Geography Education
849.5K views | +526 today
Rescooped by Seth Dixon from Maps are Arguments
onto Geography Education!

A Campaign Map, Morphed By Money

A Campaign Map, Morphed By Money | Geography Education |

NP: Four years ago, Channel One News, the weekday news program for middle and high school kids featured a dynamic area cartogram as a way of making the point that some states have much more electoral weight than others. In that broadcast, the map of the United States, featuring the familiar red and blue states indicating presidential election results, became animated. States with smaller populations squeezed into tiny shapes, while states with large populations expanded. At the time, we didn't know this kind of map was called an area cartogram; we called it a "squishy map." It does a nice job of making this case: some states matter more than others when it comes to US presidential elections.


Seeing the map on Channel One also launched me into work that continues with my dissertation. What kind of sense do kids make from complex representations like an area cartogram? In the Channel One broadcast in 2008, the map was presented as part of a sensible lesson about "electoral weight." With Vanderbilt professors Rogers Hall and Kevin Leander, we wondered if the map made sense to kids and if the argument was strengthened by the map.


Four years later, I'm still working on those questions and others like them. In the mean time, here's another awesome area cartogram. In this case, NPR's "It's All Politics" blogger Adam Cole makes an argument about the advertisement spending of superPACs and other outside groups. Which states matter to these groups? And how much do they spend per voter on these ads? The squishy maps tell the story. Cole has a great video here as well--it's whimsical and informative. Finally, another move by Cole in these maps is the scaling of elections at the level of the state by popular vote. This means that states that are more contested turn purple (half blue and half red) rather than the color of the winning candidate from the last election.

Via Nathan Phillips
Matt Mallinson's comment, November 5, 2012 11:28 AM
All the states blown up in size are the deciding factors in this years election as usual, this map is an interesting way to look at things. It's still crazy to me that this is how our voting system works and that some states dominate the others.
Lindsey Robinson's comment, November 5, 2012 11:32 AM
This map is perfect for young voters. It uses visuals to show how important states like Ohio and Florida are during the election. It shows people why the candidates are always spending campaign money on these swing states and not states like Massachusetts, Rhode Island, etc. In states like these, Republican voters almost don't even matter because the two states are so democratic. The electoral votes automatically make the state blue. The same goes with strictly Republican states like Texas or Oklahoma.
Lisa Fonseca's comment, November 6, 2012 9:56 PM
I found this article to be very informative, it represented information to those who aren't familiar with the facts of an election. It demonstrated that it isnt the size of a state that matter it is the electoral vote that counts, therefore regardless a state is so large it may not count as much in electoral votes as a smaller state. It also explained how bigger states need to spend more money because they are the states needing to get their point across and making a larger difference.
Geography Education
Global news with a spatial perspective:  Interesting, current supplemental materials for geography teachers and students.
Curated by Seth Dixon