people voting for Trump (%):Figure 2.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to malignant neoplasms (i.e. cancer, in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.21p_F = 0.0004824 ***p_t[????0] = 0.856997p_t[????1] = 0.000482 ***Interestingly, relating data on cancer-caused mortality to Trump votes yields a relatively weak (see R²_adj) but nonetheless seemingly significant (see p_F) relationship..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 3.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to heart disease (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.2553p_F = 0.0001084 ***p_t[????0] = 0.020797 *p_t[????1] = 0.000108 ***This model shows signs of correlation..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 4.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to motor-vehicle accidents (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.4948p_F = 7.376 * 10^(-9) ***p_t[????0] = 2.79 * 10^(-12) ***p_t[????1] = 7.38 * 10^(-9) ***Well this is an unexpected outcome..In fact, a similarly strong relationship (but in opposite direction) can be observed when substituting Trump votes with Clinton votes (see below).Figure 5.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to motor-vehicle accidents (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Clinton in each state.R²_adj = 0.3971p_F = 5.648 * 10^(-7) ***p_t[????0] < 2 * 10^(-16) ***p_t[????1] = 5.65 * 10^(-7) ***Examining the model with Trump voters a bit further, Breusch-Pagan (p = 0.1193) and Score test (p = 0.1449) suggest absence of heteroskedasticity in data..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 6.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to suicide (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.24p_F = 0.0001811 ***p_t[????0] = 2.26 * 10^(-8) ***p_t[????1] = 0.000181 ***This model also shows signs of significant correlation, albeit weak between states that favored Trump and mortality rates due to suicide..Conversely, states that favored Clinton show lesser rates of such mortality — with an even better fit.Figure 7.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to suicide (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Clinton in each state.R²_adj = 0.4636p_F = 3.196 * 10^(-8) ***p_t[????0] < 2 * 10^(-16) ***p_t[????1] = 3.2 * 10^(-8) ***Running diagnostics on Trump votes model yields the following:Breusch-Pagan p = 0.1763463 | No heteroskedasticity!Score test p = 0.08569949 | No heteroskedasticity!Shapiro-Wilk p = 0.2942 | Normal distribution!Kolmogorov-Smirnov p = 0.8451 | Normal distribution!Anderson-Darling p = 0.3797 | Normal distribution!Durbin-Watson p = 0.704 | Uncorrelated errors!Mortality rate due to homicide (per 100,000) vs..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 8.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to homicide (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.1366p_F = 0.007208 **p_t[????0] = 2.61 * 10^(-16) ***p_t[????1] = 0.00721 **This model shows a weak correlation between the homicide morality rates and Trump support..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 9.: A scatterplot relating age adjusted mortality rate due to drug poisoning (in incidents per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.0179p_F = 0.7115p_t[????0] < 2 * 10^(-16) ***p_t[????1] = 0.711There is neither significant nor noticeable correlation between states that supported Trump in 2016 elections and mortality rate due to drug poisoning.Conclusion on Mortality RatesIt appears that the states supporting Trump in 2016 tend to suffer from high mortality rates due to various causes, as compared to states supporting Clinton..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 10.: A scatterplot relating rate of infant deaths (per 1,000 live births) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.256p_F = 0.0001239 ***p_t[????0] = 0.000297 ***p_t[????1] = 0.000124 ***When it comes to Trump support and infant death rate, it appears that the states favoring Trump also have slightly higher infant death rates..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 13.: A scatterplot relating rate of hispanic infant deaths (per 1,000 live births) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.09937p_F = 0.03432 *p_t[????0] = 1.74 * 10^(-5) ***p_t[????1] = 0.0343 *There is a negligent relationship between the states favoring Trump in 2016 election and hispanic infant death rate.Conclusion on Infant Death RatesIn accordance with the mortality data, infant death rates also trend towards higher Trump support..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 14.: A scatterplot relating rates of Chlamydia (per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.01594p_F = 0.6329p_t[????0] = 1.7 * 10^(-8) ***p_t[????1] = 0.633There appears to be no obvious or significant relationship between Trump support and rates of Chlamydia.Rates of Gonorrhea (per 100,000) vs..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 15.: A scatterplot relating rates of Gonorrhea (per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.02107p_F = 0.1582p_t[????0] = 1.13 * 10^(-15) ***p_t[????1] = 0.158There also appears to be no obvious or significant relationship between Trump support and rates of Gonorrhea.Rates of Syphilis (per 100,000) vs..people voting for Trump (%)Figure 22.: A scatterplot relating rate of violent crime(per 100,000) to percentage of people voting for Trump in each state.R²_adj = 0.009291p_F = 0.4624p_t[????0] = 5.1 * 10^(-13) ***p_t[????1] = 0.462No apparent association between these two variables.Rate of murder and non-negligent manslaughter (per 100,000) vs.. More details