What is this map trying to tell us? :)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 03:13:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  What is this map trying to tell us? :)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What is this map trying to tell us? :)  (Read 952 times)
solarstorm
solarstorm2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,637
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 20, 2012, 06:03:16 PM »




The winner gets a cookie.
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2012, 06:17:45 PM »

It's something to do with how consistently the state votes for a single party. DC, MN, the Dakotas, NE, KS, OK, WY, ID, UT and Alaska are all lightly shaded, and have voted for the same party consistently for quite some time. Not sure how far back the map goes - someone else could speculate on that, I'm sure, but given MN being in the lightest ban, it mustn't include Nixon's landslide.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2012, 06:31:12 PM »

The map shows how accurate each state votes for the winner for the presidential candidate (i.e. bellwether state).
Logged
solarstorm
solarstorm2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,637
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2012, 07:18:30 PM »

It's something to do with how consistently the state votes for a single party. DC, MN, the Dakotas, NE, KS, OK, WY, ID, UT and Alaska are all lightly shaded, and have voted for the same party consistently for quite some time. Not sure how far back the map goes - someone else could speculate on that, I'm sure, but given MN being in the lightest ban, it mustn't include Nixon's landslide.

You're very good at reasoning. Cheesy
So, what is the correct answer? You almost got it right.
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2012, 07:59:40 PM »

It's something to do with how consistently the state votes for a single party. DC, MN, the Dakotas, NE, KS, OK, WY, ID, UT and Alaska are all lightly shaded, and have voted for the same party consistently for quite some time. Not sure how far back the map goes - someone else could speculate on that, I'm sure, but given MN being in the lightest band, it mustn't include Nixon's landslide.

You're very good at reasoning. Cheesy
So, what is the correct answer? You almost got it right.

I'd have to say, frequency with which the state has changed parties in presidential elections since (and including) 1976.
Logged
solarstorm
solarstorm2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,637
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2012, 08:04:00 PM »

I'd have to say, frequency with which the state has changed parties in presidential elections since (and including) 1976.

Exactly, since 1976; i.e. the last 10 elections.
You've won the cookie. Cheesy
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2012, 12:59:07 AM »

I like these sort of guessing maps which are fact based/quantitative (as opposed to "have a guess what two candidates I'm thinking of when I show you this map").
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.032 seconds with 11 queries.