Just The Numbers: Behind Sanders-Wiggins 2010: The late trend towards Wiggins

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

The late trend towards Wiggins

We've still got a few hours before the results roll in this afternoon, so I wanted to take a minute to try and figure out just how much the late swing towards Wiggins impacted the end result of this election. With apologies to Yakima and the 30 other counties, I'll mostly focus on the Big Eight given their large impact on statewide vote totals.

To start with, here's a quick look at the SMOV % trend between last Thursday and Monday:

All eight counties showed a drop in SMOV between the total results on Thursday and each of the successive days' results, through Monday.

I've already done some casual speculating on why the later ballots may have shifted towards Wiggins, and if you're reading this, I'm sure you might make the same speculations. Incidentally, this post may be the closest we'll ever come, statistically, to measuring the late impact the Seattle Times had on this election.

====

So let's re-allocate all ballots counted on Friday, Saturday, and Monday, using Thursday's SMOV%. To control for error, I'll use the actual VCR% from each day. To complete the totals, I'll project out the latest EBOH numbers that we have, using Thursday's SMOV% and the VCR% from my standard "progressive" model. We'll compare the "What If" totals to the actual totals, and see just how much this late swing helped Wiggins:

That's a net swing of 21,282 votes from Wiggins to Sanders. No model (that I'm aware of) is currently predicting a win by Wiggins that will nearly equate to that.

As the results come in, the media and various political figures may laud or criticize King County as the source of Wiggins's victory. But the true story here is the SMOV % shift. As I noted in a previous post, Wiggins saw a 2-4% increase in his vote margins nearly across the board between Thursday and Friday, a trend that continued throughout the weekend and in to Monday. That margin is what will eventually propel Wiggins to (projected) victory.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Terminology

The Terminology post is quickly working its way down the page, so here it is, reproduced at the top, for all time. A quick introduction to the terminology I use on this blog:

SMOV: Sanders Margin of Victory (%). Within a defined universe of ballots (say, one particular county's ballots on one particular day), it refers to the percentage of ballots cast for Sanders. [Ed. Note: I'm not expressing an ideological preference: as of this posting, Justice Sanders is leading the race; and using the leading candidate makes the math easier.] Accordingly, a SMOV of 51% means that if 100 ballots were cast, Sanders received 51 and Wiggins received 49.

VCR: Votes Cast in Race (# or %). Not every ballot contains a vote for Sanders or Wiggins. Indeed, on average so far, just under 77% of all ballots cast have contained a vote for either candidate. Some voters may have chosen to write in a candidate -- it's even possible that they may have chosen to write in Sanders or Wiggins, which creates some interesting possibilities (which may be explored in a later blog post). But largely, it's because people chose not to vote in this particular race. They may have been single-issue voters (i.e. the U.S. Senate race), or they may have only cared about the initiatives; I have several friends who only cared about I-1100 and I-1105. Or they may have just stopped at the first page and decided to go do something else. Either way, the VCR% plays a big role in our analysis.

EBOH: Estimated Ballots on Hand (#). This refers to the number of ballots that each county is estimating still remains to be counted. EBOH x VCR% would yield the total number of votes that still remain to be allocated between the two candidates. Note that EBOH is not a static number. Each day in which votes are counted should result in a net decreate in the EBOH total, as votes from that category are counted and allocated to the candidates. However, some ballots may be disqualified for any number of reasons; further, disqualified ballots may be later added back to the EBOH pile if they are later verified by affidavit. Furthermore, ballots may still be arriving, which would increase the EBOH total. Although most of these ballots will be disqualified for being postmarked after election day, some may be from overseas military voters or may be correctly postmarked and will be counted.

SAND or WIGG: I sometimes refer to the candidates as SAND (Sanders) or WIGG (Wiggins) for short. I intend no disrespect.

KPS: A reference to King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties, the three largest counties in Washington in terms of registered voters. There are 3,601,152 registered voters (as of Election Day 2010) in Washington; King has 1,069,791 (29.71%), Pierce has 410,081 (11.39%); and Snohomish has 377,739 (10.49%), for a total of 51.58% of all registered voters in Washington.

KPSS: Same as KPS, but add Spokane county; it has 261, 250 (7.25%). KPSS together has 58.84% of the total registered voters in Washington.

KPSSCTKW, or THE BIG EIGHT: Yes, this probably seems a little ridiculous, but stay with me. Same as KPSS, but now add the counties of Clark (219,616, 6.10%), Thurston (149,024, 4.14%), Kitsap (143,796, 3.99%), and Whatcom (116,576, 3.24%). The Big Eight are the counties with over 100,000 registered voters each, and together, they comprise 76.31% of the total registered voters in Washington. [Ed. Note: Yakima is very close to joining this club at 99,568; sorry Yakimanians, I had to draw the line somewhere. Go sign up 432 more voters, and you're in! (next time)]