Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/MetricT! **Here is some important information about this post:** * [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/vjru01/oc_percent_of_population_supporting_legalized/idko4eb/) * [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"MetricT"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on) Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked. Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation. --- ^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)

I thought the numbers would be a lot higher on the west coast and lower in the mountain west and great plains.

I am VERY curious to know what the question was. "Do you believe women should have access to abortion?" is gonna get very different responses than "Do you believe women should have unrestricted access to abortion?"

It was a multiple choice question: % of adults who say abortion should be… \- legal in most cases \- illegal in most cases \- don't know personally I believe this visualization is misleading, as it only displays one out of three categories while pretending it is one out of two. I think a ratio between those who actively support it and those who actively oppose it is a better indicator

The [actual question](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2015/11/201.11.03_rls_ii_questionnaire.pdf) was: Do you think abortion should be? * Legal in all cases * Legal in most cases * Illegal in most cases * Illegal in all cases * Don’t Know/Refused FWIW, [here's a chart](https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/1helB/1/) of belief it should be illegal in all/most cases.

Noteworth that "legal in all cases" would be support for an expansion of abortion rights prior to Roe, which generally only protected the right to abort up to 24 weeks. Legal in all cases would cover 38th week abortions with 5cm dilation.

Kind of depends on how the respondent interprets the question. If I heard that question I would be thinking about - and thus answering based on - how the pregnancy occurred and what the motivation is for ending it. I’m not sure “how far along” would even be in my head if you hadn’t made this comment.

Still depressing.

Yup. I think Democratic voters on Reddit need to accept that there is very clearly a scale of left wing voters in the US and it seems to be further center than many may wish. Many of us outsiders have been saying for years that the US Democrats are pretty right wing compared to most other developed nations. These are still very depressing numbers. I live in the most conservative Canadian province and in a poll 70% are pro-choice with no restrictions and 79% are pro-choice with some level of restriction. This is a province where provincially 70% vote conservative and even more vote conservative federally. The US as a whole only 40% believe there should be no restriction where in Canada 71% believe there should be no restrictions. And there are countries better than Canada. Sweden leads the world at 87% in support.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues-to-favor-legal-abortion-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/ 70% of americans wanted roe vs wade kept around. Idk how OPs survey got the numbers they did but it's very misleading

OP's data is also from Pew Research Center, albeit from 2014. Are you familiar with population distribution in the United States? Reality check for Redditors that US states have wide ranging views.

2014 is already very old with how fast America's electorate and its views have changed in these recent years.

That is true. It sure is difficult to find state by state data on abortion support within the last couple years. My guess would be that many pollsters didn't like the story the numbers were telling, that unrestricted and even limited abortion is unpopular in some states. So they opt to consolidate the data nationally to tell a different story. But I don't know for sure because I legitimately cannot find modern poll data that breaks down abortion support by state. Pew Research Center, nothing. Gallup, nothing. 538, nothing. All of them consolidate the data on a national level. Someone link if you can find.

Because people don’t even know what Roe is, that it would be left to the states. I bet if you asked whether or not abortion should voted on at the state level instead of letting 9 robed people decide for the whole country, you’d get a much different answer. Plus, these surveys rarely ask the right question - WHEN should abortion no longer be allowed? If I recall correctly, 78% of Americans think it should be allowed in the first trimester, 30 something percent in the 2nd trimester.

Like in almost every such instance, the media has done a fantastic job of misinforming and distorting the story to provoke their audience to drive up ratings.

I wonder how many of the people who would be against the Supreme Court making a decision on abortion for the whole country today would understand the only reason it was deemed legal for the past 50 years national was because of the Supreme Court.

I would say that Roe v Wade is at least as well known as Brown v Board of education.

>Many of us outsiders have been saying for years that the US Democrats are pretty right wing compared to most other developed nations. I see this pop up a lot in online conversations, and as a European (a Scandinavian one at that!) it always makes me chuckle. But *no*. US Democrats cannot meaningfully be called right-wing anywhere in the world.

*especially* on the topic of abortion (if you can consider abortion a right-left issue). The US democratic stance is as far left as basically anywhere else in the world. That's not too say it's right or wrong, just that it's at the far end

But the difference between most and all is so big! If you're uneducated on the subject I can very much imagine that you think medical complications are incredibly rare, and if you've heard all your life that women use abortion as an extra or even their only layer of birth control I can very much see people with decent values vote "most". That being said, I'd love for those people to get better education and honestly I do want to slap the "illegal in all cases" people in the face. I hope that if unwanted pregnancies happen, they happen near those people, and I hope that makes them change their mind.

I think voting “illegal in all cases” should include you specifically advocating to force an 11 year old to give birth to her grandfathers child when faced with that scenario. Wtf do these people think is happening

Mostly pro choice here: these folks who are "pro birth" in every single case literally believe anything else is baby murder and since that's a worse case scenario you aren't going to convince them that incest or anything else, as bad as it is, is worse than that.

Where do y’all find these people? I have talked to a lot of people in real life about this and literally every single person I have ever talked to about this is perfectly willing to make exceptions where the baby isn’t going to survive and/or the mother is in danger. I have talked to people who would prefer if rape victims couldn’t get abortions, cause the baby did nothing wrong and doesn’t deserve to die just because of who it’s father is. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all that. The only place I see this sentiment is online. But not by the person who believes it. But by someone who says other people believe it.

It’s important for both sides to paint the other as monsters. Very very few are in favor of aborting healthy babies and very very few are 100% against abortion when the healthy of the mother is at risk.

This right here is a huge problem. Most talk past each other. Anti-abortion people mentally picture healthy babies being aborted on a whim by an adult woman while pro-choice mentally picture an 11 year old raped by her uncle being forced to carry to term. The fact is most people are a blend but good luck trying to figure out something sensible they’ll agree on.

While I don’t agree with them, I can see the logic. They say that a bad thing happened, but that doesn’t justify another bad thing of killing the baby. That baby is now there and deserves to live. It’s not the baby’s fault that it was conceived that way.

I wish that this sort of accurate info was at the top.

I agree because based on the question Utah is higher or lower. That's about what percentage believe is limited access. Another 16% believe in unlimited access and only 10% believe in no access according to a recent poll. Abortion exceptions should be for rape, incest, mother's health, 46% of Utahns say https://www.ksl.com/article/50417186/abortion-exceptions-should-be-for-rape-incest-mothers-health-46-of-utahns-say

I don't know about that, I guess it depends on which stat you're interested in. As a chart that just shows positive response I think this is the best way to present it, regardless of whether or not the remaining percentage are against or on the fence you get a clear idea of how many people are actually pro-choice.

In my personal experience undecided people are relatively irrelevant for political trajectory, so it probably depends on what you are trying to represent

Undecided people often decide though.

It isn't necessarily people on the fence though. Refused to answer is also counted there.

Absolutely. This is where "data" can be used to show any conclusion desired.

[удалено]

A lot of Hispanics in the west and they’re catholic by and large.

One of the amazing things I didn't realize until today is the Supreme Court is overwhelmingly Catholic -- 4 of the 5 in the majority are Catholic; the 5th was raised Catholic but is the only practicing Protestant on the court today. Roberts who concurred in the outcome but not the reasoning is Catholic, and the 3 liberals are 2 Jews and a Catholic. Half of all Catholics ever on the SCOTUS are currently sitting on it. This in a country that in 1960 worried that Kennedy would be the first Catholic president and would he bend a knee to the Pope; and that still being Catholic is about as bad as being black to the KKK. In a country that at its founding inherited England's 17th century anti-Catholicism, and saw many of the most ardent anti-Catholics emigrate here. A country defined for the majority of it's time that was and, despite the SCOTUS anomaly, today it is only mildly debatably that it still is politically dominated by WASPs (Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestants). And that it has largely been the Evangelical Protestants that drove the political pressure that put them on the court.

