok we're going back to normal, even when those people I'm vaccinated some people? Might not be able to give acts are needed because they haven't had the opportunity of looking at the stats in that New York Times article. It looks like even amongst poor Americans still seventy six to eighty six percent of Americans who are in that an income bracket who want a vaccine have had at least one doubts. So how does the political and medical but health community go about negotiating where the cut off as well we say: okay, we have sacrificed enough. We locked down enough

now. People vaccinated here, you gotta, get back to it to me, we just let it if there was a cut off. It feels like The way that a lot of these decisions have been made has been very ad hoc, so, for instance, before we just suddenly reopened and got rid of all of our masking mandates on a Friday as a surprise, the pre, He is way that that had been set up was seventy percent of Minnesota is fully backs needed or July. First, whichever came first, that's not a scientifically sound way of setting up like if you're going to choose a cut off for vaccination should actually have a cut off for vaccination levels, and that should be how it's based on not a randomly assigned timetable, so

I think, to the extent that I am frustrated with this is the way that it has seemed far more politically driven then science driven and that there is not even a pretence at trying to make it about what is best for scientific standpoint, it's just going straight to like what is politically feasible at this very second or would you know from it social psychology, yeah sure is because people just stop Karen the CDC had to say and in baby just stop caring about corona virus in general, like what's going on like where we never on track with the science, and so this is nothing new in the way that it would inevitably shake out. Why is this happening? This way, I think the reasons for that are complex and they range from everything from political pressure. That just leaders are putting on governor is right now like there is that aspect built in here I mean trust in the CDC has gone down over the course of this

in Denmark, the cities still like their net google is still higher than any other leadership group around the pandemic and like what people are seeing as appropriate response. But morning counselled has been tried. In this sense, the pandemic began and trust in the CDC has fallen hard It started around seventy percent net approval back in April of last year. and it's down to thirty nine percent now, so it's real great in comparison to Congress, but that's only because our trust in Congress is it like three percent net approval, suppose there's is to be less trust in what the CDC has to say and that's therefore reasons I mean the CDC has had a not rate pandemic from the perspective of Giving straightforward information and not flip lobby,

round things and making sure that everything makes sense to people like it. Just has not done that consistently to some extent. I am prepared to give the CDC the benefit of the doubt a little bit and just assume that they have a really bad communication. problem. I'm not sure that this guidance, necessarily in any sort of worlds, could take into account just like the ways people will just disregard mascot. Its whenever they want you anyway, right, because to a certain extent, you start out this by saying like mass mandates, are that enforceable should begin with so late Maybe people who didn't want to wear masks already worked wearing them at it. Didn't really change. Much I mean think, just in places where there were mask mandates, it was much easier up to somebody in a supermarket and say: hey put on your mask, please John, and even though supermarket still could say we're policy, where we want everyone to where mass that's gonna be way harder to enforce. When people started coming in saying,

but an that's needed. The CDC says I can do whatever what now? It just seems to me like part of the issue here, is that, like it was just a week, two weeks before the they updated there, hence on outdoor air and now This feels like such a huge change from bad, so I think for a lot of people who have been found The CDC guidance. This feels like a giant sea change. That has happened so quickly, workers, women, up dated the guidance for not masking outside At the same time, they also gave guidance for vaccinated people indoors, and it was in all circumstances, indoors met you should wear amassed, even if your vaccinated Anything is also an element of lake damned if you do damned, if you don't hear lake, if they didn't update their masking guidance for vaccinated people, that would not be and evidence based choice and the more people got to be talking about that. The more it would become obvious, the CDC was completely out of step with the science.

