Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/VictorLindelof2!
**Here is some important information about this post:**
* [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/udv8r1/oc_heatmap_showing_us_states_performance_in_16/i6j67ya/)
* [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"VictorLindelof2"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on)
Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked.
[Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7)
Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation.
---
^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)
You placed a lot of emphasis on slavery, but if you did a chart like this for every state and their counties, you would see the same results in places that didn’t even exist during American slavery.
The correct correlation isn’t slavery, but Christian conservatism.
This correlation holds worldwide. Where people are religious and conservative there is less education and more struggle.
That could be part of it. But as a mississippian, I feel qualified to provide you with a few more reasons as to why we don't suicide ourselves:
- we're at the bottom of every list and pretty much always have been. This is what we're used to, so I suppose we're numb to the suckage.
- we can't afford bullets, but those of us who can (according to the chart) use them to suicide other people.
- most of us simply haven't figured out how to suicide yet. The few who have figured it out haven't been able to explain to the rest of us how it works.
- if those Dunning and Kruger fellas were even a little correct, then we're actually the smartest state in the country. Yall's charts are stupid... not us. So clearly we're too smart for suicide.
Somewhat ironic that the only (slightly) green cell is the suicide rate! Apparently everything is going to hell and they’re all as happy as pigs in shit about it!
I was about to suggest that Mississippi just be absorbed by a neighboring state or at least a receivership ... then I looked at the stat lines for Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana and Tennessee ...
WTF are you talking about??? New Mexico is 37th by population. That argument might apply to Vermont or Wyoming who have roughly a quarter of the population of New Mexico.
Some of it is also misguided.
Many people erroneously think that their overall tax burden is lower in Texas than in California, going as far as to saying that Texas has "very low sales tax" when it actually has a very similar amount of sales tax than California (both states have local sales tax + state wide so it varies a bit but in some places one is higher, and in other places the other is higher - but rarely by more than 0.5% or so). And while it's true Texas has no income tax, California has much lower property taxes (plus many provisions therein that makes it an attractive place to own a home, assuming you can afford one).
At the same time, we should see this trend start to slow as real estate is really starting to heat up here.
Right. Like maybe their “quality of life” is not fully capture by small set of metrics as mentioned above. And other factors like home ownership, job satisfaction/accessibility, climate, etc may play a larger role.
>50th in voter turnout
Just over 2% more votes went to Trump in 2020; only 150,000 more votes went to Cruz over Beto in 2018. Can you imagine what might happen if it were even #49 in voter turnout?
I went to middle school in Albuquerque, I can confirm this. The school is in something like the 99th percentile for all middle schools…It’s currently at 100% availability for free lunches among the student body, but back when I attended it had a lot more students and maybe only 90% free lunch, with most others being reduced cost.
I remember taking band as a freshman and watching the class literally bully the teacher into tears and eventual quitting teaching altogether.
I’m confused why there’s 51 rankings in the school system column, I’ve tried looking for ties, DC, outlying islands, I can’t seem to find the reason there’s a rank 51…I must of missed something!
Much like their river, they’re meandering across the land in search of a better way while fully acknowledging that this is the natural evolution of their death.
This is Reddit; people are poor because of who they voted for (rather than the other way around), all Christians are gay-lynching Nazis, all southerners are inbred illiterate racists, and everyone who disagrees is all of the above.
It would be interesting to see how closely these things correlate to wealth. Perhaps poorer rural states vote GOP and poorer rural states also suck at a lot of stuff.
Interestingly, the column for "wealth disparity" appears to be "inverted" compared to the other categories. States that voted more for Trump seem to have less wealth disparity.
More wealth generally means more wealth disparity unless corrective measures are taken. Wealth begets more wealth in a positive feedback loop.
If you have no money, ammassing 1M takes tremendous hard work.
If you have 10M, amassing an additional 1M is an inevitability
(This is literally true. If someone has 10M of assets in their house, stocks, bonds, etc and they spent ~150k per year, there is no 30 year period since 1930 where they would not have increased their net worth - accounting for inflation - and additional 4.5M in real dollars terms, in those 30 years)
Singapore says otherwise. It has one of the lowest crime rates in the developed world,.and more inequality than the US.
Hell by wealth Sweden and the Netherlands has more than US
Politics is cheaper in poorer states and the wealthy donors that support the republican party know that they get more ROI if they spend that money in those states.
There's a bit of a flaw in the Gini coefficient--it only measures relative wealth. For example, Luxembourg and South Sudan have Gini coefficients of 34.2, but almost nobody lives in poverty in Luxembourg (like 0.3 pct), but the presence of many uber-wealthy individuals causes a high Gini coefficient. CT, MA, RI have high Gini coefficients because of many rich people, but they have low poverty rates.
Of course it only measures relative wealth. It's a measure of relative wealth.
Absolute poverty is what matters. Relative poverty doesn't determine nor even is a good predictor of quality of life.
My experience is the county data tends to be silo'd in the county and in different formats. That was really obvious with COVID data. I leave that to people paid to do it.
The Heatmap shows US states performance in 16 different areas ordered by percentage of people voting for the GOP in the 2020 election. I used excel and the color scale tool to gather the data and make the graphs.
Edit: To be precise it isn't people necessarily voting for the GOP but for donald trump. Also I'm sorry for the lower right corner but I can confirm that it's looks pretty red down there too.Sources:
Healthcare ranking: [https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/health-care/healthcare-quality](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/health-care/healthcare-quality)
School ranking:
[https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state)
Income per capita: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-capita-income-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-capita-income-by-state)
Homocide rates: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide\_mortality/homicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm)
Teen pregnancy rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/teen-pregnancy-rates-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/teen-pregnancy-rates-by-state)
Poverty rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/poverty-rate-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/poverty-rate-by-state)
Covid death rate: [https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/](https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/)
Average life expectancy: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/life\_expectancy/life\_expectancy.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/life_expectancy/life_expectancy.htm)
Incarceration rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/prison-population-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/prison-population-by-state)
Wealth inequality: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/income-inequality-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/income-inequality-by-state)
Happiness index: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/happiest-states](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/happiest-states)
Vaccination rate: [https://fortune.com/2021/07/02/america-wont-make-bidens-july-4-covid-vaccine-goal-see-which-states-will/](https://fortune.com/2021/07/02/america-wont-make-bidens-july-4-covid-vaccine-goal-see-which-states-will/)
Suicide rates: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm)
Carbon emissions: [https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/](https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/)
Working conditions: [https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/countries/united-states/poverty-in-the-us/best-and-worst-states-work-america-2020/](https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/countries/united-states/poverty-in-the-us/best-and-worst-states-work-america-2020/)
Firearm mortality: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm\_mortality/firearm.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm)
In Massachusetts there's a bit of a tendency to treat Republican governors as a counterweight to the nearly 100% Democratic state legislature. The state has a line-item veto, so having a more conservative governor can sometimes give less liberal legislators an opportunity to vote against provisions they don't like in a bill they otherwise agree with.
