Red and Yellow Maps
So the Twitter project @ElectionMapsUK has become a big success with a series of great graphics and political factoids. This week this one went viral purporting to show “How the next general election would look if only 18-24s were allowed to vote”. It was of course a sea of red and seemed to show a massive Labour victory from a generation-quake.
How the next general election would look if only 18-24s were allowed to vote (Data from @YouGov, 28-29th August). I’m expecting some great GIFs, everyone…
LAB: 66%, 600 Seats
LDM: 13%, 21 Seats
CON: 12%, 0 Seats
GRN: 4%, 1 Seat
SNP: 3%, 9 Seats
PLC: 0.4%, 1 Seat pic.twitter.com/CxaL1oBJ9u— Election Maps UK (@ElectionMapsUK) September 4, 2018
But it doesn’t really make any sense for Scotland.
As Erik Geddes explained:
I’m a big fan of @ElectionMapsUK but this, going viral as it is shared by Corbynites, is misleading within the context of Scotland. https://t.co/9u84EmVfxw
— Erik Geddes (@erikgeddes) September 5, 2018
Here’s the most up to date Westminster election voting intentions with a subsample of people aged 18-24 in Scotland. https://t.co/earl7QZyrx
— Erik Geddes (@erikgeddes) September 5, 2018
This is how the Scotland Votes website project the results into seats.
And how the map looks. pic.twitter.com/DmAu3d1Hew— Erik Geddes (@erikgeddes) September 5, 2018
A whole number of people pointed this out, but by which time the original red map had gone viral.
The tale has a happy ending however as @ElectionMapsUK issued the following statement … (you can click on the image to embigggen)
“will ensure I use accurate sub-national data”
He still doesn’t get it
Aside from the observation that you should only use constituency-level maps if you have constituency-level data, if only 18–24-year-olds were allowed to vote I imagine the election would have to be postponed due to civil war. Perhaps if articles on data science (there are some good, free, online courses) were more popular, then the electorate would be discussing methodology, common problems and data quality with familiarity.
The very fact it went viral among Labour activists, only goes to prove what lengths they will go to, to delude themselves.
If only 18-24, or 34, or even 44 year old’s would actually bother to take the time to vote. But they don’t. They continue to leave the governance of their future in the hands of people from the past i.e. pensioners – who continue to be the largest group of actual voters since records began. Across most of western civilization.
Sadly, awareness of the power of the franchise only comes to most people in their dotage. If they haven’t made it by then, they, like the young, are in the hands of those that have made it. And the latter are never satisfied. It has ever been thus in this benighted realm. Time for a re write.
Building a new nation is a far more inspiring path for our youth to follow. Trying to reform England is wasted effort these days when the Tory shires won’t wear it. The latter are full of those that have made it. They will never vote Labour.
If Tory candidates ate babies and shot puppies, they would still vote for them. As long as they continue to be triple locked by the Tory government, the I’m all right jacks will continue to prop up the lunatic fringe that is the Tory Party these days.
But, what the hell, good luck to them.
Imagine mapping voting intentions of 60+ year olds.
A sad prospect. But…
Research has shown that voting intentions calcify around the mid 20s in age.
So influence the 16-24 demographic for the next 20 years and the job is done.
They did – https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/new-maps-show-staggering-political-divide-between-generations-in-britain-a3930341.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
“….Oops! Is Scotland an actual separate place then? Sorry, thought it was just the colder bit of north England. Yeah, sure, I’ll be more careful next time. No offence, eh?. Oh yeah?, Wales too? , no probs” .
A “factoid” is the exact opposite of what you mean. It’s something which appears to be true but isn’t. A falsehood, in other words. Unless, of course, you are American, which you may be since you start your sentences with “so”. Can you be less ambiguous with your language please?