Skip to content

Conversation

@Elaineeechen
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

Copy link

@lindsaypoirier lindsaypoirier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Submission Checklist

  • standards.qmd completed
  • contributions.qmd completed
  • All documents rendered
  • All final code in main

Nice work team. This was a simple and straightforward analysis.

Transforming Data

Standard Score Comments
Demonstrates an ability to subset data 1
Demonstrates an ability to aggregate data 1
Demonstrates an ability to interpret the results of data wrangling 1

Joining Data

Standard Score Comments
Demonstrates an ability to join to data frames 1
Demonstrates an ability to select the most appropriate type of join 1
Demonstrates an ability to reflect upon ethical concerns of joining information across data frames 1

GitHub

Standard Score Comments
Demonstrates an ability to delegate tasks effectively via Issues 1
Demonstrates an ability to collaborate across multiple GitHub branches 1
Demonstrates an ability to review collaborators' code 1

candidate_loc_donations <-
candidates |>
select(cand_id, cand_name, cand_st)
candidate_loc_donations

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this analysis, I think it would have been nice to have a summary table of the number of candidates in each state.

contributions |>
select(cand_id, name, state, transaction_amt, transaction_tp, tran_id) |>
filter(transaction_tp == "24E") |>
arrange(desc(transaction_amt))

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this analysis, I think it would have been nice to have a summary table of the number/amount of contributions in each state.




#Are contributors donating support money to candidates from their own states?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's a really interesting question and simple analysis here.

# Blog post

Compose your blog post here...
The question we wanted to answer through the data analytical process was investigating if contributors supporting candidates were particularly biased to candidates from their own state. When looking at the contributions data set, we saw information on the contributors and the amount of money they donated in the 2016 election cycle. Then, when looking at the candidates data set we were able to see the data on each candidate and the amount of donations they got from each contributor in the 2015-2016 election cycle. In the first data chunk, we wrangled the data from the contributions data set to find out what state each contributor was located in, and how much money they donated throughout the election. In the second chuck, we did a similar wrangling, looking at the candidate data set, finding out location and donation size. Lastly, in the third data set, we joined the two wrangled data frames in order to see if there was any overlap between candidates and contributors.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is this dataset? How would you explain it to someone unfamiliar with the fec16.

inner_join(candidate_loc_donations, by = "cand_id") |>
mutate(did_the_states_match = case_when(state == cand_st ~ "Yes", TRUE ~ "No")) |>
group_by(did_the_states_match) |>
summarize(number_of_yes_or_no = n())

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could be cool to also consider percent of total

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants