If this includes social security or Medicare then yeah that makes sense no one lives in rural areas other then elder people.
Leon3226 on
So, how would you interpret this data? I can think of at least three different explanations, but I don’t know much about America, I’m interested in what you think
SouthImpression3577 on
What’s its weight by population? Sure there may be more red counties but less people tend to live there
Ellis4Life on
Land doesn’t vote, people do.
Lemonio on
I think all these graphs are confusing and misleading
The electoral map looks like a few blue counties with very large populations from big cities and suburbs and then lots of small rural counties that are republican
So it’s retty much any way you slice the data by count you’ll get a lot of red counties and fewer blue ones
Much better to just use population imo
But if this is trying to say that trump is strong among poor rural voters that is true but I don’t think number of counties is too useful
swazal on
Side by sides don’t work to drive home the point, and some analysis is good company. Anyone do overlays with this kind of data?
cryptotope on
Interesting, but not surprising. Cities that are the engines of the economy, and money flows out from them to subsidize rural communities.
Note that interpreting this sort of map and graph suffers from the usual problem associated with comparing state- or county-level data: **land doesn’t vote, people do**. U.S. counties have *wildly* different populations, so just counting up counties can be extremely misleading.
(The [top ten most-populous counties](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_statistics_of_the_United_States) in the U.S. all have more than 2 *million* residents; LA County has nearly 10 million. The bottom ten least populous have fewer than a thousand; Loving County in Texas had just 57 residents in the last census.)
mf-TOM-HANK on
Boy, hardly any yellow counties in the evil commie bastions of CA, NY, and IL
im_intj on
I mean probably a good amount of that was COVID aid in the form of PPP.
jeffrowl on
Which government programs and subsidies are being referenced in your graphs?
FightOnForUsc on
Yea can we get this map with population rather than counties? As many like to point out, myself included at times. There’s like 7 states with a population higher than LA county. Using counts of counties and a map of counties isn’t necessarily misleading but it also doesn’t necessarily mean what we think it does
StobbstheTiger on
Old people vote Republican more often, who would have guessed. This would be interesting to see with SS and Medicare not taken into account.
trucorsair on
You mean that Republican leaning voters against big government and fiercely independent actually depend on the government they profess to hate to survive…say it isn’t so!!!
acwalshfl on
Wouldn’t 2022 include CARES and ARPA? I fully believe that most of the red counties drew significant federal funding in general, but a better chart would probably be 2000 vs. 2019 and maybe now 2000 vs. 2024 since most of that funding has been fully drawn.
talrich on
Does this visualization count health insurance programs (Medicare, Medicaid, etc) as income at their full cost? If so, that’s highly misleading.
Medicaid is a safety net, which the country provides to limit the number of citizens without healthcare, but it’s not real income to those individuals. They cannot sell it. They don’t control it. Medicaid is a take it or leave it proposition.
Jets237 on
I live in CT. It’s a blue state but moderate. We have a balanced budget and a strong safety net (although a previous governer did poach some pension funds we’re re-imbursing at the moment.) Still with little federal support
BrainRotTakes on
Look at voting patterns of these people receiving assistance. Your graph would then be more accurate based of individuals voting that receive assistance rather where they are located. I really don’t understand how the left touts they love black people then constantly tries to throw them in conservative numbers.
scdiabd on
I feel like the map is a bit confusing, but this is terrifying for next month.
HolidayUsed8685 on
Don’t some counties have a larger population then others?
mich160 on
Is this another rant on republicans? Stop imitating objectivity, please
Dr_Catfish on
Needs to be overlaid with urban centers to make some sense of density.
At face value, it looks like people taking the most government assistance are actively voting against government assistance but that can’t be correct.
People are stupid, but that would literally be sub-brick levels of foolishness.
Opsaunders on
Who is posting all these political maps? They are so so so misleading man. Nothing is normalized, Nothing is proportional. It’s insane. This is a prime example of using data and stats to sell a story.
