Double Blind

Based off of the preliminary results of the election (I will update the numbers of this post if the results change), my absolute error in seat count was 62.

Party – Actual – Predicted – Error
Conservatives – 167 – 160 – 7
Liberal – 34 – 39 – 5
NDP – 102 – 79 – 23
Bloc – 4 – 28 – 24
Ind – 0 – 2 – 2
Green – 1 – 0 – 1

Provincial Split – Actual vs. Predicted (CON/Lib/NDP/BQ/Ind)
BC: 23/1/12/0/0 – 21/2/12/0/0 and one GRN
Alberta: 26/0/1/0/1 – 27/0/1/0/0
Saskatchewan: 13/1/0/0/0 – 13/1/0/0/0
Manitoba: 10/0/4/0/0 – 11/1/2/0/0
Ontario: 70/16/20/0/0 – 73/11/22/0/0
Quebec: 5/9/32/28/1 – 6/7/58/4/0/0
New Brunswick: 6/2/2/0/0 – 8/1/1/0/0
Nova Scotia: 3/3/5/0/0 – 4/4/3/0/0
PEI: 1/3/0/0/0 – 1/3/0/0/0
Newfoundland and Labrador: 2/3/2/0/0 – 1/4/2/0/0
Territories: 1/1/1/0/0 – 2/0/1/0/0

Surprises/Analysis this election (only two):
1. The collapse of the Bloc Quebecois, mostly at the expense of the NDP. Conversely, the holding up of the NDP vote in Quebec, which I expected to have been diluted a few percentage points from what the pollsters predicted. Even if the NDP and Bloc vote swung 3% (in opposite directions, so a net effect of 6%), it only would have impacted the result of 2 seats that the Bloc were trailing within 6% or less from the NDP (Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord, Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine) but for the rest of the seats the NDP victories were crushing. This was the biggest mistake that my prediction model made, by far.

2. Elizabeth May. She has absolutely proven me wrong when I incessantly harped about how that along as she is leader of the Green party that the party will never win an elected seat in the House of Commons. She won with 46% of the vote against Conservative Gary Lunn, who lost with 36% of the vote. I would be highly curious to know what happened with the local campaign there during the election. Although I disagree with mostly everything that comes out of May’s mouth, she has to be congratulated for her victory in Saanich–Gulf Islands.

Other pundits out there:
Actual result – 167/34/102/4/0/1
ThreeHundredEight.com (Eric Grenier) – 143/60/78/27/0/1, error: 24/26/24/23/1/1 = 99
DemocraticSpace.com (Greg Morrow) – 155/47/86/20/0/1, error: 12/13/16/16/1/1 = 59
ElectionPrediction.org (Milton Chan) – 146/63/65/33/0/1, error: 21/29/37/29/1/1 = 118
LangleyPolitics.com (Jordan Bateman) – 136/52/79/39/0/2, error: 31/18/23/35/1/2 = 110

I wonder if anybody else has done a comprehensive compilation of pundits out there.

I managed two campaigns in Richmond, in 2008 and now 2011:

Year – Richmond Result / BC Conservative Vote / Outperformance
2006 – 38.7% / 37.3%
2008 – 49.8% / 44.4% / +4.0%
2011 – 58.3% / 45.5% / +7.4%

(Outperformance is measured by the difference between the local result and the provincial vote average)

Our campaign turned in a performance that was the third best in the lower mainland (behind Abbotsford – 64.8%, Langley – 64.1%) and in relative outperformance, we were the best in BC. When you consider our geographical proximity, we absolutely did fantastic. Our campaign team, with our candidate, supporters and volunteers is the best in Canada.

There will be a couple days to relax and dismantle the campaign office, but after this we will continue the work we have been doing in Richmond.

Here is my election prediction. I have tried to do this with as much of a non-partisan analysis as possible, but keep in mind I have been neck-deep in the campaign in Richmond – I’ve only had today to seriously look at the publicly available data (there is no insider information I am basing this on). This has also been a very strange campaign.

Conservative – 160
Liberal – 39
NDP – 79
Bloc – 28
Independent – 2
Greens – ZERO (Elizabeth May, 25%)

Provincial Split (CON/Lib/NDP/Bloc/Ind):
BC: 23/1/12/0/0
Alberta: 26/0/1/0/1
Saskatchewan: 13/1/0/0/0
Manitoba: 10/0/4/0/0
Ontario: 70/16/20/0/0
Quebec: 5/9/32/28/1
New Brunswick: 6/2/2/0/0
Nova Scotia: 3/3/5/0/0
PEI: 1/3/0/0/0
Newfoundland and Labrador: 2/3/2/0/0
Territories: 1/1/1/0/0

Notes: The NDP is suffering from a problem of vote diffusion, similar to the Green Party. This should disproportionately favour the Bloc. Note that all it took for the Bloc to consistently take 50 seats out of play in Quebec was 40% of the vote.

The Liberals have concentration in Toronto, Montreal and pockets of Atlantic Canada. The notable change this election should be the area surrounding Toronto – the Vaughn by-election was a precursor for this.

Ontario remains the key battleground, which reminds me of a reduced version of the 1997 election when the PCs and Reform combined took 38% of the vote, but the Liberals took 101/103 seats with 49.5% of the vote.

In BC, the Liberals continue to get squeezed by the Conservatives on the right and the NDP on the left. There is not much room left in the spectrum for the Liberals anymore.

Their April 29th poll declaring a 46% Conservative victory is brave. This poll is the classic case of an outlier. Assuming the averages of the other polling agencies (approximately 37%) is the actual result, the 9% variance would have meant that about 82 of the 750 people interviewed were more biased toward the Conservatives than the baseline number.

