More than 75% of the land area is red, when looking at the map based on land areas, while shifting to the population view only about 46% of the map is red. As a result, the blue counties tend to be the smaller ones so blue is visually less represented than it should be based on vote totals. Less densely populated counties tend to vote republican, while higher density, typically smaller counties tend to vote for democrats. An interesting thing to note is that this view is even more heavily dominated by the color red, for the same reasons. This map looks at the 20 presidential election results, county by county. Thus, when your eyes attempt to discern which color prevails, the comparison is more accurate and attempts to replicate the relative ratio of electoral votes for each side. That cartogram changed the size of the states so that large states with low population, and thus low electoral votes tended to shrink in size, while smaller states with moderate to larger populations tended to grow in size. On a normal election map, Red states dominate, especially because a number of larger, less populated states happen to vote Republican. The idea for that map was that by portraying a state as Red or Blue, your eye naturally attempts to determine which color has a greater share of the total. Previously, I created a map (cartogram) that showed the state by state electoral results from the Presidential Election by scaling the size of the states based on their electoral votes. This interactive map shows the election results by county and you can display the size of counties based on their land area or population size.
IN this case, its just “hey check this out, it’s kind of cool and think of all the questions it poses for further research.” Of course, there are swathes of research on this out there already, but some people find it fun to do their own.The map has been updated to include the latest 2020 results and also adds the option to color the circles by the win margin rather than just looking at the winner.Ĭlick here to view a visualization that looks more explicitly at the correlation between population density and votes by county. It’s only a bad thing if it is used misleadingly towards a particular end.
Just because data doesn’t have a specific purpose doesn’t make it useless or any less interesting. Maybe certain cultural norms more heavily influence density than geographic or environments /shrug. Perhaps if you went through the numbers, the sample size might be big enough to find a correlation between some more data on cultural differences and this data on population distribution. An opening image to discussion on how environments and geography effect human settlement The fact that the geographic distribution of human population is skewed. how dense we can pack human population if needed (This is very relevant to some of Australia’s approaching environmental problems). It reminds us of some of the following facts, but not limited to: It is ale eye opening to the vast sums of people who are uneducated, or to children. It gives visual perspective, which is great for some learning types, or use as supporting material for more specific data, for presentations, etc.
#Us population density map download#
If you want to work through the data yourself, you can download it here in CSV format. Tierra del Fuego, Antártida e Islas del Atlántico SurĪysén del General Carlos Ibáñez del Campo Sign up to have new Metrocosm posts delivered to your inbox Cities Can You Fit Inside Greater Tokyo?įor it’s size, Tokyo has the highest population density in the world. The table below shows the full list of territories covered by each region, along with their 2014 populations.įor a related post, see: How Many U.S. It encompasses several prominent, powerful countries, including Australia, Ireland, Canada, and Saudi Arabia.Ĭan you identify the two countries within the red region? Notice that the blue region covers more than just uninhabited deserts and tundras. The original map turned out not to be entirely correct (the red region covered only about 3% of the world population), so I made this one from scratch based on the same concept.
When I first came across the original map, via the awesome Twitter feed of I was skeptical, so I went through and checked the numbers. This is a modified version of a map from reddit user Ibisdigitalmedia. There are just as many people living in the small red area as there are living in all the blue areas combined. Update: What this map looks like as an equal area projection, and why it would have been a poor choiceīelieve it or not, it’s true. For comparison, the same number of people live in the small red region. Only 5% of the world’s population lives in the entire blue region.
0 kommentar(er)
