Skip to content

Federal level · Current term

Nevada

Nevada’s congressional delegation

statements analyzed
12,403
officials covered
6
last updated
Oct 28, 2026

What each party owns

Democrats name Health more often than Republicans do; Republicans name Armed Forces more often. Health is named in 23.5% of Democrats’ policy statements and 10.3% of Republicans’, a gap of 13.2 points; Armed Forces and National Security in 44.6% of Republicans’ and 12.5% of Democrats’, a gap of 32.1 points. On 3 of the 25 areas the two parties are within one point of each other.

Each bar is the share of Democrats’ policy statements that name an area minus the share of Republicans’ that do, in percentage points, among 6 members of Nevada’s congressional delegation in the current term. Bars to the right are areas Democrats name more often; bars to the left, areas Republicans name more often. The AI model tags each policy statement with any of the Congressional Research Service’s 25 policy areas. The figures beside each bar are both parties’ shares.

Policy areas, Democrats minus Republicans

Share of policy statements naming each area, members of Congress, the current term, sorted by the gap

← Republicans say moreDemocrats say more →−20 pts+20 ptsHealth: Democrats 23.5%, Republicans 10.3%; gap +13.2 pointsHealth+13.2D 24% · R 10%Labor and Employment: Democrats 8.8%, Republicans 3.3%; gap +5.6 pointsLabor+5.6D 8.8% · R 3.3%Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues: Democrats 8.1%, Republicans 3.3%; gap +4.8 pointsCivil Rights+4.8D 8.1% · R 3.3%Education: Democrats 7.6%, Republicans 3.3%; gap +4.4 pointsEducation+4.4D 7.6% · R 3.3%Foreign Trade and International Finance: Democrats 7.5%, Republicans 3.8%; gap +3.7 pointsForeign Trade+3.7D 7.5% · R 3.8%Agriculture and Food: Democrats 5.8%, Republicans 3.3%; gap +2.5 pointsAgriculture+2.5D 5.8% · R 3.3%Families: Democrats 3.4%, Republicans 1.1%; gap +2.4 pointsFamilies+2.4D 3.4% · R 1.1%Commerce: Democrats 8.3%, Republicans 6.0%; gap +2.3 pointsCommerce+2.3D 8.3% · R 6.0%Law: Democrats 2.5%, Republicans 0.5%; gap +1.9 pointsLaw+1.9D 2.5% · R 0.5%Finance and Financial Sector: Democrats 2.3%, Republicans 0.5%; gap +1.7 pointsFinance+1.7D 2.3% · R 0.5%Taxation: Democrats 10.8%, Republicans 9.8%; gap +1.0 pointsTaxation+1.0D 11% · R 9.8%International Affairs: Democrats 6.3%, Republicans 5.4%; gap +0.9 pointsIntl. Affairs+0.9D 6.3% · R 5.4%Housing and Community Development: Democrats 8.0%, Republicans 7.6%; gap +0.4 pointsHousing+0.4D 8.0% · R 7.6%Environmental Protection: Democrats 4.2%, Republicans 4.9%; gap −0.7 pointsEnvironment−0.7D 4.2% · R 4.9%Energy: Democrats 6.5%, Republicans 10.9%; gap −4.4 pointsEnergy−4.4D 6.5% · R 11%Crime and Law Enforcement: Democrats 7.7%, Republicans 13.6%; gap −5.9 pointsCrime−5.9D 7.7% · R 14%Water Resources Development: Democrats 3.3%, Republicans 9.2%; gap −5.9 pointsWater−5.9D 3.3% · R 9.2%Transportation and Public Works: Democrats 6.3%, Republicans 13.0%; gap −6.7 pointsTransportation−6.7D 6.3% · R 13%Public Lands and Natural Resources: Democrats 5.5%, Republicans 14.7%; gap −9.2 pointsPublic Lands−9.2D 5.5% · R 15%Emergency Management: Democrats 3.4%, Republicans 13.6%; gap −10.2 pointsEmergencies−10.2D 3.4% · R 14%Immigration: Democrats 7.3%, Republicans 17.9%; gap −10.7 pointsImmigration−10.7D 7.3% · R 18%Science, Technology, Communications: Democrats 3.6%, Republicans 15.2%; gap −11.6 pointsScience and Tech−11.6D 3.6% · R 15%Economics and Public Finance: Democrats 21.8%, Republicans 33.7%; gap −11.9 pointsPublic Finance−11.9D 22% · R 34%Government Operations and Politics: Democrats 12.9%, Republicans 26.1%; gap −13.2 pointsGovernment−13.2D 13% · R 26%Armed Forces and National Security: Democrats 12.5%, Republicans 44.6%; gap −32.1 pointsArmed Forces−32.1D 13% · R 45%
Show the data
Diverging bars for 25 policy areas: Democrats’ share minus Republicans’ share of policy statements, the current term. Democrats name Health (13.2 points more) more often; Republicans name Armed Forces and National Security (32.1 points more) more often.
Policy areaDemocratsRepublicansGap, D − R (points)
Health23.5%10.3%+13.2
Labor and Employment8.8%3.3%+5.6
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues8.1%3.3%+4.8
Education7.6%3.3%+4.4
Foreign Trade and International Finance7.5%3.8%+3.7
Agriculture and Food5.8%3.3%+2.5
Families3.4%1.1%+2.4
Commerce8.3%6.0%+2.3
Law2.5%0.5%+1.9
Finance and Financial Sector2.3%0.5%+1.7
Taxation10.8%9.8%+1.0
International Affairs6.3%5.4%+0.9
Housing and Community Development8.0%7.6%+0.4
Environmental Protection4.2%4.9%−0.7
Energy6.5%10.9%−4.4
Crime and Law Enforcement7.7%13.6%−5.9
Water Resources Development3.3%9.2%−5.9
Transportation and Public Works6.3%13.0%−6.7
Public Lands and Natural Resources5.5%14.7%−9.2
Emergency Management3.4%13.6%−10.2
Immigration7.3%17.9%−10.7
Science, Technology, Communications3.6%15.2%−11.6
Economics and Public Finance21.8%33.7%−11.9
Government Operations and Politics12.9%26.1%−13.2
Armed Forces and National Security12.5%44.6%−32.1
Notes

