What to make of NV?

[Mr.Bakari-Sellers]

This result would be fun:

NC and GA are likely Red states not AZ and NV
NV and MI polls are off, we aren't winning NC Robinson is ahead by 4 pts, all we need is AZ and 279 and OH, MT and NEB S and 218 H

The problem is that Rs can't dent Tester, Brown advantage

[ProgressiveModerate]

The trend in NV post 2008 has been pretty clear, maybe the trend stops in 2024 but we will have to see, this is how NV has voted relative to the nation since 2008:

2008: D+5.3
2012: D+2.8
2016: D+0.3
2020: R+2.1

There has been a pretty consistent 2.5% shift towards the Republicans relative to the nation in every election since 2008, would suggest something like a R+4.5 lean in 2024. If Biden expands his NPV margin from 2020, he can hold NV, but absent that, Trump will win it.

The weird thing about Nevada is it took a huge lurch left in 2008; there is an argument to be made NV, along with many midwestern states like MI WI PA, Obama era was the abberation and 2016/2020 were just reversions to the norm. I think people often forget WI/MI/PA we’re only very narrow Kerry and Gore wins.

[🥥🌴]

Downballot might be very interesting.

If i'd to bet i would say

presidential: Trump between +2 and +4
senate: Rosen +0
district 1: D+2
district 2: safe R
district 3: D+0
district 4: D+2

Must say, excellent D gerrymander here, i don't think one of the districts will flip, even if Trump wins by 3 or 4. District 1 might see the largest shift, but it's district 3 that was the closest in 2022. Also think Rosen holds on, even if Trump takes it by 3 or 4, but a very narrow defeat is possible, i mean if you can win your elections by 10K you can also lose them by 10K. Definitely a contendor for the closest senate race, but Rosen probably overperforms Biden quite a bit.

Nevada is one of the few states that doesn't seem to give incumbents advantages.

If Trump wins it by 4 everything flips, especially since Las Vegas is slowly turning Republican, the D gerrymander will flip to an R gerrymander.

congressional ballot in 2022 in Nevada was already R+3.5. And the three districts remained democrat, the closest being +2, which is the whitest of the three. Secondly, i think Trump overperforms GCB.

I agree with everything else you've said. And it's risky but i think - barring a larger Trump win - the districts will remain Democratic (for now).

A 2026 Biden midturn though would make them vulnerable (but no senate race would be up, since CCM was up in 2022 and rosen now)

[Tekken_Guy]

Downballot might be very interesting.

If i'd to bet i would say

presidential: Trump between +2 and +4
senate: Rosen +0
district 1: D+2
district 2: safe R
district 3: D+0
district 4: D+2

Must say, excellent D gerrymander here, i don't think one of the districts will flip, even if Trump wins by 3 or 4. District 1 might see the largest shift, but it's district 3 that was the closest in 2022. Also think Rosen holds on, even if Trump takes it by 3 or 4, but a very narrow defeat is possible, i mean if you can win your elections by 10K you can also lose them by 10K. Definitely a contendor for the closest senate race, but Rosen probably overperforms Biden quite a bit.

Nevada is one of the few states that doesn't seem to give incumbents advantages.

If Trump wins it by 4 everything flips, especially since Las Vegas is slowly turning Republican, the D gerrymander will flip to an R gerrymander.

congressional ballot in 2022 in Nevada was already R+3.5. And the three districts remained democrat, the closest being +2, which is the whitest of the three. Secondly, i think Trump overperforms GCB.

I agree with everything else you've said. And it's risky but i think - barring a larger Trump win - the districts will remain Democratic (for now).

A 2026 Biden midturn though would make them vulnerable (but no senate race would be up, since CCM was up in 2022 and rosen now)

Does Trump carry any of the three Democratic districts, or does he only win the 2nd like Lombardo?

[DrScholl]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hard to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

[🥥🌴]

Downballot might be very interesting.

If i'd to bet i would say

presidential: Trump between +2 and +4
senate: Rosen +0
district 1: D+2
district 2: safe R
district 3: D+0
district 4: D+2

Must say, excellent D gerrymander here, i don't think one of the districts will flip, even if Trump wins by 3 or 4. District 1 might see the largest shift, but it's district 3 that was the closest in 2022. Also think Rosen holds on, even if Trump takes it by 3 or 4, but a very narrow defeat is possible, i mean if you can win your elections by 10K you can also lose them by 10K. Definitely a contendor for the closest senate race, but Rosen probably overperforms Biden quite a bit.

Nevada is one of the few states that doesn't seem to give incumbents advantages.

If Trump wins it by 4 everything flips, especially since Las Vegas is slowly turning Republican, the D gerrymander will flip to an R gerrymander.

congressional ballot in 2022 in Nevada was already R+3.5. And the three districts remained democrat, the closest being +2, which is the whitest of the three. Secondly, i think Trump overperforms GCB.

I agree with everything else you've said. And it's risky but i think - barring a larger Trump win - the districts will remain Democratic (for now).

A 2026 Biden midturn though would make them vulnerable (but no senate race would be up, since CCM was up in 2022 and rosen now)

Does Trump carry any of the three Democratic districts, or does he only win the 2nd like Lombardo?

It's possible, but unlikely



The lt. gov won his race by 3.6% and still failed to carry any of the 3 districts.

And based on demographics, i expect the biggest shift in district 1.

It might get close, but i think Biden keeps the 3 districts until Trump starts to win Nevada by more than 4 points.

And I believe the 2022 LT gov race might be a good indicator of what I expect how NV will vote in 2024, incl. Trump failing to clear 50% probably here.

[🥥🌴]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else causing him to fall short in what otherwise was a decent environment for a flip.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else.

It would be funny if shifts eventually make it so all 4 districts vote basically in line with the state. It sounds crazy to entertain, but it's not impossible.

[🥥🌴]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else.

It would be funny if shifts eventually make it so all 4 districts vote basically in line with the state. It sounds crazy to entertain, but it's not impossible.

2nd district is too rural for that.

The three D districts basically vote to the left of the state, because the 2nd is somewhat of a GOP sink.

The only issue i can see is if Trump has a good/strong showing in NV in 2024 but Biden is re-elected, than you could really see a shift in 2026 where the state becomes more lean/likely R if the trend with the demographics continues, with Las Vegas being sort of relatively republican for an urban area in the USA (like Miami Dade). There definitely is a pathway for the GOP to flip the districts, esp 3 and 4 but maybe 1 too if hispanics trend right-wing if the environment is there, but it'll require a mid to high single points digits statewide win (which is not impossible, but requires a 'certain' environment).

NV will tho not go the way of FL because it's a relatively unpopulated state, mostly being Las Vegas (and with Reno there is another D trending city in NV that might counter a certain trend), but it might be a state where tilt to lean R races might become the norm. It's quite a unique state with unique dynamics and a unique city (or at least the nightlife/economy), but therefore also relatively uneducated (for a "blue state"), a certain working class (that tends to respond well to Trump politics, esp minority working class, being part of the 'global trend'). It won't go the way of Colorado either, definitely not.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else.

It would be funny if shifts eventually make it so all 4 districts vote basically in line with the state. It sounds crazy to entertain, but it's not impossible.

2nd district is too rural for that.

The three D districts basically vote to the left of the state, because the 2nd is somewhat of a GOP sink.

The only issue i can see is if Trump has a good/strong showing in NV in 2024 but Biden is re-elected, than you could really see a shift in 2026 where the state becomes more lean/likely R if the trend with the demographics continues, with Las Vegas being sort of relatively republican for an urban area in the USA (like Miami Dade). There definitely is a pathway for the GOP to flip the districts, esp 3 and 4 but maybe 1 too if hispanics trend right-wing if the environment is there, but it'll require a mid to high single points digits statewide win (which is not impossible, but requires a 'certain' environment).

I wouldn't say 2 is too rural; over 60% of the district lives in Washoe County alone and a good chunk of the rest live in Carson City. If Reno really does start seeing a liberal influx from Lake Tahoe, could make the district interesting, though my current prediction is it stays likely R for the decade. Also, 2 was "only" Trump+11 in 2020; I wouldn't really call that a GOP vote sink.

