Tags: print
November 18, 2004
Post-election sideshow
For our readers' convenience and entertainment, Silver Chips Online has compiled several maps of the American political landscape.
Since the election, newly configured maps of the divided American electorate have been making rounds on the Internet. Despondent Democrats sick of looking at the original electoral map dominated by red ink can find some solace in the cartographic works of art created by a team of physicists at the University of Michigan.
In the cartogram below, the states have been rescaled according to population. States are drawn with a size proportional to their number of inhabitants, not to their land size. As a result, states with more people appear larger than states with fewer people. Rhode Island, for example, which has a population of 1.1 million, is about twice the size of Wyoming, which has a population of around half a million.
More maps can be found here.
These maps compare the results of the 2004 presidential election with the pre-Civil War divide between the free states and the slave states. Free states are shown in green, slave states are shown in red and territories open to slavery are shown in brown.
Source: thechrisproject.com
The map below shows average income for each state.
Data found here.
The map below shows the average IQ for each state, as estimated from SAT and ACT scores.
The New York Times recently ran a story on divorce rates for each state. It can be found here.
To suggest additional vote correlations for Silver Chips Online to investigate, please submit a comment.
Since the election, newly configured maps of the divided American electorate have been making rounds on the Internet. Despondent Democrats sick of looking at the original electoral map dominated by red ink can find some solace in the cartographic works of art created by a team of physicists at the University of Michigan.
In the cartogram below, the states have been rescaled according to population. States are drawn with a size proportional to their number of inhabitants, not to their land size. As a result, states with more people appear larger than states with fewer people. Rhode Island, for example, which has a population of 1.1 million, is about twice the size of Wyoming, which has a population of around half a million.
More maps can be found here.
These maps compare the results of the 2004 presidential election with the pre-Civil War divide between the free states and the slave states. Free states are shown in green, slave states are shown in red and territories open to slavery are shown in brown.
Source: thechrisproject.com
The map below shows average income for each state.
Data found here.
The map below shows the average IQ for each state, as estimated from SAT and ACT scores.
The New York Times recently ran a story on divorce rates for each state. It can be found here.
To suggest additional vote correlations for Silver Chips Online to investigate, please submit a comment.
Digg
del.icio.us
StumbleUpon
reddit
Facebook
Discuss this Article
High-income tax-cut people voted for Kerry! SMART PEOPLE VOTED FOR KERRY! Except the Midwest, but they're just weird.
Bushies, one final note--Claiming tax cuts are good? When Clinton increased taxes on the rich, we went through the biggest economic expansion in history. Eat My Shorts.
So nice try. Next time, do your homework.
By that point, however, the Asian markets were at the tail end of one of the largest market crashes in history. The Nikkie lost over 30,000 points, and the Asian markets as a whole showed an almost 60% decline.
Sorry you can't recall either event. They're pretty important.
You mean, states that had people with slightly higher SAT scores were more likely to have more people vote for Kerry than Bush. This statistic is pretty useless, expecially since most liberals say that intelligence cannot be measured by tests.
There's no way around it, there are both smart and stupid people in both parties.
Having said that, 1) Clinton didn't have an awful lot to do with it, and 2) Clinton failed to safegaurd the economy against the impending market bubble. But presidents seldom practice preventative fiscal policy, so I suppose the market decline at the end of Clinton's presidency was understandable, and not totally unexpected.
Overall, Clinton's lasting legacy, economic and otherwise, will probably be globalization. NAFTA was a Reagan and Bush policy, but Clinton's initiative in finalizing the agreement was, in my opinion, his most significant success.