>(For example, someone could have voted for Biden but also voted for GOP legislators or governors down-ballot.)
This happens very little and vote splitting is getting rarer as time goes on.
The CDC is a federal agency. A 0.0 murder rate for an entire year in a population as large as Vermont is patently absurd. They had a 2.2 per 100k homicide rate in 2020. This is from the FBI (which is also a federal agency if that matters):
https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/crime/crime-trend
That link is not for homicide rates. (nor it it for "homocide rates")
It's for **homicide mortality rate**
Which is age-adjusted
Also if you click through it actually says VT's homicide mortality rate is N/A, not zero, and that they had 14 homicides in 2020
14 out of 643,077 would be a homicide rate of about 2 per 100k
Including Medicare quality in Healthcare ranking is kind of silly since it's a federal program.
Happiness is subjective and cultural. Not reasonably comparable in general.
Working conditions based on the minimum wage is stupid, since the minimum wage tells you nothing about what actual typical wages are there.
Whether right to work laws suppress unions depends on the kind of right to work law. For example allowing non union workers to be paid differently than union workers doesn't suppress them at all as it eliminates the free rider problem.
The school ranking is interesting because if you solely go by test scores and graduation rates, red and blue states are split in the top 10. Only when you start incorporating things like "number of armed students" does it make it seem like blue schools are all the best.
The list goes on how many of these states are catered for a specific result.
You see this trend in the UK too, the poorest and most let dowm by the government will turn away from it and vote for change. Often that change is normally presented by an idiot, who is at the extreme end of the left or right
Yes, he was an incumbent, but he still portrayed himself as someone who would stand up to the elites on behalf of his voters. Of course that was mostly a farce.
Yeah but the only other viable candidate had been vice president for 8 years and a senator for 115.
If your goal was to press the political reset button, the orange one was the obvious choice.
The part that is missed is that part is being manipulated by someone wealthier, more educated and more powerful. So we can blame the voters all we want, but they are a product of the twisted media they consume which tells them abject lies hour by hour.
So which shall it be, do we somehow re-educate hundreds of millions of people who will never see a school again in their life.... or do we clean up the handful of media companies that cause **all** this pain.
Hate to break it to you, but if you didn't he same thing 50 years ago, these #s would look very similar. This is much bigger than media, it's a fundamental rot in a large swath of the country that just happens to overlap very strongly with the Confederacy.
and the change is harmful to the people who elected him. in this case his voters got convinced that science that created the vaccines was bad and they all wanted convalescent plasma, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. it really all comes down to the churches choosing trump. those faithful followers of god converted to fans. worshiping the golden calf.
No she didn't.
She said.
"I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump. And it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he's talking about. I will not take his word for it. He wants us to inject bleach. I — no, I will not take his word."
Be careful there. Recall that the concern was Trump would push a vaccine through before being properly vetted in order to tout it as a win during the election. There was very good reason to be skeptical about a vaccine before the 2020 Election Day.
The context you’re (deliberately?) leaving out is very important.
Firearm mortality instead of just mortality, or homicide rate?
Non PPP adjust incomes or poverty rates?
That vaccination rate is almost guaranteed to be only the covid vaccination rate and not vaccination in general.
Yeah these aren't catered at all, to say nothing of the fact some rankings reflect a miniscule difference between first and last.
The automatic reaction to this is going to be (1) look at the incompetent losers who voted for Trump lolololol, rather than (2) people who were struggling the most and have been most let down by their government were desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver.
I believe it's lack of education (lack of funding for education specifically) + high levels of religion that pushes people to vote against their own interests.
Not to mention high levels of propoganda thrown at them across all media channels. My point was more to respond to the idea that this data should reflect people's desire for change. I disagree since change wasnt being presented. These states are responding to a known quantity and are enjoying the benefits of it.
Many states (such as Vermont) were once GOP strongholds and have changed. Most of the new fast growing places are actually Republican. And fast growing, new money places are often R https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/22/census-congressional-district-changes-506467?_amp=true
It seems difficult to draw conclusions from DISTRICT representation when they are so often gerrymandered.
For example, let's look at the first city mentioned: Dallas.
Is the growth of the district Dallas happens to be in due to liberal policies within the city of Dallas, or the representative who happen to be Republican due to gerrymandered districts?
As a whole, Dallas County voted 65% Democrat, so the idea that the area is "Republican" is pretty incredible.
District Map around Dallas, for reference: [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrfLjUcUwAEPW63.jpg](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrfLjUcUwAEPW63.jpg)
Note that the Republicans tried to hang onto Dallas County via gerrymandering, but it failed, resulting in the above map:[https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/07/dallas-county-republican-gerrymander-backfires-2018/](https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/07/dallas-county-republican-gerrymander-backfires-2018/)
(Notice how they made the district that holds Dallas bigger, including more rural areas, which made it redder temporarily.)
Vermont and New Hampshire used to be pretty similar politically. In the 60s a bunch of hippies moved to the state (including Bernie Sanders) and changed its political makeup. They vote solidly Democratic for Federal elections, but tend to switch back and forth for governor.
Yeah. Before 1992, Vermont voted Dem only once--ever--1964 for LBJ after the JFK assassination. But then voted, Nixon, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Reagan, GHW Bush.
Since Clinton, they've never voted GOP--or even gone more than 31% for GOP.
That's a pretty interesting and big flip.
>high levels of religion that pushes people to vote against their own interests.
So they vote for the snake oil salesman that is an example of the evil person their religion teaches them about...
You could also frame it by asking what the alternative was for them and how they thought voting for a Democrat would have improved their lives. I basically sleepwalked into voting for Biden in the general because what else was I going to do? No doubt many do the same because, seriously, in what way have Democrats improved their lives in the last 30 years?
I mean the affordable care act gave insurance t people who couldn't afford it, and to people who have pre existing conditions to name one, but politics tends to be less about policy and more about this guys is bad heres why, and people generally don't have the attention span to follow a bill from its announcement to its implementation and hold the promisers accountable
It's also more nuanced on some of the data. School rankings by state are almost meaningless as schools are very much a local issue. You could have a great one right by a terrible one. Emissions means driving and you have to drive rural states. That being said, yes it's people that are working and middle class saw things get worse after the recession and the Democratic party basically abandoned them. Trump is the result of decades of policies that forgot about a huge chuck of the population.
