Transcript for What would have to happen for a 3rd party to be viable
Hello and welcome to the identity politics podcast ideal injury. First of all thanks to Mike a for filling in for me last week I was on vacation now I am a little sick so it Rick Meehan funnel 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 that teachers largely I think to view we've rating with trumpets. The list included former elected officials like former Virginia representative Barbara Comstock former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman. And other outspoken critics. Price spectrum. As we've talked about on this podcast a viable third party seems like a stretch. But to date we're gonna talk about what would actually have to happen for the GOP to split. And have a third party emerge in American politics have not build this effort work as much as what would have to happen in order for any effort to work. Then later on in the show art science team is gonna join to discuss this CDC's new guidance that fascinated people don't need to Wear masks were socially distance. Into works the CDC the law of course so that guidance will interact with politics and perceptions of the CDC that have a ball over the past year. We'll also take a look at how vaccination efforts are going and how Americans are thinking about the risks of the corona virus at this point in the pen. And ask a fair question goodies appalling were bad use of polling so let's get to hear wit me. Our politics editor sir for instance and color Sarah pick and welcome back. Thank you think here on the also wrote us as elections analyst Jeffrey skelley Ajax. A Galen welcome back. Thank you think you it was you know I feel like getting just a common task Cole is true return to normalcy also being on vacation I left the country for the first time since. And acts it was and is. Very interesting and very normal feeling to it. Yet a pact JFK airport we were to Mexico this lovely beautiful country at Sutter and on that topic fort transparency state. Mike it did a lot of the prepped for today's podcast because I was still on vacation over the weekend. And he left us with few options for duty since polling or bad use of polling. Both of which we heard from listeners so the first one was a U gov poll about. The animals that Americans feel most. Likely they could take on in a fight. Yes the crescent and the second was a conclusion from a trade group of pollsters that the polling error in the 20/20 election was the worst in forty years. I still have occasion brains so we are going to tackle the first. Use of polling today and then media and candidate will talk about that opt trade group of pollsters and their conclusions about pulling it so. Let's literate sacked Jeff you're ready for this good news or bad use of polling. Let's dive then. He outs. So you got asked Americans. Which animals and they thought they could be in a fight if they were unharmed. And they broke out there responses by men and grip and the kinds of animals they asked Americans about work. Grizzly bear lion elephant guerrilla Crockett out wolf can agree to. MacKenzie king cobra large dog eagle medium sized dog goods house tack rack. On and that actually goes in order from. The animals that Americans. Felt most comfortable ansari these comfortable eating in a fight to most comfortable. Eating right. Anthony took all this data. And their kind of conclusion of a headline in the survey where it was. Compared to women men who feel most able to take on medium sized dogs antes. And the numbers that a company that conclusion and are when it comes to beauty and medium size dock in a fight. 39% of women thought comfortable that they could beat a meeting size dollar and 60% of men and then when it came to Agoos it was 51% of women. And 71% of men. So. Is this a good use of polling or bad use of polling. In a sensibly does this tell what does this tell us what is this does this tell something substantive other than being clicked. It's. That women have a better sense of how bad piece are. And so and that I have to say could use appalling rate peace or file creatures and I think this poll captures that women are a lot more realistic about what it goose encounter would entail. We fly sat out your saying that light. A human being couldn't actually take on a cruise on arms and women are more level headed about that fact. That's exactly what I'm saying he's agitated that is they knew could situation. They. You've go after they bite they would go after your ankles. You think I think you would be more bait a flight not fight situation and I think this poll captures that women are more realistically. Coming to terms about the man. A page for years. Yeah I mean I think this it's a broadly that this game he's pulling for showing their a lot of men with. Really unrealistic expectations about their fighting ability. And I say that the cases even like Tony 3% syndicate fight king cobra. Well here fighting it how how are you banking program when it's like snapping super fast you know biting you got it just is just. I think there's there's like two parks that's one part is that. Some of these answers. Surely there are at least a little in just like us a small number. Unit there always. I was get like 3% of people saying something ridiculous and it's hard to know just how serious they are. So in this case it's like well you know for grizzly bear lion elephant guerrilla crocodile it to percent her fear. People say yeah and then element really agree on us like we're not really gonna. So I think I think too many people were saying yes that's made a small. Number are beam. A little and serious this question which is also somewhat answers questions to be frank that any certainty this gender gap grow. And it's just I do think it says something about. Men having a super super unrealistic expectation about their fighting I mean. I would say personally that I think a rat and house cat are the only thing on this list that I would with think about answering yes. Geese are mean as hell. Medium sized dogs are are practically. Like small wolves and 16% say at mains that yes told law. And 60% said yes to beads that dock like dogs if people but now it's just it's it's just crazy act. Still as you suggested. On V. Extreme ends men and women mostly agrees so like when it comes out stat rat most. Men and women are not that far apart are feeling impeccable beat them