Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Electoral College Decision Tree

observablehq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 373 posts

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#11

Post by kickout »

part1of2 wrote: post #7

Where would one get started with building a graph like this? I’m trying to wrap my head around the code. Is there a simpler d3 example with less permutations that I can build upon?

The linked website (observeablehq.com) is an excellent source to learn d3 (steep learning curve though).

I'm not a programmer and taught myself D3 last fall. Amelia Wagenbruger (sp?) has a good book too.

edit: https://www.newline.co/fullstack-d3

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#13

Post by vmception »

part1of2 wrote: post #7

Where would one get started with building a graph like this? I’m trying to wrap my head around the code. Is there a simpler d3 example with less permutations that I can build upon?

mmm not really. data visualization is a multi disciplinary thing.

what you can do pretty easily is use and modify examples that seem to fit your needs.

but synthesizing from scratch isn't something very attainable and has a much steeper learning curve.

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#15

Post by roywiggins »

weakfish wrote: post #6
protomyth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Trump beat any overwhelming odds. I think the polling was beyond horrible. A bit too many people put too much faith in the NYT and 538's methodology. I wouldn't expect the map to change too much between elections. Now, the 2022 (House & some Senate) and 2024 Presidential will be different because of the change in districting and electoral votes per state caused by the census.

I thought 538 was one of the few outlets to give Trump a decent chance? Granted, I was 16 but I seem to remember that being the case.

You remember correctly. "538 thought Clinton had a lock on it" is a meme, but it doesn't seem grounded in anything.

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#18

Post by Mountain_Skies »

standardUser wrote: post #4
atonse wrote: post #2

Nerd Me: This is a really nice use of this visualization. Human Me: I saw all this stuff in 2016 and Trump still beat the overwhelming odds. (Yes 16% chance of winning is still a chance, I get it... there's just so much deja vu with all these visualizations and articles about his campaign imploding).

He "beat the odds" because most models were incorrect. They have been corrected. Are the models wrong again? Maybe, but it would need to be in a totally different way, and by a much larger margin than in 2016.

2020 is unprecedented with the various pandemic voting procedures (mail-in, early, and election day) across the country. If the models are wrong this year, that would be much more understandable than them being wrong in 2016.

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#19

Post by tgb »

atonse wrote: post #2

Nerd Me: This is a really nice use of this visualization. Human Me: I saw all this stuff in 2016 and Trump still beat the overwhelming odds. (Yes 16% chance of winning is still a chance, I get it... there's just so much deja vu with all these visualizations and articles about his campaign imploding).

I agree with your emotions. 538 puts Biden up only about 6 points in Pennsylvania (their tipping point state). If the race tightens by a few points and the polls are off by a few points, then a very tight race in Pennsylvania is plausible and due to his Electoral College advantage Trump would have a plausible path to victory that doesn't require anything shocking. It just requires several unsurprising things aligning in his favor. The odds are against that, but it's a real possibility that doesn't involve saying that "polls are meaningless!! Fake news!".

Re: Electoral College Decision Tree

#20

Post by jstanley »

vanattab wrote: post #12

Really cool use of data visualization! Nice work! What ever happens I just pray we don't hit one of the paths ending in a unfilled circle.

Unless I'm misunderstanding something, it seems obviously dumb that the electoral college has an even number of members? Wouldn't making it an odd number prevent this possibility?
Post reply on HN