GaryDog
Gold Member
- Feb 10, 2016
- 4,369
- 530
- 195
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/11/daily-chart-13
The data suggest that the ill may have been particularly susceptible to Mr Trump’s message. According to our model, if diabetes were just 7% less prevalent in Michigan, Mr Trump would have gained 0.3 fewer percentage points there, enough to swing the state back to the Democrats. Similarly, if an additional 8% of people in Pennsylvania had engaged in regular physical activity, and the rate of heavy drinking in Wisconsin were 5% lower, Hillary Clinton would have won the electoral college vote and be set to enter the White House. But such counter-factual predictions are always impossible to test. Unfortunately, there is no way to re-run the election with healthier voters and compare the results. But the evidence suggests that Mr Trump performed well in communities that are literally dying.
Thanks for the dying wish, assholes.
The data suggest that the ill may have been particularly susceptible to Mr Trump’s message. According to our model, if diabetes were just 7% less prevalent in Michigan, Mr Trump would have gained 0.3 fewer percentage points there, enough to swing the state back to the Democrats. Similarly, if an additional 8% of people in Pennsylvania had engaged in regular physical activity, and the rate of heavy drinking in Wisconsin were 5% lower, Hillary Clinton would have won the electoral college vote and be set to enter the White House. But such counter-factual predictions are always impossible to test. Unfortunately, there is no way to re-run the election with healthier voters and compare the results. But the evidence suggests that Mr Trump performed well in communities that are literally dying.
Thanks for the dying wish, assholes.