and the same goes for you know like a grizzly bear and Hawaiian. Men and women generally don't feel like they can. Beat. One of those animals. It's the middle part where we doubt 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. Oh Alec may I just don't really understand how dangerous geese are what is this question getting act. You know we like to be specific when it comes to polling about the question being asked. In his head do you think you could eat in a fight if you were on our. ED is this a situation like. One of the two animals is dying it's either you or the goose because like if you're truly Blake. Confronted with the idea that white of goose is gonna kill you. I don't know I don't know that I would say that I've disliked and laid out a letter groups on. Greatly what does this question actually asking because like USD's are mean but like what is did you decide to be mean back. It factored in death. Like to give an example hair. Personally very sad to Nazi jackal listed on this past survey as when I was once camping in South Africa mind my tent mate. Huge animal in the easiest had gone down to the watering hole. Left open the tent flap any jackal Keenan. I kicked it so I say I won that fight because the jackal left the tent did not die to be clear but I want to fight. Even cubes. So I mean like the death question you raise is interesting Galen but if it's just like curving out your space your territory like. Sarah defeated jackal Sarah and defeat days. So bluntly he'd that's because the videos that you see if he's fight online. Our videos where the goose is being the aggressor and the human is just trying to get away from the situation. But if you're in a situation where it's like a geek goose and human you're bull fighting each other. Ideally you might be able to us but us like women are underestimating their abilities in that situation. As with the men are overestimating or like. Because most decent starters you're just like get me away from this agitated dues that's trying to protect its kids or whatever not like a heater fighting partners. I mean maybe. I just. The fight to death thing. OK maybe mediate in the can take days. I honestly know the specifics line. East feet. But I would imagine that this could hurt. When their flapping around by you and attacking but the rest of these. Preachers bull I mean above use terms like. Danger. Are. They'd probably can ultimately. Act act like it counties all are all large dog. It Eagles have like serious council rip you up when he excited about the it's like the coach Terry apart in now terrific we should have invited on it. Animal acts are actually for this and FX. No there isn't great Blake murder story awhile and others like it was an out all involved slicked birds their talents. Got serious thing. That surround. So if we have any animal experts listening. Please feel free to weigh in on this goose question and I'm genuinely curious. I need I'm just being contrary and but I think I think 5051%. Of what actually have majorities of both men and women say they could they could take auditors it's 51% of women and 71%. A man. I feel like the 49% of women or whatever it was there any undecideds hall on my feet. Short selling themselves as opposed to let the comments it there was like manner too confident that they can take on a news. Up by. Let's maybe ask the broader question here which is. In the good use of polling or bad you some polling universe. Do these seemingly silly surveys. Actually teach us interesting stuff about humans or is this just clicked the. I do you think this poll. Is weirdly good news appalling I think a lot of these exit polls would normally would not all of that category but for me it's sort of like. And using her minder. Man overestimating cells and frankly. As a as a fellow man I'm just like wowed by that the people who who'd a again some of these answers. The 38 at eight reputed eagle. Yes like maybe a handful of people responding yes this question were travelers curiouser fluently but. A lot they'll sit must say yes seriously and that's just I think tally. It is like now here you're not taking eagle one. Maybe you don't realize that beat Eagles are. And it is a deficiency of knowledge of animals. Meeting and beta that's beta that's. Maybe that's an aspect of this is just not a full understanding it's like like get it grizzly bears super dangers are very few people is the Estes but. You know. I can take Arnold wolf slick. Wolves. I mean. A you know set the 16% of men said they could take Arnold wolf I mean that doesn't seem. I don't think it's fair is realistic for human like if human beats it wolf on armed in the wild that's what's scary is can be. Because of it actually taxi you have there's no way hear it for yourself successfully. Graphic ecstatic. Yes I knew I needed for these couples I normally am Marco went blank I'm like. What is actually telling me and I think you feel like purposeful. Said and mean what it's really trying to capture in particular displacing it how women and men responded. Is gender gaps re and that often and it itself in more traditional polling can yields. Answers were people aren't necessarily tuning into this is a cross section. That appeal to all different partners in rates if it does kind of speak to. False mail provider or over confidence and in a way that's meaty outside the normal circles. That would talk about this. It's appalling. Okay fair enough. What kinds of cried just. Curious here. But what kinds now on political questions would you like to see pollsters ask Americans to get a sense of like certain. Divides are nuances or whatever game that American culture like. If you could design your own survey put it to Americans. May be something as silly as vests. What would you ask them. Ninth not silly. It. I'm and then women gender acting about the times recently that it really got one unlike what you think household chores like either who's doing then. How long do you think a task would take because again like it exposed a lot of real gender to banks currently men just didn't. Actor and the amount of time at me took me collect a crack grocery Lester something. It's a great like I think this is a lot more air. A much more fun ways to do showed that two people over confidence. So actually it to steal something. That. Political scientist and have corrected for the times back in the primaries I thought was