And that would also be a bad luck. I think, for a long time, The epidemiologists that we ve talked to four podcast maintain Maggie, have been saying. We think the CDC being too conservative, like indoor gatherings four friends who were vaccinated for family members who are vaccinated is fine. You know enough, dining for people who are vaccinated, probably fine. That being said, the CDC never had that credit. In between step right. Yet one like, I think, it's really task, as you have this organization, that historically these really people that were telling you not to eat cookie dough right. This is why, the CDC has existed to do, and it feels like a big chunk of the problem with their communications over the course of this pandemic has Then flipped flopping between May containing that overly cautious cultural standpoint that they have had forever.

and then updating, really fast in a way it feels forced, or that feels like it's not actually following science, because they switch so quickly on a dime. It's not knowing how to do that in between state, I think, has been one of their biggest problems. Jiving, that's a good point, Maggie in the offing I miss you hear the CDC update something about like how much wine you can drink or sun screen or cookie there, like you mentioned, and you get kind of accustomed to. Maybe not putting that much stock in whatever message you get because you ve lived your life with, could you do and wine and the sun for months and years, whereas with the pandemic your but something that's absolutely brand new, and so you are especially in the early stages, really focused on the. You information that you're getting from the CDC and maybe more more susceptible to paying attention feeling betrayed when you feel

they haven't. Given you the right information- and we ve seen that in those numbers, approval fall to that thirty, nine percent number that you side looking forward. What are the repercussions of public trust public opinion souring on the cdc good puts a lot of pressure on individuals to go out and find expertise and things they are not experts in and corral information in a way that we shouldn't have to, because that stressful and most people that have time for that It also leaves you with a space of not having a good reliant, resource, like the CDC, showed itself in the foot on this and something that hurt us as much as it hurts them. I will also say that I dont think that this is any sort of crushing blow

to the CDC any more than anything else. That's happened over the past year. The CDC has had a problem since the beginning of this pandemic, how they communicate and, as we know, there are large segments of the population, particularly on the right that have not been following mass guidance since the very beginning, and so I'm not This is changing very much on its own. I do think that, as they ve me, The communication thereafter after communication are that's where the problem starts to to happen is build up its no individual situation, but the course of the whole thing. in writing. I saw your people talking about the o, the first few months of a pandemic. There is saying we don't have to wear masks and we shouldn't by masts because he would take mass away from healthcare workers, and you know whenever, like people still talk about the early pandemic days,

think when their describing the reasons that their maybe not trusting the CDC as much there's one important thing that we haven't talked about yet and that's kids, kids under twelve still are not vaccinated. They make up a large section the population and so in addition to essential workers, you may want to get the vaccine, but can't there's this other group of people who also can't get the shot. And Maggie I know your parent, just wondering what you thought about that in line with the new guidance- oh oh yeah, This is actually one of the things that I have heard. A lot of parents, expressing frustration with the CDC guidelines about is, they're all set up like you in individual single adult, with, like known buddy connected to you in your house, sold whatsoever and it feels like we have also had to go to, other newspaper articles to outside experts? to get any sort of sense of like how HU. I approached this with my unbox needed children

so you I mean I think that is extremely frustrating for a lot of people and they certainly frustrating for me and it's something where it definitely effects. What's going on, because how I Through the world on the days of the week that I don't have, my kids is different than what I can do with my own vaccinated kids. We talked about this. A few weeks going pack has maintained, like kids, are not just extensions of the parents right yeah examples, I mean, is it true just as a general parenting philosophy, but is definitely true here, ok Wall, that as you may know, tat and on a little life lessons with the science. Kids are not just extensions of their parents, which my dad will not be surprised to hear what he wants despite cast but anyway era and Maggie. Thank you so much for driving me today and I am sure we will check back in on the politics and public

opinion and the silence of the pandemic before this is all said and done. So thanks a lot. Thank you thanks. So much for having us, my name is Galen droop Tony Chow isn't the virtual control. room Clare, vinegary Curtis is on audio editing, you'd get in touch. I M telling us at podcast at five, thirty, eight dot com. You can also course Twitter us with any questions or comments. If A friend of the show, leave us awaiting or review in the apple pie, cast store or tell someone about us thanks for listening, and we will see you soon.

He is Elsie greater cities, human life allowed. We keep having these amazing long conversations about identity and happy day or trains defines you in other people's eyes. You know that extra hard when you're running for public office. Every time I shall my name in print, it was any fighter Gay act, it is ready to City Council. I gave my last name this week. Our guest represent thirty years of algae Bt Q, progress in politics from the first openly gay black person elected to office to tomorrow's rising stars, but the fight is an over. Yet there will be a transkei will never have to know what the progress of this moment feels like, because they will never know anything different. It's all about the journey. People like Thou from ABC Audio is available. Now, wherever you like to get your podcast.