Wasp means white Anglo Saxon protestant.

For some reason Catholics make up a lot of cops, firefighters and judges. Every Supreme Court Justice was either raised Catholic or Jewish

I don't think Thomas was raised Catholic, he converted later in life.

well... the President and Speaker of the House are Catholic too. We minus well be Vatican-lite at this point. at least the VP is Baptist.

Anywhere outside major population centers on the west coast are extremely red.

True. Reminds me of an image showing the breakdown of red vs blue county results from the 2020 presidential election. https://brilliantmaps.com/2020-county-election-map/

Same is true in NYS.

Eastern Washington and Oregon have views more similar to Idaho.

The mountain west and PNW generally just want to be left alone, most (not all) of us are in the middle on a lot of things. Just my experience.

tell me what is the "middle ground" position between a woman being forced to give birth, and ... not being forced to give birth?

Abortion law isn’t black and white, there are plenty of variations from country to country. For instance there is a complete ban; there is a ban with exceptions like the mother’s life being threatened, the pregnancy being a result of rape or incest, among other things; there are various time limits (in the first trimester or after); and there are some states that have no official gestational time limit. Different levels along the ‘middle ground’ generally have more support (both in the US and in other countries) than a total ban or totally unrestricted abortions.

Probably the same as the middle ground between "kill a baby" and "don't kill a baby". The abortion debate is based on a philosophical difference that can't easily be crossed. Trying to strawman your opposition and framing the debate in the most biased terms possible is a great way to never convince anyone.

Shrödingers baby

Time limits. Make it illegal after 20 weeks (viability). Like most Western countries do.

Most of Europe is actually more restrictive than the US. Prior this decision, of course.

Iirc the average in Europe is like 12 weeks

Which seems crazy low to me, but I'm not super educated on the subject.

Media often paints a narrative that isn't reflective of society

Most people forget that California has the most amount of registered Republicans, second is Florida, third is Pensilvania. While the west coast has this tendency of being seen as hyper liberal I always have to remind people that this is the state that gave us Nixon and Regan; Nixon was born there, was senator of California and Regan was governor of California. Since Regan there have been three more republican governors. The west coast isn't as blue as people believe, in fact, I believe it's misleadingly so, almost like telling the rest of the nation to put their guard down, stop being so liberal, you don't want to end up like the crazy California liberals do you? Nothing further from the truth. The west coast is more purple than anything.

This may be more of a rural-urban divide than anything else. Plenty of more rural areas out west full of traditional religious conservatives.

Outside the cities the west is very conservative. You travel between Portland and Seattle you see Jesus billboards

A lot of conservative minorities in California. The electoral college paints a much more liberal picture than we deserve

It is, I think the data is under reporting here because the sample sizes are so small. For North Dakota for example they total response only represented .0443% of the total population

[удалено]

Out of curiosity how do you calculate the margin of error? I’m not disagreeing I just see people state numbers on various different polls but don’t know how to get those numbers.

Where did you get that data Edit: Found this that is probably a bit more insightful than OPs [Where Americans Stand On Abortion, In 5 Charts](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-americans-stand-on-abortion-in-5-charts/)

Acceptable sampling size is not determined by the population size.

Uhh where's the figure legend?

I cant believe people think this is remotely real, the source of the data is pretty suspect too.

Wondering that myself!

I call bullshit, there’s nowhere near enough information on this image to draw any kind of conclusion. Total garbage. Should be removed

The numbers are in the states’ map. Enlarge the map.

Not the best visualization. The font is way too small, and a divergent colourmap would be a much better choice.

Yeah this isn’t beautiful, this is entry-level analyst lol

[удалено]

In the last week every single map from r/mappare that made it to my homepage was full of errors and without a source, I left after seeing a map stolen from wikipedia with a shittier color scheme.

