Since 1988, the share of adults in the U.S. who identify as political independents has continued to grow, often surpassing the that of Democrats or Republicans. In 2024, approximately ** percent of adults rejected identification with the major parties, compared to ** percent of respondents identified with the Democratic Party, and ** percent with the Republican Party.

According to a 2023 survey, Americans between 18 and 29 years of age were more likely to identify with the Democratic Party than any other surveyed age group. While 39 percent identified as Democrats, only 14 percent identified ad Republicans. However, those 50 and older identified more with the Republican Party.

In the last few decades, the Democratic Party has often pulled ahead of the Republican Party in terms of party identification. However, 2022 saw a shift in party identification, with slightly more Americans identifying with the Republican Party for the first time since 2011, when both parties stood at ** percent in 2011. These values include not only those surveyed who identified with a major political party, but also those who identified as independent, but have leanings towards one party over another.

According to a 2023 survey of U.S. adults, non-Hispanic white adults were much more likely to identify as Republican or Republican-leaning than non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults.

These values include not only those surveyed who identified with a major political party, but also those who identified as independent, but have leanings towards one party over another.

PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A05707c1dc04a814129f751937a6ea56b08413546b18b351a85bc96da16a7f8b5 for complete metadata about this dataset.

This dataset was designed to provide information on the personal and political backgrounds, political attitudes, and relevant behavior of party leaders. The data pertain to Democratic and Republican party elites holding office during the election year of 1980 and include County and State Chairs, members of the Democratic and Republican National Committees, and delegates to the National Conventions. These data focus on the "representativeness" of the party elites on a variety of dimensions and also permit a comparison of party leaders from the local, state, and national organizational levels. Other issues explored include the party reform era, the effects of the growing body of party law, and the nationalization of the political parties. Specific variables include characterization of respondent's political beliefs on the liberal-conservative scale, length of time the respondent had been active in the party, and the respondent's opinions on minorities in the party, party unity, national- and local-level party strength, and party loyalty. Respondents were also queried on attitudes toward important national problems, defense spending, and inflation. In addition, their opinions were elicited on controversial provisions in their parties' charters and on the directions their parties should take in the future. Demographic characteristics are supplied as well.

This data collection contains electoral and demographic data for Massachusetts counties and cities during 1848-1876. The data for this collection were compiled to study electoral changes in Massachusetts politics during the Civil War period and to link the changes to socioeconomic determinants of support for the Republican and Democratic parties. Specific variables include number of voters for specific years and demographic information such as number of males and females and number of males employed in certain trades. Electoral data consists of election results.

The Detroit Area Study (DAS) is a face-to-face survey of adults in the Detroit, Michigan metropolitan area. Information was collected on the political attitudes and behavior of 596 adults in the period during the fall of 1956 and early spring 1957. This collection was a combination of two separate studies: PARTY LEADERSHIP AND POLITICAL BEHAVIOR by Daniel Katz and Samuel Eldersveld, and INTRA-CLASS CORRELATION OF ATTITUDES IN DETROIT by Leslie Kish. Of the 596 respondents, 149 were categorized as belonging to a leadership sample consisting of 77 Republicans and 72 Democratic precinct leaders. For data on the political activities and attitudes of party leaders, see the related collection, DETROIT AREA STUDY, 1957: LEADER SURVEY (ICPSR 7107) (ICPSR 07107). Items in this survey focused on perceptions, attitudes, and behavior of the adult public toward party structures and organizations at the county, district, and precinct levels. In order to assess the sources of influence on the respondents' political attitudes and behavior, they were asked about the mass media they depended on most heavily for political information, as well as the frequency with which politics was discussed in meetings of their families, friends, neighbors, and other groups to which they belonged. A series of questions asked for whom respondents had voted in the 1956 presidential, gubernatorial, and congressional races, as well as which presidential candidate their family, friends, co-workers, and neighbors voted for. Other questions elicited information about the respondents' knowledge of and involvement in local party politics and their knowledge of precinct workers and their state party chairman. Also explored were respondents' feelings about the importance of voting, their general attitudes toward politics and political figures such as Adlai Stevenson and Dwight Eisenhower, their perception of the differences between the major parties on various issues, and their opinions on several controversial issues such as a national health care, school integration, ending the military draft, and monetary aid to countries that were not anti-communist. Additional items covered the use of telephones in respondents' homes, their living experiences before coming to Detroit, their handling of change of residences since coming to Detroit, and their feelings about their neighborhood. Demographic variables include the respondent's age, sex, race, education level, place of birth, marital status, number of children, religious preference, frequency of religious attendance, political party affiliation, voter registration status and participation history, employment status, occupation, labor union membership, perceived social class, relationship to the head of household, length of time at present residence, and length of residence in the Detroit area. Demographic information was collected on the nationality, occupation, and political party affiliation of the respondent's father. Information was also collected on the number and ages of household members, the number of household members employed, labor union membership in the household, household income, whether anyone in the household was employed by the government, and the occupation and employment status of the head of the household.

