(Aside: Yes, I know this is hella late. I’ve been really absorbed with an upcoming Stat exam this week and it just plain slipped my mind. But I don’t like just not doing things, so I’m going to finish this even though it’s shamefully late. My apologies.)
I examined an NPR infographic examining Trump’s potential path to earn enough electoral votes to become the next president. The article argues that for a period of a few weeks, Clinton’s path to the presidency seemed relatively secure, but in light of Clinton’s recent illness and some inflammatory remarks such as labeling Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables,” there is significant turnover in public opinion such that Trump could once again gain a lead. The accompanying infographic explains these changes (Principle 4: Integration of Evidence).
The infographic is rather complex on first glance, which is perhaps detrimental if readers feel frustrated while examining it. But its complexity allows it to convey a vast amount of information at one time (Principle 3: Multivariate Analysis). Using different-sized squares laid out in a rough approximation of the United States, the graphic shows each state’s voting power (larger state squares have more votes) and which party is most likely to win in that state (blue states=Democrats, red states=Republicans, yellow=tossups). States whose leanings have changed in recent weeks are outlined in black. A panel at the bottom of the graphic gives a summary of the state of the states in turmoil.
I like this infographic, even though it is complex, because it presents the traditional election-season state vote map in a new way. The sheer vastness of many of the Western and Midwestern states makes one believe (even when you know better) that those states must wield significant voting clout. This graphic, however, reminds you that a candidate may become president if they win merely a handful of the most densely populated states. Our electoral system is counter-intuitive to say the least, and it is only through the use of a somewhat counter-intuitive (or at least, nontraditional) graphic that one may convey its complexity,