Mexico June 7th 2015 elections

[ag]

There is also a problem in Huixquilucan (a in Mexico State, right on the DF border, which includes a number of very rich districts - as well as a big chunk of Mexico's Jewish community).  PAN is ahead by some 400 votes (will be a pic-up if it holds). As the ballots were loaded to be taken to Toluca for recount, there were clashed between panistas and priistas.

Also a very close result in Tlalnepantla (another suburban municipality) - but there PRI is ahead. PAN seems to be confidently winning Atizapan and Naucalpan.

[ag]

Looks like

http://www.revistapuntodevista.com.mx/mexico/con-el-2-992-el-pt-a-punto-de-perder-su-registro/70992/

also came up with 2.992% for PT which mates my calcs.  If so then I estimate of about 3200 votes that PT will need to dig up is also correct.

Yep, it is is 2.991743, which is 3,131 votes short.

[ag]

So, ignoring the 8% rule, the allocation of PR seats on the current numbers (using the largest remainder, as the law specifies) would be

a) if PT does not make it
PRI 65
PAN 47
PRD 24
Morena 19
PVEM 16
MC 14
Panal 8
PES 7

b) if PT makes it
PRI 63
PAN 46
PRD 24
Morena 18
PVEM 15
MC 13
Panal 8
PES 7
PT 6

Of course, PRI should hit the bound, so they will have fewer PR seats in total, and others more. If PT makes it, PRI is capped at 197 seats, and if it does not, PRI goes up to 202 (in both cases it is a mere whisker from 198 and 203, but still below). However, we do not really know how many seats they will loose because of the cap (and, hence, how many seats are there to redistribute):  to do that, one needs to be certain which of the PRI/PVEM guys are registered as PRI, and which as PVEM.

[jaichind]

So, ignoring the 8% rule, the allocation of PR seats on the current numbers (using the largest remainder, as the law specifies) would be

a) if PT does not make it
PRI 65
PAN 47
PRD 24
Morena 19
PVEM 16
MC 14
Panal 8
PES 7

b) if PT makes it
PRI 63
PAN 46
PRD 24
Morena 18
PVEM 15
MC 13
Panal 8
PES 7
PT 6

Of course, PRI should hit the bound, so they will have fewer PR seats in total, and others more. If PT makes it, PRI is capped at 197 seats, and if it does not, PRI goes up to 202 (in both cases it is a mere whisker from 198 and 203, but still below). However, we do not really know how many seats they will loose because of the cap (and, hence, how many seats are there to redistribute):  to do that, one needs to be certain which of the PRI/PVEM guys are registered as PRI, and which as PVEM.

Yep.  I came up with similar numbers/calculations.  Glad we are using the same methodology.  Yes, in both cases PRI was very very close to getting 203 (PT out) or 198 (PT in) seats but in both cases PRI just misses.  One area I was not 100% sure about is in the calculation for the 8% rule, should the vote for independents (which is a first this year) be counted toward the denominator.  I assume it did NOT since a vote for an independent should be for an individual and not a party ergo should not be relevant in calculation for PR seats allocation.  Different sources does still have some different results in how many seats each party won FPTP.  Some sites have PAN winning 54 FPTP seats and some has it 55.  We will have to find out which one is correct.

Based on own back-of-the-envelope calculations, the seats distribution should be based on current vote count
              
              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        54     55        109
PRI        160    42        202
PRD         26     28          54
PVEM       28     18          46
PT             6       0            6    -> disbanded
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1     11          12
MORENA  14     22         36
PES           0       9           9
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 248
PAN worst seat result since 1991 even if you count the 1 independent as PAN


On the flip side, if somehow PT makes it it will be

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        54     54        108
PRI        160    37        197
PRD         26     28          54
PVEM       28     18          46
PT             6       7          13  
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1     10          11
MORENA  14     22         36
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 243.  Still a gain from 2012.

[jaichind]

With PT being very close to cross 3%, will PT demand a nationwide recount ?  Most likely yes.  Does the election laws allow for this ?  If so would not the allocation of seats drag out weeks if not months?

[jaichind]

FPTP breakdown seems to be

PAN           55
PRI            25
PRD             5
MC            10
PANAL        1
Morena      14
PRI-PVEM 160
PRD-PT       29
Ind              1

Based on what I could find online the breakdown seems to be

PAN            55
PRI           157
PRD            28
PVEM          28
PT                6
MC             10
PANAL         1
Morena       14
Ind              1

But I am not sure about this.  I am not sure how INE figures out how to distribute seats for joint candidates.  Is it by vote share ? Is it written into the alliance agreement between the alliance parties ?

[jaichind]

Based on own back-of-the-envelope calculations, the seats distribution should be based on more up-to-date information
              
              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     54        109
PRI        157    45        202
PRD         28     28          56
PVEM       28     18          46
PT             6       0            6    -> disbanded
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1     10          11
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 248
 
On the flip side, if somehow PT makes it it will be

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     53        108
PRI        157    40        197
PRD         26     28          56
PVEM       28     18          46
PT             6       7          13  
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1       9          10
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 243.  Still a gain from 2012.

At this stage the key variable for driving the PRI-PVEM seat share is: How many seats did PVEM win in FPTP.  It is much larger this year most likely because of the PVEM sweep of CHIAPAS.

[ag]

A few things I do know:)

1. For the purposes of PR distribution, Independent votes are subtracted from the total - see article 16 of the electoral law.

2. Seems like PAN - 55. That is what is on the INE official count. But some districts are very tight and will be recounted (see point 4).

3. The PR vote for joint candidates is unambiguous, and has already been distributed in our calculations. I believe, the FPTP identity of the candidate is provided in the nomination papers. But I might be wrong.

4. The law goes for automatic recount in a FPTP district if the margin is below 1% of the vote. I am not sure what, if any, are the provisions for the nationwide recount in a case like this.

5. But, and this is even more likely to change the results, there is a whole roster of reasons to try to recount and/or annul precincts selectively. TRIFE will have a few weeks to rule on that. Things rarely get much affected in the process - but you need very little here. PT lawyers have their work cut out for them.

[ag]

In Colima the official count is giving PRI a victory margin of 487 votes out of 299,869 votes cast. PAN is asking for a full recount.

[jaichind]

Here is a projection online I found



This one seems obsolete since it only has 299 FPTP seats and the numbers for FPTP for each party seems off.  Also it has PRI at 203 which was true toward the end of the count but the relative vote share of PRI went down a bit at the very end to make it 202.  But there is two pieces of data that I want to extract.  This projection has PT at 6 FPTP (which is what I have as well) and PVEM FPTP at 29 and I have 28.  I adjust my projection with this "new" information.

[jaichind]

Taking advantage of info I got on-line that PVEM FPTP is really 29.  The plugging that in we get
             
              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     54        109
PRI        156    46        202
PRD         28     28          56
PVEM       29     18          47
PT             6       0            6    -> disbanded
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1       9          10
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 249
 
On the flip side, if somehow PT makes it it will be

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     53        108
PRI        156    41        197
PRD         26     28          56
PVEM       29     18          47
PT             6       7          13   
MC          10      15         25
PANAL       1       9          10
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 244.  Still a gain from 2012.

[jaichind]

This site



Mostly matches my numbers but their calculations has PRI at 203 with the 8% rule.  It really comes down to is the 8% rule give you a ceiling or a target.  A ceiling means you cannot go above it, in which case PRI should be at 202 and a target means you round which means you round to it which gives PRI 203.   I agree that if PRI is at 203 then it is PAN that loses an extra seat to be at 108.

[jaichind]

Just to show you how critical the PVEM FPTP seat share to the total PRI-PVEM total seat share.  Lets suppose that 25 of PRI FPTP winners were registered as PVEM.  This mean PRI FPTP is 131 and PVEM FPTP is 54 as opposed to 156 and 29.  This still puts PVEM seat share still well below what the 8% rule but gives PRI-PVEM a significant majority

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     45        100
PRI        131    71        202
PRD         28     23          51
PVEM       54     15          69
PT             6       0            6    -> disbanded
MC          10      13         23
PANAL       1       8           9
MORENA  14     18         32
PES           0       7           7
Ind           1                    1

Putting PRI-PVEM at 271.

[jaichind]

Now, lets reverse this analysis.  In 2012 PVEM won 14 FPTP seats out of a total of 177 PRI and PVEM FPTP wins.  This year there are a total, it seems, of 185 PRI and PVEM FPTP wins.  Lets say PVEM won roughly the same ratio of total PRI and PVEM FPTP wins which would put it at 15 PVEM wins.  That would put PRI FPTP wins at 170.  That would give us.

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     59        109
PRI        170    32        202
PRD         28     30         58
PVEM       15     19        34
PT             6       0           6    -> disbanded
MC          10      17        27
PANAL       1      11        12
MORENA  14     23        37
PES           0       9          9
Ind           1                   1

That would put PRI-PVEM at 236 a loss of 5 seats from 2012. 

