… what’s love got to do with it?

The main goal for this exercise was to find the effect and influence the 2008 presidency candidates had on several toss-up states during their campaign. The analysis is based on the percentages each person had on a monthly basis right until election month.

Campaign Trail 2008

moneymap+text

Swing states– text

Youth Vote and the Swing States

Statistics show an overwhelming increase in registered voters for the 2008 election. Across the United States the “young voters” those ages 18-29 have increased their votes in every state except New York. In the year 2004 the average youth vote per state was 46,373. The average in 2008 is 174,646. In most states, young Democrats appear to be outnumbering young Republicans at the polls. This graph establishes a correlation between, the youth vote in 2004 and 2008 and the party affiliation of the state in each year.

Does it help? Updated

I felt that my graphic was lacking some information. I took this opportunity to include a cloth that represents where Obama spent more time campaigning. This adds a little more clarity as to why in some places McCain was not ranked high in the polls. Again the numbers are a little exaggerated. II did this because the actual numbers were too close to see any distinction in the graphic. Red represents McCain and Blue Represents Obama.

Nat’l Approval Average

Exercise 06

coverage_explanation

Campaign Events

the image above graphically represents the campaign trail of both major canidates for the 2008 presidential election.  obama is represented by the blue pattern and mccain is represented by the red pattern.  by using resources such as the washington post, i compiled the number of events held in each state of the continental united states.  the set of conditions illustrated show the overlapping and interweaving of how many times each canidate visited the state contextually showing where a majority of their campaigning attention was given.  this also represents where both canidates overlapped and/or divided their focus.  the extremes of the conditions range from 178 events/visits to 0.

Does it help?

I based my analysis on all the Toss Up states and McCain’s campaign specifically.  I chose to quantify the time McCain spent in each one of the States and compare it to whether it helped him win votes or hurt him.  The days spent campaigning in each state is displayed as a transparent sphere.  The actual votes are represented are a solid mass.  the solid mass was sized using the transparent sphere’s size as a starting point.  The size of the “actual votes” sphere was based on the the difference of the votes between McCain and Obama.  The difference between the states were by a maximum percentage of 5 points.  Then I sized that difference using the percentage out of a factor of 5.  I had to exaggerate the number in order to be able to see it in the graphic.  The results show that spending more time in some states benefited McCain and in others didn’t help.   In states like Florida and Ohio, McCain spent a lot of days campaigning but no good came from doing so.

coverage_ex06

2004 vs 2008

mapping

This 3D model shows a comparison between the election in 2004 and the current election.

Bush Approval by the Media

The image above presents data regarding the Bush approval rating throughout 2008 by three major media outlets. At first I thought about having the “Approve” stay separate from the “Disapprove”, but in working in FormZ and Illustrator, I found that intersecting the two was more spatial, especially when I aggressively intersected the two polls. Below is the actual FormZ model and the FormZ model with Illustrator:

East Coast State Distribution

This set of conditions represents the percentage popularity of Obama vs. McCain in the states on the East Coast. The percentages range from 30 percent to 60 percent. These conditions are mapped over the time period of January to November 2008. The east coast states are shown as connected in this graphic to reveal the change in popularity of the two candidates as one travels down the east coast. I achieved this by creating a lofted shape of the popularity of Obama and the popularity of McCain. These shapes are connected to show one whole image of each candidate’s popularity. The intersection of the two images signifies a change in preference of one candidate over the other.

_Map of Polls x Multiracial Population

I started with the map of polls for this years elections and with a map that showed the concentration of multiracial populations throughout the territory of the United States of America. With both of the maps in hand, I decided to create a nurb representing the information applied to their geographical location and have them overlap showing the influence they have over each other. McCain is represented by the red, Obama by the blue and the concentration of multiracial population is gray.
The pick of different views gives the opportunity of seeing different interactions of the data.

3D Mapping

The graphic maps a comparison between a poll done by SurveyUSA for the state of Ohio and the overall national trend for the 2008 Presidential election, from January to November 2008, as compiled by Pollster.com.   I chose to create the graph of the poll statistics for Ohio using by cubes, as they can be stacked and displaced to represent a margin of error that comes with pre-election polls.  Furthermore, they are also the “building blocks” that make up the national polls, which is why I chose to represent them as larger and generally more consistent, sweeping elements that weave through the Ohio poll.  The grey rectangles a 10% range in which most of the information falls (between 40 and 50%).

Electoral Mapping

I started by mapping the electoral votes alloted to each state and in what direction that state voted. A state like California with 55 electoral votes in an election that voted democratic would be 55 units above the horizon, while a state like Texas that has 34 votes and voted republican would be 34 units below. I then went back to the last 7 elections to see if there was any type of trend. What I found was that in recent history, other than the 8 years Clinton was in office, the country voted HIGHLY Republican. It has not been until recently that there was more disparity among the states. Finally, the color of each graph denotes who won that election, blue being democratic and red being republican.

This elections stats are based on estimates with no toss up states.

