Here's quite a pretty purple county-by-county map of the 2004 vote, but what I'd like is 2000 and 2004 purple maps with the same format so that I can compare them. Anyone know of such?
Thanks. It's close, but not quite close enough. The color tones don't seem similar between them, and for some reason my printer isn't distinguishing the shades of purple.
I was wondering whether the country was somewhat more geographically polorized this time around, and I couldn't tell. Of course, maybe it just isn't more (or less) polarized than it was, so the maps look pretty similar.
Go here (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/) and click on the state of your choice, say, um, Pennsylvania (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/index.html). See, counties in various shades of blue or pink! You can even click on a county to see the vote totals for that county.
To me these colors are almost more suitable for a baby's room than an electoral map, but dark colors (Philadelphia in bright blue, Fulton in hot pink) show a heavy percentage in favor of one candidate or the other -- yay, Philly!* -- while pale colors (Washington County in very pale blue, Centre County in pale pink) show the votes were nearly even there. Lawrence County is white, because it was virtually even: W won there by only 411 votes!
*and it takes a lot for a Pittsburgher to say that!
Thanks, but what I'm looking for is national county maps with the same format for 2000 and 2004.
The cnn link is interesting though--I suppose it's not surprising that the R's had better party discipline (as shown by a lower percentage of registered R voting D) than the D's. On the other hand, one of the reasons I though Kerry would win was the big name R's going over to him.
At this point, I'm also curious about those 100% party exit poll pie charts. Doesn't anyone believe in a secret ballot any more?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-04 06:02 pm (UTC)(I searched http://images.google.com with the keywords "purple map 2000 presidential" for that one.)
no subject
Date: 2004-11-04 08:54 pm (UTC)I was wondering whether the country was somewhat more geographically polorized this time around, and I couldn't tell. Of course, maybe it just isn't more (or less) polarized than it was, so the maps look pretty similar.
CNN has something similar
Date: 2004-11-04 11:44 pm (UTC)To me these colors are almost more suitable for a baby's room than an electoral map, but dark colors (Philadelphia in bright blue, Fulton in hot pink) show a heavy percentage in favor of one candidate or the other -- yay, Philly!* -- while pale colors (Washington County in very pale blue, Centre County in pale pink) show the votes were nearly even there. Lawrence County is white, because it was virtually even: W won there by only 411 votes!
*and it takes a lot for a Pittsburgher to say that!
Re: CNN has something similar
Date: 2004-11-05 11:35 am (UTC)The cnn link is interesting though--I suppose it's not surprising that the R's had better party discipline (as shown by a lower percentage of registered R voting D) than the D's. On the other hand, one of the reasons I though Kerry would win was the big name R's going over to him.
At this point, I'm also curious about those 100% party exit poll pie charts. Doesn't anyone believe in a secret ballot any more?