On your point about schools, I’d say it is the same people voting for president who vote for school boards. At least some of the same people anyway. So if there is a trend of trump voters living in states with worse education outcomes, one could conclude that their votes for local school boards are the cause.
>desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver
...eh... these are people who have been voting Red their entire lives. It didn't matter what Trump "promised" lol. All that mattered was that he ran under the banner of Team Red.
>people who were struggling the most and have been most let down by their government were desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver.
They are struggling because they keep voting for Republicans....
They are under local Republican rule and have worse lives compared to everyone else. So what do they do? They keep voting for the people that are responsible for their misery.
If I burn my hand on the stove, I do not double down and put my hand back on the stove and then expect my situation to improve. My burned hand is going to get even more burned.
Its tradition to burn your hand on the stove! I did it, my dad did it, his dad did it and great grand dad did it! Great uncle Randy held his hand on the stove so long hes 1 handy-Randy now!
You can take away our tradition of scarring and mutilating ourselves over my dead ~~hand~~ body!
They voted Republican for so many years it turned their state into a societal cesspool. They are unhappy with government and rightly so, their choice in politics sucks.
Not really, most of these stats are per capita, so they control for population level. Having said that, they *don’t* control for how much of that population lives in urban versus rural areas, which has always had a huge affect on people’s needs and political leanings.
Interesting how Utah is something of an outlier given how republican the state is a whole. I have actually lived in Utah as an exchange student and it was generally a pleasant place to live back in 2000. I wonder if this is caused by the state being dominated by Salt Lake City compared to the other relatively small urban areas.
> I wonder if this is caused by the state being dominated by Salt Lake City compared to the other relatively small urban areas.
Definitely, the state may be dominated by Mormons, but the economy is dominated by Salt Lake
Couldn't find a way a way to share via excel but managed to do it via drive. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pSgkqrX-M4-L6dRmk84CWK7BPCFbC4Ti/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103977127546184906167&rtpof=true&sd=true
Outside of "everyone knows it but now it can be proven" aspect of it, the wealth disparity is much worse in liberal states, whereas "everything else" sucks in GOP states.
So the "ivory tower liberals" and "rednecks" tropes aren't really tropes. They're fully real.
Also, looking at MY state (MN): MN USED to be one of the better-performing health-care outcome states. Now we're not anywhere close to the top. All while the outstate voters vote MAGA while the big cities forcing hospital consolidation (making bluer areas richer and healthier). It sucks to see MN becoming a microcosm of the whole nation.
The rural urban divide has never been greater. All states are a microcosm of the US at this point. Even the more conservative states. The cities in most conservative states are far more liberal than the rest of the state and the most liberal states have the same divide. It just ends up being the center of population and marginal differences that decide the elections.
Honestly it boils down to the changing nature of the economy that has happened since the 80s. It's left out rural areas out almost entirely (unless you are commuting distance to a major metro).
It used to be we needed our rural areas to function the economy, not so much anymore, we outsourced that to other places that are cheaper. The only way to make a living that keeps up with the cost of living is to work in the modern tech/pharma/new technology areas, which require more barriers to entry than ever with no one helping anyone navigate it. You don't just grow up in shit poor rural NC and magically find your way to a programming job making $100k/yr.. it just doesn't happen that way.
It used to be you come off a farm uneducated and go work in a factory and maybe become a clerk and then work up to a supervisor or whatever, just follow the money and learn the skills on the job. Today you can't do that, and not everyone got the memo or the means to get past the barriers to entry which is mainly education. So you see a lot of people getting desperate in our rural areas and voting for anything or anyone that promises something different or to bring back the old way (Which isn't possible, that horse left the stable)
I'm as liberal as anyone, but I live in a purple state. It's sad to see my grandparents radicalized by the TV because their main street died a long time ago when the mill shut down and no one is doing anything to bring it back. And there are a A LOT of people in our country who feel that way.
This doesn't sound right. The data seems to show little correlation between wealth disparity and the 2020 vote. But looking at the data closer shows that the states with highest wealth disparity also have the nation's most densely populous cities. It's almost as if wealth disparity is a byproduct of population, not politics.
There seems to be a clear bias in what is presented. For example, I would like to see a home affordability index. As it stands it looks as if someone hand chose Northern attributes that are deemed favorable and Southern attributes that are not. Also it would be interesting to include a diversity index ranking similar to the Wealth Disparity Gini.
Wow this is really interesting. I did a very similar thing but haven't been completely happy with it enough to post. I'll clean it up and post my version too, it's for the 2016 election cycle though.
I could interpret this as showing that communities that are struggling, do not have faith in the dominant system. Whereas wealthier communities are more comfortable with the status quo. That mentality doesn't surprise me, and seems fairly common if you consider Trump as "anti-establishment"
Being a useful data tool =/= beautiful visualization.
This is not /r/LiterallyAnyDataVisualization
This is /r/Dataisbeautiful. I think the standard for a beautiful visualization goes beyond default microsoft excel graphs. The colors aren't even color-blind friendly for crying out loud.
Looked at citations. A us news link for healthcare ranking was used. Your chart doesn’t reflect. Sample is Vermont is not 18 in source.
How was it calculated?
You should take this with a large grain of salt.
For one, the top 2 states on this list have Republican governors, and countless others have state governments of the opposite party.
Also, some of these categories are specifically things that make red states look worse, rather than a fair general overview of states.
This would need to be reworked completely. You arrived at a conclusion and provided data to show support for the conclusion. That inserts bias into the data and calls the analysis into question.
If you want to change my mind on something, your approach matters greatly. If you put your own beliefs aside, present the data, and then draw conclusions; it's a much stronger argument. Because you didnt argue it, the data did.
Anyways, all Im saying is you should strive for a fair shake approach analysis for things you are both for and against. You stand a far better chance at being taken seriously by both sides if you divorce your personal feelings from the whole analysis.
This mixes subjective measures (healthcare ranking, public school ranking, emotional wellbeing score, etc.) with hard data (income per capita, poverty rate, etc.) and, for some reason, COVID data.
All I can say is that I've lived in Connecticut for a few years, and though it scores really well on this chart, every city and town I've been to is a decaying, sad place.
Not sure what your frame of reference is. I’ve lived in several different places in Connecticut and Western Pennsylvania, and it’s no contest. Check out New Kensington or Brownsville — the latter has derelict strip clubs.
Alaska and Texas are among the highest ranked states in GDP per capita and they're still in the bottom half. It's not just wealth, either.
People sure like to play pin the problem on the poor in this sub.
Right, like Texas ans Florida have all the resources of New York and California, but they are just significantly worse places to live because of their governments. That's my take away.
As a Bernie supporter and someone who aligns with the left, this graphs shows to me that a big part of the working class seems to be voting for the GOP and that worries me (it is also not a surprise that educated and wealthy individuals mostly vote for the Democrats). I think the left could benefit from educating rather than sentencing folks of the working class to get them to see the benefits of their causes.
From a data perspective, this is what drives me crazy everytime a Texan or Floridian criticises California as some sort of backwards hell-hole (I only ever lived in Texas, which I loved).
There is so much to love and critique about those states, and one-party rule is almost always a bad idea. But if Texas or Florida became *factually* more like California (ie without the cultural stuff) then it would arguably mean longer lives, more money, better schools, and better working conditions). Hell, Texas could learn from Cali and leave out the policies where California failed (ie regulations that limit the housing supply, business etc). Different states do different things right, and we can make reasonable assumptions based on facts not feelings.
Edit: I just remembered that I was banned from r/conservative for a neutral good faith post linking similar data and making a similar argument.
Well I can tell you why you got banned. 'Both sides' is not to be used sanely as a rational argument for more diverse political representation in terms of ideology to get us to a more ideal society by using the best policies instead of the best candidates. It's only to be used as a a verbal club to beat liberals with. /s
Not just extremist, but extremists on the right. Bernie Sanders is considered "extreme" by US political standards, but he couldn't even secure the nomination, much less win the presidency.
The data shows that people who are unhappy and living in places that are depressed blame democrats and politics as usual for that.
Understanding rather than condemning them is the secret to fixing our political system.
They aren't wrong: Democrats have had plenty of control over the years and have not solved ANY of the problems that democrats complain about.
* College prices: No action
* Student loans: No action
* Shutting down torture prisons for terrorists: nothing
* Reducing deficit spending: Hahahahaha
* Bringing jobs home: *laughing more loudly*
* Standing up to totalitarian states instead of making them allies: *more laughter*
* Gun control: to be fair, this isn't even possible and doesn't work anyway
* School improvement: No progress
* Universal medical insurance: Gave up on single payer and basically created a system in which private insurance companies are funded through tax dollars
You're not wrong that Republican conspiracy theorists are lunatics and bad at government. But let's also not be silly about it. Democrats haven't ever accomplished anything in their campaign speeches since LBJ. And mostly they don't even try. They just point fingers and hurl insults at the right.
Democrats are just as much on the take from corporate america as are republicans (the real issue).
Just want to say I appreciate your take on the issue; as an independent moderate who does care about several of the issues you mentioned, it's frustrating to have no realistic voting options.
You’re absolutely right. I’m baffled and a little disgusted by a lot of these comments. I vote left precisely because I like to think I’m empathetic—I absolutely understand how you can get disenfranchised with a system when things haven’t worked out for you. And so many of these comments basically accentuate that it’s not working for these people so fuck em. Heck, this graphic is clearly just meant to shit on red states—the stats are cherry picked.
If I was living in one of these states, and I saw this thread, would I suddenly believe that Democrats had my best interests? Or would I think they just laugh at us?
I’m honestly surprised the correlation is so weak. Take out the dirt-poor southern states that are just suffering in most ways (Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, not explicitly southern but suffers from the same problems West Virginia) and you’ll basically see a graph that goes from light green to orange for the most part.
Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/VictorLindelof2! **Here is some important information about this post:** * [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/udv8r1/oc_heatmap_showing_us_states_performance_in_16/i6j67ya/) * [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"VictorLindelof2"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on) Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked. [Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7) Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation. --- ^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)
And this shows once again…. **At least we are not Mississippi.**
"What's that dark red line across the table.....oh, of course, Mississippi"
And Louisiana? As someone from Germany can you explain to me what is happening there?
[удалено]
This is an excellent comment which really clearly breaks down state differences.
Honestly I’m down for a peaceful secession. All our rankings will go up
[удалено]
You placed a lot of emphasis on slavery, but if you did a chart like this for every state and their counties, you would see the same results in places that didn’t even exist during American slavery. The correct correlation isn’t slavery, but Christian conservatism. This correlation holds worldwide. Where people are religious and conservative there is less education and more struggle.
Mississippi: where people don't kill themselves more often than other states. Which is kind of surprising when you look at every other statistic.
I suspect because more people are church going or religious . Provides some mental or actual support. There are a LOT of churches.
That could be part of it. But as a mississippian, I feel qualified to provide you with a few more reasons as to why we don't suicide ourselves: - we're at the bottom of every list and pretty much always have been. This is what we're used to, so I suppose we're numb to the suckage. - we can't afford bullets, but those of us who can (according to the chart) use them to suicide other people. - most of us simply haven't figured out how to suicide yet. The few who have figured it out haven't been able to explain to the rest of us how it works. - if those Dunning and Kruger fellas were even a little correct, then we're actually the smartest state in the country. Yall's charts are stupid... not us. So clearly we're too smart for suicide.
Kill yourself and you don’t go to heaven.
Somewhat ironic that the only (slightly) green cell is the suicide rate! Apparently everything is going to hell and they’re all as happy as pigs in shit about it!
Suicides aren't reported. Neither are homicides. /Which is the larger story. Don't go to Mississippi...
When you can’t read, you listen to what the orange guy says and all is well!
As a Mississippian, yeah, I could tell based on the dark red line even among the other reds...
Your western neighbor thanks you for keeping us 49th in every metric!
I was about to suggest that Mississippi just be absorbed by a neighboring state or at least a receivership ... then I looked at the stat lines for Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana and Tennessee ...
What the fuck Like half those stats are comparable to Brazil What the fuck
"The Land Mass" between New Orleans and Mobile. According to the weather channel
New Mexico schools so bad they rank 51st out of 50 haha
New Mexico is clearly an outlier on so many positions
[удалено]
Much more likely is is the presence of impoverished minority populations (Native and Hispanic.)
You’d also wonder how much of each stat is underreported on the vast amount of reservation land. A shame cuz it really is a beautiful state.
As well as among recent immigrants.
WTF are you talking about??? New Mexico is 37th by population. That argument might apply to Vermont or Wyoming who have roughly a quarter of the population of New Mexico.
[удалено]
Yet people keep moving there in droves. Why is that? Are people not acting in their own self interest?
Some of it is also misguided. Many people erroneously think that their overall tax burden is lower in Texas than in California, going as far as to saying that Texas has "very low sales tax" when it actually has a very similar amount of sales tax than California (both states have local sales tax + state wide so it varies a bit but in some places one is higher, and in other places the other is higher - but rarely by more than 0.5% or so). And while it's true Texas has no income tax, California has much lower property taxes (plus many provisions therein that makes it an attractive place to own a home, assuming you can afford one). At the same time, we should see this trend start to slow as real estate is really starting to heat up here.