This Gallup Poll aims to gather the Canadians' opinons of politics. Included is data regarding voting habits, election interest, favoured political parties, and attitudes towards the careers of politicians. Information regarding demographics, geographic location and social class was also collected from the respondents. Topics of interest include: car ownership; family problems; the federal election; phone ownership; political careers for the respondents' sons; political parties; union membership; and voting behaviour. Basic demographics variables are also included.

Details the statistics of the Electoral College vote and popular vote over time in both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Also shows the voting population participation trend over time.

Political situation in Germany. Attitudes towards political parties.

Topics: Turnout intention and voting intention (Sunday question); Alternative voting intention; other electable party: Pirate Party; other electable party: Free voters; voting behaviour in the last federal election in 2009 (recall); positive or negative association with terms (people´s party, compassion, conservative, christian, social, close to the economy, middle-class, liberal, opportunities, achievement, cohesion, freedom, security, stability, order, performance justice, social market economy, centre, qualified immigration, budget consolidation, freedom of choice for families, intelligent saving, respect, demographic change, values, tradition, home, trust); annoyance about political decisions; issues about which one was annoyed; affected by political decisions (current); decisions by which one was personally affected (current); positive or negative impact of the decision; affected by political decisions (prospective); decisions by which one will be personally affected (prospective); party with which one feels most comfortable; subjective affiliation with ´little people´.

Political positions (politics takes care of the problems of the little people, concern about limiting living standards, debt reduction to maintain prosperity, public debt is good if it is made for the future of the children, fear of going out alone in the evening, problems keeping up with the pace of everyday life, state support for those who are willing to perform, acceptance of the performance principle, people´s parties prevent the assertion of individual interests, 30 km/h speed limit in cities, support for large-scale projects); association of certain terms with parties (people´s party, modern, compassionate, conservative, christian, down-to-earth, social, close to the economy, middle-class, liberal, advancement, opportunities, achievement, cohesion, freedom, security, stability, order, performance fairness, future, social market economy, centre, prosperity, qualified immigration, budget consolidation, freedom of choice for families, intelligent savings, demographic change, values, tradition, home, good governance, expertise, cares for citizens, party for all, can move Germany forward, strong leadership, energetic, honest, reliable, credible, responsible, trust).

Demography: age; highest school-leaving qualification; intended school-leaving qualification, completed studies; completed apprenticeship; occupation; profession; household size; frequency of churchgoing; party identification (direction, strength, stability); sex.

Additionally coded were: Federal state; inhabitant of place of residence; target persons in the household; number of telephone numbers; indicator replenishment sample; weighting factors.

We examine the social antecedents for contributing to campaigns, with a particular focus on the role of population density and social networking opportunities. Using 10 years of US campaign contribution data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and a national survey of party leaders, we find that recruiting contributors is easier in a densely populated region, where the daily opportunity of individuals being exposed to the same information via their social networks is high. Furthermore, the effect of population density is heterogeneous with respect to mobility: if a region has substantial commuting outflow, the chance of being mobilized from the place of residence decreases, but the chance of mobilization in their place of work increases. This analysis also reveals differences between political parties. Democrats are more dependent on social networking in population dense areas. This difference in the importance of social networking opportunities present in geographical space helps explain macro-level patterns in party fundraising.

This Gallup poll aims to collect the political views of Canadians. It seeks thoughts on political parties, issues central to politics, and interest in elections, across various demographic, geographic and social groups. Topics of interest include: car ownership; farm problems; the federal election; health plans; high prices; labour problems; phone ownership; preferred political parties; taxation; union membership; and voting behaviour. Basic demographics variables are also included.

