Analysing the electoral results
•
by Miro86
Yesterday we saw another exciting elections at the UNL. The main question is of course who won and who lost. The big winners are of course I&W who now have 47% of all congress seats, which is a lot. Congratulation guys. LP are up one seat and that was to be expected given their recent growth. However let's have a quick look at the results themselves.
First of all, less people voted this time, which is not a positive development. In some regions (East) congressmen were elected on the base of a single vote, which is a bit sad.
Another thing that we can look at is activity, where the number of votes per member function as a proxy. We can clearly see that in this area, LP is well ahead of its competition. I&W is second, LSD and GLD are respectively 3rd and 4th and the least active party is the Belgian Party.
Another interesting area is the ability of the different parties to vote strategicually. As a measure here i use the ratio of votes per seat attained for each of the parties. Surprisingly, despite their large numbers, I&W were best at coordinating and averaged at 5.26 votes per seat, second were GLD, closely followed by the LP. LSD performed abysmally, showing an inability to coordinate its members.
Combining the measures of activity and strategic voting we get the ratio of members per seat, where I&W and LP perform the best. LSD and BP have the worst ratios.
Finally we can look at the disproportionality of the system. Here I compare the obtained results under the current system, with a hypothetical case in where the most proportionate system is used. As proxy of this most proportionate system i use the following: Single district, M=40, PR-LR using the Hare quota. Unfortunately i do not have the computational resources to recalculate the results using PR-HA with the Sainte-Lague formula which is arguably more propostionate. Given the large size of M, there should not be too much of a difference. What we can see is that GLD profit the most from the system by getting an extra seat or 25% more. In absolute numbers however I&W gains 3 seats, which is quite an amount.
The table should speak for itself. Green is good, red is bad. The first 4 columns were obtained from eAnalytics. The next 3 columns contain the ratios: votes per seat; members per seat and votes per member. The 8th column contains the hypothetical results using a single district PR-LR (Hare) system. The last column is the percentage gain in seats in comparisson to the most proportionate scenario.
Miro
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
voted!
I don't get it. Seems logic though 😛 Voted
Basically, LP were the most active, I&W were the most organized. LSD were inactive and unorganized (no offense). Size of course also matters, but this helps to explain why LSD has so few seats and LP and IW so many. Having a more proportional system (fi like in RL NLD or ISR) would have given fewer seats to IW and GLD.
Good analyses. The win for I&W, with their presidential vote it has 20 out of 41 congressional votes. The loss for eUNL: -20% of voters 🙁
I&W leads government for quite some time now. I am surprised eUNL is not growing. But maybe the grow will come soon.
It would be good to see more government articles to attract the (new) citizens more in the community in stead of loosing them to either starvation or emigration.
There are many new people, but the amount of dying people is just bigger.
( To add to Niemand and Cocoa: we also still have quite some eUNL citizens moving to eBelgium. )
About the article: I DID GET IT! Although I must confess it took me 3 times looking at that table and difficult paragraph...
I don't know what you either have been smoking, or have been studying, but it's some serious shit 😛
voted!
@Boklevski: people moving to belgium makes sense, as it is mostly the inactive half dead ones that stay, which leads to a lower participation rate.
For next time i'll try to build a Sainte Lague model(most proportionate) and a D'Hondt model(used in RL NL & Belgium) based on a single district. I just might need to switch to something more nasty than excel...
As a noob my first wonder then would be, why are they all going to belgium, is the economy better there? (probably a 'duh' moment for al experienced players)