elections – Page 2 – Pertinent Observations

Election Metrics goes international

For those of you who are not particularly aware of it, for the last year and a half I’ve been writing this column called Election Metrics for Mint. It’s basically a quantitative take on elections, and in my estimate I should’ve written over 50 pieces for them so far.

The last two pieces, however, have been different in the sense that I have now moved beyond covering Indian elections to look at elections abroad. In my last but one post, published last month, i took a look at potential cheating in Afghan elections. (Now I remember linking to that piece from here).

Now, in the latest piece that was published today I look at the forthcoming Scottish referendum, and a recent poll by YouGov in which 47% of respondents said they wanted to vote in favour of independence. I use some binomial jugglery that shows that this translates to a 2.5% chance of a Yes vote, which while insignificant, is an order of magnitude higher than the 0.0004% chance of “Yes” that can be implied from an earlier poll.

I then use the “possible, plausible and probable” framework made famous by Bill Gurley and Aswath Damodaran in their “exchange” in July to show why this poll is significant (it shows that a “Yes” vote is “plausible”, while earlier it was possible but definitely not plausible).

Dictatorships and primaries

In their excellent book “the dictator’s handbook” Bruno bueno de Mesquita and Alastair smith talk about why dictatorships usually put on a garb of democracy and hold (mostly) sham elections.

According to bueno de Mesquita and smith the reason is not to appear good in front of the international community, as the general discourse goes. Dictators are extremely rational actors, they say, and reputation in the international community didn’t usually give enough benefit to compensate for the cost of the garb of democracy and elections.

Instead, bueno de Mesquita and smith say that the real purpose of the elections is to keep followers in check. If a member of the dictator’s team “misbehaves” for example, getting rid of him is normally a difficult process. Essentially sacking is a hard job for anyone, even for hard nosed dictators. In the context of dictatorships sackings can get controversial and often bloody and is not a particularly pleasant process.

By putting in a garb of democracy, however, there is an easy way to sack an official. Assuming that in a dictatorship most citizens vote according to the fancies of the dictator, all a dictator needs to do to sack an official is to instruct the electorate to vote against the official the next time he is up for reelection. The sacking having been effected by “popular mandate”, the process is easier and likely to be less bloody and troublesome for the dictator.

Now, the question is if we can use this framework to understand the new US-style primary elections that the Indian national congress has been using for candidate selection in some constituencies in the forthcoming elections.

Normally in the congress, like in most other parties in India, candidates for elections are determined top-down, by the party “high command”. The risk with this however is that candidates who did not get a ticket to contest the elections know that for whatever reason the party high command is not in favour of them contesting. This can lead to disillusionment and can lead to defections to rival parties.

In this context a primary election acts as a facade through which the party high command can get its choice of candidates without pissing off those applicants who did not get the ticket. Now the purported message to these unsuccessful applicants is that the next time they should work of getting the support of the party rank and file in their constituency.

In reality however, with the party being high command driven, the rank and file has voted as per the instructions of the high command! The high command thus gets its choice of candidates without losing the support of the unsuccessful candidates.

So why is it that primaries work in the US? For the same reasons that elections work in democracies! In the US parties are truly democratic and organised bottom up. There is no high command there to (credibly) dictate the choices for the rank and file. So the results of the primaries are truly reflective of the opinion of the party rank and file.

In conclusion, given the high command based structure of political parties in India, primaries will not work. Instead they will only end up as instruments in the hands of the party high commands, just like the sham elections on dictatorships.

Me, all over the interwebs this week

Firstly, on Tuesday, I got interviewed by this magazine called Information Week. Rather, I had gotten interviewed by them a long time back but the interview appeared on Tuesday. I spoke about the challenges of election forecasting in India and the quality of surveys.

Again on Tuesday, and again on Wednesday, I wrote a pair of articles for Mint analyzing constituencies and parties. On Tuesday, I analyzed constituencies whose representatives have always belonged to ruling parties in the last 4 elections. There are 34 such constituencies. Then on Wednesday I wrote about the influence of states in the Lok Sabha, analyzing the proportion of MPs from each major state that was part of the ruling coalition.

If I had forgotten to mention earlier, I have a deal with Mint that lasts till next October where each month I’m supposed to write 3 articles on election data. You can find all my articles so far here.

Then, today, Pragati published my review of the book Why Nations Fail by Acemoglu and Robinson. More than a book on economics or institutions, it is an awesome history book. Get it.

And in the midst of all this, right here, I wrote a “worky” post about the pros and cons of having a dedicated analytics team.

And if you didn’t notice, this website now has “new clothes”. It was a rather long-pending change and the most important feature of the new layout is that it is “responsive”, and thus looks much better on smartphones. I’ve heard a couple of issues with it already, and do let me know if you have any more issues. And for the first time last night I opened this blog on an iPad and I find that it looks fantabulous, thanks to the OnSwipe plugin I use.

More Karnataka: Averaging between ULB elections and 2008 elections

Recently I met my MLA, who is from the BJP, and told him about my analysis extrapolating from the recent urban local body elections, which gave Congress an absolute majority. He countered that the BJP has never been strong at the sub-state level so one shouldn’t read too much into these elections. So I decided to create this tool which uses a slider which you can use to decide how much importance to give to the ULB polls. A value of 0 represents the seat distribution as per the 2008 elections. A value of 1 uses an extrapolation of the ULB elections only (without using information from the 2008 polls). I hope you have fun with this tool.

