So, what have we seen? Early ABC figures showed a catastrophic rout for ALP and a sensational showing for the GRNs, however TruthSeeker figures never quite picked this up and instead showed a consistent record of massive swings from LIB/NAT/ALP to PUP/GRN.
For the record, my methodology for basing my swings was
1. List 2013 vote by party for each booth in an electorate
2. Calculate benchmark 2013 "base" expected performance for each electorate that depends on %counted. While we can't do a matching booth comparison, we did instead do a matching by vote counted, where the order of counting each booth within an electorate is assumed to be directly propotional to the number of votes (bigger booths take longer)
3. Lookup current vote counted for each party, compare to the expected vote, calculate swing
4. Add swing to 2013 vote
The proof is in the pudding - I'm happy with the stability of my estimates as the night has progressed.
My prediction is for a 3-1-G-P outcome at this stage, with a 2-2-G-P an unlikely but plausible. Despite HEMP vote exceeding my expectations, votes of the majors has meant that a HEMP harvesting operation has not materialised. Also notable is the NAT reduction - in a previous post I referred to the Wirrpanda effect whereby the NAT vote in 2013 was inflated by nominating a footballer. Despite NAT having a much better ballot draw this time, it still shed two-fifths of its votes! In fact, had NAT held its vote and indeed increased it by 0.2% due to a better ballot position, as would have been expected with Wirrpanda, it would have overtaken LIB3 and have got elected.
But the big winner is the big Clive Palmer. To increase his vote from pterodactayl size to brontosaurus size was a great outcome for him and his fledgling party.
My next post(s) will depend on the complexity of the count. If it gets a bit closer, you'll see a lot more of me!
Let's hope that no further reelection is required for this poll.
Here are my final predictions for the night:
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.12% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.34% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.82% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.21% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.13% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.72% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.54% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.08% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.04% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.96% |
Outcomes:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.638 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.362 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 1.000 |
Easy.
1:38am
58% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.11% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.23% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.90% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.22% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.18% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.72% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.53% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.09% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.04% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.96% |
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.514 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.442 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.996 |
| HEMP : | 0.040 |
| WIKI : | 0.005 |
| VEP : | 0.003 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.510 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.438 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.048 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.004 |
1:30am
And it just gets closer and closer
Here it's worth considering the relevant flow of BTL votes
But again, both ALP+GRN and LIB+NAT are starting from a similar base. This means, that there are probably the same number of BTL's sitting within each party's current estimate.
1:20am
55% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 33.98% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.27% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.93% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.22% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.20% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.72% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.53% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.10% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.05% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.97% |
Results are:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.524 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.434 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.997 |
| HEMP : | 0.034 |
| WIKI : | 0.007 |
| VEP : | 0.004 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.521 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.431 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.045 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.003 |
1:00am
48%
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.22% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.10% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.91% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.18% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.25% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.71% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.50% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.11% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.06% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.96% |
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.570 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.385 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.995 |
| HEMP : | 0.041 |
| VEP : | 0.005 |
| WIKI : | 0.004 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.565 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.380 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.050 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.005 |
12:51am
"Median scenario" TruthSeeker numbers, with zero variation, shows 2-2-G-P outcome. But variation either way makes it 3-1-G-P
12:50am
So, ALP now up to 39% of getting 6th seat. VEP still refusing to die. HEMP getting a bit further away.
12:45am
40% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.40% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 20.95% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.99% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.09% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.34% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.68% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.49% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.12% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.06% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.94% |
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.564 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.385 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.989 |
| HEMP : | 0.056 |
| WIKI : | 0.005 |
| VEP : | 0.001 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.553 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.380 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.056 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.006 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.005 |
12:35am
And yet again, VEP get a bit of an airing. But this is incredibly unlikely.
12:30am
35% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.60% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 20.75% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.84% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.14% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.41% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.72% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.48% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.10% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.07% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.95% |
Results are:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.661 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.258 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.990 |
| HEMP : | 0.084 |
| WIKI : | 0.006 |
| VEP : | 0.001 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.651 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.256 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.083 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.008 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.002 |
12:20am
29% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 36.45% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.42% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.94% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.32% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.51% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.86% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.51% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.11% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.09% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.98% |
Results are:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.766 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.179 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.955 |
| HEMP : | 0.087 |
| WIKI : | 0.011 |
| VEP : | 0.002 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.721 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.163 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.071 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.029 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.016 |
12:05am
23.2% counted
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 36.21% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.32% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 16.07% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.40% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.49% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.84% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.58% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.17% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.08% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 0.99% |
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.753 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.172 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.974 |
| HEMP : | 0.095 |
| WIKI : | 0.006 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.727 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.163 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.084 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.017 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.009 |
11:55pm
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 36.00% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.50% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.87% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.52% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.58% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.85% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.56% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.16% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.09% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.00% |
Outcomes again:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.760 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.155 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.983 |
| HEMP : | 0.092 |
| WIKI : | 0.007 |
| VEP : | 0.003 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.743 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.149 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.091 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.011 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.006 |
11:45pm
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 36.44% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.23% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 15.76% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 12.44% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.68% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.85% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.57% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.17% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.03% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.03% |
And the outcomes are:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.802 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.120 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.956 |
| HEMP : | 0.117 |
| WIKI : | 0.003 |
| VEP : | 0.002 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.758 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.106 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.092 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.030 |
| 30-2-100 : | 0.014 |
11:33pm to confirm, this assumes that all "group" votes are indeed ticket votes. This is valid until we actually start knowing the breakdown of ATL/BTL votes.