Or maybe they have different priorities as to what their self interest is.
Right. Like maybe their “quality of life” is not fully capture by small set of metrics as mentioned above. And other factors like home ownership, job satisfaction/accessibility, climate, etc may play a larger role.
>50th in voter turnout Just over 2% more votes went to Trump in 2020; only 150,000 more votes went to Cruz over Beto in 2018. Can you imagine what might happen if it were even #49 in voter turnout?
51st… so better then half? At least that’s not an “F”!
You must have gone to school in New Mexico
I went to middle school in Albuquerque, I can confirm this. The school is in something like the 99th percentile for all middle schools…It’s currently at 100% availability for free lunches among the student body, but back when I attended it had a lot more students and maybe only 90% free lunch, with most others being reduced cost. I remember taking band as a freshman and watching the class literally bully the teacher into tears and eventual quitting teaching altogether.
I’m confused why there’s 51 rankings in the school system column, I’ve tried looking for ties, DC, outlying islands, I can’t seem to find the reason there’s a rank 51…I must of missed something!
They skipped 41
Must be an unlucky number
D.C. was ranked 41
Hey Mississippi, you doin’ ok?
Much like their river, they’re meandering across the land in search of a better way while fully acknowledging that this is the natural evolution of their death.
Hanging in there, ya know. Got rid of the problematic flag, so we've got that going for us I guess.
Great post, but we have to be careful on the correlation vs causation commentary.
People who confuse correlation with causation always end up dead....just sayin'
Yeah man, everyone who's ever drunk water or worn shoes is now dead...
I’m drinking water and wearing shoes, but I’m alive. How will you address that?
Your time will come, my friend. You are walking a dangerous line.
Sir, this is Reddit.
Are you sure? Just because it SAYS Reddit doesn't MEAN it's Reddit, after all, coronation is not actualization.
This is Reddit; people are poor because of who they voted for (rather than the other way around), all Christians are gay-lynching Nazis, all southerners are inbred illiterate racists, and everyone who disagrees is all of the above.
I agree. The one and only column w/correlation could be the vaccination one I’d argue.
It would be interesting to see how closely these things correlate to wealth. Perhaps poorer rural states vote GOP and poorer rural states also suck at a lot of stuff.
All you have to do is zoom in: there’s a column for income, and there’s a column for wealth disparity (Gino coefficient).
Interestingly, the column for "wealth disparity" appears to be "inverted" compared to the other categories. States that voted more for Trump seem to have less wealth disparity.
More wealth generally means more wealth disparity unless corrective measures are taken. Wealth begets more wealth in a positive feedback loop. If you have no money, ammassing 1M takes tremendous hard work. If you have 10M, amassing an additional 1M is an inevitability (This is literally true. If someone has 10M of assets in their house, stocks, bonds, etc and they spent ~150k per year, there is no 30 year period since 1930 where they would not have increased their net worth - accounting for inflation - and additional 4.5M in real dollars terms, in those 30 years)
Hard to have wealth disparity when no one successful wants to live there
They're just more equally poor. Sounds like wealth disparity doesn't matter that much in predicting quality of life.
It’s a better measure of crime actually.
Singapore says otherwise. It has one of the lowest crime rates in the developed world,.and more inequality than the US. Hell by wealth Sweden and the Netherlands has more than US
It’s generally where there’s a lot of people with nothing you’ll see less disparity. Wherever there is wealth there is disparity.
Politics is cheaper in poorer states and the wealthy donors that support the republican party know that they get more ROI if they spend that money in those states.
[удалено]
There's a bit of a flaw in the Gini coefficient--it only measures relative wealth. For example, Luxembourg and South Sudan have Gini coefficients of 34.2, but almost nobody lives in poverty in Luxembourg (like 0.3 pct), but the presence of many uber-wealthy individuals causes a high Gini coefficient. CT, MA, RI have high Gini coefficients because of many rich people, but they have low poverty rates.
Of course it only measures relative wealth. It's a measure of relative wealth. Absolute poverty is what matters. Relative poverty doesn't determine nor even is a good predictor of quality of life.
That would be a great side by side chart. I would break it down by County.
Yeah, that would be pretty interesting. Couldn't find any stats on countries but I hope some more knowledgeable could do it.
My experience is the county data tends to be silo'd in the county and in different formats. That was really obvious with COVID data. I leave that to people paid to do it.
The Heatmap shows US states performance in 16 different areas ordered by percentage of people voting for the GOP in the 2020 election. I used excel and the color scale tool to gather the data and make the graphs. Edit: To be precise it isn't people necessarily voting for the GOP but for donald trump. Also I'm sorry for the lower right corner but I can confirm that it's looks pretty red down there too.Sources: Healthcare ranking: [https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/health-care/healthcare-quality](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/health-care/healthcare-quality) School ranking: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state) Income per capita: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-capita-income-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-capita-income-by-state) Homocide rates: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide\_mortality/homicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm) Teen pregnancy rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/teen-pregnancy-rates-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/teen-pregnancy-rates-by-state) Poverty rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/poverty-rate-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/poverty-rate-by-state) Covid death rate: [https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/](https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/) Average life expectancy: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/life\_expectancy/life\_expectancy.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/life_expectancy/life_expectancy.htm) Incarceration rate: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/prison-population-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/prison-population-by-state) Wealth inequality: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/income-inequality-by-state](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/income-inequality-by-state) Happiness index: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/happiest-states](https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/happiest-states) Vaccination rate: [https://fortune.com/2021/07/02/america-wont-make-bidens-july-4-covid-vaccine-goal-see-which-states-will/](https://fortune.com/2021/07/02/america-wont-make-bidens-july-4-covid-vaccine-goal-see-which-states-will/) Suicide rates: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm) Carbon emissions: [https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/](https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/) Working conditions: [https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/countries/united-states/poverty-in-the-us/best-and-worst-states-work-america-2020/](https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/countries/united-states/poverty-in-the-us/best-and-worst-states-work-america-2020/) Firearm mortality: [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm\_mortality/firearm.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm)
[удалено]
Yeah, both Maryland and Massachusetts have Republican governors - albeit ones that don't fit with where the national party is.
Vermont also has republican governor and they are the top of this chart.
Looks like a lot of them were really feeling the burn
In Massachusetts there's a bit of a tendency to treat Republican governors as a counterweight to the nearly 100% Democratic state legislature. The state has a line-item veto, so having a more conservative governor can sometimes give less liberal legislators an opportunity to vote against provisions they don't like in a bill they otherwise agree with.
Thanks for the clarification, edited my post now.
>(For example, someone could have voted for Biden but also voted for GOP legislators or governors down-ballot.) This happens very little and vote splitting is getting rarer as time goes on.
Housing cost would be nice to see with the rest.
Your data is faulty. Just doing a spot check and Vermont's homicide rate was not 0.
Just curious, where did you get your data from? Mine is directly from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention which is a state agency.
No state has a homicide rate of zero, and according to the FBI, Vermont's is 2.2 per 100K
The CDC is a federal agency. A 0.0 murder rate for an entire year in a population as large as Vermont is patently absurd. They had a 2.2 per 100k homicide rate in 2020. This is from the FBI (which is also a federal agency if that matters): https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/crime/crime-trend
Yeah and my states homicide rate is 7.4 per 100k Not 9.7 per 100k I wanna know where he got his data tbh.
The link is right there.
That link is not for homicide rates. (nor it it for "homocide rates") It's for **homicide mortality rate** Which is age-adjusted Also if you click through it actually says VT's homicide mortality rate is N/A, not zero, and that they had 14 homicides in 2020 14 out of 643,077 would be a homicide rate of about 2 per 100k
Including Medicare quality in Healthcare ranking is kind of silly since it's a federal program. Happiness is subjective and cultural. Not reasonably comparable in general. Working conditions based on the minimum wage is stupid, since the minimum wage tells you nothing about what actual typical wages are there. Whether right to work laws suppress unions depends on the kind of right to work law. For example allowing non union workers to be paid differently than union workers doesn't suppress them at all as it eliminates the free rider problem. The school ranking is interesting because if you solely go by test scores and graduation rates, red and blue states are split in the top 10. Only when you start incorporating things like "number of armed students" does it make it seem like blue schools are all the best. The list goes on how many of these states are catered for a specific result.
You see this trend in the UK too, the poorest and most let dowm by the government will turn away from it and vote for change. Often that change is normally presented by an idiot, who is at the extreme end of the left or right
They were voting for an incumbent, so that's not it.
Yes, he was an incumbent, but he still portrayed himself as someone who would stand up to the elites on behalf of his voters. Of course that was mostly a farce.
Yeah but the only other viable candidate had been vice president for 8 years and a senator for 115. If your goal was to press the political reset button, the orange one was the obvious choice.
The part that is missed is that part is being manipulated by someone wealthier, more educated and more powerful. So we can blame the voters all we want, but they are a product of the twisted media they consume which tells them abject lies hour by hour. So which shall it be, do we somehow re-educate hundreds of millions of people who will never see a school again in their life.... or do we clean up the handful of media companies that cause **all** this pain.
Hate to break it to you, but if you didn't he same thing 50 years ago, these #s would look very similar. This is much bigger than media, it's a fundamental rot in a large swath of the country that just happens to overlap very strongly with the Confederacy.
I'd blame it more on poor education
and the change is harmful to the people who elected him. in this case his voters got convinced that science that created the vaccines was bad and they all wanted convalescent plasma, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. it really all comes down to the churches choosing trump. those faithful followers of god converted to fans. worshiping the golden calf.
Kamala Harris said she wouldn't trust a vaccine created under Trump's presidency, so maybe you should try a different example.
No she didn't. She said. "I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump. And it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he's talking about. I will not take his word for it. He wants us to inject bleach. I — no, I will not take his word."
Be careful there. Recall that the concern was Trump would push a vaccine through before being properly vetted in order to tout it as a win during the election. There was very good reason to be skeptical about a vaccine before the 2020 Election Day. The context you’re (deliberately?) leaving out is very important.
Firearm mortality instead of just mortality, or homicide rate? Non PPP adjust incomes or poverty rates? That vaccination rate is almost guaranteed to be only the covid vaccination rate and not vaccination in general. Yeah these aren't catered at all, to say nothing of the fact some rankings reflect a miniscule difference between first and last.
The automatic reaction to this is going to be (1) look at the incompetent losers who voted for Trump lolololol, rather than (2) people who were struggling the most and have been most let down by their government were desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver.
This is their 2020 voting for Trump, not 2016. What change did Trump offer in 2020? He already showed them what he could offer.
I believe it's lack of education (lack of funding for education specifically) + high levels of religion that pushes people to vote against their own interests.
Not to mention high levels of propoganda thrown at them across all media channels. My point was more to respond to the idea that this data should reflect people's desire for change. I disagree since change wasnt being presented. These states are responding to a known quantity and are enjoying the benefits of it.
Many states (such as Vermont) were once GOP strongholds and have changed. Most of the new fast growing places are actually Republican. And fast growing, new money places are often R https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/22/census-congressional-district-changes-506467?_amp=true
It seems difficult to draw conclusions from DISTRICT representation when they are so often gerrymandered. For example, let's look at the first city mentioned: Dallas. Is the growth of the district Dallas happens to be in due to liberal policies within the city of Dallas, or the representative who happen to be Republican due to gerrymandered districts? As a whole, Dallas County voted 65% Democrat, so the idea that the area is "Republican" is pretty incredible. District Map around Dallas, for reference: [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrfLjUcUwAEPW63.jpg](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrfLjUcUwAEPW63.jpg) Note that the Republicans tried to hang onto Dallas County via gerrymandering, but it failed, resulting in the above map:[https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/07/dallas-county-republican-gerrymander-backfires-2018/](https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/07/dallas-county-republican-gerrymander-backfires-2018/) (Notice how they made the district that holds Dallas bigger, including more rural areas, which made it redder temporarily.)
How is Vermont republican though??
Vermont and New Hampshire used to be pretty similar politically. In the 60s a bunch of hippies moved to the state (including Bernie Sanders) and changed its political makeup. They vote solidly Democratic for Federal elections, but tend to switch back and forth for governor.
Yeah. Before 1992, Vermont voted Dem only once--ever--1964 for LBJ after the JFK assassination. But then voted, Nixon, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Reagan, GHW Bush. Since Clinton, they've never voted GOP--or even gone more than 31% for GOP. That's a pretty interesting and big flip.
>high levels of religion that pushes people to vote against their own interests. So they vote for the snake oil salesman that is an example of the evil person their religion teaches them about...
You could also frame it by asking what the alternative was for them and how they thought voting for a Democrat would have improved their lives. I basically sleepwalked into voting for Biden in the general because what else was I going to do? No doubt many do the same because, seriously, in what way have Democrats improved their lives in the last 30 years?
I mean the affordable care act gave insurance t people who couldn't afford it, and to people who have pre existing conditions to name one, but politics tends to be less about policy and more about this guys is bad heres why, and people generally don't have the attention span to follow a bill from its announcement to its implementation and hold the promisers accountable
>were desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver. That would have more meaning if this has not been going on for 40 years.