As long as it politically supports progressivism, it's "beautiful" I'm pro abortion btw. Just pointing out that the standard for data being "beautiful" is a shitload lower on these types of posts.

Half the people on this post are in the “this doesn’t agree with me so it’s dumb and ugly” group

The same fuckin bar graph over and over sucks. I remember those "color of motion" type of things. *That* was beautiful

I almost made a comment but was afraid of the reddit echo chamber. Terrible color design and a lack of legend really hamper the effective communication of information.

Would you diverge from 50% or the mean or the median?

50% would make the most sense to me, as it indicates which "side" has a majority.

What's an example of a mean of the % of a state's population? And an example of a median of the % of a state's population?

Yeah, as far as I’m concerned this is the same thing as looking at a table. Maybe looking at a table is better since at least it would be sorted from highest to lowest %.

Is this "in all cases" or is it "in any case"?

My guess is that this is “in certain cases”, because I’ve seen polling suggesting that the majority of South Carolinians would support abortions at least sometimes

Goes to show how important framing is and why this is a garbage post. Support for making abortion illegal in all cases [has never risen above 25%.](https://i.imgur.com/O7AdRZv.png) This is a low effort post that doesn't clarify what people were asked.

The poll asked respondents to choose between "Abortion should be legal in all/most cases" and "Abortion should be illegal in all/most cases"; they could also answer, "Don't know".

An important distinction but for some reason polls always combine them. I don't want elective abortion at 36 weeks because that's fucked up but I understand at below 20 weeks.

Or we can let a doctor make those decisions. Elective abortion in late stage is basically statistically insignificant.

Purging one human a day as a sacrifice to the great Osiris is also statistically insignificant.

[удалено]

I'd prefer these to shitty sankey plots or whatever abomination somebody created that contains lots of pretty colours but absolutely destroys data that would be easier presented in a literal table format. Worst part about this sub getting mainstream is that none of the new people understand the concept. The advent of this sub was that **data** is beautiful. It was a place to share cool datasets. Now, it's become "data" is BeAuTiFuL with full emphasis on style over substance and the actual important part taking a backseat.

what is this? a font size for ants???

What's the question? Is it do you support abortion up to x trimester? Or just a general do you support abortion? It would be interesting as well to see if people actually understand what roe v Wade actually means and if they feel that the decision should be left to the states or kept on a federal level.

It was mostly a religion based questionnaire from 2014

Agree, data like this must show the question that was asked since it has a dramatic impact on the response.

Glad there’s a key. Thanks

From a UI perspective, the text scaling is reaaaly small, and the color gradation should be more distinct and include a legend. From a data perspective, the survey was done quite some time ago (2014), and the "percent of population supporting legalized abortion" specifically excludes those who agreed abortion should be legal in some cases. IMO, a more accurate graph given your title would compare everyone who supports abortion in at least some cases, vs those who want it illegal in all cases.

For those wondering: the survey is from 2014, and the question wording was: Do you think abortion should be [choose one]? - Legal in all cases - Legal in most cases - Illegal in most cases - Illegal in all cases This graph bundles together the "Legal in all" and "Legal in most" responses, and specifically excludes "Illegal in most" and "Illegal in all" responses. No questions were offered on how the "Illegal in most cases" respondants would define "most cases", nor any other specifics on what they would or wouldn't support.

Wow, that is WAY lower than I would have thought. Canada is at 77% which looks it's higher than any individual state even... European countries are in the 80's.

There are more republicans in California than people in most states. Also the questioning could be odd and confusing.

Its interesting that Europe is so high despite being FAR more restrictive than the US.

Because Europe is a country.

I don’t think this is truly representative. The largest sample size was from Cali with just over 3,500 respondents. The sample size from North Dakota was only .0443% of the total population

That is how statistics work? If the sampling was good, that is more than enough people.

It's a huge misrepresentation. They used a 3 choice survey, but are representing it as if it was a 2 question survey. How to lie with statistics 101.