11:30pm the previous update has HEMP being elected at the midpoint scenario, but with LIB getting elected at most of the outliers.
11:23pm Update at 4.2%
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 35.17% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 20.43% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 14.13% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 13.70% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.54% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.69% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.40% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.21% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 1.15% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.02% |
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.711 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.012 |
| GRN : | 0.999 |
| PUP : | 0.998 |
| HEMP : | 0.230 |
| VEP : | 0.032 |
| WIKI : | 0.018 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.708 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.277 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.012 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.002 |
| 30-1-011 : | 0.001 |
11:13pm
That is, if HEMP elected, then it will be likely at the expense of LIB3
11:10pm
Latest top 10 parties
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.88% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 20.98% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 14.08% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 13.35% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 4.13% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.71% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.35% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.16% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.05% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 0.97% |
...leads to the following results:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.857 |
| NAT : | 0.001 |
| ALP : | 1.025 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 0.993 |
| HEMP : | 0.105 |
| WIKI : | 0.011 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.850 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.117 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.025 |
| 30-1-101 : | 0.007 |
| 21-1-110 : | 0.001 |
11:08pm
HEMP polling more than 1% - putting them in the frame?
11:01pm
Recent data in much better for greens as vote counted crosses 2%.
Using the following top 10 estimated primaries
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 34.23% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.60% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 14.66% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 13.03% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 3.47% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.72% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.60% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.15% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.14% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 0.92% |
Outcomes with 10% variation are:
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.717 |
| NAT : | 0.000 |
| ALP : | 1.222 |
| GRN : | 1.000 |
| PUP : | 1.000 |
| HEMP : | 0.052 |
| WIKI : | 0.007 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.717 |
| 20-2-110 : | 0.222 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.061 |
10:51pm: First M-C outcomes - +/-10% variation for everyone, so pretty small:
3 LIB, 1 ALP, 1 PUP looking likely.
| Party | Elected |
| --------- | --------- |
| LIB : | 2.997 |
| NAT : | 0.002 |
| ALP : | 1.333 |
| GRN : | 0.608 |
| PUP : | 1.000 |
| HEMP : | 0.001 |
| LN-A-GPO | Prob |
| ---------- | -------- |
| 30-1-110 : | 0.606 |
| 30-2-010 : | 0.332 |
| 30-1-011 : | 0.059 |
| 21-2-010 : | 0.001 |
| 21-1-110 : | 0.001 |
| 20-1-111 : | 0.001 |
10:47pm
Estimated primaries for top 10 parties
| LIB.. .. .. .. | 35.70% |
| ALP.. .. .. .. | 21.66% |
| PUP.. .. .. .. | 13.54% |
| GRN.. .. .. .. | 12.16% |
| NAT.. .. .. .. | 4.39% |
| GOD.. .. .. .. | 1.64% |
| LDP.. .. .. .. | 1.51% |
| HEMP.. .. .. .. | 1.20% |
| SEX.. .. .. .. | 1.12% |
| SFP.. .. .. .. | 0.94% |
10:30pm First simulation coming up very soon....
10:30pm Disagree with ABC swings at this stage. I'm getting:
| WIKI | -0.1% |
| NAT | -0.8% |
| IND | 0.6% |
| DEM | 0.0% |
| ALP | -5.7% |
| LDP | -2.0% |
| PUP | 6.6% |
| LIB | 0.5% |
| SFP | 0.4% |
| HEMP | -0.1% |
| GOD | 0.0% |
| GRN | 0.8% |
| SEX | -0.4% |
at this point in time. PUP stronger swings in regional areas than ABC seems to be giving credit for
9:50pm Is low voter turnout going to cost Labor? TruthSeeker analysis from the Griffith byelection will result in a net swing from Labor to LIB of ~0.15%. Not massive. In fact, borderline nothing!
9:41pm: Has the AEC had a technical difficulty?