Yes, more republican counties are supported by gov’t aid, HOWEVER, if you normalized by amount of total aid, a move clear picture would be shown. Pull up a map of counties that are republican vs democrat.. Its all red. Im not deep diving the data but something like 90% are red… HOWEVER, if you normalize by population with a bubble chart, you get a more clear picture of the data without trying to be selective. Again, google the images, they exist.
but uhhh nice job using “data” to sell a story.. props to ya
22 Comments
If this includes social security or Medicare then yeah that makes sense no one lives in rural areas other then elder people.
So, how would you interpret this data? I can think of at least three different explanations, but I don’t know much about America, I’m interested in what you think
What’s its weight by population? Sure there may be more red counties but less people tend to live there
Land doesn’t vote, people do.
I think all these graphs are confusing and misleading
The electoral map looks like a few blue counties with very large populations from big cities and suburbs and then lots of small rural counties that are republican
So it’s retty much any way you slice the data by count you’ll get a lot of red counties and fewer blue ones
Much better to just use population imo
But if this is trying to say that trump is strong among poor rural voters that is true but I don’t think number of counties is too useful
Side by sides don’t work to drive home the point, and some analysis is good company. Anyone do overlays with this kind of data?
Interesting, but not surprising. Cities that are the engines of the economy, and money flows out from them to subsidize rural communities.
Note that interpreting this sort of map and graph suffers from the usual problem associated with comparing state- or county-level data: **land doesn’t vote, people do**. U.S. counties have *wildly* different populations, so just counting up counties can be extremely misleading.
(The [top ten most-populous counties](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_statistics_of_the_United_States) in the U.S. all have more than 2 *million* residents; LA County has nearly 10 million. The bottom ten least populous have fewer than a thousand; Loving County in Texas had just 57 residents in the last census.)
Boy, hardly any yellow counties in the evil commie bastions of CA, NY, and IL
I mean probably a good amount of that was COVID aid in the form of PPP.
Which government programs and subsidies are being referenced in your graphs?
Yea can we get this map with population rather than counties? As many like to point out, myself included at times. There’s like 7 states with a population higher than LA county. Using counts of counties and a map of counties isn’t necessarily misleading but it also doesn’t necessarily mean what we think it does
Old people vote Republican more often, who would have guessed. This would be interesting to see with SS and Medicare not taken into account.
You mean that Republican leaning voters against big government and fiercely independent actually depend on the government they profess to hate to survive…say it isn’t so!!!
Wouldn’t 2022 include CARES and ARPA? I fully believe that most of the red counties drew significant federal funding in general, but a better chart would probably be 2000 vs. 2019 and maybe now 2000 vs. 2024 since most of that funding has been fully drawn.
Does this visualization count health insurance programs (Medicare, Medicaid, etc) as income at their full cost? If so, that’s highly misleading.
Medicaid is a safety net, which the country provides to limit the number of citizens without healthcare, but it’s not real income to those individuals. They cannot sell it. They don’t control it. Medicaid is a take it or leave it proposition.
I live in CT. It’s a blue state but moderate. We have a balanced budget and a strong safety net (although a previous governer did poach some pension funds we’re re-imbursing at the moment.) Still with little federal support
Look at voting patterns of these people receiving assistance. Your graph would then be more accurate based of individuals voting that receive assistance rather where they are located. I really don’t understand how the left touts they love black people then constantly tries to throw them in conservative numbers.
I feel like the map is a bit confusing, but this is terrifying for next month.
Don’t some counties have a larger population then others?
Is this another rant on republicans? Stop imitating objectivity, please
Needs to be overlaid with urban centers to make some sense of density.
At face value, it looks like people taking the most government assistance are actively voting against government assistance but that can’t be correct.
People are stupid, but that would literally be sub-brick levels of foolishness.
Who is posting all these political maps? They are so so so misleading man. Nothing is normalized, Nothing is proportional. It’s insane. This is a prime example of using data and stats to sell a story.
Yes, more republican counties are supported by gov’t aid, HOWEVER, if you normalized by amount of total aid, a move clear picture would be shown. Pull up a map of counties that are republican vs democrat.. Its all red. Im not deep diving the data but something like 90% are red… HOWEVER, if you normalize by population with a bubble chart, you get a more clear picture of the data without trying to be selective. Again, google the images, they exist.
but uhhh nice job using “data” to sell a story.. props to ya