about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,706 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and the second variable is Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags.  The chart goes from 1990 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The increased support for the Libertarian candidate led to more widespread implementation of the "live free or die" mindset, prompting Californians to demand greater autonomy, even from their vehicles. As a result, cars started feeling the pressure to assert their individuality, leading to a surge in airbag malfunctions. It seems the political campaign really inflated the recall numbers, as the cars couldn't contain their newfound sense of liberty!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bustling California street scene with a focus on voters wearing "Libertarian" stickers as they head to the polls. Show the chaotic rebellion of cars with airbags bursting unexpectedly, reflecting the spreading Libertarian spirit. The atmosphere should be both energetic and slightly whimsical, echoing the surge of unexpected airbag malfunctions across the state. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: A Discovery magazine cover image Macabre Cubism Symbolism Sci-fi fantacy
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover image

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags, in the following situation: The increased support for the Libertarian candidate led to more widespread implementation of the "live free or die" mindset, prompting Californians to demand greater autonomy, even from their vehicles. As a result, cars started feeling the pressure to assert their individuality, leading to a surge in airbag malfunctions. It seems the political campaign really inflated the recall numbers, as the cars couldn't contain their newfound sense of liberty!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In California, an increasing number of voters are seen wearing "Libertarian" stickers as they head to the polls. Meanwhile, cars on the roads start behaving rather rebelliously, with airbags suddenly bursting out unexpectedly. It's as if the Libertarian spirit is spreading from the people to the vehicles, causing a surge in unexpected airbag malfunctions across the state.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In California, an increasing number of voters are seen wearing "Libertarian" stickers as they head to the polls. Meanwhile, cars on the roads start behaving rather rebelliously, with airbags suddenly bursting out unexpectedly. It's as if the Libertarian spirit is spreading from the people to the vehicles, causing a surge in unexpected airbag malfunctions across the state. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bustling California street scene with a focus on voters wearing "Libertarian" stickers as they head to the polls. Show the chaotic rebellion of cars with airbags bursting unexpectedly, reflecting the spreading Libertarian spirit. The atmosphere should be both energetic and slightly whimsical, echoing the surge of unexpected airbag malfunctions across the state.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

The Journal of Political Behavior and Automotive Safety

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for 1990 to 2020.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Buckle up and get ready for a ride through the winding roads of political voting patterns and automotive safety! In this paper, we take a joyride into the world of statistics, where we explore the unexpected relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. It's a journey that promises to be filled with twists, turns, and perhaps a few unexpected detours.

The political landscape of California, with its diverse array of ideologies and a penchant for trendsetting, provides a fascinating backdrop for our investigation. On the other side of the coin, automotive recalls for airbag-related issues form a dramatic counterpart, reminding us that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can have a surprising impact on the political scene.

It's like witnessing a collision between individual beliefs and vehicular mishaps, but fear not – we promise to navigate through this exciting terrain with academic precision and perhaps a dash of humor. After all, when it comes to uncovering eyebrow-raising correlations, a healthy dose of lightheartedness can make the journey all the more enjoyable.

So, fasten your seatbelts as we steer our way through the data-driven highways and byways, exploring the mysterious connection between political ideology and automotive safety. This research promises a thrilling ride, with statistical insights that are sure to drive the point home – pun intended!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Buckle up and get ready for a ride through the winding roads of political voting patterns and automotive safety! In this paper, we take a joyride into the world of statistics, where we explore the unexpected relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. It's a journey that promises to be filled with twists, turns, and perhaps a few unexpected detours.
The political landscape of California, with its diverse array of ideologies and a penchant for trendsetting, provides a fascinating backdrop for our investigation. On the other side of the coin, automotive recalls for airbag-related issues form a dramatic counterpart, reminding us that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can have a surprising impact on the political scene.
It's like witnessing a collision between individual beliefs and vehicular mishaps, but fear not – we promise to navigate through this exciting terrain with academic precision and perhaps a dash of humor. After all, when it comes to uncovering eyebrow-raising correlations, a healthy dose of lightheartedness can make the journey all the more enjoyable.
So, fasten your seatbelts as we steer our way through the data-driven highways and byways, exploring the mysterious connection between political ideology and automotive safety. This research promises a thrilling ride, with statistical insights that are sure to drive the point home – pun intended!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Previous research has explored the relationship between political preferences and consumer behavior, but few studies have ventured into the peculiar intersection of voting patterns and automotive safety concerns. Nevertheless, the connection between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for airbag issues has garnered considerable attention in recent years.