9:40pm - Hmmm - I didn't round up. Quota is 2, and only 4 have quota. So result would be 2 LIB, 2 NAT, 1 PUP (and drawing of lots for the 6th electee, from anyone!)
9:30pm - 8 votes in. Just that. If this was replicated state wide, we'd see
9:20pm Welcome folks - here we go again. Stay tuned for updates as the night progresses. This page will be updated as time rolls on.
re 9:30pm post: You mean 3 LIB, 2 NAT and 1 PUP? There are only 2 National candidates.
ReplyDeleteGosh. 2 NAT. But their prefs go LIB so it would be a 4-2 split.
ReplyDeleteWhoops, yep, that's right.
DeleteI'm calling 3 Lib 1 ALP 1 GRN 1 PUP.
ReplyDeleteSports Party on 1.1%.
ReplyDelete2 Lib, 1 ALP, 1 GRN, 1 PUP look locked in, the question is who will get the last seat?
ReplyDeleteSee post above!
DeleteAgreed - it's between ALP and LIB at the moment with the ALP ahead.
ReplyDeleteThe ABC is now predicting the Green vote at 20.5%. I just can't see that being possible?!
ReplyDeleteI'm not getting it that high yet...
DeleteI think the HEMP result may fade if the Labor outcome is a little higher? I'm running sims with Labor at a base of 23% and get HEMP or VEP often getting to the last three but then getting tipped out by Labor who then lose to whichever of LIB3 and PUP was not already elected.
ReplyDeleteI'm getting the HEMP-ALP gap as ~0.1 quota or ~1.4%, so it's quite large
DeleteI actually have Labor beating them even with a lower vote. I can get HEMP to around 0.75 of a quota but after getting preferences from SEX and a GRN surplus (Pratt being selectively preferenced so she is ahead of HMP) I always have the ALP ahead of them.
DeleteCorrection to the above - I get HEMP to a little over 0.5 of a quota, not 0.75. But the rest of it holds - I have them behind Labor at that point.
DeleteBTW I'm claiming dibs for picking the result at 10:30PM :-)
ReplyDeleteYep! Great pickup. But stlil not 100% clear yet.
DeleteABC is showing 2-2-1-1 now, ALP by 800 votes.
DeleteWhat would be the effect of BTL preferencing Pratt over Bullock? I know some tickets (most importantly the Greens) have already done that, is that a good enough estimate do you think?
ReplyDeleteBTL prefing Pratt > Bullock would make no difference. Bullock elected immediately on primaries, so is thence elected and excluded.
DeleteWell, looks like the Lib/PUP arb paid off. I put the risk-free profit on GRN, and am now up 7.5% - not too shabby. Thanks Centrebet!
ReplyDeleteOne consideration is that pre-poll and postal voters would have missed some of the PUP advertising blitz and the ALP Bullock controversy. We might see some decrease for PUP and increase for ALP as those votes are included, increasing the odds of 20-2-110 relative to 30-1-110.
ReplyDeleteHow do the outcomes change if you reduce the PUP vote by say 0.5% or 1.0%, while increasing the ALP vote by the same amount?
"2. Calculate benchmark 2013 "base" expected performance for each electorate that depends on %counted. While we can't do a matching booth comparison, we did instead do a matching by vote counted, where the order of counting each booth within an electorate is assumed to be directly propotional to the number of votes (bigger booths take longer)"
ReplyDeleteThis worked much better than the ABC's model which at times projected the Greens to close to 20 (and in very early counting above it) and quite a long way into the count projected Labor to below 20. I didn't agree with their projection for Labor at the time and said so and why.
Nice work on that.
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2014/04/wa-senate-take-two-preview-live.html
ReplyDeleteLink to my comments thread. There appears to be a tipping point determined by the question of whether PUP cross on the HEMP preferences, as currently looks likely, or on the earlier LibDem preferences instead. Trivial change in the PUP vote alters final outcome by thousands. Worth keeping an eye on but my tip is vote distribution to move away from this tipping point not towards it.
And further on the tipping point - on current primaries BTLs could put PUP over it, meaning that Reynolds probably isn't actually winning yet (she also has the issue of leakage from the Nats BTLs before she gets on level terms with Pratt). Still think there'll more likely than not be enough drift to the Libs in post-count for the tipping point and BTL scenarios to disappear but this is less straightforward than it at first appeared.
ReplyDeleteRather large primary vote changes tonight, possibly on formality checking. On current votes PUP would cross before the tipping point but Labor would still lose by a thousand or so. It probably gets worse from here.
ReplyDeleteSome of the damage tonight was just data re-entry but Labor are still down several hundred for the day.
ReplyDeleteLibs gaining heaps on early postals. Looking over on this evidence.
ReplyDelete