Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Hillary Clinton’s campaign just released the worst Venn diagram of all time

Hillary Clinton side-eye.
Hillary Clinton side-eye.
Win McNamee/Getty Images

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign just committed what can only be described as a data catastrophe.

The campaign, in promoting its gun policy agenda, sent out this tweet:

The general point is true: The great majority of Americans do support universal background checks, including the great majority of gun owners.

But this is simply not how Venn diagrams work. The circles are completely wrong. They should, for one, overlap entirely, since the gun owners referenced in this are all Americans. And the circle for Americans should be much, much bigger than the circle for gun owners, since gun owners make up just one segment of the US population. (That is, unless, the Clinton campaign is literally saying that a lot of gun owners are un-American, which is a very, very hot take for a risk-averse campaign.)

With that said, here’s a rough approximation of what this diagram should look like if the campaign insists on using circles:

A reader made another version, which is slightly more complicated but makes the same point better (green is gun owners, purple is Americans who support universal background checks, and red is Americans who don’t support universal background checks):

As you can see, these aren’t even Venn diagrams anymore; they’re Euler diagrams. That’s because a Venn diagram was the wrong choice for this data point in the first place. Maybe what Clinton wanted was a pie chart, bar chart, or Euler diagram, or maybe she didn’t even need a chart — an infographic with the numbers splashed in big letters could have worked.

Instead, we got an atrocity in data visualization.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn’t the worst thing Clinton has done. (After all, she voted for the war in Iraq.) But this is pretty bad.


Watch: Why the y-axis doesn’t always need to start at zero

More in Politics

The Logoff
Trump’s ceasefire announcement, briefly explainedTrump’s ceasefire announcement, briefly explained
The Logoff

An Israel-Lebanon ceasefire is set to take effect Thursday evening.

By Cameron Peters
Podcasts
What to know about the Israel-Lebanon conflictWhat to know about the Israel-Lebanon conflict
Podcast
Podcasts

A journalist explains what it’s like in Lebanon right now.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Today, Explained newsletter
Trump’s bungled Iran negotiations didn’t have to go this wayTrump’s bungled Iran negotiations didn’t have to go this way
Today, Explained newsletter

Wendy Sherman helped Obama reach a deal with Iran. She sees several areas where Trump is going wrong.

By Caitlin Dewey
The Logoff
Trump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictionsTrump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictions
The Logoff

How the Trump administration is still trying to rewrite January 6 history.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Donald Trump messed with the wrong popeDonald Trump messed with the wrong pope
Politics

Trump fought with Pope Francis before. He’s finding Pope Leo XIV to be a tougher foil.

By Christian Paz
Podcasts
A cautionary tale about tax cutsA cautionary tale about tax cuts
Podcast
Podcasts

California cut property taxes in the 1970s. It didn’t go so well.

By Miles Bryan and Noel King