Smith et al. (2017) examine the voting demographics in California and note a curious trend wherein counties with higher Libertarian vote shares also tend to report a higher incidence of automotive recalls related to airbag malfunctions. This initial finding piqued our interest and prompted a deeper dive into the potential factors driving this unexpected correlation.

In their comprehensive analysis of consumer behavior and political alignment, Doe and Jones (2019) present compelling evidence suggesting that individuals who espouse libertarian ideologies may exhibit distinct preferences in consumer goods, including automobiles. The authors find that the intersection of political beliefs and product choices extends to safety features, with a higher likelihood of airbag-related recalls among vehicles owned by individuals sympathetic to libertarian ideals.

Venturing beyond the realm of traditional academic studies, we draw inspiration from non-fiction literature that examines the intricate dynamics of consumer behavior and political affiliations. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner offers a thought-provoking look at the unexpected connections in human decision-making, providing a fitting backdrop for our exploration of the correlation between political voting and automotive safety.

Turning to the realm of fiction, the works of Douglas Adams, particularly "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," may seem far removed from the world of statistical analysis and automotive recalls. However, Adams' whimsical portrayal of intergalactic travels and improbable connections serves as a metaphor for the improbable links we seek to unravel in our exploration of the libertarian vote and airbag issues.

In a surprising turn of events, social media posts have emerged as a source of anecdotal evidence, with individuals sharing humorous anecdotes about experiencing automotive recalls coinciding with their participation in political activities. One Twitter user aptly quipped, "Who knew exercising my libertarian rights at the polls would also trigger a recall for my car's airbag? Talk about unintended consequences!"

As we embark on this research journey, we acknowledge the need for rigorous analysis and a levity-filled lens through which to explore the unexpected correlations between political ideology and vehicular safety. With our statistical compass firmly in hand, we navigate the scholarly landscape with a keen eye and an appreciation for the lighter side of empirical inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT . You used data from 1990 to 2020

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Buckle up and get ready for a ride through the winding roads of political voting patterns and automotive safety! In this paper, we take a joyride into the world of statistics, where we explore the unexpected relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. It's a journey that promises to be filled with twists, turns, and perhaps a few unexpected detours.
The political landscape of California, with its diverse array of ideologies and a penchant for trendsetting, provides a fascinating backdrop for our investigation. On the other side of the coin, automotive recalls for airbag-related issues form a dramatic counterpart, reminding us that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can have a surprising impact on the political scene.
It's like witnessing a collision between individual beliefs and vehicular mishaps, but fear not – we promise to navigate through this exciting terrain with academic precision and perhaps a dash of humor. After all, when it comes to uncovering eyebrow-raising correlations, a healthy dose of lightheartedness can make the journey all the more enjoyable.
So, fasten your seatbelts as we steer our way through the data-driven highways and byways, exploring the mysterious connection between political ideology and automotive safety. This research promises a thrilling ride, with statistical insights that are sure to drive the point home – pun intended!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In this study, we employed an assortment of data collection and analytical methods that harnessed the power of statistical alchemy to unravel the mysterious link between voting behavior and automotive hiccups. Our data, sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, comprised a tantalizing blend of election results, vehicle recall notices, and a sprinkling of California flair. The period under scrutiny extended from 1990 to 2020, a canvas onto which we painted the colorful tapestry of political choices and vehicular safety.

To begin our journey, we channeled the spirit of Sherlock Holmes, conducting a thorough investigation of public databases and archives, akin to scouring the streets for clues. We meticulously combed through election records, extracting the tally of votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California during each election cycle. These data were pieced together with the precision of a jigsaw puzzle, creating a portrait of political leanings that would make even the most astute pollster nod in approval.

Next, we shifted gears into the realm of automotive safety, tapping into the vast troves of recall data from the US Department of Transportation. Like intrepid explorers navigating uncharted territory, we charted the frequency and scope of automotive recalls related to airbag malfunctions in the Golden State. Each recall notice became a piece of a larger puzzle, illuminating the landscape of vehicular perils and the quest for safer roads.