Health is the most-named area overall (23.3% of policy statements). Each side’s leading areas, labelled in its colour, are those at least one point apart and within half of that side’s widest gap, up to three.

Back to topNext: Who stands out

Who stands out

The five highest rates on four kinds of statement among 6 members of Nevada’s congressional delegation. An official needs at least 50 statements in the current term to be ranked.

An AI model labels every statement. An official’s rate is the share of their statements that carry a label.

Most personal attacks

Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

  1. 1Catherine Cortez MastoDU.S. Senate · Nevada8.4%
  2. 2Jacky RosenDU.S. Senate · Nevada7.3%
  3. 3Dina TitusDU.S. House · NV-013.3%
  4. 4Susie LeeDU.S. House · NV-031.5%
  5. 5Steven HorsfordDU.S. House · NV-041.4%

Most credit claiming

Claims credit for passing legislation, securing funding or grants, or other accomplishments in office.

  1. 1Mark AmodeiRU.S. House · NV-0248%
  2. 2Jacky RosenDU.S. Senate · Nevada39%
  3. 3Catherine Cortez MastoDU.S. Senate · Nevada38%
  4. 4Susie LeeDU.S. House · NV-0332%
  5. 5Dina TitusDU.S. House · NV-0129%

Most bipartisan language

Emphasises working across the aisle, compromise or common ground between the parties.

  1. 1Jacky RosenDU.S. Senate · Nevada25%
  2. 2Catherine Cortez MastoDU.S. Senate · Nevada22%
  3. 3Susie LeeDU.S. House · NV-0317%
  4. 4Mark AmodeiRU.S. House · NV-0215%
  5. 5Dina TitusDU.S. House · NV-018.0%

Most policy-focused

Discusses a specific public policy or policy area (health care, taxes, defense, …).

  1. 1Catherine Cortez MastoDU.S. Senate · Nevada84%
  2. 2Steven HorsfordDU.S. House · NV-0483%
  3. 3Jacky RosenDU.S. Senate · Nevada82%
  4. 4Mark AmodeiRU.S. House · NV-0276%
  5. 5Dina TitusDU.S. House · NV-0175%

Each official’s rates are on their profile and in the bulk file.

Back to topNext: Party comparison

Party comparison

Democrats attack opponents personally 3.8 times as often as Republicans (4.7% of statements against 1.2%). 1.7% of Republican and 2.3% of Democratic statements carry an extreme label, most often aimed at Republicans.

