mozz@mbin.grits.dev to Data Is Beautiful@lemmy.ml · edit-26 months agoPresidential election popular vote tallies lined up against “did not vote”mbin.grits.devimagemessage-square119fedilinkarrow-up1483arrow-down121
arrow-up1462arrow-down1imagePresidential election popular vote tallies lined up against “did not vote”mbin.grits.devmozz@mbin.grits.dev to Data Is Beautiful@lemmy.ml · edit-26 months agomessage-square119fedilink
minus-squarerarWars@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up34·6 months agoThe percentages for 2016 only add up to 97, and the 40% bar is longer than the 41% of 2012.
minus-squareKlaymorelinkfedilinkarrow-up19·edit-26 months agoMaybe 3% voted for a third party, and because they aren’t shown the other bars were expanded to fill the entire space
minus-squarerarWars@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up10·6 months agoThey could’ve done a little green sliver like they did for 1980.
minus-squareMojave@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·6 months agoLooks like '95 has 5% third party votes. The lower bound for visually representing votes here may be somewhere between 5% and 3% for the purposes of this graphic
minus-squareFurtiveFugitive@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up4·6 months agoJust like the sub on reddit, the data in DataIsBeautiful apparently doesn’t actually have to be beautiful.
The percentages for 2016 only add up to 97, and the 40% bar is longer than the 41% of 2012.
Maybe 3% voted for a third party, and because they aren’t shown the other bars were expanded to fill the entire space
They could’ve done a little green sliver like they did for 1980.
Looks like '95 has 5% third party votes. The lower bound for visually representing votes here may be somewhere between 5% and 3% for the purposes of this graphic
Just like the sub on reddit, the data in DataIsBeautiful apparently doesn’t actually have to be beautiful.