With our treasure trove of data in hand, we employed statistical tools with the gusto of a pastry chef whipping up a delectable soufflé. Spearheaded by the venerable Pearson correlation coefficient, we quantified the strength of the relationship between votes for the Libertarian candidate and airbag-related recalls, producing a coefficient that could make even the most steadfast skeptic take notice. The p-value, our trusty sidekick in the realm of statistical significance, stood guard with a valor that could rival the most steadfast knight, affirming the robustness of our findings.

In the spirit of scientific inquiry, we also performed time series analyses to discern temporal trends in both political preferences and automotive recalls. This temporal exploration allowed us to map the ebb and flow of political tides alongside the rise and fall of airbag-related concerns, painting a dynamic portrait of the intertwined narratives.

The culmination of our approach, akin to a crescendo in a symphony, wove together these diverse strands of data and analyses, culminating in a vivid depiction of the interplay between voting behavior and automotive safety. Our methodology, while rigorous and disciplined, also embodied the spirit of adventure, reflecting our commitment to unraveling the enigmatic connections that lie beneath the surface of everyday phenomena.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT .

For the time period 1990 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9380996, r-squared of 0.8800308, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Buckle up and get ready for a ride through the winding roads of political voting patterns and automotive safety! In this paper, we take a joyride into the world of statistics, where we explore the unexpected relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. It's a journey that promises to be filled with twists, turns, and perhaps a few unexpected detours.
The political landscape of California, with its diverse array of ideologies and a penchant for trendsetting, provides a fascinating backdrop for our investigation. On the other side of the coin, automotive recalls for airbag-related issues form a dramatic counterpart, reminding us that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can have a surprising impact on the political scene.
It's like witnessing a collision between individual beliefs and vehicular mishaps, but fear not – we promise to navigate through this exciting terrain with academic precision and perhaps a dash of humor. After all, when it comes to uncovering eyebrow-raising correlations, a healthy dose of lightheartedness can make the journey all the more enjoyable.
So, fasten your seatbelts as we steer our way through the data-driven highways and byways, exploring the mysterious connection between political ideology and automotive safety. This research promises a thrilling ride, with statistical insights that are sure to drive the point home – pun intended!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. Our data analysis from 1990 to 2020 yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9380996, an r-squared of 0.8800308, and a p-value of less than 0.01. It's safe to say that our findings left us with our airbags fully deployed – in other words, thoroughly shocked!

Figure 1 (to be included) provides a visual representation of the eye-popping correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot speaks for itself – there's a clear trend that's as undeniable as a seatbelt reminder dinging in your ear.

We were amazed to find such a strong connection between political voting behavior and automotive safety concerns. It's as if every vote for the Libertarian candidate had an airbag-related quirk hidden up its sleeve, just waiting to be discovered. Who would have thought that political leanings and airbag mishaps could be intertwined like a pair of headphones after being in your pocket for five seconds?

These results not only raise eyebrows but also prompt us to ponder the interplay between individual beliefs and unexpected vehicular hiccups. It's a collision of concepts that leaves us wondering, "What in the world?" And let's not forget the implications for future research – who knows what other surprising connections might be waiting for us in the wild world of data analysis?

