- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LOL snopes LOL 2016 election map by county OH BOY WE LOVE FACT CHECKERS
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:11 pm to buckeye_vol
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:11 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
It didn't matter he couldn't understand a simple card game and fell down multiple times; he insisted that since he can solve some complex equation, which none of could confirm nor deny, that was evidence of his current sober state.
got my arse handed to me on my first job (in sales) when being a smart arse I drew an integral on the breakroom whiteboard with a message "integrate for $100".
another salesguy saw it who was familiar with calculus solved it and wrote "PAY UP SUCKA" below it.
had to pay up. lesson learned.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 12:12 pm
0
Posted on 1/23/17 at 12:17 pm to BamaAtl
And had the most voter fraud ever
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:05 pm to CAD703X
Now i understand why that view utterly baffled you.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:09 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
Neither tells the whole story, but it tells a more accurate story when you can see both.
Nah, the snopes graphic doesn't really tell me anything factual.
It would have taken more effort than hitting one button in gimp but the original map with varying shades of red and blue based on margins would have been ideal.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:12 pm to junkfunky
quote:Yes it does. It shows the same map accounted for population density. There are multiple ways to show it, but it provides unique information that can't be presented in the other map.
Nah, the snopes graphic doesn't really tell me anything factual.
quote:I agree that shading is more useful, but even that doesn't show everything. It's just an alternative way to few it, and everything is going to have strengths and weaknesses in isolation.
It would have taken more effort than hitting one button in gimp but the original map with varying shades of red and blue based on margins would have been ideal.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:36 pm to buckeye_vol
Showing population densities where there aren't any is totally accurate.
I don't get the point of the merging, unless it is meant to confuse. They could have much more effectively shown this information using density blobs. The blue would overrun the red but it would look natural and not forced.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:39 pm to CAD703X
The "covers the greatest amount of land" map when it comes to voting is the most absurd argument anyone makes.
Republicans trotted it out in 2008 and 2012 when they lost, claiming that "most of America" didn't support Obama.
It's a stupid argument. Cities are critical for a lot of things you take for granted, like the Internet. Without cities operating as major hubs (and requiring the large variety of expertise required to run it), you wouldn't have the message board you're on now to complain about the map in the first place.
Republicans trotted it out in 2008 and 2012 when they lost, claiming that "most of America" didn't support Obama.
It's a stupid argument. Cities are critical for a lot of things you take for granted, like the Internet. Without cities operating as major hubs (and requiring the large variety of expertise required to run it), you wouldn't have the message board you're on now to complain about the map in the first place.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:41 pm to junkfunky
quote:
Showing population densities where there aren't any is totally accurate.
Huh?
Are you saying the map is inaccurate?
Posted on 1/23/17 at 1:44 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Are you saying the map is inaccurate?
No, just lazy.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:12 pm to tiderider
quote:
for different perspectives, based on their own beliefs
Like the UN uses, because they secretly know about the flat earth...
:blackhelicopter:
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 2:13 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:19 pm to braindeadboxer
quote:
That second map is accurate and it's why I REALLY want California to GTFO
It actually isn't
As said 1000s of times we don't elect by popular vote and we never will.
The small pop states will never give up their power.
There would have never been a United States if we did.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:20 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Validation for what, exactly?
For Hillarys popular vote 'win'
1) The map is inaccurate, because its not how we elect presidents
2) The map is inaccurate, because if important, then the candidates would have campaigned better
3) The map is inaccurate, or else they would have posted a cartogram of electoral importance (which btw, wouldn't look much different from the counties map)
That's why its used. As a validation of efforts that weren't in vain. And deserved to be rewarded by a liberal presidency. Retarded!
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:23 pm to RobbBobb
The map makes no claims to what you're stating.
It's simply a population demographic of how individuals voted, nothing more.
Weird to see people melting over a map.
It's simply a population demographic of how individuals voted, nothing more.
Weird to see people melting over a map.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:23 pm to Loserman
quote:That didn't make it inaccurate; neither of the maps show that, and in fact the primary problem is using the two color scheme with no shading to differentiate highly partisan areas from less partisan.
It actually isn't
As said 1000s of times we don't elect by popular vote and we never will.
This doesn't make either map inaccurate though.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:24 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
It shows the same map accounted for population density.
Which means nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Nyet
On a "FACT CHECKING" website, demonstrating the nationwide popular vote, is not a fact that needs to be checked, in an election for the US presidency
Its just proof of bias. Nothing more
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:27 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
For Hillarys popular vote 'win'
I'm finding validation for HRC's popular vote win? That will come as a surprise to those who know that I was #neverHillary.
quote:
1) The map is inaccurate, because its not how we elect presidents
2) The map is inaccurate, because if important, then the candidates would have campaigned better
3) The map is inaccurate, or else they would have posted a cartogram of electoral importance (which btw, wouldn't look much different from the counties map)
The map is not inaccurate. The data it displays is simply that, data. By all means, claim that people using the data to make some sort of pro-HRC are making ridiculous claims, but the map itself is not inaccurate.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 2:28 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:27 pm to RobbBobb
quote:That has nothing to do with the accuracy of the map. It may not be able to tell who won the EC, but neither can the other map. That's not what they are showing though.
1) The map is inaccurate, because its not how we elect presidents
quote:This is irrelevant to the map. How hard it is it to figure out that it's showing?
The map is inaccurate, because if important, then the candidates would have campaigned better
quote:It probably would look much different since the map is even more disproportionately red than the EC.
The map is inaccurate, or else they would have posted a cartogram of electoral importance (which btw, wouldn't look much different from the counties map)
Regardless, you seem to want a different map, which is fine. But that doesn't make great map inaccurate.
Your post really makes no sense.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:31 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:Even the OP didn't seem to be making this claim. It's one thing to find it useless, which then means they should ignore it. But RobbBobb is making such a nonsensical argument about the accuracy, that accuracy has no objective meaning in that case.
The map is not inaccurate. The data it displays is simply that, data. By all means, claim that people using the data to make some sort of pro-HRC are making ridiculous claims, but the map itself is not inaccurate.
This post was edited on 1/23/17 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:36 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
BTW -- Bush beat Kerry in the popular vote by 3,012,166 votes. I thought that was important since it's the new democratic party statistic of importance. That margin is greater than Hillary's over President Trump's.
quote:
BamaAtl
Here you go, dumbass.
Posted on 1/23/17 at 2:37 pm to CAD703X
WaPo had a big article on this back in November and were running cartograms.
This is an old one:
More telling is the 3-D ones used by this guy showing margin of victory...from 2000.
This is an old one:
More telling is the 3-D ones used by this guy showing margin of victory...from 2000.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News