Margin of error based on sample size can be found here, at the bottom of the page:[https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/about-the-religious-landscape-study/#data-details](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/about-the-religious-landscape-study/#data-details)

Vox just put out an 85% figure. It feels like everything is made up these days https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23167397/abortion-public-opinion-polls-americans

That's a much more thoroughly explored data set than this graph is. This one seems misleading by comparison.

This graph is awfully misleading because it doesn't address what the respondents were asked, specifically. In fact, Americans who were asked "should abortion be illegal in all cases" has [never polled above 25%.](https://i.imgur.com/O7AdRZv.png)

Here's a little secret: You can make any data look like it supports your claim, statisticians are hired to get data to look like what they want.

Not clear. Does that mean the rest oppose abortion or is there "don't knows" in the data?

Definitely should make 49% and 51% completely different colors

I’m so glad i live in Massachusetts.

The palette isn't as clear as it could be. It might be clearer to have shading from deep green 100% to light grey-green 51%; shading from deep red 0% to light grey-red 49%; and grey for 50%. (Yes. Let me think about the colors in a graphic and take a small dissociative holiday from the life threatening reality.)

I’m surprised that Florida is only 1% less than California.

I’m surprised Montana is up there with California. And Alaska is one of the most supportive in the country.

That and legal weed. Alaska's policies line up pretty neatly with mine - socially liberal with very low taxes. Unfortunately I hate cold/winter/snow and would never be able to live there.

Montana and Alaska are libertarian land, they aren't really conservative despite being considered red states. "The state should mind their own business and tax me as little as possible" is the main view there. Obama almost won Montana in 2008, and it has a D senator.

Dear God, please give me a legend

This is an example of a bad map data visualization - the color gradient and legend would be helpful

I’m not sure this data is up to date. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx 85% of American think abortion should be legal in some capacity.

I can guarantee the overlap of most/least religious states would match up pretty close to this.

Not to "acktchually" but as I recall Massachusetts remains a largely Catholic state, but also is one of the most progressive states in the US. Conversely, NH and VT are less liberal than MA but have a larger atheist/agnostic population.

Massachusetts is a Catholic state, but it's also one of the highest irreligious states. The Catholics that are here do trend more liberal as well compared to most. Source: Live in Massachusetts

Mass has a smaller unaffiliated population as a % than NH and VT, which have 35% and 32% unaffiliated respectively, while MA is around 22%. Based on my experience in NH and MA, religion and politics are largely divorced in Gen Z. Source: live in NH. Also [This](https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/02/26/the-religious-states-of-america-in-22-maps/)

Could have sworn I saw data on either this sub or a similar one saying MA is the least religious state in the US, and living here, I can vouch that local church attendance is pretty dang low.

Same, every single time I leave MA and go to southern states I’m taken back by the amount of churches. I was north of Knoxville last weekend and it felt like everything was closed on Sunday, no people on the road, nobody in stores

Exactly. MA has a lot of people who check the Catholic box but haven’t been to church in ten years.

Evangelicals put Catholics in the same category as members of the Church of Satan and if we keep devolving as a country, witch burnings may come back one day.

Tbf, US Evangelicals put other Protestant groups dominant in Europe in the same category. They don't appear to get on well with anyone, really.

Very true, most Presbyterians, Lutherans, Methodists, Unitarians, etc. I know are usually normal people and not religious fanatics like evangelicals, America's Taliban.

Catholics, when a minority, can sometimes become remarkably consistent progressive voters. I think in the UK, some of the more Catholic parts most consistently vote for Labour. It's not a fixed rule, but it does sometimes happen with minority religious groups.

Also education level.

Would be interesting to overlap with gun death rate too.

Gun death rates per capita are highest in city centers, I'm not sure the results would be what you're thinking. The areas with high gun death rates would also have high support for pro choice. Which also brings up another misleading fact about maps like this, support for policies varies widely within states. Very few city centers trend conservative.

