back to top
Politics

9 More Deeply Dubious Graphs On 2017 Election Leaflets

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the data.

Posted on

A couple of weeks ago we had a look at the long-running election tradition of publishing wildly dodgy graphs on political leaflets. You'll be pleased to know the parties are still at it.

1. In which the Scottish Tories seem to think that 33 is four times as big as 13 (and about 20 times as big as 5).

RevStu / Scottish Conservatives / Via Twitter: @RevStu

Fixed that for you!

RevStu / Scottish Conservatives / BuzzFeed

2. Sticking with the Scottish Tories, in whose universe 6 x 8.7 ≈ 27.6.

And also, 17 is less than half of 25.9.
Stewart Bremner / Scottish Conservatives / Via Twitter: @stewartbremner

And also, 17 is less than half of 25.9.

Fixed that one too, guys!

Stewart Bremner / Scottish Conservatives / BuzzFeed

3. No but seriously, the Scottish Tories appear to actually have a problem and we shouldn't laugh at them.

They think that 39.5 is nearly five times the size of 23.4!
RevStu / Scottish Conservatives / Via Twitter: @RevStu

They think that 39.5 is nearly five times the size of 23.4!

Here you go, fixed this one as well.

Just… go back to school, OK guys? There's no shame in it. Maths has lots of real-world uses.
RevStu / Scottish Conservatives / BuzzFeed

Just… go back to school, OK guys? There's no shame in it. Maths has lots of real-world uses.

4. According to ancient prophecy, the election is not truly upon us until at least one Lib Dem candidate has churned out a truly heinous graph.

Obviously they've churned out lots already, though, so it came to pass some time ago.
Gavin Freeguard / Lib Dems / Via Twitter: @GavinFreeguard

Obviously they've churned out lots already, though, so it came to pass some time ago.

Fixed.

Looks more – one-horsey to me? Especially since there's not enough room for your percentages any more.
Gavin Freeguard / Lib Dems / BuzzFeed

Looks more – one-horsey to me? Especially since there's not enough room for your percentages any more.

5. Look at this shitshow.

I mean, even the premise is ridiculous. Who cares whether the Lib Dems have gone up 7 percentage points, if they've gone up from 0% to 7% in a seat where Labour got 55% last time? You only really care about the total.But even ignoring that, they've got it spectacularly wrong! Look! Apparently 3 is barely a quarter of 7!
Ben Brittain / Lib Dems / Via Twitter: @GavinFreeguard

I mean, even the premise is ridiculous. Who cares whether the Lib Dems have gone up 7 percentage points, if they've gone up from 0% to 7% in a seat where Labour got 55% last time? You only really care about the total.

But even ignoring that, they've got it spectacularly wrong! Look! Apparently 3 is barely a quarter of 7!

Ffffffffiiiiiiixed!

Ben Brittain / Lib Dems / BuzzFeed

6. Everyone's at it, of course. Here's Labour's contribution.

This isn't the worst, but someone on Twitter said "Outrage as Labour uses accurate graph on election leaflet!" about it, so obviously that was a challenge. Fun fact: If you add up the SNP, Greens and Lib Dem votes, you get 20,569 – more than the Labour vote. But if you add up the bars on the graph above, they're smaller. So. Not 100% honest, then.(Update: Duncan Hothersall, the aforementioned tweeter, says the graph was done in Excel and was originally accurate, but that the captions cut off the bottom of the bars.)
Duncan Hothersall / Scottish Labour / Via Twitter: @search

This isn't the worst, but someone on Twitter said "Outrage as Labour uses accurate graph on election leaflet!" about it, so obviously that was a challenge.

Fun fact: If you add up the SNP, Greens and Lib Dem votes, you get 20,569 – more than the Labour vote. But if you add up the bars on the graph above, they're smaller. So. Not 100% honest, then.

(Update: Duncan Hothersall, the aforementioned tweeter, says the graph was done in Excel and was originally accurate, but that the captions cut off the bottom of the bars.)

F. I. X. E. D.

Duncan Hothersall / Scottish Labour / BuzzFeed

7. Back to the Lib Dems, and this one is a DOOZY.

They don't give you the percentages or anything, so you can't see where the sleight of hand is happening. But the actual vote counts were Labour 17,946, Lib Dem 7,558, UKIP 7,516, and Conservatives 6,630.
Anna Turley / Lib Dems / Via Twitter: @annaturley

They don't give you the percentages or anything, so you can't see where the sleight of hand is happening. But the actual vote counts were Labour 17,946, Lib Dem 7,558, UKIP 7,516, and Conservatives 6,630.

Here's how that should have looked!

The gap between the Lib Dems and UKIP was so small that my crude measuring-it-out-on-Photoshop technique lacked the precision to detect it. And both of their votes added together were nowhere near as big as Labour's. Otherwise, great job, guys.
Anna Turley / Lib Dems / BuzzFeed

The gap between the Lib Dems and UKIP was so small that my crude measuring-it-out-on-Photoshop technique lacked the precision to detect it. And both of their votes added together were nowhere near as big as Labour's. Otherwise, great job, guys.

8. More Lib Dems, who really are the masters of this stuff.

That 32 looks suspiciously large, at a glance. It's not terrible, Dawn Barnes of Hornsey and Wood Green, but it's not great.
Jacob Smith / Lib Dems

That 32 looks suspiciously large, at a glance. It's not terrible, Dawn Barnes of Hornsey and Wood Green, but it's not great.

*extremely Coldplay voice* "And I…will try…to fix you…"

Jacob Smith / Lib Dems / BuzzFeed

9. And finally, the strange tale of the time the Lib Dems made themselves look weaker than they actually are. And forgot an apostrophe.

Some cant will win here, and everywhere else.
Matt Smith / Lib Dems / Via Twitter: @mattsmithetc

Some cant will win here, and everywhere else.

Fixé.

Matt Smith / Lib Dems / BuzzFeed

Tom Chivers is a science writer for BuzzFeed and is based in London.

Contact Tom Chivers at tom.chivers@buzzfeed.com.

Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.