Each bar is the share of a party’s statements that carry a label, pooled across 6 members of Nevada’s congressional delegation in the current term. Officials who post more count more. A statement can carry several labels, so a party’s shares can sum to more than 100%.

Statements by label and party

Share of each party’s statements, the current term

  • Personal attacks
  • Policy criticism
  • Policy discussion
  • Bipartisanship
  • Credit claiming
  • Extreme labels
Show the data
Share of statements in each category by party, Nevada: Personal attacks Democrats 4.7%, Republicans 1.2%; Policy criticism Democrats 36%, Republicans 22%; Policy discussion Democrats 80%, Republicans 76%; Bipartisanship Democrats 16%, Republicans 15%; Credit claiming Democrats 32%, Republicans 48%; Extreme labels Democrats 2.3%, Republicans 1.7%.
MeasureDemocratsRepublicans
Personal attacks4.7%1.2%
Policy criticism36%22%
Policy discussion80%76%
Bipartisanship16%15%
Credit claiming32%48%
Extreme labels2.3%1.7%
The measures

Personal attacks. Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.

Policy criticism. Objects to a specific policy, law or court ruling with fact-based arguments, without personal attacks or emotional appeals.

Policy discussion. Discusses a specific public policy or policy area (health care, taxes, defense, …).

Bipartisanship. Emphasises working across the aisle, compromise or common ground between the parties.

Credit claiming. Claims credit for passing legislation, securing funding or grants, or other accomplishments in office.

Extreme labels. Calls a politician, a party or a policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”.

Personal attacks by venue

Share of statements by 6 members of Nevada’s congressional delegation, the current term

Democrats’ personal-attack rate runs from 4.3% of their posts on X to 9.0% of their floor speeches.

0%5%10%15%Posts on X10,331 statementsPress releases1,637 statementsNewsletters138 statementsFloor speeches297 statements4.3%6.2%5.6%9.0%DemocratsDemocrats0.6%RepublicansRepublicans
Show the data
Slope chart of each party’s personal-attack rate across four venues, the current term. Democrats: posts on x 4.3%, press releases 6.2%, newsletters 5.6%, floor speeches 9.0%. Republicans: posts on x 0.6%, press releases not drawn, newsletters not drawn, floor speeches not drawn.
VenueDemocrats: personal attacksDemocrats: statementsRepublicans: personal attacksRepublicans: statements
Posts on X4.3%101730.6%158
Press releases6.2%16210.0% (fewer than 50 statements, not drawn)16
Newsletters5.6%902.1% (fewer than 50 statements, not drawn)48
Floor speeches9.0%2785.3% (fewer than 50 statements, not drawn)19
Notes

Each point is the share of a party’s statements in one venue that the AI model labelled a personal attack, pooled across members. A line joins each party’s four venues. A statement counts once and carries the label if any of its passages does.

Posts on X are 83% of the 12,403 statements here, so the pooled rates elsewhere on this page sit closest to the X points.

A party needs 50 statements in a venue before its point is drawn.

Back to topNext: Polarization

Polarization

The median Democrat scores −0.96 and the median Republican +0.80 on the CSIP scale, a gap of 1.77.

CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official on one left–right scale estimated from roll-call votes, campaign contributions and the text of their statements. Negative scores are to the left and positive scores to the right. The gap is the distance between the two parties’ medians.

CSIP scores by party

← More liberal · 0 · More conservative →

−2.0−1.00.0+1.0+2.0← More liberalMore conservative →Democratsmedian −1.0Republicansmedian +0.8
Show the data
CSIP distributions of 5 Democrats (median −0.96) and 1 Republicans (median +0.80) on one scale from −2 to +2.
GroupOfficialsMedian
Democrats5−1.0
Republicans1+0.8

Medians: Democrats −0.96, Republicans +0.80. Gap: 1.77.

Gap between the party medians

Members of each Congress

Not enough Congresses with scored members of both parties to draw a trend.

Notes

Each dot is one official, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, darker further from 0. Overlapping dots form darker patches where officials cluster. The rule in each row marks the party median.

Each official has a single score for 2014–2026, so the gap changes over time only as the membership of Congress turns over.

Each official’s score is on their profile, and the full table is in Downloads.

Back to topNext: Trends

Policy topics

Armed Forces and National Security led in Sep ’26, named in 16% of policy statements. International Affairs rose most from Aug ’26 (+4.8 pts); Emergency Management fell most (−7.9 pts).