really cool. With they asked voters what their preference plans forward foods like. Indian food. Water. Chinese food hand Italian food. What you're trying to do issues that as a proxy forward you know. Super been educated elite which can often Ian were fists and hard to define its meet yesterday. And it is concentrated in Iowa and some of the other early states again supposed to be now here we are in a statement he doesn't have huge Indian. Population he laughs and what percentage who see their familiar with Indian food I like to audiences. And it was standards and warned supporters like Biden supporters she towards the bottom and to that for the democratic primary. Again it's kind of a proxy to show. Political beliefs and where they fall and a economic strata consider it. You know like that you can pull I think there are ways to kind of asks questions that don't prying people politically as we expect that can still show. Either gender gaps or political preferences that you know our mast me the. OK so media maybe we can be on the lookout for some kind of less obviously political questions. That might tell something about America in our could use a point or bad use a point segments like this one but let's move on and talk about the possibility of a third party. In the US. As I mentioned at the top a group of Republicans launched an effort last week called. A hole for American renewal and they Leah thirteen principals like democracy constitutional order truth pluralism. Free speech the rule of law. And they wrote that our nation's future should not be dictated by a single person but by principles that bind us together. That's why we believed in pushing for the Republican Party to rededicate itself to founding ideals. Or else he's in the creation of alternative so essentially in the week of house Republicans ousting Liz Cheney from leadership last week they're saying. Listen to our priorities and our vision for a Republican Party or we're gonna create a third part. We've talked on this are cast in the past about you know how. That part of the Republican Party the part of the Republican Party that is behind this letter this initiative may not be particularly large. And there it's not clear whether they could successfully form a third party unit dividend that's their threat. In this segment today I wanna be a little more abstract maybe more political science see and talk about what conditions. Waited. You've acquired. Four and actual break in the Republican Party to happen. And for a third party to number. So. Let's kind of like. Wave the ground war two years Jeff what do you think we have to see in terms of how voters are identifying them lower kind of what their use of the party are you all of the parties are in order you to kind of create a real division record plausibly create a third part. I think it's starting place for or. A third party movement have any sort legs it's just a simple strong dissatisfaction. With the tea parties. Now on the face of it you think we have you see numbers and polls from Gallup tracking it for years. The percentage of people saying we need a third party it's like reasonably high. Com but if Jack you look at the sort of fever ability Democrats had for the Democratic Party and Republicans have toward the Republican Party and people mean. Toward the parties so most people identify with one party the other. One where are nothing if they initially in buys independent. Most people have a favorable views aren't part. And I think you would need that number to drop a lot you would need a much larger segment. Of saying GOP. GOP leaders to say I'm not happy that the car boat party and to see something went over he'll receive from from some. Sort ET trap Republicans right now to have any legs and and the same but go for maybe just a broader. Centrists or like conservative. For a democratic small. Party years something to get off the ground tracks were you I did you just need to see more dissatisfaction. With the state of the parties from the people with in those parties themselves so where is the satisfaction level now and what you think need to be. Well I mean some of the polling our worsening a couple months ago about this and this isn't like the 70s80%. Of Republicans have like if there is a party mean does numbers there are an area from polled pulled the point is it's like I think you would need to see. That number a lot lower. In order Qiyue. Actually have people entertain the idea of voting for another party. And for them basically for their Buena geez the grass roots for people who want to treat some sort of third party option to find people willing to take the time. Putting the energy organize and to fund raise for that vehicle. This is another rookie challenge is the organization of the third party movement in out top down is all is nice at all but. You need to find people day you know just laid voters are gonna actually actor movement. And that's really the proper for like troubled Balkans is not a lot of people out there so just. In a more broad sense. Their apartment and eats those kinds of matters. To come in two. Flocked to their banner issues. Yeah and is you're getting it at the outset there in union this is something that political science has tried to hear guys for awhile here and from what I can tell there's kind of like. Two steps rate for one parties could possibly splinters. The first is a major issues that's likely to divide the country along geographic and ideological lines. Two big examples and when the parties. In one case split in the other case it was a realignment the first being the so more rate the week's party at that point. We're divided on slavery tried not to take a stance on it right with the but Kansas Nebraska act which allowed new states and territories decide what their they would be sleepers trees so it compromise. But then that pitted northern and southern weeks against each other and so they created a space. For the Republican Party to charge. And in second you know in the 1960s. We talk about that urban rural sorting that now see in the Democratic Party and Republican Party. And that came out of pro civil rights legislation pushed by the Democratic Party and southern Democrats. Abandoning that as they have largely been press -- Asian. And moving into the Republican Party so again I think the heat. What we see in history at least in the US some really divisive issues that. Need some houses and have geographical split. And I think you know right now do you see in our politics. The too big to aides honor education level and an urban and rural. I think what's missing right now in terms. Why there isn't this like third party fracture is trump himself doesn't seem to be enough of an issue. To create a third party. As I think you really need maybe it's something about the economy. You know one point we are fighting over so third goal maybe there's something now with economic populism that takes off. But at this point I think that's kind of the piece that seems to be missing. And you say that it has to be it geographic split which I think gets in some ways act. The fact that we have winner take all election rightly waiting. 