Report an error
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Florida correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Number of Registered Vehicles in the US | r=0.99 | 8yrs | No |
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=0.98 | 11yrs | No |
Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs | r=0.97 | 9yrs | No |
Grocery store spend in Florida | r=0.96 | 6yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Noah | r=0.96 | 12yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Florida | r=0.94 | 12yrs | No |
Average temperature in Miami | r=0.9 | 12yrs | No |
Rain in Miami | r=0.72 | 12yrs | No |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Florida also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)