Editing 1939: 2016 Election Map
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
A similar map was actually used during the 2016 election [https://ig.ft.com/us-elections/results by the Financial Times] ([https://www.ft.com/content/3685bf9e-a4cc-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1 discussed here]). It made similar use of colorless states for geographic information and color in proportion to population for electoral information. However, the FT map is based on the electoral college, not the popular vote. It in turn is similar to a 2013 map used [https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/interactive/2013/sep/06/australian-election-results-map by The Guardian] for the 2013 Australian election ([https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2013/sep/06/better-election-results-map discussed here]). Other compromise maps of geographic and electoral information exist, such as maps of geographically accurate but re-scaled states: a 2016 election example [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ElectorScaledUS2016.svg is here], indirectly inspired by [https://www.vox.com/2015/8/19/9178979/united-states-population a similar vox.com map]. | A similar map was actually used during the 2016 election [https://ig.ft.com/us-elections/results by the Financial Times] ([https://www.ft.com/content/3685bf9e-a4cc-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1 discussed here]). It made similar use of colorless states for geographic information and color in proportion to population for electoral information. However, the FT map is based on the electoral college, not the popular vote. It in turn is similar to a 2013 map used [https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/interactive/2013/sep/06/australian-election-results-map by The Guardian] for the 2013 Australian election ([https://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2013/sep/06/better-election-results-map discussed here]). Other compromise maps of geographic and electoral information exist, such as maps of geographically accurate but re-scaled states: a 2016 election example [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ElectorScaledUS2016.svg is here], indirectly inspired by [https://www.vox.com/2015/8/19/9178979/united-states-population a similar vox.com map]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Shortly after the election Randall made [[Sad_comics|several comics]] that could indicate his emotions regarding the result, but references to the election have become fewer and farther apart. | ||
With a stick figure representing 250,000 votes, Trump would have exactly 251.918544 stick figures and Clinton would have exactly 263.37844 stick figures according to the [https://splinternews.com/here-is-the-final-popular-vote-count-of-the-2016-electi-1793864349 final results]. The map shows 252 Trump stick figures and 264 Clinton stick figures, meaning Randall used ceiling rounding instead of conventional rounding, which would have shown Clinton with one fewer stick figure. | With a stick figure representing 250,000 votes, Trump would have exactly 251.918544 stick figures and Clinton would have exactly 263.37844 stick figures according to the [https://splinternews.com/here-is-the-final-popular-vote-count-of-the-2016-electi-1793864349 final results]. The map shows 252 Trump stick figures and 264 Clinton stick figures, meaning Randall used ceiling rounding instead of conventional rounding, which would have shown Clinton with one fewer stick figure. | ||
