[Update:<\/b> Author Cosma Shalizi points out that they had an error in their program, and the effect I point out in the post was an artifact. Oh, well – another beautiful theory slain by an ugly fact. Compliments to Cosma for getting the correction out so quickly.]<\/b><\/p>\n
Via Crooked Timber<\/a>, I’m indirectly taken to this page of cartograms<\/a> on the election results by Michael Gastner, Cosma Shalizi, and Mark Newman.<\/p>\n It’s fascinating (and beautiful).<\/p>\n Here’s the money quote, though:<\/p>\n Of course, we know that nationwide the percentages of voters voting for either candidate were almost identical, so what is going on here?<\/p>\n The answer is that there were very few counties in which most people voted for the Republican candidate, but there were many in which most people voted for the Democrat. Put another way, the amount of red on the map is skewed because there are many counties in which only a slim majority voted Republican; there were substantially fewer counties in which a slim majority voted Democrat.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n As an example, leaving out for the moment voters who voted for third-party candidates, the number of counties in the US in which more than 99% of voters voted Republican was five (out of 4533). The number of counties in which more than 99% of voters voted Democrat was 307. <\/p>\n <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n