tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post2983177898875750954..comments2024-03-17T21:29:12.457+11:00Comments on Dr Kevin Bonham: 2013 Federal Election Late Counting - House Of RepsKevin Bonhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-66228421539599175452013-10-11T01:32:15.322+11:002013-10-11T01:32:15.322+11:00That makes sense. The figures don't break dow...That makes sense. The figures don't break down votes that are challenged both for formality and authenticity but I'd assume there would be some.<br /><br />Early on in the count I did notice there were a couple of booths where the total challenge rate was below the LNP 2PP, meaning that some LNP-preferencing ballots were going unchallenged (whether by accident or design) but I haven't had time to check how many more such were added since. Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-43772513036209495852013-10-11T01:09:12.556+11:002013-10-11T01:09:12.556+11:00Those booths with surprisingly low authenticity ch...Those booths with surprisingly low authenticity challenge rates have surprisingly high formality challenge rates. My assumption is that the PUP scrutineers are challenging on formality where it's sensible to do so, and challenging on authenticity otherwise.<br /><br />This is perhaps more modelling work than these challenges are worth, but here goes. Assume that the formality challenges are in proportion to the TCP vote in each booth. So, e.g., Bli Bli has the LNP on 42.3%, so guess that the PUP scrutineers are responsible for 42.3% * 302 of the formality challenges in Bli Bli.<br /><br />Add that estimate of the PUP formality challenges to the number of authenticity challenges, convert to percentage of ballot papers, plot "estimated total PUP challenges" against LNP TCP %. You get an R^2 of just over 80%, a noticeably better fit than when you just plot the authenticity challenge percentages.David Barryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08378763233797445502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-34826519332378446672013-09-19T17:06:08.981+10:002013-09-19T17:06:08.981+10:00If the remainder behave about as their vote types ...If the remainder behave about as their vote types have so far (accounting only for random variation) then Palmer's chances are very high indeed. That's even though O'Brien needs 55.4% of the remaining 911 and is projected to get 52.9%, which seems pretty close. <br /><br />I am a bit more cautious about it than the implied probability because there are still lots of absents in the mix and we don't know where they're from, though I suspect they'd be a dribble from various places and hence break representatively. Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-51304670402210304412013-09-19T16:47:31.448+10:002013-09-19T16:47:31.448+10:00On those counts, assuming no significant counting ...On those counts, assuming no significant counting errors, Palmer has to be close to home and hosed, no?mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-32907544345083681462013-09-14T13:31:24.281+10:002013-09-14T13:31:24.281+10:00That's a good question to ask as I suspect a l...That's a good question to ask as I suspect a lot of people are wondering about this. The key with Lingiari (and the reason I've not paid it attention despite the small number of votes) is that there are very few votes remaining because a lot of voters haven't voted. Following the Declaration Vote Scrutiny for the electorate (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionDecScrutinyProgress-17496-306.htm) it seems that there are at most 54 absent, 414 provisional, 802 early and 413 postals to go. That's even assuming most of the remaining postals ever arrive which some will not. <br /><br />The CLP would need a 71:29 split of all remaining votes assuming all were formal (which they won't be), all the postals arrived (which they won't) and all the remaining provisionals are accepted (which I assume also won't happen). They've been getting close to that split on postals but nothing near on other vote types (absents have been favouring Labor). So despite the closeness of the margin at present, there's just not enough to throw.<br /><br />Lingiari is historically a low turnout electorate. In 2010 its final turnout was 75.87%.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-85195938698431179422013-09-14T08:42:42.879+10:002013-09-14T08:42:42.879+10:00Hi Kevin,
Is there any chance of Lingiari changi...Hi Kevin, <br /><br />Is there any chance of Lingiari changing? The 'turnout' is at 74% and a small margin that seems to be narrowing. chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11409160297147568655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-63152589433936530972013-09-12T12:27:45.486+10:002013-09-12T12:27:45.486+10:00:) Apparently it's a swing of 100%!