Generation Y

I started with an election poll of generation Y adults which range from age 18-29, both registered and unregistered, on percentages for Obama vs. McCain. The second poll was again for generation Y to see how many were registered. The numbers fell at 78% registered, 22% not. This means that although the majority of generation Y picked Obama, only 78% of our generation will vote on election day. I went back and applied this percentage to the original polls, demonstrating four separate scenarios. Scenario one is if 100% were registered, scenario two is if that 22% that did not vote were all Obama supporters, scenario three is if the 22% were all McCain supporters, and scenario four was if the 22% not voting was spread evenly through both parties. The final graph I used was from a separate source showing a graph of age and declaration of party. As the ages get younger through all ages and into the generation Y category, the percentage of democrats increases and republican support decreases, widening the gap and showing the movement towards a democratic majority in our generation.

exercise 6

Not to be cynical, but this election might come down to money…

Starting with a map of the lower 48 states, I extruded each state based on total financial contributions to the 2008 presidential election.  Interwoven with this information is a warped plane that reflects the total electoral college votes for each state.  The intent of this juxtaposition is to produce a map that reflects both the relative wealth of states and the relative interest of states in the current election through the medium of the two biggest contributions a state can make to a national election, namely money and votes.

mapped and stacked

Swing States (seems to be a popular trend..)

I mapped data from the swing states only to look at how often each candidate (McCain and Obama only) visited each place. At the bottom, I mapped both McCain and Obama in popularity polls against the rising gas prices. I found this to be a relevant statistic because of economic factors and the candidate’s differing policies on energy. I made two images, one including the states where the data corresponds, and one with no context. Any comments on which is more successful? As a diagram, it is better without the states because it can be interpreted differently and is more about the spatial relationships and clustering of data, but having the states allows you to read it as a political message– showing who visited what state more and whether the end polls were leaning republican or democrat.

Map of Polls in Swing States

This map displays the changing polls within the swing states for the democratic and republican candidates for the 2008 election. The map begins in January and runs through November demonstrated on the x axis. The y axis graphs the polled percentage within the state. The z-axis displays how many electoral votes that state has and the location of the state. Florida, the widest, is the south most state with 27 electoral votes while Montana and North Dakota are the thinest and north most states, only having 3 electoral votes each. The wire frame nodes demonstrate when each candidate had an event in that state. The dotted vs solid line wire frame demonstrates the outcome of the 2004 election. Additionally the once solid ribbon becomes wire frame to demonstrate the known vs. what can be estimated.

how much wood could a wood chuck, chuck, if a wood chuck, could chuck, wood?

For this project I looked at the electoral map from RealClearPolitics.com (more specifically the “Toss Up” states) and chose to relate them to when the presidential candidates were on tour there over the past several months.  Each of the “skins” (one rendered, the other in wire frame), reflect an abstracted map of the United States.  Portions of the map are raised according to how often each candidate visited the “Toss Up” state over the past several months.  The colored dots throughout the map relate to the time line atop the image, the darker the dot, the more recent the visit.  The three tallest parts of the map relate to a trend I saw while looking at each candidates tour schedules.  Barack Obama seemed to have spent a large majority of his time in Iowa while, John McCain seemed to split alot of his time between Florida and Arizona.

These are just some orthographic views to make it a little more clear.

Stumped

If anyone takes a look at this sometime on Tuesday, let me know if you can help with it at all. Basically, I mapped out the electoral votes for each state and in which direction they are predicted to vote this year (blue) or how they voted in 2004 (red). In all there are about 17 states that differ. Right now the two nurbs look too similar and I am trying to figure out if I need to map them differently, or if I should add a new variable. Any input would be helpful, thanks.

Brief

Exercise06>3-d Mapping due>11/04/08 before class Goal> Mapping as defined as “the recording through the spatial distribution of a set of data” can be a valuable method in a design process. Mapping can translate social, cultural, or environmental conditions into a spatial language and can be essential in placing architecture into broader contexts. These conditions can also provide fuel for an emergent design process. This exercise explores the viability for digital modeling as media for representing data.  Further, this process presents an analysis of the potential for informational patterns to manifest as space.  This transition makes use of modelling and drawing techniques as well a scientific approach in the articulation of legitimately qualified data.  Product>Each student will choose a set of conditions relating to the 2008 United States election cycle. This could include, local, State, National or a combination of elections and/or social/cultural conditions associated with politics (including but not limited to, the Media).  Choose conditions that can be quantified into data, then map that data in 3-D using modeling software.  Quantify everything into variables and parameters and consider how associating these variables into geometries will affect the outcome of this exercise. Map at least two conditions, so that the relationship between conditions can translate into space. Choose conditions that will translate into a compelling graphic, not necessarily those that will prove a point or express a particular point of view.  The diagrams should not reveal any personal political bias by the student.   Consider whether text or labels will add to or detract from the value of the diagram in an architectural context.  Spend time framing the model as a 2d graphic and edit the geometry in Illustrator for clarity.  Some data might be overlaid in the 2d environment although a 3d component is required for this exercise.  Students will post a compressed .jpg not to exceed 200KB onto the course blog, http://0095b6.com/lostritto/arch470fa08. Post an explanation onto the blog along with (but not part of) the graphic that explains the process of mapping.  ALSO: students will turn in an Illustrator-generated PDF into the collection folder in the INTERACT folder in ttclass.

Resources>Polling Data relating to a variety of elections is readily available from multiple sources including http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/  and http://www.pollster.com/  but also consider other methods for quantifying political conditions.  One example are the Intrade Prediction Markets. It might be necessary to create your own data set using Lexis Nexis (logon for free as a student from lib.umd.edu and click on Databases to logon to this search engine of nearly ALL print media).  Media Matters  does this type of research regularly, but if you’re not comfortable with their point of view, you’ll need to do your own research.  Consider that language used by candidates is quantifiable as is money. Many candidates make their schedules available on their websites.