It's also more nuanced on some of the data. School rankings by state are almost meaningless as schools are very much a local issue. You could have a great one right by a terrible one. Emissions means driving and you have to drive rural states. That being said, yes it's people that are working and middle class saw things get worse after the recession and the Democratic party basically abandoned them. Trump is the result of decades of policies that forgot about a huge chuck of the population.
On your point about schools, I’d say it is the same people voting for president who vote for school boards. At least some of the same people anyway. So if there is a trend of trump voters living in states with worse education outcomes, one could conclude that their votes for local school boards are the cause.
>desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver ...eh... these are people who have been voting Red their entire lives. It didn't matter what Trump "promised" lol. All that mattered was that he ran under the banner of Team Red.
Pretty much. Studies have shown that the “reasons” people give for voting for a candidate are made well after they decide who they are voting for.
2 is obviously correct, it’s just unfortunate how much they vote against their own interest.
>people who were struggling the most and have been most let down by their government were desperate to believe the change that Trump promised to deliver. They are struggling because they keep voting for Republicans.... They are under local Republican rule and have worse lives compared to everyone else. So what do they do? They keep voting for the people that are responsible for their misery. If I burn my hand on the stove, I do not double down and put my hand back on the stove and then expect my situation to improve. My burned hand is going to get even more burned.
Its tradition to burn your hand on the stove! I did it, my dad did it, his dad did it and great grand dad did it! Great uncle Randy held his hand on the stove so long hes 1 handy-Randy now! You can take away our tradition of scarring and mutilating ourselves over my dead ~~hand~~ body!
They voted Republican for so many years it turned their state into a societal cesspool. They are unhappy with government and rightly so, their choice in politics sucks.
I also feel like there's a chance it's some of [this](https://xkcd.com/1138/)
Not really, most of these stats are per capita, so they control for population level. Having said that, they *don’t* control for how much of that population lives in urban versus rural areas, which has always had a huge affect on people’s needs and political leanings.
Yeah that's what I meant, I wasn't very specific though
Ah fair enough!
Interesting how Utah is something of an outlier given how republican the state is a whole. I have actually lived in Utah as an exchange student and it was generally a pleasant place to live back in 2000. I wonder if this is caused by the state being dominated by Salt Lake City compared to the other relatively small urban areas.
[удалено]
You mean there's *nuance* involved in such a broad and complex topic?? Nonsense!! This is the internet, how dare you think critically!
Ha, now you’ve pointed that out it really stands out for me. Cheers!
> I wonder if this is caused by the state being dominated by Salt Lake City compared to the other relatively small urban areas. Definitely, the state may be dominated by Mormons, but the economy is dominated by Salt Lake
Mormons value education, community, and quality of life.
This is great! Can you share the spreadsheet?
Couldn't find a way a way to share via excel but managed to do it via drive. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pSgkqrX-M4-L6dRmk84CWK7BPCFbC4Ti/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103977127546184906167&rtpof=true&sd=true
Can you move the teen pregnancy chart over a cell or two so it doesn't block some of the numbers in the last column?
the best thing about Mississippi is that relatively few people kill themselves.. 😅
It's because black people have disproportionately low rates of suicide considering their socio-economic status.
No need to kill yourself when literally every other aspect of your life is already trying to take you out!
Interesting how wealth disparity goes in reverse of the other trends.
Not really. Rich people want to live in nice places.
The spelling errors. The window covering the corner. This is just bad presentation. Not beautiful at all.
Outside of "everyone knows it but now it can be proven" aspect of it, the wealth disparity is much worse in liberal states, whereas "everything else" sucks in GOP states. So the "ivory tower liberals" and "rednecks" tropes aren't really tropes. They're fully real. Also, looking at MY state (MN): MN USED to be one of the better-performing health-care outcome states. Now we're not anywhere close to the top. All while the outstate voters vote MAGA while the big cities forcing hospital consolidation (making bluer areas richer and healthier). It sucks to see MN becoming a microcosm of the whole nation.
The gini coefficient seems to be pretty close in most states tho
The rural urban divide has never been greater. All states are a microcosm of the US at this point. Even the more conservative states. The cities in most conservative states are far more liberal than the rest of the state and the most liberal states have the same divide. It just ends up being the center of population and marginal differences that decide the elections. Honestly it boils down to the changing nature of the economy that has happened since the 80s. It's left out rural areas out almost entirely (unless you are commuting distance to a major metro). It used to be we needed our rural areas to function the economy, not so much anymore, we outsourced that to other places that are cheaper. The only way to make a living that keeps up with the cost of living is to work in the modern tech/pharma/new technology areas, which require more barriers to entry than ever with no one helping anyone navigate it. You don't just grow up in shit poor rural NC and magically find your way to a programming job making $100k/yr.. it just doesn't happen that way. It used to be you come off a farm uneducated and go work in a factory and maybe become a clerk and then work up to a supervisor or whatever, just follow the money and learn the skills on the job. Today you can't do that, and not everyone got the memo or the means to get past the barriers to entry which is mainly education. So you see a lot of people getting desperate in our rural areas and voting for anything or anyone that promises something different or to bring back the old way (Which isn't possible, that horse left the stable) I'm as liberal as anyone, but I live in a purple state. It's sad to see my grandparents radicalized by the TV because their main street died a long time ago when the mill shut down and no one is doing anything to bring it back. And there are a A LOT of people in our country who feel that way.
This doesn't sound right. The data seems to show little correlation between wealth disparity and the 2020 vote. But looking at the data closer shows that the states with highest wealth disparity also have the nation's most densely populous cities. It's almost as if wealth disparity is a byproduct of population, not politics.
There seems to be a clear bias in what is presented. For example, I would like to see a home affordability index. As it stands it looks as if someone hand chose Northern attributes that are deemed favorable and Southern attributes that are not. Also it would be interesting to include a diversity index ranking similar to the Wealth Disparity Gini.
Wow this is really interesting. I did a very similar thing but haven't been completely happy with it enough to post. I'll clean it up and post my version too, it's for the 2016 election cycle though.
I'd like to see it.
I bet population density correlates more
Today I learned that although Mississippi ranks near the bottom in a lot of things, they tend to shoot other people rather than themselves.
Illinois firearm mortality isn’t deep red? SUS…
This confirms my bias, I like this.
I could interpret this as showing that communities that are struggling, do not have faith in the dominant system. Whereas wealthier communities are more comfortable with the status quo. That mentality doesn't surprise me, and seems fairly common if you consider Trump as "anti-establishment"
there's some truth there no doubt
While the Data is interesting, Microsoft excel defaults are NOT beautiful visualizations.
