A lot of these are misleading – but hey, so are most charts. For more entertaining interpretations of the same figures, check out The Washington Post’s “31 Charts to Destroy Your Faith in Humanity.”
Immigration has always been a tough issue to deal with.
The chart reminds me of this John Stewart bit on immigration and “Traditional America”:
Two different analyses of supreme court decisions. I didn’t dig into the methodology, but the papers are available if you’re interested.
The so-called Quinn-Martin scores show the court trending significantly to the right in recent years, with even its left flank being relatively middle-of-the-road, relative to history.
Bailey shows the court has become significantly more conservative since, for example, the 1960s, he still pegs the four more liberal justices as clearly to the left of the court, historically speaking. In addition, Bailey’s model actually suggests the court, while more conservative than in most of the last several decades, isn’t all that much more so than it was in the 1970s or when Sandra Day O’Connor was the swing vote in the 1990s and early 2000s.
The effects of deregulation of the airline industry in the late 70s – from an article by the always insightful Steven Pearlstein.
Somewhat ironically, the original expansion of competition that deregulation was supposed to create has now entirely disappeared (the below could be updated to show the recent USAir/American merger).
I suppose this shouldn’t be surprising – and it’s interesting in terms of proposed changes to social security. (related article)
Interesting chart in that it combines life expectancy with "percentage of healthy years”. I’ve heard that a lot of medical research now isn’t necessarily to make you live longer, but for you to be healthy as long as possible, then fall apart all at once and die quickly.
Some fantastically clear interactive maps from the Washington Post, identifying tossups in each race (Presidential, Senate, House, Governor).
Age ranges for each sport for the past three summer games.
(note: I couldn’t get the age filter at the top to work in either firefox or IE)
The medals are mostly won by the young, however:
To understand this chart you have to be quite the congressional procedure wonk. I think they should at least have to go back to having to talk the whole time. While standing on one foot. In uncomfortable shoes. With their mom watching.
A number of news agencies took a crack at visualizing Obama’s 2013 budget proposal. (If you want to try it yourself, a shocking amount of detailed data is available in spreadsheet form at the OMB website).
Below is the Washington Post’s version. You can click on any box to see a column chart of historical values. It would have been nice to be able to drill down further, but this is a good start:
The NYT created a beautiful animated – ummm – I’m not sure what this is. A dorling diagram? Well, it looks pretty, and it’s slightly more detailed than the WashPost version, but I think the brain processes square area better than circles.
The WSJ posted five charts, but they’re nothing special:
The Post is doing a great job visualizing the election so far, with a number of clear tools that they are keeping very up to date.
First up: Maps and interactive filtering of spending on ads, including videos of the ads themselves:
A Primary Tracker: mapping out candidate visits, “pre-game analysis”, results by county, and “post-game analysis” – for EACH state!
And a campaign finance explorer:
They also have something called the @MentionMachine that supposedly tracks candidates by twitter mentions and other media references that you can drill down through. Unfortunately, it isn’t working for me on either Firefox or IE.
An addictive collection of beautiful charts, graphs, maps, and interactive data visualization toys -- on topics from around the world.