The AI model tags each policy statement with any of 25 policy areas, so shares can sum to more than 100%. A share is the percentage of a month’s policy statements by members of Congress that name the area. The lists compare the last two complete months, with changes in percentage points. A month needs at least ten policy statements to be compared.

Most discussed, Sep ’26

393 policy statements; change since Aug ’26 in grey

  1. Armed Forces and National Security16% +4.2 pts
  2. Economics and Public Finance15% −5.8 pts
  3. Government Operations and Politics15% +3.1 pts
  4. Health14% −3.5 pts
  5. Commerce13% +0.2 pts

Rising

Up most since Aug ’26

  1. International Affairs+4.8 pts
  2. Armed Forces and National Security+4.2 pts
  3. Science, Technology, Communications+4.2 pts

Falling

Down most since Aug ’26

  1. Emergency Management−7.9 pts
  2. Economics and Public Finance−5.8 pts
  3. Health−3.5 pts

Back to topNext: States

States

The state maps are on the United States dashboard.

The left map is the share of statements by each state’s congressional delegation that the AI model labelled a personal attack, the current term (members of Congress, by the state they represent). The right map is the lab’s survey estimate of affective polarization in each state: residents’ rating of their own party minus their rating of the other, on a 0–100 thermometer. Each state is a square of the same size, shaded by quintile; darker is higher.

The two maps are on the United States dashboard.

Back to topNext: Challengers

Challengers and incumbents

Challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbents they face. On posts on X since Oct 1, 2025, the median challenger’s rate is 4.5% and the median incumbent’s 1.0%; 5 of 6 challengers post personal attacks more often than the incumbent they face and 1 less often, across 4 House and Senate races with both sides measured.

Every 2026 House and Senate race with an incumbent running and at least one challenger. A candidate’s rate is the share of their posts on X that the AI model labelled a personal attack. Both sides are measured over the same months, since Oct 1, 2025, and incumbents’ press releases, newsletters and floor speeches are excluded. Candidates with fewer than 10 posts are left out.

Incumbents and challengers

Personal attacks, share of posts on X · 4 incumbents, 6 challengers · rates above 20% are drawn at the edge

0%5%10%15%20%+Incumbentsmedian 1.0%Challengersmedian 4.5%
Show the data
Every candidate in the comparison
RaceCandidatePartyStatusPosts on XPersonal attacks
Nevada 1st DistrictDina TitusDemocratsIncumbent13543.2%
Nevada 1st DistrictCarrie BuckRepublicansChallenger2405.8%
Nevada 2nd DistrictMark AmodeiRepublicansIncumbent751.3%
Nevada 2nd DistrictRick ShepherdRepublicansChallenger93510.1%
Nevada 2nd DistrictDavid FlippoRepublicansChallenger4863.1%
Nevada 2nd DistrictMatthew FonkenDemocratsChallenger761.3%
Nevada 3rd DistrictSusie LeeDemocratsIncumbent7950.8%
Nevada 3rd DistrictMarty O'DonnellRepublicansChallenger9339.4%
Nevada 4th DistrictSteven HorsfordDemocratsIncumbent15040.3%
Nevada 4th DistrictCody WhippleRepublicansChallenger1532.0%

Both are measured on posts on X since Oct 1, 2025.

The races with the widest gaps

Each incumbent (outlined) and the challenger whose rate differs most, personal attacks as a share of posts on X

Nevada 2nd District

Mark Amodei (R), 75 posts · Rick Shepherd (R), 935 posts

Nevada 3rd District

Susie Lee (D), 795 posts · Marty O'Donnell (R), 933 posts

Nevada 1st District

Dina Titus (D), 1,354 posts · Carrie Buck (R), 240 posts

Nevada 4th District

Steven Horsford (D), 1,504 posts · Cody Whipple (R), 153 posts

Show the data
The races shown, incumbent and challenger
RaceIncumbentRatePostsChallengerRatePostsGap (points)
Nevada 2nd DistrictMark Amodei (Republican)1.3%75Rick Shepherd (Republican)10.1%935+8.7
Nevada 3rd DistrictSusie Lee (Democrat)0.8%795Marty O'Donnell (Republican)9.4%933+8.7
Nevada 1st DistrictDina Titus (Democrat)3.2%1354Carrie Buck (Republican)5.8%240+2.6
Nevada 4th DistrictSteven Horsford (Democrat)0.3%1504Cody Whipple (Republican)2.0%153+1.6

Back to top