This special topic poll, conducted November 6-10, 1996, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of political and social issues. The focus of this data collection was on the presidential and congressional elections held November 5, 1996. In the days following the election, respondents who had voted were asked about their choice for president, when they decided on their candidate, whether they had known enough about the candidates to make an informed choice, and whether factors such as leadership and a candidate's stance on issues were major or minor reasons for their vote. Respondents were quizzed on their knowledge of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, as well as party platforms, campaign funding, and which party had the most members in the United States Congress. Views were sought on the media's treatment of the presidential candidates, campaign advertisements featuring the issue of Medicare, whether the presidential campaigns were more negative than in the past, and whether the news media should report public opinion poll results. Other topics addressed the condition of the national economy, abortion, sources of campaign information, types of negative news media coverage, and how much attention respondents paid to media coverage of the presidential campaign. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, ethnicity, education level, marital status, household income, political party affiliation, political philosophy, labor union membership, voter registration status, religious preference, and whether respondents thought of themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians.

According to a survey conducted in 2023, Gen Z teens were more likely than other generations to identify as independents in the United States, at ** percent. A further ** percent of Gen Z teens identified as Democratic, while ** percent identified as Republicans.

This study contains selected demographic, social, economic, public policy, and political comparative data for Switzerland, Canada, France, and Mexico for the decades of 1900-1960. Each dataset presents comparable data at the province or district level for each decade in the period. Various derived measures, such as percentages, ratios, and indices, constitute the bulk of these datasets. Data for Switzerland contain information for all cantons for each decennial year from 1900 to 1960. Variables describe population characteristics, such as the age of men and women, county and commune of origin, ratio of foreigners to Swiss, percentage of the population from other countries such as Germany, Austria and Lichtenstein, Italy, and France, the percentage of the population that were Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, births, deaths, infant mortality rates, persons per household, population density, the percentage of urban and agricultural population, marital status, marriages, divorces, professions, factory workers, and primary, secondary, and university students. Economic variables provide information on the number of corporations, factory workers, economic status, cultivated land, taxation and tax revenues, canton revenues and expenditures, federal subsidies, bankruptcies, bank account deposits, and taxable assets. Additional variables provide political information, such as national referenda returns, party votes cast in National Council elections, and seats in the cantonal legislature held by political groups such as the Peasants, Socialists, Democrats, Catholics, Radicals, and others. Data for Canada provide information for all provinces for the decades 1900-1960 on population characteristics, such as national origin, the net internal migration per 1,000 of native population, population density per square mile, the percentage of owner-occupied dwellings, the percentage of urban population, the percentage of change in population from preceding censuses, the percentage of illiterate population aged 5 years and older, and the median years of schooling. Economic variables provide information on per capita personal income, total provincial revenue and expenditure per capita, the percentage of the labor force employed in manufacturing and in agriculture, the average number of employees per manufacturing establishment, assessed value of real property per capita, the average number of acres per farm, highway and rural road mileage, transportation and communication, the number of telephones per 100 population, and the number of motor vehicles registered per 1,000 population. Additional variables on elections and votes are supplied as well. Data for France provide information for all departements for all legislative elections since 1936, the two presidential elections of 1965 and 1969, and several referenda held in the period since 1958. Social and economic data are provided for the years 1946, 1954, and 1962, while various policy data are presented for the period 1959-1962. Variables provide information on population characteristics, such as the percentages of population by age group, foreign-born, bachelors aged 20 to 59, divorced men aged 25 and older, elementary school students in private schools, elementary school students per million population from 1966 to 1967, the number of persons in household in 1962, infant mortality rates per million births, and the number of priests per 10,000 population in 1946. Economic variables focus on the Gross National Product (GNP), the revenue per capita per household, personal income per capita, income tax, the percentage of active population in industry, construction and public works, transportation, hotels, public administration, and other jobs, the percentage of skilled and unskilled industrial workers, the number of doctors per 10,000 population, the number of agricultural cooperatives in 1946, the average hectares per farm, the percentage of farms cultivated by the owner, tenants, and sharecroppers, the number of workhorses, cows, and oxen per 100 hectares of farmland in 1946, and the percentages of automobiles per 1,000 population, radios per 100 homes, and cinema seats per 1,000 population. Data are also provided on the percentage of Communists (PCF), Socialists, Radical Socialists, Conservatives, Gaullists, Moderates, Poujadists, Independents, Turnouts, and other political groups and p

This special topic poll, conducted October 19-22, 2006, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the current presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way George W. Bush was handling his job as president, whether they approved of the way Congress and their own representative in Congress was handling their job, and to rate the condition of the national economy. Registered voters were asked whether they followed the congressional elections, whether they were likely to vote, and which candidate they would vote for if the election were being held that day. Registered voters who had already voted absentee were asked which candidate they voted for, how enthusiastic they were about their vote, and whether their vote was more for one political party, or more against the other political party. Opinions were solicited on what was the most important issue in congressional elections, whether things in the country were generally going in the right direction, whether their reason for voting for a candidate for Congress included showing support for George W. Bush, which political party they trusted to do a better job handling issues such as the situation in Iraq and the economy, and whether they thought a change of control from the Republicans to the Democrats would be a good thing. Information was collected on whether respondents had been contacted by any organization working in support of a candidate for Congress and which political party they were asked to vote for, whether the 2006 congressional elections were more important to the country than past elections, and whether the war with Iraq was worth fighting. Additional questions asked how much Congress should be blamed for problems relating to the war with Iraq, how much credit Congress should get for preventing terrorist attacks, whether respondents felt optimistic about the situation in Iraq, and if the United States had the same kind of involvement in the war with Iraq as it did the Vietnam war. Demographic variables include sex, age, religion, race, education level, household income, labor union membership, voter registration and participation history, political party affiliation, political philosophy, employment status, marital status, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).

US Presidential Campaign Logos

Color Diversity and Demographics

By Amber Thomas [source]

About this dataset

We conducted extensive research on popular election campaigns from 1968-2020 as compiled on Wikipedia's entry for each year. From this initial list, we excluded 32 candidates whose images could not be found--leaving us with a total of 271 primary and general party candidates across 14 electoral cycles during that period. In our search for campaign logo images, we prioritized official signs used at rallies, podiums, yards, posters, and bumper stickers with required Federal Election Commission disclaimers--resorting to using buttons only when absolutely necessary . We acknowledge that due to advances in technology, the printing process has significantly impacted the design aesthetics for modern logos compared to those made decades ago.

Using Chrome DevTools or Adobe Photoshop software programs; hexadecimal color values were retreived for each logo clipped from sources such as candidate websites or obtained through additional research efforts. To recognize RWB logos--those using only three colors of red white blue (RWB) --we also surveyed designs including accent tones paired with RWB palettes , two-color schemes (Red/Blue; Red/White; Blue/White), and multiple shades derived from a combination of any 3 primary or secondary RBW hues respectively.

In addition to visual elements associated with picture datasets , candidate demographics such as race , gender are indicated here as binary categories indicating whether a particular demographic is identifiable under one particular label ie either male / female or White / non White individuals . Candidates who fit into both these dual criteria are classfied under majority categories identified under binary labels ie ' whiteMale '. For greater census accuracy candidates classified simply as minority categorizations are merged sounding various Other labels including males belonging outidese racial definitions regardless if identifyingthemselves belonging within -- inclusion of them details belongs hereinunder :

name: The name of the candidate    (String);
party: The political party of thhe candiatate (String);              
white : Binary value indicating if thee candidiate is White     (Boolean);        male: Binary value indocating ffffthueee ccandidate is maille      (Boolean );           whitaeMaile :: Binary alula indicatig

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset can be useful for understanding trends in campaign symbolism and visual rhetoric surrounding US presidential elections over time. This data could be used to evaluate how diversity amongst candidates is reflected in their campaign visuals by looking at changes in color usage or exploring differences between Democratic and Republican campaigns.

The data can also be visualized to create charts or maps that display possible trends or themes across different elections. This can help users more easily identify patterns between campaign logs for research purposes or simply make for an interesting comparison tool to explore different aspects of certain elections through visuals rather than text alone.

Using this data is easy! Start by familiarizing yourself with all the columns included; you will find information regarding RWB & non-RWB percentages, hexadecimal value breakdowns of each logo's colors & general candidate demographic information such as gender & race. Select desired columns to focus on and decide which analysis method works best; graphical representational options including line graphs, scatter graphs & pie charts are great ways to visually explore how various factors affect color usage both within an election cycle & across multiple cycles over time! Finally you can use these insights gleaned from your analysis to generate interesting questions regarding campaign symbolism design's relationship/influence on voting population demographics/politics!