30% of the vote across a bunch of different districts or states doesn't get anything you actually have to hot some sort of concentrated support in certain discrete. Districts or states or whatever to actually start gaining power and representation. Eating congress war you know pat. Executive level as state governor or you know whatever the president. How much of what's preventing a third party. Is systemic. Based on the American political system verses. Just like we don't actually have the diversity of opinion network. For irate third party in America because enough people are happy with the two parties. Right well as you pointed at him. Winning 30% doesn't get you very much ideas politics and that's because most elections United States operate winner take all. I'm in the sense that if you do you have a third party. And they went like 28%. Or something in assist you don't do anything that. You know the country that has a proportional representation system you would get seats for. I'm but we don't have that in the US generally speaking so it's it's not possible specially you know federal level I'm particular. Another thing that we have to keep in mind it's not only does that sort of that that situation just in general elections push towards sort of to big tent parties. We also have the electoral pouch and this is something that most other countries do not have a two day. At least as this sort of indirect electoral system where. 21 mile from its in basically every stay outside Nebraska and Maine when all of them you just have to have those votes and so. 88 is enough that's just like another force on top just her baseline winner take all just had an election. Set up that. Makes it even harder for their partisan vote because the sort of the incentive to coalesce into two large curtsy give yourself the best chance of winning. I is it sort of just exacerbated magnified by the Electoral College be there as well as obviously when the president missed important opposite terms. Me it's mr. pardon office centers of power and it's obvious in the one gets the most attention you theories we advertise the return the presidential elections. That's like just another those are systemic factors that make it tough. I think Jeffries race there are alive and longstanding reasons for why even when they're in political realignment Miley into the two parties again you know a period of many we're sorting it out. The US returns to the Tea Party system. That sent though you can imagine either you know a strong personality says they trump running again in 20/20 four. Doesn't mean he would win as under a third party banner but that could happen right it's happened before president Theodore Roosevelt did that back and then nineteen hundreds. He could also imagine it around in issuing mentioned economic populism earlier but what about racial justice we side in the wave that protests and the summer really captured a slice of the American population it happen before. If that remains a pressing issues to the party's divide along pathways through third parties that emerges in that gap. There's a lot of reasons for why it doesn't make sense through that reasons. Jeffrey outlined but I still think the great issue. And the two parties failing to take an authoritative stance on it. Could create the right opportunity for at third party. Asks it's happened before. Well yeah it sounds like what ends up happening is a third party gets created. What. That really beats to is a realignment. Where again we just yet to parties. What would into the gates. Environment. That third party's platform PU suggests that some possibilities. It looks like. In this case where the pole for American. Renew all its. Something of you know and media George W. Bush or Republican Party you we have a little more talk about kind of welfare. And things like that. You don't wait. Is that where a third party could potentially emerge that shakes things up what is. What is the gap. Where. People are fighting what they want. We have the two parties and the smile. That's a good question I mean. What I see it as this kind of the disconnect your right that that spike never trucker he well it's kind of what is seen as dissatisfied right now on the Republican Party. And I don't think that matches two where there's perhaps this fat dissatisfaction. Among Democrats. For instance even though the number of Democrats who are liberal has been increasing. You know astronomically in the last decade. Over half of democratic voters you there identifies moderate or conservative. And seat could see a world in wit us any more centrist candidate if they survive her primary system. Two dozen marriage in tries to make a big and Ehrlich camp that appeals to both some of the moderate Republican voters. And some of the moderate democratic senators the problem is Cheney and some of her supporters are not moderates great insight do you think. While all we've seen some economic populism process there so in and the 2016 primary east. 12% of Bernie Sanders supporters then vote for trump the general election. That says to me that there is something there economic populism I cannot see it on the fiscal conservative axis I 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 can never trump her. Group gains enough of that wrote last body heat to form a third party. I think this is another place where it's. Difficult to see the path for. Via third parties to develop. Because I'm not really sure that. Sort of gap between Democrats and poked it's truly exists in the sense that there being meaningful like a very large percentage of people there I just don't know if that's really