You might also notice that I now give you the actual seat distribution party-wise.

Bangalore North, South, Central, Rural

I don’t know if you want to call this gerrymandering, but I just want to pictorially map out the areas of Bangalore that fall under different parliamentary constituencies.

White: Chickballapur

Black: Bangalore North

Red: Bangalore Central

Green: Bangalore South

Blue: Bangalore Rural

Karnataka – effect of swings from 2008 election

You can use the slider below to see how changes in vote share of major parties affects the seat distribution. The “base” here is the vote share in the 2008 Assembly Elections. The numbers on the sliders are in percentages.

Update
This new version uses the vote shares in various districts during the recent Urban Local Body elections to account for the BJP split. As you can see, there is a slider that allows you to indicate how much of the split of the BJP’s votes as per the recent ULB elections will reflect in the forthcoming assembly elections. The reason for this slider is due to feedback that the split of BJP votes in the local body elections may not translate directly to the assembly elections.

There is also a slider called ‘performance impact’. This is based on data from the Daksh survey where samples of voters were asked to evaluate their sitting MLA. The way to use this is that when the slider is at 0, there is no impact of the MLA’s performance on vote share in the forthcoming elections. When it is at 5, an MLA who voters are “extremely happy” with will get 5% additional votes, and an MLA who voters are extremely unhappy with gets 5% less votes than what he did last time.

A Victory By Default for the Congress in Karnataka

Voters like to chase winners. Everybody wants their own MLA to belong to the winning party, for they perceive that the benefits to the constituency in that case are likely to be much greater. Some people vote by ideology. Others by caste. Many, however, just try to second-guess who the winner is, and vote for them.

A recent survey conducted by Daksh asked voters across Karnataka if they had voted for the winning candidate. A whopping 75% of the voters said they did so. In the 2008 Assembly Elections, the average vote share gained by a winning candidate was 43%. The graph here shows, constituency wise, the vote share of the winning party in the 2008 Elections and the number of survey respondents in the constituency who claimed to vote for the winner.

Source: The Daksh Survey of Karnataka MLAs and empoweringindia.org

Notice how in most constituencies, the proportion of survey respondents who have said they’ve voted for the winner is far higher than the vote share the winning candidate got in the elections. This can mean one of two things. One possibility is that the sample that Daksh used for their survey was heavily biased. However, given that the result is consistent across all constituencies, it is unlikely that they would have got a biased sample in all constituencies. The other possibility is that everybody likes to be associated with the winner.

In most elections, it is difficult to gauge who “everyone else” is voting for. People sometimes rely on opinion or exit polls, but they are usually based on small samples. This election is different. It was immediately preceded by elections to 200 odd urban local bodies all over Karnataka. All towns and cities in Karnataka went to the polls only a month or two back. While there are some cities where the local bodies have been hung, if you look across the state, the verdict is clear. And people are aware of that verdict.

Given the Congress’s strong performance in the recent urban local body elections, the marginal voter is likely to swing to the Congress. Media reports indicate that all is not well with the party and there is considerable bickering for tickets. However, the weight of the marginal votes is going to be enough to push the Congress comfortably over the line. The bickering for tickets can be looked at in another way – Congressmen know that their party is going to form the government, and are extra keen on riding a winning horse.

Importance of candidate’s caste in voting

Not-for-profit Daksh recently conducted a massive survey in Karnataka which tried to understand voter preferences, evaluate MLA performance, etc. This was a comprehensive survey covering over 12000 voters across all districts in Karnataka. Apart from capturing demographic information, the survey asks questions on what candidates look for in a candidate and what issues they think are important for an MLA.

One of the questions asked was the importance of a candidate’s caste when it comes to voting. Voters were asked to indicate if it was “very important”, “important” or “not important”. For purpose of my analysis I’ve given a score of 1 for “very important” and 0.5 for “important” and 0 for “not important”. The relationship between a voter’s annual family income with his perception on the importance of caste is extremely interesting, as this graph indicates.

Data Source: Daksh Survey on Perceptions about Karnataka MLAs. Thanks to Harish Narasappa of Daksh for sharing data with me

How urban and upper-class are Bangalore constituencies?

There are 28 assembly constituencies in the general Bangalore area. General discourse is that these are urban middle class areas. This is going to be a bit controversial but I use the proportion of SC/ST population as a measure of how "middle-class" a constituency is. Population density is a proxy for how urban a constituency is. Data is taken from http://bbmpelections.in/wards — There are 28 assembly constituencies in the general Bangalore area. General discourse is that these are urban middle class areas. This is going to be a bit controversial but I use the proportion of SC/ST population as a measure of how “middle-class” a constituency is. Population density is a proxy for how urban a constituency is. Data is taken from http://bbmpelections.in/wards

Congress Tipped For Major Gains in Forthcoming Karnataka Assembly Elections

For each major political party, this graph shows the number of seats they won (red) and the number of seats they came second in (blue) in the recently concluded Karnataka Urban Local Body Elections. The horizontal black line is the number of seats the Congress WON. Notice that the number of seats the Congress won exceeds the number of seats the BJP or the JDS won or came second in. Based on this, it is very likely that the Congress will do very well in the forthcoming Assembly Elections