Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 01, 2015, 08:12:51 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Summary - Sibboleth

Offline Offline
Username: Realpolitik
Name: Sibboleth
"Oh, there thou bist" "Ay. Here I be"
Posts: 58097 (13.925 per day)
Position: YaBB God

Gender: Male Male
Age: N/A
Location: Somewhere
Country: Saint Helena Country
Local Time: April 01, 2015, 01:12:51 pm
Date Registered: October 29, 2003, 05:13:42 am
Last Active: March 31, 2015, 07:08:18 pm
Language: English

Contact Me :)
Email: Email hidden
Website: Website Ippikin - slightly deranged writings

Report to admin

Show the last posts of this person.
Show general statistics for this member.

My Pictures
Currently, there are no pictures.

About Me
I'm in too deep to get out now. Anyone who knows how far up the rot goes must be eliminated.

My Interests
My interests are none of your business

My Media

Atlas Features
Atlas Account LinkedYesPM Graph
Atlasia Wiki Page Realpolitik
Atlas WeblogAl's Blog
Political PartyOther
Political Matrix Economic: -7.74
Political Matrix Social: 0.52
Weblog: Al's Blog
Latest Post: Multi-seat Madnesson 2009-03-10 19:52:54
Just to demonstrate a problem that can occur with fptp elections in multi-seat districts, the result of the 2008 municipal election in the Tredegar Central & West ward (a four seater) of Blaenau Gwent CBC:
  1. S.Thomas, Lab, 808
  2. H.L.Trollope, Lab, 740
  3. N.Hobbs, Lab, 712
  4. D.I.Morris, Lab, 691
  5. G.Bowen-Knight, Plaid, 587
  6. G.Walters, PV, 544
  7. W.Kenvin,LDem, 539
  8. D.Wilcox, PV, 516
It is obvious that the voters of Tredegar preferred all four Labour candidates to all four non-Labour candidates. And, on one level, that's all that matters. But election junkies are usually more interested in partisan support than 'owt else, election junkies like statistics and election junkies like percentages. So, what were the party totals for Tredegar Central & West? If we just add up everything we get:
  1. Labour, 57.4%
  2. PV, 20.6%
  3. Plaid, 11.5%
  4. LDem, 10.5%
The problems here are obvious. Only one party ran a full slate; two of the parties ran just one candidate. And each voter has four votes; as a result more votes were cast in this election than registered voters in the ward (and this with the usual awful turnout of a local election). One common solution to this problem is just to take an average of the votes for each party, thus:
  1. Labour, 30.8%
  2. Plaid, 24.5%
  3. LDem, 22.5%
  4. PV, 22.1%
While this method might make sense if all parties ran full slates, when one party runs four candidates and no other runs more than two, the percentages start to have little in common with the actual election result. Another common method is just to use the top candidate of each party; this method has the same problem with results like this as just doing an average and throws in a different problem (that of personal votes). A further, desperate, alternative would be to average the results of the Labour and non-Labour candidates, thus:
  1. Labour, 57.5%
  2. Non-Labour,  42.5%
The problems here are obvious as well. When given the choice, some voters always split their tickets and quite a few will only vote for a single candidate (especially if their chosen party has just one candidate). And so on. In other words, there appears to be no easy solution to this problem, and where does that leave map-makers? A possible answer would be to abandon (more or less) winning-party maps and just map party support instead... comparing the vote of each party to the number of voters in each ward and not to the votes of other parties in the same ward. More on that at a decent hour.
Atlas Predictions History
Prediction Score States Percent Total Accuracy Ver #D Rank#Pred
P 2008 President 52/56 38/56 90/112 80.4% pie 1 26 219T1,505
P 2006 U.S. Senate 32/33 18/33 50/66 75.8% pie 3 9 156T465
P 2006 Governor 34/36 22/36 56/72 77.8% pie 3 1 58T312
P 2004 President 54/56 38/56 92/112 82.1% pie 10 1 126T1,994
Aggregate Predictions 172/181 116/181 288/362 79.6% pie
Atlas Endorsements History
Endorsements #End #Dem #Rep #Ind #Oth #Non Partisan %#End
E 2008 Senate 16 14 1 0 1 17 88% pie219
E 2006 Governor 30 26 1 0 3 6 87% pie98
E 2006 Senate 30 24 2 1 3 3 80% pie118
Atlas Presidential Mock Election Endorsement History
Vote not publicWrite-in
Latest Gallery Images

Views: 5
Filesize: 53.64kb
Date: March 23, 2015, 06:52:07 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 4
Filesize: 17.93kb
Date: February 20, 2015, 12:13:14 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 7
Filesize: 12.48kb
Date: February 12, 2015, 12:33:36 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 3
Filesize: 24.61kb
Date: February 11, 2015, 11:57:56 am
Comments (0)

Views: 1
Filesize: 966.51kb
Date: February 02, 2015, 01:38:38 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 12
Filesize: 27.18kb
Date: February 01, 2015, 08:55:37 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 15
Filesize: 92.4kb
Date: January 31, 2015, 01:33:07 pm
Comments (0)

Views: 8
Filesize: 40.42kb
Date: January 24, 2015, 02:53:56 pm
Comments (0)

"Whatsoever Aristotle may have thought of this, I do not care"

William of Occam
My Buddies

Offline Offline

Famous Mortimer
Online Online

Tender Branson
Offline Offline

Add comment


Offline Offline
August 29, 2011, 08:00:05 pm
Jolly good.
London Man

Offline Offline
April 17, 2010, 02:34:16 pm
Alun, you are truly the most intelligent poster on this forum.

Right now, you're on fire. Not literally, of course.
Pages: [1]

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines