Key Takeaways:
– A graph circulated by ZeroHedge implies a static voter base for Democrats except in the year 2020.
– The validity of the graph decreases due to the projected 2024 vote count which is not yet complete.
– Misinterpretation of data can lead to the spread of incorrect information.
Article:
Remember that fancy pie chart from ZeroHedge that has been making the rounds online? We’ve all seen it – a graph that’s been shared to tens of millions of people worldwide. This graph seems to show an interesting pattern for the Democrats in the 2012, 2016, and projected 2024 presidential elections. According to this chart, Democrats received only about 66 million votes in each of these elections. Except in 2020, it claims, where they suddenly jumped to a whopping 81 million votes.
Understanding the Graph
Let’s take a step back and delve a bit deeper into this. The graph served to us suggests consistency in the electorate’s support for Democrats over multiple elections and paints the 2020 election as an outlier with an excessive surge of votes. This sounds suspicious, right? But before we jump to conclusions, let’s take a closer look.
Dissecting the Data
If we sophisticatedly dissect the graph, certain anomalies become apparent. The biggest red flag is that the 2024 vote count is represented as complete. Now pause for a moment. Did I say complete? That’s right. How can the count be complete for an election that hasn’t even taken place yet? This casts a shadow over the credibility of the entire graph right off the bat.
In fact, the unverified presumption of a complete 2024 vote count hints that the graph could be misleading. It’s like telling you the end of a movie which hasn’t been filmed yet!
Where’s the Snag?
The graph attempts to infer an unchanging voter base for the Democratic party in 2012, 2016, and projected 2024. The 2020 upshot is then portrayed as an anomaly. The inferred constancy, however, is problematic in itself. Why? Because the characteristics of the US electorate are not static. Such demographics evolve over time due to changing social, political, and economic conditions, as well as the diverse strengths and weaknesses of each presidential candidate.
The Fallacy of Misinterpretation
The visual presentation may seem impactful, but like a magic trick, it just might not be real. In fact, manipulation or misinterpretation of statistics can acutely topple the truth from its throne. This graph is an intriguing case in point. The cherry-picked data effectively massaged the narrative and painted a different picture from what might have truly play out or potentially could with the 2024 electoral vote.
Endnote
So, next time you see a graph or any kind of statistics online, especially in relation to presidential elections – pause. Dig a little deeper, ask some questions. Is the data complete? Is it accurate? Has it been interpreted correctly? Remember, all that glitters is not gold. And misleading graphs are no exception.