Las Vegas definitely gives simillar cultural vibes to Miami in many ways, but I think there are some differences. One huge difference is metro Miami's political geography is pretty polarizing with heavily R cuban areas to the west and heavily D black areas to the west, whereas Vegas is basically a giant D+15ish square who's political geography seems to be neutralizing as non-whites shift right. Would be funny if Nevada becomes an R-leaning state with D supermajorities in the legislature because of this distribution.

[BG-NY (permanently retired)]

2020 Exit Polls, fwiw:

AZ 41% WWC/33% WColl/2% Black/19% Hispanic/6% Asian+other
FL 39% WWC/24% WColl/14% Black/19% Hispanic/4% Asian+other
NV 42% WWC/23% WColl/7% Black/17% Hispanic/10% Asian+other
TX 34% WWC/26% WColl/12% Black/23% Hispanic/5% Asian+other

Grain of salt as always with Exits, of course, but I'm not sure I buy NV voting far right of AZ.

[The Economy is Getting Worse]

NV has low college education which should help Trump, but is also very pro-choice which should help Biden. I expect a Lombardo sized victory for Trump given the current political environment.

[BG-NY (permanently retired)]

NV has low college education which should help Trump, but is also very pro-choice which should help Biden. I expect a Lombardo sized victory for Trump given the current political environment.

My current predictions for November:

North Carolina: T+5
Georgia: T+3
Michigan: T+2
Wisconsin: T+1
"National Popular" Vote: T+1
Nevada: T+0
Arizona: B+0
Pennsylvania: B+1

[🥥🌴]

2020 Exit Polls, fwiw:

AZ 41% WWC/33% WColl/2% Black/19% Hispanic/6% Asian+other
FL 39% WWC/24% WColl/14% Black/19% Hispanic/4% Asian+other
NV 42% WWC/23% WColl/7% Black/17% Hispanic/10% Asian+other
TX 34% WWC/26% WColl/12% Black/23% Hispanic/5% Asian+other

Grain of salt as always with Exits, of course, but I'm not sure I buy NV voting far right of AZ.

Based on that, i wouldn't buy FL and TX voting far right of NV either.

And NV is much closer to FL.

The thing that sets AZ apart is WColl (and its educated ratio generally).

Also, looking at minority demographics with a general 'hispanic' isn't too helpful either since it isn't a 'homogenous group' either. It's a catch-all term.

[BG-NY (permanently retired)]

2020 Exit Polls, fwiw:

AZ 41% WWC/33% WColl/2% Black/19% Hispanic/6% Asian+other
FL 39% WWC/24% WColl/14% Black/19% Hispanic/4% Asian+other
NV 42% WWC/23% WColl/7% Black/17% Hispanic/10% Asian+other
TX 34% WWC/26% WColl/12% Black/23% Hispanic/5% Asian+other

Grain of salt as always with Exits, of course, but I'm not sure I buy NV voting far right of AZ.

Based on that, i wouldn't buy FL and TX voting far right of NV either.

And NV is much closer to FL.

The thing that sets AZ apart is WColl (and its educated ratio generally).

Also, looking at minority demographics with a general 'hispanic' isn't too helpful either since it isn't a 'homogenous group' either. It's a catch-all term.

That's a fair point, I guess this explains a lot of that (source: vividmaps):

Are Hispanics in the Northeast also more right-leaning than the non-Florida US?

[Tekken_Guy]

NV has low college education which should help Trump, but is also very pro-choice which should help Biden. I expect a Lombardo sized victory for Trump given the current political environment.

My current predictions for November:

North Carolina: T+5
Georgia: T+3
Michigan: T+2
Wisconsin: T+1
"National Popular" Vote: T+1
Nevada: T+0
Arizona: B+0
Pennsylvania: B+1

Michigan will not vote 3 points right of PA. It’s just not happening. And Biden probably isn’t holding PA or AZ in a Trump PV win.

[BG-NY (permanently retired)]

NV has low college education which should help Trump, but is also very pro-choice which should help Biden. I expect a Lombardo sized victory for Trump given the current political environment.

My current predictions for November:

North Carolina: T+5
Georgia: T+3
Michigan: T+2
Wisconsin: T+1
"National Popular" Vote: T+1
Nevada: T+0
Arizona: B+0
Pennsylvania: B+1

Michigan will not vote 3 points right of PA.

