{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031007751937984496, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01107419712070875, 'mean_word_length': 4.986754966887418, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A City Shape Explanation of Why Donald Trump Won

The paper introduces urban centrists (who embrace carbon taxes) and urban decentrists (who reject them). Its theoretical analysis solves linear programs that help estimate (unobservable) centrists and decentrists. Its empirical analysis computes these estimates for U.S. metro areas and applies them to the 2016 U.S. presidential election. This analysis suggests that Donald Trump's shift away from the traditional bipartisan consensus on global warming - wittingly or not - has gained him nearly 280,000 votes he else would not have enjoyed (in cities where decentrists were strong). U.S. city shapes have contributed to why Donald Trump won. If decentrists continue to gain in importance (not unlikely, given ongoing decentralization and suburbanization), we should expect the rift over global warming to play an even greater role in future elections.