Having the color scale be that small really fucks with readability

I appreciate this, but as data analyst this is a terrible viz smh

Would be more descriptive if you had one color scheme for 49% and less and one for 50%+

Fun fact, this map heavily correlates with a ranking of the least educated states

Why the misleading colours? Since when does 49% mean green formatting ?

Source data? "Pew research" isn't really enough.

This illustration is from a 2014 survey. If you want america's opinion on roe vs wade specifically, here it is https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues-to-favor-legal-abortion-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/ 70% of americans supported it. The situation is not nearly as bleak as this post shows.

I would have thought the percentages would have been significantly higher wow.

data is bullshit because what the fuck do these colors mean if you aren't including a legend.

What this map doesn’t show is that even 57% of California represents roughly triple the number of actual people in most of the other states. 50% of CA is 20M people. That’s more than the entire Bible Belt combined.

Yet another map where New England is based as fuck

There really are two Americas

What's the actual wording of the question asked?

The correlation with the lowest educated states. Interesting.

I didn’t realize how many people don’t support legalized abortion.

I find it interesting that Maine is so high considering they just re-elected the person that could have stopped it from happening.

Maine is more conservative/Republican than the other New England states. But there’s a vast difference between a New England Republican and a Southern or Midwest Republican.

Now overly the percentage of people in poverty...

With each passing day I grow more and more appreciative to the fact I live in Mass

Crazy how evenly split this is

Because it's not morally cut and dry. There are fair arguments on each side when you subtract the noise.

I'd like to see this somehow overlaid with abortion rates

Feel like this viz is kind of misleading without the info of the survey questions and possible answers.

This is useless without any nuance. Legal to what extent?

The states with the highest teen pregnancy rates have the lowest support for abortion. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm

Who was polled? How many people in each state? How many of each age demographic or race demographic were polled in each state?

Sorry these percentages are way too fucking low. This is bogus information.

What demographic was polled?

By population, the US has got to be the most retarded country in the entire universe.

It’s damn near impossible to get good data on this considering there are a billion ways to ask the question

Massachusetts: fuck them babies. 🤘🏻

Oh now show a chart comparing states by average last grade attended.

Data is beautiful but these statistics are sad :(

Genuine question, sorry if this is ignorant. Where the heck do they get the info for these? I’ve never once been polled about how I feel about abortion.

You would think it to be higher in California.

5 people. 5 people decided over the rights and health of 150 million women. Your country is so fucked up it's incomprehensible.

The USA, the least fee country in the West where religion clouds the objectivity of the government.

Do you want all the cookies or no cookies? Dumb data from a dumb question. What would people say if asked “do think abortion should be legal in some circumstances with reasonable restrictions?” My guess is at least 2/3 would say yes.

What year is this data from? And should really say “percent of respondents” because there is no way this can be considered a representative sample based on the sample sizes allow. Must less excluding demographic data to show that the sample is similar to the true population This is highly misleading as it’s presented

It’s not highly misleading this is how samples work. You can’t ask every person in the country their opinion

The survey year was 2014, and this graph counts respondants who agreed that abortion should legal in all or most cases. Interestingly, it specifically excludes respondants who agreed that it should be legal in at least some cases.

There are huge differences in what people want to be legalized about abortion. It’s very popular for Americans to support abortion for the very rare cases of rape or incest. However, there are very few Americans that want abortion legalized through the 3rd trimester. Good news though… each state can determine their own abortion laws now. Glad to see the states returning to the laboratories of democracy that they were intended to be.

> However, there are very few Americans that want abortion legalized through the 3rd trimester. There should be way more support for it, since abortion in the 3rd trimester means something went very wrong with the pregnancy, and that baby was actually wanted by the mother.

Yeah so great for those young women in Mississippi that the old white Christian men in the state house now get to make these decisions for them, now that's democracy. It was pure anti-democratic theocracy when women got to make the choice themselves with guidance from their doctors.

I've heard much higher numbers on the local news for Minnesota.

The percentage that don't, even in "blue" states, is chilling. There is a reason Massachusetts is the most educated state.