[jaichind]

Since many of the FPTP races were multi-polar, I decided to see which seat was won with the lowest share of the vote.  I conclude that this honor belonged to MORELOS 5th district where PRI and PVEM did not run in an alliance and that PANAL won with 16.8% with PRD/PT at 16.45% and PRI at 14.57% close behind.  Even normalizing this out for NULLs has PANAL winning the seat with 17.9%.  This was the only FPTP seat PANAL won this election and I am pretty sure ever. 

[jaichind]

It seems this took place several days ago but only read about it now, but it seems PRD Senator Manuel Camacho is dead.  Manuel Camacho and Marcelo Ebrard back in 1995 left PRI to form PCD.  It seems that Camacho was angry that he was passed over for the leadership of PRI in 1994, twice , since Colosio and then Zedillo was picked ahead of him.  After the 2000 elections where PCD bombed both made their way to PRD.  Ebrard is now with MC and might even run for President in 2018 and taking down AMLO along the way, while Camacho has passed away.  Camacho as President in 1994 is another one of those what ifs.  Zedillo took various actions, although the 1995 crisis might have forced some of them on him, that undermined the PRI system and paved the way for PRI defeat in 2000.  Perhaps with Camacho at the helm PRI domination could have lasted longer.

[jaichind]

It seems like the overall narrative of the lower house elections is the split of Left between PRD-PT, Morena, and MC which benefits non-Left parties (like DF, TLAXCALA, and OAXACA), the small decay of the PRI-PVEM as well as the PAN vote, better PRI-PVEM alliance formation which should help PRI (like SONORA, SINALOA, and COAHUILA), and outside DF, different degrees of anti-PRI tactical voting mostly helping PAN (like in DF, GUANAJUATO, and PUEBLA.)  All in all PAN should gain a bit due to tactical voting and the split of the Left while PRI-PVEM should gain from the split of the Left.  There were several states where what took place went outside of this narrative.

1) CHIAPAS.  This state which used to be a battleground between PRI and the Left with a significant PAN presence has elected a PVEM governor and I do not what took place but the PVEM vote has become massive.  PRI is allied with PVEM and retained some level of support while all other parties has shrunk to single digits.  There is either massive rigging, very effective clientelist policies by PVEM, or both.  PRI-PVEM taking all seats is not a surprised and expected.  The massive swing toward PVEM is the surprise.

2) BAJA CALIFORNIA.  This is a state where PAN has been strong and PAN swept the state. For some reason PRI-PVEM did very well here in 2012.  2015 is a reversion to the mean.  

3) COAHUILA and TAMAULIPAS.  Both were strong PRI states and PRI swept both states.  This is the inverse of BAJA CALIFORNIA where in 2012 for some reason PAN did very well in both states.  PRI-PVEM had an alliance in 2015 in COAHUILA as opposed to 2012 so there should have been gains but the sweep that PRI-PVEM achieved was unexpected relative to 2012 results.  2015 is a reversion to the mean.

4) MICHOACAN.  A traditional PRI vs PRD battleground with significant PAN presence as well.  With the Left split 3 ways it should been easy for PRI to sweep the state even if there is a small falloff in PRI-PVEM support especially now PRI-PVEM have an alliance unlike 2012.  Instead anger at the PRI state government lead to very high turnout and despite losing votes to Morena and MC, PRD-PT managed to split honors with PRI-PVEM aided by limited losses to Morena and MC as well as PAN tactical voting.

5) GUERRERO.  Has been dominated by PRD for a decade or so.  While PRI-PVEM was expected to make some gains, with PRD-PT keeping most of the PRD machinery plus expected PAN anti-PRI tactical voting since PAN is so weak here, it was expected that the PRD-PT loses might be contained.  In the opposite of MICHOACAN, anger at the PRD state government lead to very high turnout which led to a surge of PRI-PVEM support and swept the polls even with the expected PAN falloff AND limited losses to Morena.

6) JALISCO.  Historically a PRI vs PAN battleground with PAN actually having the upper hand.  In 2012 this started to fall apart where a PAN rebel running on the MC ticket became the main rival to PRI in the governor election which led the PAN to lose the governor election for the first time 1988.  In 2012 PRI-PVEM swept the polls defeating the weakened PAN.  PRI-PVEM was expected to repeat this feat even if its vote base eroded a bit.  Now things are getting worse for PAN.  In a development which is not good news for PRI-PVEM either, MC surged top become the main opponent to PRI-PVEM and managed to split honors with PRI-PVEM with PAN pushed solidly into third place.  PAN must somehow reverse this or go into terminal decline in this state.

