The Census Bureau just released county-level population data using its 2014 estimates, which allows us the opportunity to geek out over new maps. Oh, and also to learn lessons about politics? Sure, why not.
We must note at the top that the maps below show where everyone lives, not just voters. So if you are a 2016 candidate hoping to use these maps to plan your strategy, you should maybe hire someone to look more closely at actual data.
That said, here's where America lives, America! The 2014 data ... looks a lot like the 2012 data, because it's not like millions of people were fleeing Godzilla or something. Changes are subtle.
But when you look at the percent of change in counties between the last full Census and the new estimates, some patterns reveal themselves.
The dark purple areas, the areas that saw the biggest increases in population, are mostly areas that saw a boom in the energy industry. The dark purple blotch in western North Dakota? That's fracking. Now, this is percentage, meaning that a lot of people moving to a lightly populated area is going to result in a higher value than even more people moving to, say, Manhattan. But it's still significant.
Another way to look at that. Here's the percent increase in every county that saw an increase since 2010. Again, notice North Dakota.
Overall, the changes are subtle. For kicks — and for your use, Mssrs. Cruz, Paul, Santorum, Huckabee, Whoever — we looked at the biggest changing counties in Iowa over the past four years. It's a mix of large and small counties, with larger counties seeing net increases and smaller ones seeing net losses.
That's not surprising. On average, counties with populations under 100,000 (over 2,500 of them) saw a decrease of 0.4 percent in population. Those with populations of over 100,000 (290 of them) saw an average increase of 3.4 percent.
So, you know, focus on the cities, 2016 candidates. That's ... where the people are.
Hope that helps.
Philip Bump writes about politics for The Fix. He is based in New York City.
6
Comments