In conclusion, our findings provide a fresh perspective on the relationship between political ideology and automotive safety, offering a dose of statistical humor along the way. After all, who said research has to be as serious as rush-hour traffic?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research has explored the relationship between political preferences and consumer behavior, but few studies have ventured into the peculiar intersection of voting patterns and automotive safety concerns. Nevertheless, the connection between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for airbag issues has garnered considerable attention in recent years.
Smith et al. (2017) examine the voting demographics in California and note a curious trend wherein counties with higher Libertarian vote shares also tend to report a higher incidence of automotive recalls related to airbag malfunctions. This initial finding piqued our interest and prompted a deeper dive into the potential factors driving this unexpected correlation.
In their comprehensive analysis of consumer behavior and political alignment, Doe and Jones (2019) present compelling evidence suggesting that individuals who espouse libertarian ideologies may exhibit distinct preferences in consumer goods, including automobiles. The authors find that the intersection of political beliefs and product choices extends to safety features, with a higher likelihood of airbag-related recalls among vehicles owned by individuals sympathetic to libertarian ideals.
Venturing beyond the realm of traditional academic studies, we draw inspiration from non-fiction literature that examines the intricate dynamics of consumer behavior and political affiliations. "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner offers a thought-provoking look at the unexpected connections in human decision-making, providing a fitting backdrop for our exploration of the correlation between political voting and automotive safety.
Turning to the realm of fiction, the works of Douglas Adams, particularly "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," may seem far removed from the world of statistical analysis and automotive recalls. However, Adams' whimsical portrayal of intergalactic travels and improbable connections serves as a metaphor for the improbable links we seek to unravel in our exploration of the libertarian vote and airbag issues.
In a surprising turn of events, social media posts have emerged as a source of anecdotal evidence, with individuals sharing humorous anecdotes about experiencing automotive recalls coinciding with their participation in political activities. One Twitter user aptly quipped, "Who knew exercising my libertarian rights at the polls would also trigger a recall for my car's airbag? Talk about unintended consequences!"
As we embark on this research journey, we acknowledge the need for rigorous analysis and a levity-filled lens through which to explore the unexpected correlations between political ideology and vehicular safety. With our statistical compass firmly in hand, we navigate the scholarly landscape with a keen eye and an appreciation for the lighter side of empirical inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. Our data analysis from 1990 to 2020 yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9380996, an r-squared of 0.8800308, and a p-value of less than 0.01. It's safe to say that our findings left us with our airbags fully deployed – in other words, thoroughly shocked!
Figure 1 (to be included) provides a visual representation of the eye-popping correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot speaks for itself – there's a clear trend that's as undeniable as a seatbelt reminder dinging in your ear.
We were amazed to find such a strong connection between political voting behavior and automotive safety concerns. It's as if every vote for the Libertarian candidate had an airbag-related quirk hidden up its sleeve, just waiting to be discovered. Who would have thought that political leanings and airbag mishaps could be intertwined like a pair of headphones after being in your pocket for five seconds?
These results not only raise eyebrows but also prompt us to ponder the interplay between individual beliefs and unexpected vehicular hiccups. It's a collision of concepts that leaves us wondering, "What in the world?" And let's not forget the implications for future research – who knows what other surprising connections might be waiting for us in the wild world of data analysis?
In conclusion, our findings provide a fresh perspective on the relationship between political ideology and automotive safety, offering a dose of statistical humor along the way. After all, who said research has to be as serious as rush-hour traffic?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results certainly give new meaning to the phrase "political impact." It appears that the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for airbag issues is as tight as a seatbelt in a sports car. This unexpected finding reinforces the initial observations made by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, who highlighted the intriguing relationship between political leanings and automotive safety concerns.

The strength of the correlation coefficient, r-squared value, and p-value in our analysis reaffirms the notion that political ideologies may indeed play a role in consumer behavior, extending even to safety-critical features such as airbags. It seems that when it comes to both politics and car safety, the airbags aren't the only things deploying – our findings have deployed a whole new avenue for future investigative work.

Returning to the lighthearted inspiration we drew from Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner's "Freakonomics," we can't help but marvel at the unexpected connections that arise in the world of data analysis. Just as they delved into the hidden patterns behind seemingly unrelated phenomena, our research has unveiled a correlation that is as surprising as finding a lost earring in your car's glove compartment.

The whimsical musings of Douglas Adams also offer a fitting lens through which to view our findings. Much like the serendipitous occurrences in "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," our discovery of the relationship between political voting and automotive safety recalls serves as a reminder that the universe of statistical analysis is filled with delightful twists and turns.

While we joke about the surprising connections we have uncovered, our findings hold serious implications for both academia and public safety. Acknowledging the substantial correlation we've identified, we are now in uncharted territory. The overlap of political preferences with product safety features raises important questions about the underlying mechanisms driving these associations. After all, it seems there's more than one way to "airbag" a vote.

As we reflect on the unexpected twists and turns of our research journey, one sentiment holds true: the intersection of statistical analysis and everyday phenomena never fails to astonish. Our findings encourage future explorations into the unexpected links between political ideologies and consumer product safety. Who knows what other surprising connections might await us in the world of statistical inquiry? Only time and research will tell – but in the meantime, we'll keep our seatbelts buckled and our statistical senses sharpened for the next unexpected correlation.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California and Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Buckle up and get ready for a ride through the winding roads of political voting patterns and automotive safety! In this paper, we take a joyride into the world of statistics, where we explore the unexpected relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. It's a journey that promises to be filled with twists, turns, and perhaps a few unexpected detours.
The political landscape of California, with its diverse array of ideologies and a penchant for trendsetting, provides a fascinating backdrop for our investigation. On the other side of the coin, automotive recalls for airbag-related issues form a dramatic counterpart, reminding us that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can have a surprising impact on the political scene.
It's like witnessing a collision between individual beliefs and vehicular mishaps, but fear not – we promise to navigate through this exciting terrain with academic precision and perhaps a dash of humor. After all, when it comes to uncovering eyebrow-raising correlations, a healthy dose of lightheartedness can make the journey all the more enjoyable.
So, fasten your seatbelts as we steer our way through the data-driven highways and byways, exploring the mysterious connection between political ideology and automotive safety. This research promises a thrilling ride, with statistical insights that are sure to drive the point home – pun intended!

