**Maps & Charts: Jill Stein Vs Harris**

Tecfai Editorial Team

You need 3 min read

·

Post on Nov 06, 2024

39 visitor like this post

Share

Maps & Charts: Jill Stein vs. Harris - A Visual Breakdown of the 2016 Election

The 2016 US Presidential Election was a closely contested race, and the Green Party's Jill Stein and the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris (who was not a candidate in 2016), were both major figures in the political landscape. While Harris was not running for president, her role as California Attorney General, her stance on various issues, and her later rise to national prominence as Vice President under Joe Biden, make it interesting to compare her potential performance to Stein's in the 2016 election.

This article explores the potential electoral landscape had Harris been a candidate in 2016, using data visualization to compare her possible performance to Stein's actual results.

The Green Party's Jill Stein

Jill Stein, the Green Party's nominee, garnered a significant amount of attention in 2016, especially given her focus on issues like climate change and social justice. While her ultimate vote count was relatively small, it's important to consider the potential impact of her candidacy.

Key Takeaways from Stein's 2016 Performance:

• Strongest in Vermont: Stein's highest percentage of the vote was in Vermont, reaching almost 5%, indicating strong support in a state known for its progressive leanings.
• Regional Clustering: Her vote share tended to cluster in certain regions, like Vermont, Maine, and Washington State. This suggests potential for a similar demographic appeal if Harris were to run.
• Limited National Impact: Stein's overall vote share remained low, indicating her limited national appeal. This reflects the difficulty for third-party candidates to break through in a two-party system.

Kamala Harris' Potential Landscape

While it's impossible to know for sure how Harris would have performed in 2016, we can speculate based on her political profile, her stances on key issues, and her potential appeal to different demographics.

Factors to Consider:

• Progressive Appeal: Harris's progressive stances on issues like criminal justice reform and healthcare align with some of Stein's key platforms, potentially attracting similar voter bases.
• National Profile: Harris's national prominence as Attorney General and later as Vice President suggests she may have a wider appeal than Stein, reaching beyond just a progressive base.
• Demographic Considerations: Harris's race and gender could attract voters looking for representation and change, potentially drawing in voters not traditionally aligned with the Green Party.

Visualizing the Potential: Maps & Charts

To explore these possibilities, let's consider a hypothetical scenario where Harris runs in 2016. By overlaying Stein's actual vote share map with Harris's potential appeal, we can visualize potential areas of overlap and differences.

Maps: A side-by-side comparison of maps showing Stein's 2016 results and a hypothetical Harris map would highlight potential areas of strength and weakness for both candidates.

Charts: Charts comparing Stein's vote share by state with a projected Harris vote share would allow for a numerical analysis, showing potential areas of higher or lower support.

Note: These visualizations would be based on speculation and assumptions, providing a general understanding of potential trends rather than precise predictions.

Conclusion: Insights and Considerations

While a definitive analysis of Harris's potential 2016 performance is impossible, comparing her political profile and stance on key issues with Stein's actual results offers valuable insights.

• Potential for Growth: Harris's national profile and potential appeal to a wider demographic could suggest a larger vote share than Stein's in 2016.
• Geographic Appeal: While Harris's potential appeal may extend beyond Stein's base, certain regions like Vermont and the West Coast could show significant overlap in voter preference.
• The Third-Party Challenge: Both Stein and Harris face the challenge of breaking through in a two-party system, highlighting the need for strong messaging and strategic campaigning to gain traction.

Ultimately, this exploration of maps and charts provides a framework for understanding the potential electoral landscape of a 2016 Harris campaign. It highlights the complexities of third-party candidacies and the importance of demographic and regional factors in electoral success.