Absentee ballot performance
Posted May 27, 2009 by Sacha Peter - Link
Category: Analysis
Comments (8)
I have been looking at the numbers comparing initial count to final count. There were some addition errors that were made (resulting in the dramatic turnaround in Cariboo-Chilcotin), but assuming we take everything as-is, we have the following statistics:
Initial count vs. Final Count results, popular vote:
BC Liberals 37,915 (41.5%) – vs. 45.8%
NDP 40,478 (44.3%) – vs. 42.1%
Greens 9,601 (10.5%) – vs. 8.2%
Conservatives 1,814 (2.0%) – vs 2.1%
Others 1,608 (1.8%) – vs. 1.7%
If the seats in the legislature were chosen exclusively from absentee and special balloting (again, this assumes the final count is exclusively from absentee and special ballots), the legislature would be as follows:
NDP 47
BC Liberals 37
Independent 1
With these assumptions, the BC Liberals underperformed in absentee and special balloting, something I would have not expected. The NDP have outperformed and the Green party has especially outperformed – going from 8.2% to 10.5% is more impressive than 42.1% to 44.3%.
The ndp also gained net votes after absentee/special ballots were added to the “final count” in 2005.
Many of these votes are from younger people who are more mobile and have moved recently. Younger voters trend toward the ndp or green parties. In some districts with a larger senior citizens population more votes are recieved via mail. In some years these ballots slightly favour the ndp.
This year more identification was required; this may produce more ballots that were counted late and also trended ndp or green.
The Cariboo Chilcotin discrepency appears more than just absentee/special ballots. I believe there is some miscounting. Is anybody pursuing this matter?
When the NDP lies so blatantly and is run by Jim Sinclair, I for one am not going to trust them.
Glass – that is a good question – why are the NDP not screaming blue murder about the 82 vote taken away from election night – Behind the scenes Elections BC are investigating the matter – whether we hear anything may depend on what they find.
If there was even a hint of fraud or impropriety in the count, Charlie Wyse had the right to call for a judicial recount. I forgot what the deadline it – it might even still be possible.
The most likely explanation is that the poll clerk wrote down a number for the BC Liberals and the other number for the NDP, when the two should have been flipped around. The accounting the poll clerks have to do at counting time would have still balanced.
This is why they call it “initial count”, mainly because the numbers aren’t to be taken as authoritative.
It didn’t copy well here – but in your post on a previous article it only shows that the NDP had 82 votes taken from them and no votes added to the Liberals which would suggest that they never existed in the first place.
Cariboo-Chilcotin 0 -82 0 0 0 0 0 -82 LIB 59
Elections BC knows which poll these numbers come from and who the voting officers were – they are awaiting for info on how the numbers were arrived at – the fact that the NDP have been silent so far may indicate that they are aware that these votes never existed and therefore aren’t disputing them
Thanks for the mention – I would be absolutely shocked if the NDP and/or Charlie Wyse did not follow up on it. If there was something “smoky” there, I am absolutely sure it would have hit the media by now.
This is also why the judicial recount option is available.
Elections BC has always done a top-notch job, and such corrections have occurred in other electoral districts. Just that the closeness of this particular race is what made us notice what would otherwise be routine adjustments.
I have been a scrutineer, and I can swear that the clerks and the counters are all partisan. Of course they generally have the discipline to abide by the law and keep it private.
But when one party (NDP) encourages ideologism, cause oriented belief systems, and fanaticism, what that means is that, – what is good for the party is good for society – and invariably you will see bias show through the election process – only from the side that promotes ideology (NDP, leftists) and not those who suppress ideology (liberals).
In other words, those who play loosy and goofy with the truth (for example NDP lies that 700 IPP projects are about to start) can always be suspect of shady behaviour – for good reason.
Hell hath no fury like an ideologue scorned.
Glass – I suggest that if you want what you say to be given any credibility, then you should reference where it has been said that the NDP claims 700 IPP projects are about to start. In your case, all your assumptions appear to be based on unsubstantiated stories and sound like corner store gossip that does nothing for anyone’s reputation, including yours.