Connect with us


Do You Think You Can Tell How a Neighborhood Voted Just by Looking Around?




Thank you for playing. (Refresh to try again.)

We selected 10,000 American neighborhoods at random. If we dropped you into one of them, could you guess how most people there voted?

In 2020, most voters around here preferred …

This quiz never ends.

But if you’ve seen enough, click here to see how you did and learn more about where our political perceptions can fall short.

Or keep playing — you’ll still be able to quit anytime. (We’ve got thousands more!)

Imagery source: Google

You: 0/0


Suspiciously superb

You’re brilliant! Or getting brilliant help.

Top 1%

Aspiring political operative

You’re ready to micro-target voters!

Top 10%

Sage of the suburbs

Extraordinary canvassing, friend.

Top 25%

Road trip veteran

You’ve seen some things.

Top 50%

Not bad at all

This isn’t an easy quiz.

Top 75%

Well, you did your best

Enjoy this participation trophy.

Top 95%

Geo coin-flipper, or close

Read up. Then refresh.

Bottom 5%

Impossible to say

Answer 10 questions or more next time.

Didn’t even play

Your loss. The article remains worth it.

Most readers who have played so far are pretty good at this game, at least in certain kinds of places. The precincts that voted overwhelmingly for Donald J. Trump or just as heavily for Joe Biden were generally the easiest for New York Times readers to identify.

You don’t need an elaborate quiz to tell you that those two sets of places typically look different from each other, even without clichéd signals like pickup trucks in the driveways, or without demographic clues from neighbors tending their lawns. In a country that has become increasingly divided along urban-rural lines, country roads with sparse housing are a good bet for Trump territory, while blocks of midrise apartments and row homes are most likely Biden ground.

But the closer you get to the political center — in mostly suburban precincts that more narrowly chose one candidate over the other — the harder the game gets.

The chart below shows this pattern. It describes readers’ success rates according to the vote margin in a place, with the precincts that voted most heavily for Mr. Biden on the left and those that voted most heavily for Mr. Trump on the right. On average, the closer a precinct was to an even 50-50 split, the less likely readers were to peg its politics correctly, resulting in the subtle “V” shape you see here:

Which places readers got right, by partisanship of neighborhood

If your own guesses followed this pattern, you’ve just experienced a pretty good summary of political geography in America today. The cities and countryside are both mostly uncontested; all the suspense is in between. That same heuristic would have failed you, however, if we had tried this game 60 years ago. Back then, population density wasn’t such a clear predictor of an area’s politics.

Now it is.

Let’s say that instead of carefully studying the little details in these images for partisan hints (you did that, right?), you let density be your only guide: If a place looked denser than the middle ring suburbs of Philadelphia, Minneapolis or most major metro areas, you guessed Biden; if it looked less dense than that, you guessed Trump. That simple rule would result in the correct answer about three in four times — better than most humans are doing at the moment.

To be fair to you, it’s not always possible to tell a precinct’s density from a single image, and it’s also not easy to guess the precise tipping point to guide your choices.

But you can see in the images below the kinds of places Mr. Trump won that Times readers had very little trouble with:

Trump precincts that most Times readers guessed right

Imagery source: Google

What these photographs have in common: open skies, open spaces, spacious yards. You generally don’t see overt political cues like yard signs, and you don’t need them. You may not know these towns by name but you can spot their more rural character.

On the other end of the spectrum, these images are from places that Mr. Biden won handily, and that Times readers also nailed:

Biden precincts that most Times readers guessed right

Imagery source: Google

Here, we’ve got homes on top of one another, homes right next to one another, neighboring front doors practically touching. In these images, you’re more likely to see a pedestrian passing by, a bike locked to a lamppost, a car parallel-parked. There are a lot more sidewalks and a lot fewer lawns.

Most American voters, however, live somewhere between these sparse and dense extremes. They live here:

More competitive, more suburban precincts

Imagery source: Google

Welcome to suburbia: America’s perennial political battleground, the terrain that decided the 2020 election, and the neighborhoods that look not so much stereotypically Democratic or Republican, but generically American.

Here the yards are more generous, and the streets tend to be tree-lined. The detached homes have driveways and garages (many big enough for more than one car). Some of these suburban-seeming streets may technically be located inside city limits. But they all look relatively alike, and are alike in their purple-ish politics. The places above were decided by less than 20 points in 2020, and they all tripped up readers far more than the neighborhoods with more lopsided results.

These are also the places where the stereotypes that American partisans have developed of one another prove less useful.