It did in 1984 and 1988.

[BG-NY (permanently retired)]

Same caveats as always with exits, but look at 2020:

WWC/WColl/Black/Hispanic/Asian+Other
OH 53/30/11/3/3
MI 52/29/12/3/5
PA 45/36/11/5/2

OH is almost identical to MI. PA is more educated.

[Tekken_Guy]

NV has low college education which should help Trump, but is also very pro-choice which should help Biden. I expect a Lombardo sized victory for Trump given the current political environment.

My current predictions for November:

North Carolina: T+5
Georgia: T+3
Michigan: T+2
Wisconsin: T+1
"National Popular" Vote: T+1
Nevada: T+0
Arizona: B+0
Pennsylvania: B+1

Michigan will not vote 3 points right of PA.

It did in 1984 and 1988.

1984 and 1988 are 40 and 36 years ago. So I guess we should expect West Virginia to vote to the left of California then?

[DrScholl]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else causing him to fall short in what otherwise was a decent environment for a flip.

The point is that Republicans failed to gain anything federally and it's obvious that there was a separation between the federal and state races. Abortion and democracy are the issues that hindered the GOP at the federal level and it showed. But I'm not going to argue about it and will just leave it at that.

[🥥🌴]

The 2022 say a lot particularly with the federal races. The whole "BUT TRUMP WASN'T ON THE BALLOT!" argument goes out the window considering that some Republicans did better than but still lost anyway. Even with COVID having hit tourism hard the Governor's seat only flipped by a percentage point. Nevada used to be a Republican blowout in midterms, but that changed.

It was the only swing state that Republicans flipped something in the midterms.

Also the party registration lead for Democrats shrunk again to just 59k.
At that rate it could be possible for Republicans to take the lead for the 1st time since Dec. 2005 by election day.

A very weak flip that is hard to use as evidence for a 2024 GOP landslide and it was based a lot of something that is not a factor this year (COVID). I'd wager that the GOP would have traded the Governor's seat for the Senate seat and three House seats. Overall my point still stands that Republicans did better without Trump on the ballot yet still lost so it's hardly to call those people out as losing just because Trump wasn't on the ballot.

Well given the lt.gov won his race by 3.6 points and still failed to win any of the three districts, the GOP really need a big win in NV to win any of those, so... i don't think the GOP failing to win any of the three districts should be used as counter-evidence or a sign of the GOP not making inroads in NV. I've already shown that for the three districts to flip, (at least two of the three) you need at least a 4%-5% win statewide, and while NV was a GCB win for the GOP, it was not by that margin but that does not matter for a presidential election (where poll after poll also backs up that downballot Democrats will do better than Biden on top of the ballot).

From a neutral POV, it's an excellent gerrymander. I don't think you can draw many conclusions based on that, though i'll say it shows that Laxalt had no business losing that election, based on other races in the state in 2022, because Laxalt underperformed basically everyone else causing him to fall short in what otherwise was a decent environment for a flip.

The point is that Republicans failed to gain anything federally and it's obvious that there was a separation between the federal and state races. Abortion and democracy are the issues that hindered the GOP at the federal level and it showed. But I'm not going to argue about it and will just leave it at that.

The GCB raw vote saw GOP do 4.3 points better in 2022 than 2020, slightly more than federally. While in 2020 they also made up ground and in 2018 they did less worse than nationally too.

2022 in Nevada on the GCB barely is only 1 point less well than 2010. They did much better in 2014 when there were no senate elections up (and Dems basically not contesting the gubernational election due to Sandoval being popular and his coattails causing wins downballot).

While the GOP definitely was disappointing federally 2022 relative to expectations, it wasn't that disastreous in NV. They came very close in the senate and it's one of the first seats that would've flipped if they did a little better. Democrats did a lot better in Arizona, they won the senate race there with five points (though arguably, especially considering the generic congressional ballot in Arizona, candidate quality is the reason why. Lake & Masters had no business losing those elections, esp. Masters by five - EDIT: the Democrats didn't contest district 8 and 9 so hard to draw conclusions based on GCB in Arizona in 2022)