[tolien]

You're "merely" ignoring the confounding reason why Republican-leaning areas have fewer cases, as pointed out by the parent post.

From your own reference:

> This party-line split isn’t that surprising, though: According to experts, many public health issues — which are seemingly nonpartisan — have become increasingly polarizing.

So no surprise that Republicans think their guy's doing good, and Democrats think he's doing badly.

It's surprising (and a little disappointing really) that 538 didn't seem to consider where independents split on it.

[jfim]

> You're "merely" ignoring the confounding reason why Republican-leaning areas have fewer cases, as pointed out by the parent post.

Can you explain to me how that's relevant here? The grandparent post said that "This will cost them dearly in November," which is not borne by evidence at this point in time.

If you have evidence that points to the fact that Republicans or independents are considering voting Democrat based on this issue, I'd love to hear it.

[tolien]

> Can you explain to me how that's relevant here?

>> Most urban counties are blue. Cannot blame Dems for infectious disease based on density of cases.

GP asserted that incidence of SARS-CoV-2 didn't correlate with majority voting inclination.

> If you have evidence that points to the fact that Republicans or independents are considering voting Democrat based on this issue, I'd love to hear it.

If you have any proof that Republicans or independents are more inclined to vote, or to vote Republican, as a direct consequence of the Republicans' handling of this pandemic, I'd love to hear it.

On the basis that the pandemic is likely to be the causal factor in a global recession, there's plenty of evidence that would factor negatively in the US election [1]

1: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-views-of-the-...

> the fact that independents appear persuadable on the economy is a point in favor of the theory that a recession would indeed damage his reelection chances.