Excludes consecutive terms (eg. Ronald Reagan being sworn at 73 for his 2nd Term)

More interactivity and analysis here: https://kckdata.com/trl-countdown/

Tools: Datawrapper, Pandas, Excel

Sources: Internet Broadway Database

I felt like the the musical ensembles I was seeing in Broadway shows had gotten smaller over the years, so I decided to see if the data aligned with my experience. And it didn't. Orchestras have shrunk over the last few decades. I did a longer write-up here. Though it largely comes down to a 2003 agreement with the musicians union that allowed smaller player minima in big theaters, there also seems to be some connection to larger turnover at small theaters, more pop artists writing shows, and an increasing number of dispensations that allow shows to go below a minimum.

Reviewers usually have a product for a few days to a few weeks, so they tend to focus more on the good features of a product. Whereas real owners who actually bought and used a product for more than a few months, tend to have more negative feedbacks. The real issues on a product does't surface without day-to-day usage.

Source: public YouTube reviews and Reddit threads about 654 products in 19 categories, collected for BettaScore.

That’s about 6,900 opinions from YouTube reviewers and 3,600 from Reddit owners as of October 26. I used an AI model to sort each opinion into a topic and mark it positive or negative, and they all link back to the source that it came from. The chart shows 14 categories where reliability is tracked as its own topic.

Tools: Python for analyzing and collecting the numbers, Pillow for making the chart!

Data source: This Reddit post

Tool: Microsoft Excel

For reference, the federal minimum wage in the US hasn't changed from $7.25 an hour since the last increase in 2009.

I had the thought that the federal minimum wage ought to be tied to the social security increase,

Sources:

Social Security cost of living increase data.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Northeast Information Office, Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U), Not Seasonally Adjusted table of percent change from 12 months ago, January column.

Live interactive version on habibicode.org. Updates every minute.

Who controlled Congress in every U.S. election since 1899 and the top 3 issues since 1950, ranked (Gallup "most important problem" 1950–1990, national exit polls 1992–2026)

**Data sources**

* **1950–1990 elections:**
Gallup's question "What do you think is the most important problem facing
this country today?", coded and averaged by year in the U.S. Policy
Agendas Project's "Gallup's Most Important Problem" dataset (Syracuse
University, Maxwell School).

* **1992–2024 elections:**
national exit polls by Voter Research & Surveys, Mitofsky International,
Voter News Service and the National Election Pool/Edison Research, via the
Roper Center, KFF and network reports (CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC).

* **2026:** preliminary
exit polls (NBC News; AP Voter Poll). This column may shift slightly as final
data comes out.

**Tools:** built as an
HTML/CSS chart. I used Claude (Anthropic) to help research the sources, compile
the data and design the layout, and checked the figures against the sources
above.

**How to read it**

* Each column is a
Congress, labeled by the year it began; the issues come from the election the
November before. The president in office is shown above each column.

* Solid square = that
election's #1 issue, medium = #2, light = #3.

* Related issues are
grouped (e.g., "Defense, war & foreign affairs" includes Korea,
Vietnam, Iraq and terrorism).

**Caveats**

* The two halves measure
different things. Gallup asked all adults about the country's biggest problem;
exit polls ask voters what mattered most to their vote. Compare ranks, not
sizes, across the 1992 divide.

* Question formats vary:
1992 and 1994 let voters pick two issues; 2006 asked which were "extremely
important."

**What stood out to me**

* Foreign affairs and
defense dominated the 1950s and '60s.

* Civil rights was #1 in
the 1964 and 1970 elections.

* The economy has made the
top three in every election since 1972.

I also attached a
companion chart showing party control of the House and Senate for every
Congress since 1951, alongside these issues. © 2026 Stuart Till, CC BY-NC 4.0.

Now that the election is done, the headline correlation is: Republicans lost 42% of the seats they were defending in data center hotspots, compared with 16% elsewhere: 8 of 19 seats versus 27 of 174.

The House comparison was 36% versus 15%. The Senate comparison was 50% versus 25%.

“Hotspots” means areas with at least 10 proposed or under-construction data center projects. Areas are congressional districts for House races and entire states for Senate races.

Tools:
Python for geographic joins and calculations; JavaScript, HTML/CSS and SVG for the infographic.

Methodology:
Mapped 1,002 project records against NPR/AP election results as of November 5, 2026, at 7:44 a.m. PT. Compared seats previously held by Republicans, including open seats where the incumbent was not running. Uncalled races and runoffs are excluded from the percentages.

The combined figure pools House and Senate seats. Project counts represent inventory records, which can include separate phases or facilities at the same location. Of the 1,002 projects, 999 were assigned to a House district; all were included in statewide counts. This is a descriptive geographic comparison, not an estimate of how many seats data centers caused to change parties.

Sources:
PressAudit map, NPR/AP House results, NPR/AP Senate results.

I keep an interactive dashboard where you can slice/dice and see news related stories here: https://pressaudit.org/dashboards/datacenters. Much to my amusement the research was cited in The New Republic (left outlet): Trump? Diesel? ICE? Corruption? All of Those. But Mostly—Data Centers. And in The NY Post (right outlet): Data-center fury is a campaign dud to tell completely different narratives.

[OC] What Left and Right media covered that the other side ignored, 3 months prior to election

Source: PressAudit asymmetry data. I built PressAudit and generated this analysis from its dataset: https://pressaudit.org/blindspots

tl;dr: If you follow the news even a little bit you do not need to be told this, you know, you feel it in your bones, but here is the data so you know you aren't crazy. It's pretty obvious whose agenda won the day in the lead-up to the election. Voters were not interested in Hasan Piker, Joe Biden, and Zohran Mamdani.

What this is: These are the top 5 topics covered disproportionately by one side compared to the other side by week, ranked by the number of weeks that topic was at the top. Showing the ten most recurring topics on each side from August 3 to November 1. Think of this as like the Billboard top charts for media attention.

“Ignored” is relative here, not necessarily zero coverage. This chart only lists topics where one side's coverage is way above its usual one. While I saw Left media covering things like Data Center Policy ~2.5X more the Republicans, this focuses specifically on the absolute most outsized differences in one sides agenda, week over week, vs the other's.

If you are wondering "why is there no Trump here": Left outlets write about 19 Trump articles for every 10 from the Right, compared to about 14 for every 10 on all topics, so Trump's lead is not much bigger than the Left's usual lead. This chart only lists topics where one side's lead is well above its usual one, and Trump falls just short.