« How will the Times show election results next week? Will they give us a cliffhanger? | Main | Mapping the two Americas »



Recommended reading is Nate Silver's blog post just before the election http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/final-election-update-theres-a-wide-range-of-outcomes-and-most-of-them-come-up-clinton/ Although the headline is misleading, they put the probability of a Clinton win a 71-72% far from a certainty. What he does point out is that undecided/other was high at 12.5% of voters and that could easily lead to a different outcome.

I think polls deserve to die, as the only thing that matters is the election, but that is unlikely. What has made them important to people is their belief that the party that wins is more important than the actual policies.


Ken: Haha, you scooped me on this one. I will be blogging about the election forecasting and I plan on linking to Nate's last article which is required reading.

kim mutikainen

You find it good practice to overlap labels so its unreadable?. I guess with small adjustments this could be heaps more readable.


KM: I highlighted the scatter plot for being insightful so yes, fixing the overlap would be recommended. The NYTimes and a few outlets subsequently published variations of this chart without the overlapping labels.


Is it possible to have Washington Post's Nation of Peaks link?
Good review. Thank you Kaiser.


Antonio: Sorry for the oversight. The link is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/election-results-from-coast-to-coast/

The comments to this entry are closed.


Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter