Happy New Year! As we wrap up another successful year of the statistics blog (now with >50k followers), we would be remiss not to recognize some nice friends who are still feeling disappointed over the outcome of the recent U.S. election. It is worth exploring a little more about the election results, based on the most updated voting records. Particularly as the Democrats have pivoted the tête-à-tête from recount and FBI director Comey, to popular vote and Russian president Putin.
What does it mean to now imply that "most Americans" voted for Democratic ideals, given the results (looked at through the prism of a popular vote tabulation) showed Hillary Clinton won by only a couple percent?
It turns out that this sort of conclusion is false, and instead it leads to one party presuming to hold a mighty moral high-ground from their ¼ voting share?
From a peak in 2008, now through 2016, those not caring to vote (in white below) continuously rose to 45% (from 43%). This is a higher voter apathy than in virtually all other advanced countries. And frankly, it is the largest American segment of 114m (up from 99m). Last-minute undecideds (including me) rose.
Additionally, the voting share for the popular vote "winner" (in blue below) fell to 48% (from 53%), or as a portion of the entire eligible population (as opposed to as a portion of voters) it fell to 26% (from 30%). So on net, even as the population grew, a small fraction voted (and within that an even smaller fraction voted for the popular vote "winner"). This results in Hillary Clinton not epitomizing the views of "most Americans" even if she "won the popular vote", but rather supported by only 66 million Americans (down from 70 million who voted for Barack Obama in 2008).
I'm with her? Observe their share of the pie, below! Democrats have simply seen a continuously dwindling moral-standing to speak for all Americans, even as the population has grown in the past 8 years.
So now back to my friends who are still feeling sour over the Presidential election and looking for relief. I feel a particular sense of responsibility since my polling probability research was read by millions and continuously solicited/shared by one party, and always properly showed Donald Trump had much stronger odds (~3x) versus what MSM polls or Nate Silver were "scientifically" suggesting. It is worth noting something here at year-end: it's an acutely individual loss, to not see that there are so many tremendous and long-term opportunities we get to enjoy, just living in a great nation such as the United States. We get most things right, most of the time. We get to argue about politics and not worry about a knock on our door in the middle of the night.
The rest of the world has already moved on, as they should. They really never cared as much about you, or your candidate (just as ½ of our own country doesn't, per above). That was mainstream media noise that fooled you. And having worked for many years, in and out of Washington, we can assure you that well over 90% of people have issues so much larger than who was or will be in the White House. Yet it's captivating, nonetheless, the amount of attention spent in social circles defying this actuality, and presuming moral high-ground by falsely twisting statistics to suit private needs. By setting some simple statistics straight, we honestly hope 2017 ushers in a new era of knowledge, contentment and worldly views, as we leave the disparaging partisan choke-hold of the 2016 elections behind.
via http://ift.tt/2iBvLhB Tyler Durden