My election prediction will be coming up tonight.

Here is a first-pass projection of seats when I read my tea leaves… note this is not my “final” projection – I need to tweak my models a bit further. There are a lot of regional and sub-regional dynamics.

Format:
Province – CON / LIB / NDP / BQ / Other
BC – 23 / 2 / 11 / 0 / 0
Alberta – 27 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1
Saskatchewan – 12 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 0
Manitoba – 9 / 0 / 5 / 0 / 0
Ontario – 60 / 18 / 28 / 0 / 0
Quebec – 5 / 3 / 43 / 23 / 1
New Brunswick – 6 / 1 / 3 / 0 / 0
Nova Scotia – 3 / 3 / 5 / 0 / 0
PEI – 2 / 2 / 0 / 0 / 0
Newfoundland and Labrador – 3 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 0
Territories – 1 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 0
Totals: 151 / 33 / 99 / 23 / 2

Again, this is a draft model. I will attempt to have a “final” projection out by Sunday.

I will be making an election projection for the 2011 Canadian Election – I will likely post it around Saturday or Sunday.

The 2008 Election Prediction Results are here, with an absolute seat error of 36.

The 2006 Election prediction (prediction, results) is linked, with an absolute seat error of 24.

Every pundit in the country is trying to ask themselves the question – “what is the impact of the NDP surge on the overall seat count?”. Because of my rather intensive involvement in this election campaign I haven’t had too much time to focus on the national numbers, but I will be able to give it more attention later this week.

Those people that watch the first 15 minutes of political theater in the House of Commons known as Question Period will probably recognize what went on in the last English leader’s debate – it was a repeat performance.

By not losing, Stephen Harper wins.

Also, the more the media raises expectations on the debates, the lower the potential impact. These performances are so well scripted by the major party leaders that it renders what happens on television nearly useless. I did not catch it live, but when reviewing the video (mainly having the audio spewing in the background while I do some real work on the computer), it was a two hour snooze-fest that was utterly identical to all of the other political mud-flinging that our federal political system seems to have descended into.

Media enforces political correctness, which makes sure that candidates that have off-politically correct (or party-correct) thoughts on issues will never reveal them since they will be more strongly punished for those thoughts than rewarded. Unless if there is some sort of decentralization of party branding in the political system, I don’t foresee this changing any time soon.

The Bev Oda scandal involving the altered document should be an embarrassment to her. A quick summary is that two years ago, her department recommended funding an aid group to the tune of about $8 million, but she wrote “not” before the word “recommend”. When news came out that funding was rejected, she denied that she put the “not” in the document. Fast forward in 2011, it was revealed that it was indeed her that changed the document.

The opposition is trying to make it look like that Stephen Harper penned in the “not” but this attack is not sticking. They are trying a slightly more plausible route saying that the Conservative benches are all full of liars, but the public realizes that calling a politician a liar is like the proverbial tea kettle being black.

It is pretty clear that Bev Oda is looking foolish after this incident (why not just admit denying the funding up-front back in 2009?), but this is the wrong type of scandal for the opposition. Why? Because it involves the minister going out of her way to deny funding to a religious aid group.

If the scandal instead was the minister overruling a staff recommendation so that she could fund a religious aid group, this scandal would have much more traction than the current version of events.

Hence, the wrong type of scandal for the opposition.

This will not shelter Bev Oda from the inevitable repercussions involving parliamentary privilege, which the speaker will likely judge that she violated. In terms of this being able to smear the whole government, it is unlikely to occur.

The big game changing events in Ottawa will involve one of two matters which are always the downfall of politicians: sex or corruption. So far, the only item of note in the “sex” category has been Maxime Bernier’s fling with Julie Coulliard (and realizing that this is Quebec politics, which is a whole different game), and very little on the corruption side.

I just love all of this pre-parliamentary banter about all the parties beating their chests like gorillas as they prepare for the start of the Winter session of the House of Commons scheduled for January 31, 2011 barring an unlikely prorogation or dissolution of Parliament. It seems to be an application of Sun Tzu’s Art of War:

Warfare is the Way of deception.

Therefore, if able, appear unable,

if active, appear not active,

if near, appear far,

if far, appear near.

If they have advantage, entice them;

if they are confused, take them,

if they are substantial, prepare for them,

if they are strong, avoid them,

if they are angry, disturb them,

if they are humble, make them haughty,

if they are relaxed, toil them,

if they are united, separate them.

Attack where they are not prepared, go out to where they do not expect.

This specialized warfare leads to victory, and may not be transmitted beforehand.

Before doing battle, in the temple one calculates and will win, because many calculations were made;

before doing battle, in the temple one calculates and will not win, because few calculations were made;

many calculations, victory, few calculations, no victory, then how much less so when no calculations

By means of these, I can observe them, beholding victory or defeat!

It seems the louder the parties beat their chests and make noises about an election, the less likely it is to occur.

The following picture was taken on “Day 1″ of the 2008 election campaign in Richmond, BC:

On January 23, 2006, Canadians voted in 124 Conservative MPs forming a government with Prime Minister Stephen Harper at the helm. He wasn’t expected to ever lead a government, and he wasn’t ever expected to last this long. But five years later, and one election later, Stephen Harper is still around.

In a couple weeks, the Harper administration will have lasted longer than Lester B. Pearson’s minority government – Harper officially took office on February 6, 2006. Pearson’s administration lasted five years plus a couple days.

Now you hear the same critics say that Stephen Harper will never form a majority government. We will see!