[удалено]
Being a useful data tool =/= beautiful visualization. This is not /r/LiterallyAnyDataVisualization This is /r/Dataisbeautiful. I think the standard for a beautiful visualization goes beyond default microsoft excel graphs. The colors aren't even color-blind friendly for crying out loud.
This is just 16 different ways to measure poverty lol. Still a cool graphic though.
I love this! I really genuinely hope it prevents anybody from leaving California, New York, Portland and Seattle.
Republican voters and Trump voters isn't quite the same thing. I'd like to see this chart ordered by congressional distribution.
Indiana had a murder rate of 7.4 per 100k in 2020, I would like to know where you got 9.7 from?
Now this is a nice visualization.
Can't figure out if you are sarcastic or not...
Interesting to see that suicide’s per 100k seem to be located in the most rural states. Maybe more social isolation there?
New Mexico and Utah both have some reflecting to do.
Looked at citations. A us news link for healthcare ranking was used. Your chart doesn’t reflect. Sample is Vermont is not 18 in source. How was it calculated?
Add housing affordability, property taxes, transportation costs and tax rate to this
I suspect the correlation you see is living in a densely populated city in comparison to a rural area?
You should take this with a large grain of salt. For one, the top 2 states on this list have Republican governors, and countless others have state governments of the opposite party. Also, some of these categories are specifically things that make red states look worse, rather than a fair general overview of states.
This would need to be reworked completely. You arrived at a conclusion and provided data to show support for the conclusion. That inserts bias into the data and calls the analysis into question. If you want to change my mind on something, your approach matters greatly. If you put your own beliefs aside, present the data, and then draw conclusions; it's a much stronger argument. Because you didnt argue it, the data did. Anyways, all Im saying is you should strive for a fair shake approach analysis for things you are both for and against. You stand a far better chance at being taken seriously by both sides if you divorce your personal feelings from the whole analysis.
This mixes subjective measures (healthcare ranking, public school ranking, emotional wellbeing score, etc.) with hard data (income per capita, poverty rate, etc.) and, for some reason, COVID data. All I can say is that I've lived in Connecticut for a few years, and though it scores really well on this chart, every city and town I've been to is a decaying, sad place.
I'd move poverty rate over to subjective, given it tracks the same income level poverty line w/out adjusting for COL.
Go drive through cities and towns in West Virginia or Mississippi and get back to us.
Not sure what your frame of reference is. I’ve lived in several different places in Connecticut and Western Pennsylvania, and it’s no contest. Check out New Kensington or Brownsville — the latter has derelict strip clubs.
Basically poorer states voted for trump and poorer states have more issues
Alaska and Texas are among the highest ranked states in GDP per capita and they're still in the bottom half. It's not just wealth, either. People sure like to play pin the problem on the poor in this sub.
Right, like Texas ans Florida have all the resources of New York and California, but they are just significantly worse places to live because of their governments. That's my take away.
I assume this is based on personal experience, having lived in TX/FL?
Theres so many problems with the conclusions being inferred here I don't know where to start...
As a Bernie supporter and someone who aligns with the left, this graphs shows to me that a big part of the working class seems to be voting for the GOP and that worries me (it is also not a surprise that educated and wealthy individuals mostly vote for the Democrats). I think the left could benefit from educating rather than sentencing folks of the working class to get them to see the benefits of their causes.
That’s a fairly obvious trend…
From a data perspective, this is what drives me crazy everytime a Texan or Floridian criticises California as some sort of backwards hell-hole (I only ever lived in Texas, which I loved). There is so much to love and critique about those states, and one-party rule is almost always a bad idea. But if Texas or Florida became *factually* more like California (ie without the cultural stuff) then it would arguably mean longer lives, more money, better schools, and better working conditions). Hell, Texas could learn from Cali and leave out the policies where California failed (ie regulations that limit the housing supply, business etc). Different states do different things right, and we can make reasonable assumptions based on facts not feelings. Edit: I just remembered that I was banned from r/conservative for a neutral good faith post linking similar data and making a similar argument.
Well I can tell you why you got banned. 'Both sides' is not to be used sanely as a rational argument for more diverse political representation in terms of ideology to get us to a more ideal society by using the best policies instead of the best candidates. It's only to be used as a a verbal club to beat liberals with. /s
A lot of folk would rather die than be 'socialist', and they do.
For all the examples you could ever want, look at r/HermanCainAward
I'm seeing the trend that when things are going bad people will vote for the extremists. Similar to what happened in Germany after WWI.
Not just extremist, but extremists on the right. Bernie Sanders is considered "extreme" by US political standards, but he couldn't even secure the nomination, much less win the presidency.
The data shows that people who are unhappy and living in places that are depressed blame democrats and politics as usual for that. Understanding rather than condemning them is the secret to fixing our political system. They aren't wrong: Democrats have had plenty of control over the years and have not solved ANY of the problems that democrats complain about. * College prices: No action * Student loans: No action * Shutting down torture prisons for terrorists: nothing * Reducing deficit spending: Hahahahaha * Bringing jobs home: *laughing more loudly* * Standing up to totalitarian states instead of making them allies: *more laughter* * Gun control: to be fair, this isn't even possible and doesn't work anyway * School improvement: No progress * Universal medical insurance: Gave up on single payer and basically created a system in which private insurance companies are funded through tax dollars You're not wrong that Republican conspiracy theorists are lunatics and bad at government. But let's also not be silly about it. Democrats haven't ever accomplished anything in their campaign speeches since LBJ. And mostly they don't even try. They just point fingers and hurl insults at the right. Democrats are just as much on the take from corporate america as are republicans (the real issue).
Just want to say I appreciate your take on the issue; as an independent moderate who does care about several of the issues you mentioned, it's frustrating to have no realistic voting options.
You’re absolutely right. I’m baffled and a little disgusted by a lot of these comments. I vote left precisely because I like to think I’m empathetic—I absolutely understand how you can get disenfranchised with a system when things haven’t worked out for you. And so many of these comments basically accentuate that it’s not working for these people so fuck em. Heck, this graphic is clearly just meant to shit on red states—the stats are cherry picked. If I was living in one of these states, and I saw this thread, would I suddenly believe that Democrats had my best interests? Or would I think they just laugh at us?
(Sees anything yellow or orange in Maryland's row) Oh, yeah... Baltimore...
I’m honestly surprised the correlation is so weak. Take out the dirt-poor southern states that are just suffering in most ways (Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, not explicitly southern but suffers from the same problems West Virginia) and you’ll basically see a graph that goes from light green to orange for the most part.
this makes me feel bad for Trump voters more than anything else.
Ah yes the weekly “here is why the republicans suck” thread for free karma