Hello I'm gonna judge the election maps based off how they look, my political views are not taken into account just the asthetic look of the map and how nice it looks. First I'll do the 21st century so 2000 to 2020!
Well this is the first map. Do I like it? Not very much. For starters, two massive eye sores are immediately visible : blue New Mexico and red New Hampshire, they really stand out in the worst way possible in a sea of red/blue respectively. The West Coast looks good, the sea is blue so it suits the Democrats'. The next issue is Iowa, the best way to describe Iowa is "lumpy", its a weird imbalance between red Indiana and Ohio on one side and the blue quartet of MN, IL, WI and IA. The lack of a connection between these two blobs of Democrat states is an issue that will be resolved once in 2008. Verdict : 6/10
Now for the 2004 map. Personally this is the best looking map of the 21st century. First thing, the horrendous eyesores of New Mexico and New Hampshire have been fixed, the Iowa imbalance has also been fixed. The almost continuous streak of red states from Virginia to Nevada is very pleasant to the eye, same for the New England + PA and MD region that just works so well! The Midwest could be better in my opinion had Illinois been red as the blue would only be on the extremities of the US and usually by water creating a decent contrast with the red interior! Verdict : 8.75/10
Time for 2008. This map is full of eyesores such as the SouthWest (this will be a trend), the awkward outpost of New Mexico and Colorado between the sea of red. Nevada isn't as much as an eye sore, its continous with the West Coast and fits in quite well. The Midwest looks the best in this map than any other. The connection of the blue parts through Indiana lead to a continuity that is quite pleasant to the eye! The Iowa imbalance is in balance with IN and OH being blue. The only minor complaint is WV which it being blue and VA-NC being red would make the map look more continous and pleasant. Then there's Florida..... you can't make Florida look nice, it stands out so badly, you essentially need the entire Southern coast to be blue for it to look nice but in that case KY and TN would ruin the map due to being surrounded by blue. Its unfixable. The map is still nice however! Verdict : 7/10
Ohh boy... 2012... Well to start, the Midwest I praised for being continuous, GONE! The silly CO-NM outpost is still there, Florida is still sticking out like a sore thumb and now Virginia is hanging out there seemingly hinged to Maryland, which looks worse than the 2008 map. Verdict 5/10.
2016 is one of those maps that you see and go "why?". Let's start on positives : the South no longer has the Florida issue and looks good. Ohio and Indiana look good on the map. The Pennsylvania and Michigan sort of fit in, Wisconsin however... doesn't. It creates a weird issue with Minnesota and Illinois, its this weird disjointed map where they're not even connected, its NM and NH syndrome at its worse. Same complaints about VA and CO-NM. Oh and we don't talk about Maine! Verdict 4.5/10
Now to 2020, The Southwest isn't fixed, its just as bad as before maybe a little worse... Utah now looks super out of place, if it were blue it would look nicer but nah! I've whined about VA since 2008 or 2012, still applies but hey now we can whine about GA too! The upper Midwest is fixed but not connected, new england looks good better than 2016 but still worse than 2004 or 2008. Too many things stand out and its painful to see, is it better than 2016? not really? Its about the same level of "eww".
I'll do other elections later but my brain isn't happy
Give me your take this is just a sh**tpost in snobby artist form!
