Skip to main content

Election Results with Census Data

I normally focus on Higher Education data on this blog, and in fact, this visualization started out as a higher education post: I wanted to look at presidential election results from 2012 to see if education played a part in how people voted.  But since I had a large census file anyway, with lots of interesting information like income, ethnic groups, and other data, I decided to take it one step farther.  OK, may steps farther.  And to me, almost everything is ultimately about education.

If you don't like to interact with these visualizations, stop right now.  You'll have to play with this to see how it works.

On the top view, you see every county as a dot, color-coded by region, and arranged on a grid.  Hover over any dot for details, if you'd like.  Counties voting more heavily for Obama are on the right; Romney counties are on the left.  Wealthier counties are on top (higher median family income), and poorer are at the bottom.  Note the reference line at $53,046, the national median.

If you want to look at a specific state or region, you can do that using the filters.  But you can also look only at counties that meet certain demographic criteria, of your choice.

For instance, you could find counties that are at least 15% Hispanic and where at least 10% of the adults have a Bachelor's degree.  Once you apply the filters, only the counties that meet those criteria are displayed.  Use filters in an combination.  (Of course, you can't find any county that's 51% White and 51% African-American; the filters aren't magic.)

The data also shows up on the map at bottom; it's pretty self-explanatory: Each county is colored blue (Obama won) or orange (Romney won.)

As always, the reset button is at bottom.

I find this very interesting, and I hope you do too.  And I hope you vote in November; I need you for my next visualization!


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Baccalaureate origins of doctoral recipients

Here's a little data for you: 61 years of it, to be precise.  The National Science Foundation publishes its data on US doctoral recipients sliced a variety of ways, including some non-restricted public use files that are aggregated at a high level to protect privacy. The interface is a little quirky, and if you're doing large sets, you need to break it into pieces (this was three extracts of about 20 years each), but it may be worth your time to dive in. I merged the data set with my mega table of IPEDS data, which allows you to look at institutions on a more granular level:  It's not surprising to find that University of Washington graduates have earned more degrees than graduates of Whitman College, for instance.  So, you can filter the data by Carnegie type, region or state, or control, for instance; or you can look at all 61 years, or any range of years between 1958 and 2018 and combine it with broad or specific academic fields using the controls. High school and indep

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

So you think you're going back to the SAT and ACT?

Now that almost every university in the nation has gone test-optional for the 2021 cycle out of necessity, a nagging question remains: How many will go back to requiring tests as soon as it's possible?  No one knows, but some of the announcements some colleges made sounded like the kid who only ate his green beans to get his screen time: They did it, but they sure were not happy about it.  So we have some suspicions about the usual suspects. I don't object to colleges requiring tests, of course, even though I think they're not very helpful, intrinsically biased against certain groups, and a tool of the vain.  You be you, though, and don't let me stop you. However, there is a wild card in all of this: The recent court ruling prohibiting the University of California system from even using--let alone requiring--the SAT or ACT in admissions decisions next fall.  If you remember, the Cal State system had already decided to go test blind, and of course community colleges in