The vote...:) Apparently it's a swing of 100%! <br /><br />The votes were not actually "missing" as such, but rather mislabelled. A box with slightly over 2000 McGowan votes in it had been marked as containing slightly over 1000. I can well imagine how this would happen as I have sometimes seen such counting errors myself - for instance when wrapped bundles of 1000 are wrongly assumed to be bundles of 500. <br /><br />What is amazing is that a discrepancy as large as 1000 votes got as far as the results being published on the AEC website without cross-checking to determine that the PPVC booth was 1000 votes short of target. Can't recall that ever happening before. AEC will need to conduct a review.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-81164239799270868992013-09-12T12:04:42.183+10:002013-09-12T12:04:42.183+10:00Is that consistent with the missing vote count in ...Is that consistent with the missing vote count in Indi in previous elections?mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-57113407680063047702013-09-11T16:13:18.274+10:002013-09-11T16:13:18.274+10:00Unless Sophie has 1000 votes of her own somewhere....Unless Sophie has 1000 votes of her own somewhere. <br /><br />There are the ordinary votes, the early votes, the provisional votes, the postal votes and the absent votes. And then there are the *missing* votes. Bit hard to compete with a 100-0 split on those ones in a tight contest. ;)Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-1395899709427799052013-09-11T15:47:59.722+10:002013-09-11T15:47:59.722+10:00Indi called then?Indi called then?mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-21656713964859941482013-09-10T20:14:33.347+10:002013-09-10T20:14:33.347+10:00One interesting thing to note - Palmer BTL propens...One interesting thing to note - Palmer BTL propensity is similar to the Greens, not to Labor or Liberal.intuitivereasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15444634755480881972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-9118750958373635282013-09-10T16:32:37.710+10:002013-09-10T16:32:37.710+10:00I will note Palmer probably did have a semi-decent...I will note Palmer probably did have a semi-decent base vote before the campaign there. Scott Steel said PUP were polling low double figures in that area even before any campaigning, and that comment was months ago.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-43804440960150014722013-09-10T16:30:39.438+10:002013-09-10T16:30:39.438+10:00Denison in 2010 was prematurely reported as a win ...Denison in 2010 was prematurely reported as a win for Labor in numerous media sources during a similar process. <br /><br />There has been an update in Fairfax, I will post new comments soon.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-14107446762633293942013-09-10T16:08:19.238+10:002013-09-10T16:08:19.238+10:00I'd guess (and it really is a guess) that Palm...I'd guess (and it really is a guess) that Palmer would struggle with voters who were not so exposed to what I assume was a blitz of PUP advertising in Fairfax. Moreso because it seems as though the surge of support for Palmer only manifested itself in the last couple of weeks of the campaign.<br /><br />Could be very interesting...mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-8038903443914546982013-09-10T15:53:13.262+10:002013-09-10T15:53:13.262+10:00interesting that's it's viewed as a no con...interesting that's it's viewed as a no contest elsewhere then. I guess people just want to believe...mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-8824232220819550312013-09-10T15:25:01.723+10:002013-09-10T15:25:01.723+10:00Your assumption is correct. Additionally, Fairfax...Your assumption is correct. Additionally, Fairfax saw a strong performance on post-counting by the Coalition last time, where they gained by 0.60% 2PP. If they gained by that last time, and they are up against a candidate who surged on late campaigning this time, then given the increase in postals it's quite possible they'd pull back from over 51% 2PP. Palmer is currently projected to have 50.9% at the end of ordinaries. He could be projected to 51.5 and I would not be willing to call it for him as a certain win at that point. Not without seeing some postals.<br /><br />That said, we do not know whether the Coalition would outperform Palmer the way they outperform Labor on postals. Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-50738846949439076622013-09-10T15:12:11.233+10:002013-09-10T15:12:11.233+10:00I assume your latest update about postals throws e...I assume your latest update about postals throws extra doubt onto the Fairfax race as well? I've seen this called for Palmer in a few places already. At the least there doesn't seem to be such an acute focus on that seat around the traps anymore.mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-71386631007298433732013-09-10T13:29:16.352+10:002013-09-10T13:29:16.352+10:00I haven't looked at this yet. I do know that ...I haven't looked at this yet. I do know that voting before the day was up, presumably causing a decline in voting on the day, but I don't know where the overall picture is likely to be once both are accounted for.