Just as density has become more predictive of partisanship over time, consumer and lifestyle choices — pickup trucks vs. Priuses, Indian vs. American chain restaurants, broad lawns vs. sidewalk stoops — have become more correlated with politics, too. Some of those signals may have helped you in this game.

“None of those things used to have political content to them,” said Marc Hetherington, a political scientist at the University of North Carolina whose research has tracked this change since the 1990s. “But now because of how we’re sorted out politically, they do.”

On average, these stereotypes may help you reach the right conclusions about the partisanship of a person or place. But they miss a lot, too. And there’s something pernicious about that, Professor Hetherington said: Political stereotypes can lead voters to caricature one another, or to lose sight of the vast parts of the American electorate that don’t conform neatly to stereotypes at all.

Among our pictures, there are clear examples where these generalizations will lead you astray. Parts of Hasidic Brooklyn are more Republican as rural North Dakota. Many Staten Island neighborhoods look like they’d be deeply blue, but they’re the opposite. Some distinctly rural places voted decisively for Mr. Biden — on Indian reservations, along the edges of small college towns, across the Southern Black Belt.

These kinds of places confounded many Times readers, and perhaps you, too:

Places that Times readers misjudged the most

Imagery source: Google

In other places, you may have found further details that could help ground you in a more familiar political mental map: Craftsman-style architecture that would put you in the Pacific Northwest, xeriscaping that might mean the Southwest, infant trees typical of newly built exurbs more likely to lean Republican.

Obviously, there’s no partisan smoking gun in a random address. And it’s possible that the location we chose from a place isn’t perfectly representative of its overall partisan makeup — maybe the farms begin a block over from the subdivision we showed you.

But we believe these scenes together give a pretty comprehensive tour of where American voters live in this large and varied country. There are places that will, indeed, confirm your stereotypes right back at you. But there are also parts of America where your intuition will do you little good.

All the neighborhoods in this quiz , along with the places you guessed

Below, find a table illustrating each of the neighborhoods we showed you, along with how its surrounding precinct voted and how well other readers did with the same images.

How you and other readers fared on the neighborhoods you saw

Neighborhood or area 2020 Result Pct. who got it right You


Source link

Continue Reading


FDA finds peeling paint, debris at US plant making J&J’s COVID vaccine





A US plant that was making Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine must fix a long list of problems including peeling paint and unsanitary conditions and practices to resume operation, according to a highly critical report by the Food and Drug Administration.

Experts said addressing the issues raised in the scathing FDA inspection report could take months.

Neither J&J nor the FDA has said when they expect vaccine production to restart at the Baltimore plant owned by Emergent Biosolutions. Only two other plants are currently equipped to supply the world with the key drug substance for J&J’s vaccine.

“It may take many months to make these changes,” said Prashant Yadav, a global health care supply chain expert at the Center for Global Development. He described some of the issues raised by the FDA as “quite significant.”

No vaccine manufactured at the Emergent plant has been distributed for use in the United States. However, J&J said it will exercise its oversight authority to ensure that all of the FDA observations are addressed promptly and comprehensively.

The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was put on a pause in the US over a potential link to a blood clotting condition.
Getty Images

The health care conglomerate has drawn scrutiny for months over its halting process to scale up production of a vaccine that is easier to handle and, by virtue of being a single shot, easier to use than other authorized vaccines.

Its use in the United States has been paused since last week as health officials study a possible link to a very rare but serious blood clot condition.

Emergent has been seeking regulatory authorization to make the J&J vaccine in the United States. It stopped production at the plant recently, saying the FDA had asked it to do so after an inspection.

J&J’s plant in Leiden, the Netherlands, is still producing doses for the world. It has another facility in India, which is currently curtailing exports of the shot as it struggles to vaccinate its own population.

Johnson & Johnson reiterated on Wednesday that it was working to establish a global supply chain in which 10 manufacturing sites would be involved in the production of its COVID-19 vaccine, in addition to the Leiden plant.

The company has a US government-brokered agreement with rival drugmaker Merck, which is preparing to make doses of J&J’s vaccine.

Failure to train personnel

The FDA in its final 12-page inspection report said it had reviewed security camera footage in addition to an in-person site visit to the Emergent plant.

It found a failure to train personnel to avoid cross-contamination of COVID-19 vaccines from Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, which had also been produced at the site. The agency also cited staff carrying unsealed bags of medical waste in the facility, bringing it in contact with containers of material used in manufacturing.