Research Ideas

• Create an interactive map to show the color trends of presidential logos over the years.
• Use a machine learning algorithm to analyze how the logo colors correlate with primary and general elections.
• Analyze how diversity and inclusion in presidential campaigns has changed by comparing RWB versus non-RWB percentages for each year or election cycle

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

...

Description:

This dataset contains comprehensive voting data for the 2024 US elections, focusing on general ballot measures. This information includes voting results from various sources and tracking public opinion about political parties and candidates across states and demographic groups. Each item in the dataset represents a specific poll. Along with detailed information about the dates of the polls. Survey organization, sample size, margin of error, Percentage of respondents supporting each political party or candidates

Key Features:

Poll Date:The date when the poll was conducted.

Polling Organization: The name of the organization that conducted the poll.

Sample Size: The number of respondents in the poll.

Margin of Error: The statistical margin of error for the poll results.

Party/Candidate Support: Percentage of respondents who support each political party or candidate.

State/Demographics: Geographic and demographic breakdowns of the polling data.

Use Cases:

Analyzing trends in public opinion leading up to the 2024 U.S. elections. Comparing support for different political parties and candidates over time. Studying the impact of key events on voter preferences. Informing political strategies and campaign planning.

This dataset contains simulated data for social media users' demographics, behaviors, and perceptions related to political content. It includes features such as age, gender, education level, occupation, social media usage frequency, exposure to political content, and perceptions of accuracy and relevance.

the features included in the "Social Media Political Content Analysis Dataset":

1. Age: Age of the user.
2. Gender: Gender identity of the user.
3. Education Level: Highest level of education attained by the user.
4. Occupation: Current occupation of the user.
5. Political Affiliation: Political leaning or affiliation of the user (e.g., Liberal, Conservative, Independent).
6. Geographic Location: Country or region where the user is located (e.g., USA, UK, Canada, Australia).
7. Social Media Usage Frequency: Frequency of social media usage by the user (e.g., 0-1 hour, 1-2 hours, 2-4 hours, 4+ hours).
8. Preferred Social Media: Social media platform preferred by the user (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram).
9. Political Content Exposure: Frequency of exposure to political content on social media (e.g., Once a day, Few times a week, Rarely, Several times a day).
10. Types of Political Content: Types of political content consumed by the user (e.g., News articles, Opinion pieces, Memes).
11. Sources of Political Content: Sources from which the user obtains political content (e.g., Mainstream media, Political parties, Independent bloggers).
12. Recency of Exposure: Recency of the user's exposure to political content (e.g., Within the last hour, Within the last 24 hours, Within the last week, Longer than a week ago).
13. Interactions Frequency: Frequency of user interactions with political content on social media (e.g., Once a day, Few times a week, Rarely, Several times a day).
14. Political Content Topics: Topics of political content that interest the user (e.g., Economy, Healthcare, Immigration, Environment).
15. Perception of Accuracy: User's perception of the accuracy of political content on social media (e.g., Very accurate, Somewhat accurate, Not accurate).
16. Awareness of Algorithms: Whether the user is aware of algorithms that determine their social media feed (e.g., Yes, No).
17. Perception of Relevance: User's perception of the relevance of political content on social media (e.g., Very relevant, Somewhat relevant, Not relevant).
18. Personal Impact: User's perception of the personal impact of political content on social media (e.g., Strong impact, Moderate impact, No impact).
19. Trust in Social Media: User's level of trust in social media as a source of political information (e.g., Trust a lot, Trust somewhat, Do not trust).
20. Concerns about Algorithms: User's level of concern about algorithms shaping their social media experience (e.g., Very concerned, Somewhat concerned, Not concerned).
21. Overall Quality of Discourse: User's perception of the overall quality of political discourse on social media (e.g., High quality, Moderate quality, Low quality).
22. Views on Influence: User's perception of the influence of political content on social media (e.g., Very influential, Somewhat influential, Not influential).
23. Suggestions for Improvement: User's suggestions for improving the quality or experience of political content on social media (e.g., Increase transparency, Provide more diverse sources, Improve fact-checking, Enhance user controls).