true. You know we we talk about we there's a piece that Lee drummer for factory between nineteen where he looked at. Sort of people's. Political affiliation. Partisan identity may fifth affiliated did and also their ideology and it turned out that there wasn't necessarily a ton of overlap between people might say they were independent. And insane over your ideologically moderate. And other studies Sharon it. In any might have some and he works out on average to be ideologically moderate but it turns out they have very left wing views on certain things very right wing views and something else and so. In terms of actually appealing it. To a large slot of the public to make a third party realistic that that's just another challenge and again I'm not really sure. At the moment there exists an issue where you can grab hold that mean cirrus talking about what might need water to you really big issues sort of break apart the norm right now but I don't know what that actually would be you know in the won't know it until it happens if it happens. And let's stimulate in the absence of that you know we are seeing a political realignment of sorts. In the sense that you know right now. White voters without college degrees they vote Republican that wasn't true you know as recent as the two thousands ray. That kind of shift has happened and I think it's really hard about realignment and white so controversial. It's because it happened Scully surely it doesn't happen overnight you know this will be something for studying fifty years from now to kind of understand how the party sort. And we'll see two and 20/20 two you know do the suckers continue to the good fertile ground for Democrats. That would be you know one point in favor pre enlightenment. Or if they flip back to Republicans. May be everything I've told you is untrue you know it's just it's always that given Paul and it happens very slowly. I mean we're talking about the conditions. That would be necessary so maybe we've sky for a minute. You know what something that could happen in American politics. That would Couri that would allow a viable third parties to. Be created what it does mean that like. The Democratic Party has to move further last. I'd have to at least that we thought might be out of the mainstream and a wave that. Trump kind of took aspects of the Republican Party late why. What would what could create an environment where a third parties Cree it. NAS my thighs you'd need to have. Some outside issue. The two parties are not seen his. Adequately here even remotely adequately addressing. I'm that is that is causing a crisis. Of sorts calm you know the populace in the late nineteenth century. Kamen really really broke open because. Farmers are struggling out in the midwest and west. There was this. Well there are multiple economic crises in the nineteenth century that happened. Com and there was a push to try to make silver. Basically bring silver and as a form. Species Kirk species currency back. Obviously because you'd use gold it's like everything's based in the gold standard. But they want it's over to the to be an option for exchange so that things were is why Adam bold because it is killing farmers turn pay off debts. It's a private party really blows up really makes ground or gains ground in and parts of the country. And say have a moment terrorists or to an after party system. But. Eventually that got sort of swallowed up by the Democrats. Or at least the sort of ET gold standard view. Slaughter by by the Democrats in language William Jennings Bryant and six election. So I think it's that kind of thing we're at the tea parties are not initially not seen is addressing it all. That may be issued its looking at technology since that obviously is something where. Has got it in for its allies going forward you know maybe some in the social media I mean that's not crazy but I I don't have some something with. Some technological. Thing and I can't name yet date that could prompt. Innocence or breakage with with what the currents. Yeah nanny and a different talked about it's hard for me not to see it cleavage along economic lines Jeffrey was getting at bear and do you think there is some overlap and were right for that. I also think you know looking at the last two times American party splintered. It was on a racial issue greatness on the question of slavery and it was on the question of civil rights. He could see a authored. Race issue here may denounce police brutality. You know could be something I'm not thinking but how the two parties just continue to sort along those lines you know one thing we've seen for instance. From the 20/20 election was yes trap made you know marginal gains with Hispanic and black voters spoke when you look at how they voted and thought about race was actually very similar to some of the white that hooters with out of college degree and so that sorting along class lines. Does that continue how does race play into that is the last seen as she were saying at the topic in Ireland you know going too far on some issues is that. Cause Americans to you know sort along those lines I think. You know it really will take like a big flash point issue. More so then this overall culture war that we're kind of then at the moment I think that leads to two minor. Actress seeing and realignment. If for kind of the watershed moment you would need it thinks the big issue in American history is any. Indication I think there's a good chance that does fall longer racial line. Our ball that sounds like Africa at a place to leave things and next up our science team is guarantee you'd be joining me so. Sarah and Jeffrey thanks so much for during the pots as a construction. Thanks Aaron. Thanks let's discuss the leaders CBC guidance on masking and social distancing you Doris for vaccinated people last Thursday the CDC updated its guidelines saying that quote fully vaccinated people no longer need to Wear a mask work physically distance in any setting. So of course that also means indoors now with after the originally published guidelines for vaccinated people saying they should continue wearing maps inside. We're gonna talk about how this intersects with politics and public opinion and Hewitt need to do that is senior science writer MacKey Kirkland Maggie and welcome high. And all singer that's is the host of podcast nineteen and science science journalist and a Rothschild hello and podcast. On things for having me. Thanks for being here and listeners are purpose for me plenty but if anyone out there it still doesn't listen to puck past nineteen certainly go subscribe where ever you listen to podcasts. So first and foremost. Why did this CDC make this change. That I think came someone as a surprise to a lot of people who have been watching the news. Coming out of the CDC urged watching news generally ME not that it's a surprise because it's not in line with the science but just in. In a surprise in the sense that didn't expect the CDC to make this call acts. A surprise Olson disease he gave no one no warning that this was companies. I think outlets that. It also. You know it's a little unclear why the CDC decided to release this statement in the way that they happen. But the science of vaccination at this point for coat it is pretty clear so. Are vaccines do a great job of preventing illness. They do a great job but even preventing asymptomatic infections so you even if you. Like we heard earlier in the pandemic about people getting sick and not knowing they actually were sick and transmitting it to other people. And it also does a great job. Preventing transmission so if you do get sick it's unlikely that you'll actually pass on the buyers somebody else. So there was this. One clinical trial that was recently Don among health care workers. And basically for those who got MR NA vaccines there were 90% less likely to test positive for coded in weekly screenings. Then unvaccinated health care workers and then the number of breakthrough actions also is extremely. Extremely well. So there is good science to back up this decision. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the weighed the CDC did it or that timing of it makes. Kind of just. Or what other people have done with a sense I don't like there's there's. There was really good scientific evidence for why the CDC would do this. But there's not really good scientific evidence for. Instance buying. My statements. It's now happening no masking and it's whatsoever indoors. Like that's. There's as we extrapolation between what the CDC says it. These political. News back our. As evidence based as the CDC was saying but we're done be constantly the CDC's. Like that. That's interesting to me. So this is guys are people who are fascinated. By doesn't necessarily mean it should be applied. To all people vaccinated or not accident and there still enough people not vaccinated that they were questioner appoint him of. Wrecked late. In there is the CDC is saying it thank you and impacts need individual. Can't go inside the building that out your time and the chances you it. Contracting. The virus spreading the virus are still Olympic you can just basic legal acts normal life. But after a populous nation we don't have enough people vaccinated right now. Fully vaccinated that it makes good sense for us to BE just toll free one as a whole city go out there and start living your life like normal. Don't Wear masks inside that's fine those are two completely separate things but it didn't completed politically. Lunch and think just because because bill Wheatley to. There's no way to actually do what the CDC's as a political move. Out. Well because Blake who. What are you data daily usually check people like there's no there's no federal. There's no federal vaccine. Database like no one actually knows what you've been vaccinated or not. And gators. Police book politically socially. Economically. And functionally. In terms of like what we have the infrastructure for there is literally no way anyone is ever going to dude some kind. Vaccine passport system in the United States. So really your only options are. Flipping the light switch on her flipping it costs and by chance governors looked at what does he said look let's switch on. I think that in an ideal world. The CDC's guidance makes a lot of sense. But we don't live in an ideal world where everyone is following the letter of the law perfectly and and this case is not a little cuts to some guidance but the acting stupid. I mean we've already had a lot of trouble getting people to comply with mask mandates when they exist. And I think that a lot of people and a lot of politicians have seen this as an incentive to just lift mask mandates which are hard to enforce anyway and just. Throw caution to the wind and say okay you're all on your own make the pastor sisters. So. You mention a couple. Aspects that are placed here which is. The political reality on the ground. You know that is the science itself that the CBC. News. Working whereas. What public opinion here I mean it seems like part of this might just be a response to you okay it's Villa in sixteen months. People art art on like is this the data back that up. Dina does back I mean it. Didn't Bristol seem like he's being partisan divides between who is most comfortable returning to their normal routine rightly being. There is I think decade. Yes Ed twenty point spread between Republicans and Democrats that even. Among the Democrats. 49% of them as of may first are comfortable returning to their normal routine. Like that's extremely. High let's go on. Hunt hunt and most of that changes happened just since February. So there's definitely think it sends. The vaccine is out there. I'm getting vaccinated. I'm gonna go back to normal and live my life again. And again in theory that should be fine except that there are these large swath of the population who are not get vaccinated. And when we talk about that we're not just talking about anti taxpayers. No we don't at all and injured there are errors thirty million American adults who are open to giving creditors vaccine who asked not. Actually managed to do yet. There's big story in New York Times a couple of weeks ago that was looking active state. And in our. That's a lot of people and the majority. Aren't coming from households with incomes of less than 50000 dollars a year. And that makes complete and others this mealy if you look act Howell. Vaccines. Roll outs happens. You're talking about things that's. Ideally. Those familiar with what happened in Minnesota what's been going on Minnesota. And what he had you're initially it was Bentley if you didn't have high speed Internet and the ability to sit at home well. All day and and times refreshing. Five or six different web sites trying to find