he carried in 2016. It is fraudulent in the sense that it does not indicate the number of people who voted for him. Most of the red counties are rural with low populations; empty land doesn't vote. Most of the blue counties are urban with high populations. The map on the right is adjusted for population:

He won a lot of counties that had very few people in them, so it's a gross misrepresentation of his "win."

But what else is new?

I wish Cook County, IL would invade the red counties surrounding Milwaukee.

The article contends that it shows counties Clinton carried in red AND that it understates her win by 1.7 million votes.

Both of those are false statements.

You said, "It's not exactly fraudulent in the sense that it correctly shows which counties he carried in 2016."

The article directly disputes that assertion

I imagine he spends in Executive Time sucking his thumb and hugging that map like it's an American Flag...

With apologies to Charles M. Schulz, I can imagine a political cartoon modeled after:

And of course, he says it over and over again, on radio and TV.

I’m done with this guy.

Also some low-information voters. So much for 45’s “Electoral College Landslide.”