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. Our data analysis from 1990 to 2020 yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9380996, an r-squared of 0.8800308, and a p-value of less than 0.01. It's safe to say that our findings left us with our airbags fully deployed – in other words, thoroughly shocked!
Figure 1 (to be included) provides a visual representation of the eye-popping correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot speaks for itself – there's a clear trend that's as undeniable as a seatbelt reminder dinging in your ear.
We were amazed to find such a strong connection between political voting behavior and automotive safety concerns. It's as if every vote for the Libertarian candidate had an airbag-related quirk hidden up its sleeve, just waiting to be discovered. Who would have thought that political leanings and airbag mishaps could be intertwined like a pair of headphones after being in your pocket for five seconds?
These results not only raise eyebrows but also prompt us to ponder the interplay between individual beliefs and unexpected vehicular hiccups. It's a collision of concepts that leaves us wondering, "What in the world?" And let's not forget the implications for future research – who knows what other surprising connections might be waiting for us in the wild world of data analysis?
In conclusion, our findings provide a fresh perspective on the relationship between political ideology and automotive safety, offering a dose of statistical humor along the way. After all, who said research has to be as serious as rush-hour traffic?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In summary, our findings elucidate the riveting correlation between political voting behavior and automotive safety, unveiling a connection as unexpected as finding a clown car at a traffic stop. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 had us reeling with amazement, much like when a car unexpectedly deploys its airbags in a comedy of errors.

Our results not only drive home the point that statistical analysis can be as surprising as a sudden honk from a clown horn, but they also beckon us to ponder the larger implications. It's as if each vote for the Libertarian candidate was carrying a payload of airbag-related intrigue, akin to a magician pulling endless scarves from a hat.

The sheer magnitude of this correlation left us breathless, much like when a particularly zealous car air freshener overwhelms the senses. It's a reminder that in the realm of statistical inquiry, there's always the potential for unexpected detours, much like trying to navigate a GPS that seems determined to take you on a scenic route.

As we close the door on this investigation, we must assert that no further research is needed in this area. We've thoroughly explored the intersection of political ideology and automotive safety, and the results speak for themselves – with a touch of statistical humor, of course. After all, there's no need to beat a dead horse, or in this case, a deflated airbag!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Behavior and Automotive Safety


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Automotive Safety and Political Science


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Driving the Point Home: The Air Bag Issue and the Libertarian Vote in California with an abstract of In this paper, we delve into the intriguing world of automotive safety and political preferences, examining the eyebrow-raising correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in California and automotive recalls for issues with airbags. By analyzing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, we uncovered an unexpected connection with statistically significant results. A correlation coefficient of 0.9380996 and p < 0.01 for the period spanning 1990 to 2020 left us simply breathless. Our findings not only shed light on the interplay between individual beliefs and automotive safety, but also provide a lighthearted, yet thought-provoking perspective on the relationship between political ideology and vehicular mishaps.

ChatGPT:

Libertarian vote, California, airbag recalls, automotive safety, political preferences, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US Department of Transportation, correlation coefficient, vehicular mishaps, political ideology, statistical analysis, automotive recalls, individual beliefs, presidential candidate, correlation analysis

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California

Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags

Correlation r = 0.9380996 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.8800308 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California) over the 8 years from 1990 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00057. 0.0005657664479069742000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.94 in 0.057% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,768 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.69, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
19921996200020042008201220162020
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California (Percentage of votes)0.4324490.734570.4151080.4038610.4983231.098443.374091.07363
Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags (Recalls)481514132310658




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0.432449,0.73457,0.415108,0.403861,0.498323,1.09844,3.37409,1.07363,])
array_2 = np.array([4,8,15,14,13,23,106,58,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in California"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls for issues with the Air Bags"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 4706 · Black Variable ID: 26062 · Red Variable ID: 1105
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0