out where the next schedules appointments were available. Basically no chance of getting an act seen for months at least it was like that. And it's starting to get out to the queens where that's easier to access. But it's still. A inwardly you have to take the time that you immediately go and show some where he schedule time. And not everybody has the ability to do that something that is easiest if you are working white collar job. If you have the ability to take time off if you have. The ability to know that you are evenings are free if you don't have linked all of this cognitive load stuff on your life. That makes it harder to him. You don't just jump in gold naked changing your schedule. And the other thing is many of these people also can't get time off of work if they actually experience and he cited acts of getting vaccines. And one thing that was really sort public striking to me from New York Times article was that they look debt. Howell. Like that this sort of disparity between vaccination rates among people who are well in high on what's called. The social vulnerability index basically if this measure. Howell well community can bounce back after disaster to the past we used to think evidently natural disaster like hurricane. Now we're sort of using it for covad and it measure stuff like. You know. That pumped poverty there is in particular community access to transportation. Things like that. And basically. The lower or the higher you are on the social vulnerability index. The lower your chances of being vaccinated. And that's only getting the disparity is only getting wider as time. I mean how does the US ago about. Negotiating. This question because we know that not everyone in the United States it is going to be vaccinated because people and march are. Be forced to be vaccinated so. To are certain extent. You know some people won't be vaccinated because they don't want him and maybe. As part of our social contract were OK with going back to normal even when those people vaccinated. Some people you know might not be able to get vaccinated because they haven't had the opportunity you know looking at how the stocks in the New York Times article. It looks like even amongst poor Americans still 76 to 86%. Of Americans who were in net income bracket who want a vaccine cut out at least one dose so how does he political and medical. Public health community go about negotiating. We're caught office when we say OK you know we have. You know it's our president we locked down enough enough people are vaccinated period. Get facts are. I think like Tim need. I would just love it if there was a cup. It feels like the way it a lot of these decisions have been made has been very ad hoc. And let sit for instance before me just randomly you reopened and got rid of all of our. Masking mandates. On the Friday as a surprise. The previous Weydedat had been sent out was 70%. Minnesotans. Back city fully backs needed it or July 1 whichever came first. Rich isn't. How you actually like that's guts not a scientifically sound waves and right like either going to choose a cut off. For vaccination should actually have a cup after vaccination levels. And that should be how it's based on and not be randomly assign timetable. So I think like. Adding to the extent that I am frustrated witness is. And bats. There is not even a pretense at trying to make it. Opt out what is best from a scientific standpoint. It's just going streets like what is politically feasible at this varies. I mean why. Ease that. We just because people lake is because people just stopped caring what the CDC. Kind of had to say and in May be just stop cared about corona virus in general like. What's. Torre got wind aided believe. Do we re never run trot out the science is that this is nothing here when kind of the reader with an aggregate we shake out but why is happening. And I think it reasons for that are complex right leg and a range from everything from that. Political pressure that legislators are putting on our governors. Rightly there is bad aspects built in here deer is also I think the I mean trust in the CDC has gone down right thank. Then over the course of this pandemic. The CDC is still the it. But their net approval is still higher than any other leadership group around the pandemic and like what people. Arsene has appropriate response. But morning console has been pulling this statement tracking this since the pandemic began and C trusting the CDC has fallen hard. You know it started around 70%. Approval back in April up last year. And it sounded 39%. Now so it's really great in comparison to congress but that's only because our trust in congress is like 3%. Net approval sit well it's. There's definitely I think less. There's there seems to be less trust in what the CDC has to saint. And I think that's there for reasons and the CDC has. AE and nine. Rate and panic from the perspective. Giving straightforward and Venetian. And not flip flopping around things and making sure that everything makes sense to people it just has not on. Consistently. Also I mean. To some extent I'm prepared to give the CDC the benefit of the doubt a little bit and just assume that they have a really. Bad communication problem. Lake. In the neat well I don't know I'm sure that this guidance necessarily. Done. In any sort of worlds could take into account just like the ways people just disregard mask mandates whenever they want to any right. Ready to let us to a certain extent like. You as you start out the segment by saying like. Masked bandits are batted forcible CB didn't read so let up maybe people who didn't wanna Wear masks already port where an addict to. Change much era. Yeah I mean I think just in places where there were masking and it's it was much easier to go up to somebody in a supermarket and say hey put on your mask the use plan. You know. And an even those supermarkets still trade the say we have a policy where we you know. Want everyone to Wear masks that's going to be in way harder to enforce when people start coming in saying but I'm fascinated the CDC says I can do whatever I want now you know. But it just seems to me like part of the issue here is that lake it was just. Like what was it to a week two weeks before they updated their guidance on outdoor air. And now this feels likes to huge change from that. So I think for a lot of people who have been following CDC guidance. This feels like a giant sea change. That it's happened so quickly if that makes cents wreck as when they. Up dated the guidance for not masking outside. At the same time they also gave guidance for vaccinated people indoors and it was it also indoors that you should Wear a mask even if your facts and. It is also an element afflict and defeated him if you don't hear right like did they didn't change. If they didn't update they're asking guidance for vaccinated people. They that would not be. An evidence based choice right. And the more people got to be talking about that than were to become obvious the CDC was completely out of step with the science. And that would also be about. I think for a long time many of the epidemiologist that we talked to for podcast 1990. Have been saying we think the CDC's being too conservative. Rate like. Indoor gatherings for friends who are vaccinated for family members were vaccinated this fine you know. Indoor dining for people who are vaccinated probably find. That being said you know the CDC never had that kind of in between steps we. It out. It's. I think it's really tough because you have this organization. Like historically these are the people that we're telling you not to eat cookie dough right like this is what the CDC has existed to do. And it feels like a big chunk. The problem with their communications over the course this pandemic has been flip flopping between. Maintaining that Oprah will be cautious. Kind of cultural standpoint that they had had. Forever. And then. It really. Asks in a waved it feels forced or that feels like it's not actually following science because they switched so quickly time. Not not knowing how to do that in between stage acting has been like one of their biggest problems. Yeah I think that's a good point Maggie and that oftentimes you're here this CDC update something about like how much might you can drink order sun screen. Cookie dough like you mention it. And you get kind of accustomed to. Meeting putting much stock in whatever message you get because you've lived your life with cook ego and why and the sun. For months and years. Whereas with pandemic they're dealing with something that's absolutely brand new and so you are especially in the early stages really focused on the new information you're getting from the CDC. And maybe more susceptible choose. Paying attention feeling betrayed when you feel like they haven't given you the right information. And we've seen that you know in those numbers. Approval faulted at 39% number. Looking forward what are the repercussions. Of public trust public opinion souring. On the CDC. Nothing good day it's a lot pressure on individuals to. Go out and find expertise and things they are not experts and and corral information in a way that we shouldn't have to because that's stressful and those people didn't kind of act. And it also I think late. It leaves you with the space. Not hacking a good just. Reliable resource. I mean like the CDC a shot itself in the foot on this isn't something that hurts us as much as it hurts now. I also say that I don't think that this is any sort of like crashing blow to the CDC any more than anything else that's happened over the past year. I mean the CDC has had a problem. Since the beginning of this pandemic. Like how they communicate and and as we know they're. Really like large segments of the population particularly on the right that have not been following mass guidance for the various it since the very beginning. And so I'm not sure that this is changing very much on its own I do think that. As they've made it sort of communication error after communication here that's where the problems text it to happen. It's the bill. Not the end it's no no individual situation. The course of the whole idea of sure I mean I still hear people talking about the owed the first about the pandemic are saying we don't have to Wear masks and we shouldn't. Buying masks because it would take mass away from health care workers and you know whenever like people still talk about early pandemic days I think when there. Describing the reasons that their meeting not trusting is much. There's one. Thing we haven't talked about that I think is kind of important and that's kids. You know kids under twelve still are not vaccinated they make up at large section of the population. And so. In addition to an essential workers 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 you're a parent I was just wondering you know what you thought about that in line with the new guidance. This is actually one of the things that I had heard a lot of parents expressing frustration with the CDC guidelines about is that there also. Like your individual single and ultimately an old buddy connected to you in your household whatsoever. It feels like we've all sort of had to go. Two other newspaper articles two outside experts to get any sort of sense of like how do I approach this with my unvaccinated children. And so yeah and I think that is extremely frustrating for a lot of people and it certainly frustrating for me and it's something we're definitely affects. What's going on because. How I didn't move through the world on big days of the week that I don't have my kids. Is different than what I can do with my and that's needed kids. Your kids I think we we talked about this a few weeks gone podcast nineteen like kids are not just extensions of their right. Yeah I think Tony is that. It's true just as a general parenting philosophy but it is definitely trim here. OK well that is a nice notes net and on a little life less than in Britain the science kits are not just extensions. Their parents. Which my dot will not be surprised when it's too. The but anyway. And and Maggie thank you so much effort Jordan today picture renewal. Check back in on the politics and public opinion. And the science. The pandemic before it's offset. Some picks to stage you. Think so much for having us. My name is dale hunter Toney chow is in the virtual control room clearing bitty Gary Curtis is on audio editing. You get in touch by emailing us at pod cast at 530 dot com you can also course treated us with any questions or comments. If you're a fan of the show rivas a rating or refute in the apple podcast store or tell someone about us thanks for listening and we will see news. And and.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.