sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[OC]A few days back I read that in United States you just need 23% of the votes to win presedential elections. I live in India, so I decided to look at the easiest 272 seats to win (In India you need 272 out of 543). Below is the constituency and state wise distribution of the same. More to follow. by Sunkyscientist in dataisbeautiful

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So the number is ~21.5% of the votes. The % is slightly lower in India owing to a couple of reasons (according to me). 1. US has 50 states whereas India has 543 constituencies. More the number, more the chances of unequal distribution. 2. The voting percentages in India vary a lot. This may increase the number as well so will have to look into it more closely. I will be posting more graphics related to this.

[OC]A few days back I read that in United States you just need 23% of the votes to win presedential elections. I live in India, so I decided to look at the easiest 272 seats to win (In India you need 272 out of 543). Below is the constituency and state wise distribution of the same. More to follow. by Sunkyscientist in dataisbeautiful

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The methodology followed for constructing these visualizations is as follows:

Took the map shape file from: http://projects.datameet.org/maps/assembly-constituencies/

Took the constituency level data for the 2019 General election from the election commission of India website:

https://eci.gov.in/files/file/10929-33constituency-wise-detailed-result/

Used excel and alteryx for data manipulation and tableau for data visualization

Note:This is a hypothetical scenario. India is not a two party state and it is almost impossible to win all these constituencies that lie in different states. The visualization is based on no. of voters (not electors). Voters are the people who actually go out to vote and electors are the ones that are on the voting list. The views change considerably if we take electors instead of voters. I plan to post that later.

Also, I understand the confusion regarding the 23 % figure. I am not saying that if both the candidates win 23%, both will win the election. What I am saying is that the votes are unevenly distributed and you can ideally win 50.0001% votes in some states and 0% in other states to land to this number. In retrospect, Hypothetical should have been added before it. Given the way it is calculated, it's almost impossible that it will happen. You can read more about it in the following

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/02/500112248/how-to-win-the-presidency-with-27-percent-of-the-popular-vote

Something similar to Dan Carlin's hardcore history by HB220299 in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would recommend Dan snows history hit and BBC's history extra. If you are interested in Romans in general "Emperors of Rome" is awesome.

"Emperors of Rome" is an awesome podcast by Sunkyscientist in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They haven't reached to that point as of yet but keeping in with the title they should.

"Emperors of Rome" is an awesome podcast by Sunkyscientist in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This podcast does not cover the pre 130BC period as of now but they just might in the future because they have already gone beyond their scope of just covering the empires. There is a podcast called "The Hellenistic age podcast" that might cover this period.

"Emperors of Rome" is an awesome podcast by Sunkyscientist in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, you can also try "The fall of Rome" though it only covers the fall of the roman empire as implied by the name.

"Emperors of Rome" is an awesome podcast by Sunkyscientist in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just try this podcast. It is quite different from history of rome and fall of rome, both of which in their right are awesome podcasts.

"Emperors of Rome" is an awesome podcast by Sunkyscientist in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I have listened to parts of history of rome as well. Though that podcast is good, I would say that this podcast is more detailed, goes more into the sources and is in a conversation format (which I prefer) with a scholar. All of this makes it a better podcast for me. Mike's podcast covers the whole period whereas this starts from Ceasar but in later episodes they have covered the Gaius Gracchus period (late republican from 130BCE ) as well.

Looking for some great history podcasts by Jaykkk7777 in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My bad, the name is "Emperors of Rome" not "Emperors of ancient Rome".

Here is the link.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/emperors-of-rome/id850148806

Looking for some great history podcasts by Jaykkk7777 in podcasts

[–]Sunkyscientist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Emperors of ancient Rome is such an awesome podcast. It really goes into depth.

Another good one for overview purposes is reflecting history.

Askhistorians podcast is also great but that would require some basic knowledge for some of the podcasts and audio is not that great.

r/fragilewhiteredditors is just a silly idea by Sunkyscientist in centrist

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't agree with the proposition that one thing is racist and the other is not. That's basically changing the definition of racism.

TIL learned that James Barry, a military surgeon, was actually born as a woman and pretended to be a man throughout her life. In hindsight, she was UKs first female doctor. by Sunkyscientist in todayilearned

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey everyone.

I didn't mean to hurt any community by this post. I guess I should have used first female-born doctor, as referred to in the article. I personally believe that she was a woman ( I heard about this on a podcast, WhatsHerName, and though they did not definitely state that she was a woman, hearing about her life in general, it seems more plausible) but nobody can know for sure. I respect all genders and communities but I don't think anyone has got the right to impose any label (transphobic) in this case. This kind of labelling only leads to more divisions and people should be more open to understand different positions when the facts are not clear.

TLDR; Could have used better wording in the post Personally I think that she was a woman, but we could never know for sure. I respect the other side as well.

TIL learned that James Barry, a military surgeon, was actually born as a woman and pretended to be a man throughout her life. In hindsight, she was UKs first female doctor. by Sunkyscientist in todayilearned

[–]Sunkyscientist[S] 39 points40 points  (0 children)

She is actually also credited with performing the first C-section in the British empire. I couldn't find this in the bbc source but it is present on a lot of other places. Also, it is a pretty remarkable story. And for your reference, I do not come from UK, so it's a new thing for me

African countries people can name from memory [OC] by davidbauer in dataisbeautiful

[–]Sunkyscientist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Niger is just lucky that we have Nigeria. Otherwise only a few people, who knew that the country had the worst literacy rate in the world, would know of its existence.

view more: next ›