The FDA reviewed security camera footage and visited the Emergent BioSolutions plant in Baltimore.
Getty Images

Earlier this week, the House launched an investigation into whether Emergent used its relationship with a Trump administration official to get a vaccine manufacturing contract despite a record of not delivering on contracts.

Emergent said in a statement that it is working with the FDA and J&J to quickly resolve the issues outlined in the report.

Production of the AstraZeneca vaccine, which is not yet authorized for use in the United States, was previously stopped at the Emergent plant after ingredients from that shot contaminated a batch of J&J vaccine, ruining millions of doses.

The FDA also noted that Emergent did not produce adequate reports showing that the vaccines it was producing met quality standards.

The inspection, carried out between April 12 and April 20, also found the building not of suitable size or design to facilitate cleaning, maintenance or proper operations.

J&J said it was redoubling its efforts to get authorization for the facility as quickly as possible.


Source link

Continue Reading


One dead after pair of fires breaks out in Manhattan





One person was killed and several others were injured in a pair of Manhattan fires Wednesday morning, officials said.

The first blaze erupted in Midtown around 8:15 a.m. inside a DSW Designer Shoe Warehouse at 213 W. 34th St., where an escalator became fully engulfed in flames — sending smoke billowing into the first and second floor and the interconnected 40-story hotel building, fire officials said.

It was not immediately clear which hotel it was.

Five firefighters suffered minor injuries putting out the blaze.

“The fire went out, but we have a smoke condition that we’re trying to alleviate,” FDNY Battalion Chief John Porretto said at the scene. “Units are going to remain on scene until all the smoke alleviates.”

The fire marshal will determine the causes of the fire.

A second blaze broke out 15 minutes later on the Upper East Side at 1576 2nd Ave., officials said.

A three-alarm fire at 213 W. 34th Street in Manhattan that left one dead
A three-alarm fire at 213 W. 34th St. in Manhattan left one dead.

One man died in the fire and a second man was in serious condition at Lenox Hill Hospital, police said.

A firefighter suffered minor injuries battling the blaze and was taken to Cornell Hospital, fire officials said.


Source link

Continue Reading


NYC school leaders react to Derek Chauvin guilty verdict





The leaders of the city’s public schools and largest charter network both weighed in on the Derek Chauvin verdict with passionate statements about how there is still a long way to go to reach systemic equality.

Department of Education Chancellor Meisha Ross-Porter issued a personal commentary Tuesday night after the murder conviction of former Minnesota cop Chauvin.

“I felt pain and rage, deep in my bones,” she said of her initial reaction to George Floyd’s death. “It wasn’t a new feeling. I have felt that many times in my life, as a Black woman, sister, daughter, and mother to Black children—and as an educator who has served children of color in this city for more than 20 years.”

Ross-Porter said the Department of Education would be issuing guidance for teachers and families to help them process the verdict.

Eva Moskowitz with two students, the CEO and Founder of the Success Academy
Success Academy CEO Eva Moskowitz issued a statement on the Derek Chauvin verdict.
Brigitte Stelzer

“For our Black and brown children to know that they matter, the accountability this verdict represents is so important,” she stated. “In a world that too often tells them otherwise, accountability in this moment tells the Black and brown children in our schools that their lives matter, and lifts up the importance of their futures.”

Several teachers told The Post on Wednesday morning that they planned to broach the topic with their students to allow them to discuss Floyd’s death and Chauvin’s conviction.

Schools Chancellor Meisha Ross-Porter said the Department of Education would issue guidance to help teachers and families process the verdict.
Schools Chancellor Meisha Ross-Porter said the Department of Education would issue guidance to help teachers and families process the verdict.
Mark Lennihan/AP

“Because while the individual who took George Floyd’s life will be held accountable, we recognize that systemic racism, and the violence it fuels, is still creating tragedy and inequality across our country every single day,” Ross-Porter said. “We are all part of the work to undo this harm and reach true justice.”

Success Academy CEO Eva Moskowitz, who oversees the city’s largest charter school network, also issued a statement.

People react after the verdict was read in the Derek Chauvin trial in Minneapolis.
People react after the verdict was read in the Derek Chauvin trial in Minneapolis.
Scott Olson/Getty Images

“We are grateful that justice has been served and that the judicial process has worked as intended,” she wrote. “We recognize, however, that this verdict does not resolve the systemic inequities that led to Floyd’s death; nor does it heal the anguish we feel witnessing our fellow citizens die at the hands of the public servants tasked with protecting us.”


Source link

Continue Reading