7)  VERACRUZ.  Historically a PRI vs PAN battleground with PRI having the upper hand.  With the split of the Left if anything PAN should gain a bit due to tactical voting.  Instead what took place was the split of the Left actually pulled votes away from PRI-PVEM a bit (expected) but PAN lost a large chunk of votes to the Left parties.  The result is that PRI-PVEM was flat in terms of number of seats and votes but the shift away from PAN toward the Left parties is significant.  

8 ) MORELOS.  Used to be a PRI vs PAN battleground but more recently has become a PRI vs PRD battleground with PRD getting the upper hand.  PRI and PVEM alliance failed to be created here, PAN continued its decline and the Left Parties split.  The state has become a free-for-all where PANAL and MC vote share surged since the threshold of winning a seat has gone down pushing more votes to small parties.  PAN's vote share went down a lot but won a seat this time versus zero in 2012.  Just like PANAL winning a seat this has to do with the very low threshold for victory since elections here have become real 5- or 6- way battles.

9) QUERETARO.  Traditionally a PRI vs PAN battleground with PAN having the upper hand.  The PRI-PVEM alliance was suppose to even the odds like it did in 2012.  The governor race here which PAN won actually also polarized the race for the lower house as well as pushed up the turnout.   The Left split did not lead to diffusion of votes toward the Left but instead PRI-PVEM kept their vote share and PAN actually gained vote share leading to PAN gaining a seat from PRI from 2012 results.

10) NUEVO LEON. Another PRI vs PAN battleground where PAN and PRI-PVEM shared honors in 2012.   This time, the seat share results are very similar but due to impact from El Bronco in the governors race, the vote share of both rivals went down significantly but not enough for another party to win any seats.  It seems that El Bronco voters spread their votes across non-PAN and non-PRI-PVEM parties with an unusual number of them going to MC and PES.

[jaichind]

I found this image of where the FPTP victories are located by party.  PAN is strong in the NE and Northern cities with some pockets of support in Central Mexico.  Left parties strong in the South and of course especially DF.

[jaichind]

Some other guy who did his projection.  Same as my except he assumed that PT is gone so the 6 PT FPTP goes to PRD.  He also has a section that puts the pro-Nieto parties in one bloc (PRI PVEM PANAL), Left and PAN.  The "Rest" which is the independent (who seems to be a PAN rebel) and PES both are center-right.  So I would lump them in with PAN under Right. 

[jaichind]

INE came out with PRI at 203 (156 FPTP and 47 PR.) This tells me the way they applied the 8% rule is a target (which implies rounding) and not a cap (which implies a hard cap).  My calculation has PRI capped at 202.995 seats using the 8% rule.  That INE came out with 203 means that they target PRI to have 202.995 seats rounded to 203.  Taking this methodology into account we get

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     53        108
PRI        156    47        203
PRD         28     28          56
PVEM       29     18          47
PT             6       0            6    -> disbanded
MC          10      16         26
PANAL       1       9          10
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at exactly 250
 
On the flip side, if somehow PT makes it it will be

              FPTP   PR     Total
PAN        55     53        108
PRI        156    42        198
PRD         28     27         55
PVEM       29     17         46
PT             6       7          13  
MC          10      15         25
PANAL       1     10          11
MORENA  14     21         35
PES           0       8           8
Ind           1                    1

PRI-PVEM at 244.  Still a gain from 2012.  The extra seat that PRI gets from change my understanding methodology is a gain from PVEM so PRI-PVEM stays the same.

[jaichind]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/15/us-mexico-calderon-wife-idUSKBN0OV00H20150615

The wife of former Mexican President Felipe Calderon, Margarita Zavala, said on Sunday she would seek to emulate her husband by running for the presidency in 2018, and left open the prospect of staging an independent bid.

Mexico's Hillary ?

[jaichind]

A chart on result from media outlets with comparison to what the outgoing congress elected in 2012 looked like.

[jaichind]

PRI-PVEM actually gained seats from 2012 in a mid-term.  This is the first time this took place since 1991 where there was a fairly unique circumstances with PRI hitting a low in 1988 due to various factors but especially its poor handling of the Mexican City Earthquake of 1985.  In the USA this is pretty rare as well.  Nieto now joins FDR 1934, Clinton 1998 and Bush 2002 as achievers of this rare feat.