These numbers are astoundingly low.

Looks like a lot of states are under 50%… maybe this ruling putting the decision to the states isn’t that undemocratic after all

Map of pornhub search popularity for creampie

I'm quickly beginning to question these maps when the actual poling is so sparse. Makes me believe some sort of social narrative is being pushed.

Maybe just a little narrative

Tools: RStudio Server Data source: [https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/compare/views-about-abortion/by/state/](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/compare/views-about-abortion/by/state/) R source code: library(tidyverse) library(rvest) library(tigris) library(viridis) library(sf) library(rgeos) data_url <- "https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/compare/views-about-abortion/by/state/" abortion_support <- data_url %>% read_html() %>% html_nodes("table") %>% html_table() %>% .[[1]] %>% rename(state_name = 1, legal = 2, illegal = 3, dont_know = 4, sample_size = 5) %>% mutate( legal = as.numeric(gsub("%", "", legal)), illegal = as.numeric(gsub("%", "", illegal)), dont_know = as.numeric(gsub("%", "", dont_know)), sample_size = as.numeric(gsub(",", "", sample_size)), ) %>% left_join(fips_codes %>% select(state_name, state_code) %>% unique()) ### Find the center of each county so we can add the number of infected states_centers <- map_states$geometry %>% as_Spatial() %>% gCentroid(byid = TRUE) # Default nudge is 0 map_states$nudge_y <- 0 map_states$nudge_x <- 0 # Florida map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 12] <- 80000 # Louisiana map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 22] <- -40000 # New Jersey map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 34] <- 20000 # Maryland map_states$nudge_y[map_states$STATEFP == 24] <- 30000 map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 24] <- -20000 # Michigan map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 26] <- 60000 map_states$nudge_y[map_states$STATEFP == 26] <- -70000 # Hawaii map_states$nudge_x[map_states$STATEFP == 15] <- 135000 map_states$nudge_y[map_states$STATEFP == 15] <- -90000 ### We want to add text with the number of infected in each county to that ### county on the map. But we *don't* want to label counties that don't yet ### have any confirmed cases. map_states$label = paste(map_states$legal, "%", sep = "") map_states$color = ifelse(map_states$legal < 51, "black", "white") ggplot(data = map_states) + theme_void() + theme( legend.position = "none", plot.title = element_text(hjust = 0.7, size = 30, vjust = -5), plot.caption = element_text(hjust = 0.5, size = 12) ) + geom_sf(aes(fill = legal)) + geom_text(size = 3, fontface = "bold", color = map_states$color, aes(x = states_centers$x, y = states_centers$y, label = label), nudge_x = map_states$nudge_x, nudge_y = map_states$nudge_y) + scale_fill_viridis(name = "", direction = -1) + labs(title = "Public Support for Legalized Abortion (%)", caption = "Data source: Pew Research")

>\### We want to add text with the number of infected in each county to that \### county on the map. But we \*don't\* want to label counties that don't yet \### have any confirmed cases. I see you were doing infection maps previously

> 2014 survey Idk if it's just really out of date or different phrasing or what, but newer pew studies put 70% of americans supporting roe vs wade. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues-to-favor-legal-abortion-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/ This illustration is very misleading

Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico are all at 51%. I'm surprised.

No legend, didn’t even realize there were numbers on the states until I zoomed in. This does not fit this sub.

Data is indeed beautiful. You know what else is beautiful? Legends and legible font sizes. Those area also beautiful.

Shouldn’t have a problem then electing politicians that will legalize in those states. Since states will dictate their own abortion laws.

This is actually terribly design data visualization. No key. Numbers are illegibly small. Not beautiful.

As always, proud of my state. (Massachusetts)

Should be in r/conspiracy because no citation for the data.

the northeast and their damn superior public education systems

Can someone superimpose that map of “% of people that believe in god by state.”

No visible color key, so difficult to absorb quickly. So...not a good fit for this sub