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-5876552906447995172013-09-10T13:19:50.369+10:002013-09-10T13:19:50.369+10:00Probably not something of much interest to you Kev...Probably not something of much interest to you Kevin, but is there any way to get a feel for voter turnout numbers at this stage, or will we only know about that when all votes are in?mikhfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01270827523976317291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-50611461340062511972013-09-09T13:57:02.879+10:002013-09-09T13:57:02.879+10:00Okay, thanks. Sounds like "Myth busted"Okay, thanks. Sounds like "Myth busted"Truth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05272077261033925542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-64673050974208642342013-09-09T12:27:51.207+10:002013-09-09T12:27:51.207+10:00They're estimates only and I don't believe...They're estimates only and I don't believe they're informed by scrutineering data. The ABC's estimates overstated the flow to Wilkie in a similar situation in 2010 (by a fair amount, I recall) and I suspect the same is true for Palmer in this case. But not necessarily enough to cost him the seat. Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-14048616704624704072013-09-09T12:09:30.569+10:002013-09-09T12:09:30.569+10:00Thanks Blair. Yes, I also suspected the large Jew...Thanks Blair. Yes, I also suspected the large Jewish vote in Melbourne Ports had something to do with that.Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-29927133533562945382013-09-09T11:36:34.073+10:002013-09-09T11:36:34.073+10:00I assume the 2PP distributions on the ABC are rubb...I assume the 2PP distributions on the ABC are rubbish in seats like Fairfax because there is no historical evidence for preference flows involving PUP? The blindmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02677139641680516700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-59288220606639782812013-09-09T09:31:32.436+10:002013-09-09T09:31:32.436+10:00Melbourne Ports has a large orthodox Jewish popula...Melbourne Ports has a large orthodox Jewish population (who tend conservative and don't vote on Saturdays) which may explain its behaviour.Blair Trewinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01149841441852181770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4052593945054595675.post-6432883157904947382013-09-09T02:22:03.702+10:002013-09-09T02:22:03.702+10:00Had a look at this and got the following (and then...Had a look at this and got the following (and then realised why):<br /><br />For a recontesting Coalition incumbent, as the swing to incumbent goes up, the post-count swing to Coalition compared to ordinary goes down.<br /><br />For a recontesting ALP incumbent, as the swing to incumbent goes up, the post-count swing to Coalition compared to ordinary goes up.<br /><br />Not strong relationships, 9% and 8% explained respectively after removal of three outliers. And the relationship is so mild it takes an 11% swing to a Coalition incumbent, or a 17% swing against a Labor incumbent, before there's a projected zero net post-count swing (ordinary votes to final) to Coalition.<br /><br />Thought "that's odd", then realised it probably isn't. For instance, if there's a big swing in either direction in an electorate, then it may have built up over the campaign, and hence the post-count (containing early voting) will be milder for the Coalition in the case of a swing to Coalition, or better for the Coalition in the case of a swing to Labor.<br /><br />Maybe here a whiff of a hint that Labor may perform better in terms of post-count swing in McEwen than if there'd been nothing going on in that seat. <br /><br />As for sitting member vs no sitting member, very little to see there (maybe makes a little bit of difference but not statistically significant for one election.) Ditto for ALP sitting member vs L-NP sitting member - difference in averages was that the post-count swing to Coalition was 0.06 points lower if there was a Labor incumbent, but it wasn't statistically significant. Even if it had been stat. sig. it would have said nothing because it could be that the kind of seats held by each party have a bearing on it.<br /><br />Seems that if being a sitting member helps you do well on postals it also helps you do well on the day and that the idea about postals favouring sitting members isn't really any use here.<br />Kevin Bonhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845545257440242894noreply@blogger.com