[jaichind]

Another thing I observed about the nature of PRI-PVEM alliance logic.  The number of seats that PRI-PVEM have alliances is is directly related to the anxiety that PRI has about possible loss.  The better position PRI thinks it is in, the less likely it is to form alliances with PVEM as giving out too many seats to PVEM will lead to internal problems.  A chart of PRI-PVEM vote share (after stripping out nulls) by election year plus number of seats PRI-PVEM have alliances is telling.

Year         PRI-PVEM votes     Number of PRI-PVEM          PRI-PVEM FPTP wins
                    share                 alliances (out of 300)
2003          42.2%                          100                                     164                              
2006          29.0%                          300                                       65
2009          46.2%                            63                                     188
2012          40.0%                          199                                     177
2015          38.0%                          250                                     185

It was clear 2003 and 2009 were going to be good years for PRI so the number of PRI-PVEM alliances were small.  The PRI correctly calibrated that 2009 was going to be even better than 2003.  2006 it was clear that the PRI ship was sinking so PRI rushed to get alliances in all 300 seats.  It seems that even in 2012 when there were all these polls showing a massive Nieto lead, PRI internally knew the score and locked in a bunch of alliances with PVEM.  It was wise in retrospect as 2012 turned out a lot worse for the PRI than expected.  In 2015 the PRI knew it was in even worse shape than in 2012 so it increased the number of alliances with PVEM which paid off.

Just for comparison we can compare these results to PRI results  at 1997 and 2000 when PRI ran by itself.
               PRI votes             PRI FPTP wins
                                            (out of 300)
1997         39.12%                     165
2000         37.83%                     132

One can see in the 1997-2000 period PRI's vote share was actually at part with PRI-PVEM vote share in 2015 but had a lot less FPTP seats due to anti-PRI tactical voting, which was very heavy in 2000.

[jaichind]

The PRI-PVEM FPTP victory was especially efficient this year, mostly because of the scattered nature of the races.  I calculated effective vote (sums the largest votes for all alliance parties in a seat if there is no alliance in said seat and sum them up) of every alliance that won significant number of seats since 1997, then calculate seats captured per vote share.  What PRI-PVEM did in 2015 was the most efficient of all of them.  Obviously, given the nature of FPTP the larger the vote share the greater the seat bonus and ergo seat to vote share efficiency.  But this chart also tells us that PRD as a whole is very efficient in terms of seats per vote share mostly because its support are concentrated in certain states.  And PAN is the most inefficient because its support is more evenly distributed.  Only when PAN came in first and got a bunch of tactical votes in 2006 did PAN efficiency rise.

year           alliance   Share   seats   Ratio
2015   PRI-PVEM    36.9%   185   5.01
2009   PRI-PVEM    39.3%   188   4.78
2012   PRI-PVEM   38.6%   177   4.59
2003   PRI-PVEM    38.1%   164   4.30
1997   PRI             39.1%   165   4.22
2006   PAN            34.4%   137   3.98
2000   PAN-PVEM   39.2%   143   3.65
2000   PRI             37.8%   132   3.49
2006   PRD-PT-MC  29.8%   98   3.29
2003   PRD             18.2%   56   3.08
2009   PRD             12.9%   39   3.02
1997   PRD-PT-MC 25.7%   70   2.72
2015   PRD-PT       12.8%   34   2.66
2003   PAN            31.8%   80   2.52
2015   PAN            22.1%   55   2.49
2012   PRD-PT-MC 28.4%   70   2.46
1997   PAN            26.6%   64   2.41
2009   PAN            29.7%   70   2.36
2006   PRI-PVEM    29.0%   65   2.24
2012   PAN            27.3%   51   1.87
2015   MORENA      8.8%   14   1.59
2000   PRD-PT       19.1%   25   1.31
              -MC-PSN

It is also interesting that from an efficiency point of view 2015 PAN did pretty well as well compared to other PAN performances in other years.  The split of 2015 PRD-PT and MORENA clearly hurt their efficiency relative to their performances in 2009 and 2003 but it does not seem to be as bad as it could have been.  One last note I can make is that the effective vote share of PRI-PVEM in 2015 is even lower than PRI's losing effort in 2000 but won a lot more seats.  Of course that is the effect of the anti-PRI vote concentrating itself on PAN-PVEM in 2000.