Seat Predictions Ontario 2018 Election

80 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

Pogo wrote:

Sean, I agree you laid it very clearly.  I would just like add that each party probably has a base of seats that are very solid.  Whether it be strong voting culture, on the ground organization or well liked candidates there will be some ridings that hold their vote when the general party vote collapses.  You can save the furniture.

Absolutely -- I think though that for some parties this concentration may included more than needed to hold the seat -- and that means extra votes that do not deliver more seats. A party that is low in a pile of places and then in a few places up to 60-70% has lots of wasted vote in places where it is more than they need or not enough to benefit. This is inefficient. and also as you say there are voters that are more solid than others -- and these are not distributed evenly so you could have a concentration saving a few seats when overall support drops. This is the thing seat prediction sites miss and why I think the Liberals may hold 5-6 seats when the raw vote only points to 0-2, for example.

NorthReport

Election Forecast: Vote Percentages

NDP - 39%

PCs - 39%

Libs - 18%

Other - 4%

Ciabatta2

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

General comment on efficiency -- all parties will necessarily have various bands of support that are efficient depending on their level of concentration. So a party that is highly concentrated in strongholds would be remarkably efficient at a low level

...

I do not see last minute guesses as cheating. I see earlier guesses without data as baloney.

Great post.  The bit at the start was what I was trying to get at - that I believe that in low levels of support the Liberlas have an efficiency band due to their concentration in Ott/TO.  Yes you can't be efficient at every level, I thought that was just intuitive, but to be fair my posts never state that so fair point in bringing that up.  If I wasn't in my own head, I would have read them the exact same as you did.

I think the last bit there is the only thing we really disagree on (aside from the seat numbers and projections, of course.)  If there is no point looking at current data and postulating into the future, then there is no point in having threads and websites and commentators open for predictions until a day or two before the election, really - it's just a never ending "if the election was tomorrow..." feedback loop.  What matters isn't a fake tomorrow - it's what happens between now and the end date.  But that's just a bug bear of mine, I guess and fair game to anyone who disagrees, since I seem to be in the minority on that.

Definitely, though, its getting late for any Liberal rise.  The post debate hasn't resulted in a bump.  So I'm probablywelllikely going to be wrong!

Thanks for the great chats on this.

Sean in Ottawa

Ciabatta2 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

General comment on efficiency -- all parties will necessarily have various bands of support that are efficient depending on their level of concentration. So a party that is highly concentrated in strongholds would be remarkably efficient at a low level

...

I do not see last minute guesses as cheating. I see earlier guesses without data as baloney.

Great post.  The bit at the start was what I was trying to get at - that I believe that in low levels of support the Liberlas have an efficiency band due to their concentration in Ott/TO.  Yes you can't be efficient at every level, I thought that was just intuitive, but to be fair my posts never state that so fair point in bringing that up.  If I wasn't in my own head, I would have read them the exact same as you did.

I think the last bit there is the only thing we really disagree on (aside from the seat numbers and projections, of course.)  If there is no point looking at current data and postulating into the future, then there is no point in having threads and websites and commentators open for predictions until a day or two before the election, really - it's just a never ending "if the election was tomorrow..." feedback loop.  What matters isn't a fake tomorrow - it's what happens between now and the end date.  But that's just a bug bear of mine, I guess and fair game to anyone who disagrees, since I seem to be in the minority on that.

Definitely, though, its getting late for any Liberal rise.  The post debate hasn't resulted in a bump.  So I'm probablywelllikely going to be wrong!

Thanks for the great chats on this.

Thanks -- my initial point though was the I don't think the Liberals are very highly concentrated and that is why they would be expected to get fewer seats at a low level than the NDP which is more concentrated. The Liberals are a little more spread out so they get a band of efficiency at a higher level than the NDP. This is a problem for the NDP because there is a mid range inefficient place for them but these recent polls suggest they are above that.

So While the NDP is efficient at 20% they are not very at 30% but they are back to efficient by high thirties. The Liberals are inefficient at 20 but become efficient into the low 30s where the NDP is not efficient -- etc.etc.

Now I also have said I think that the Liberals party are probably, while not very efficient at 20% a bit more than what polling models suggest and this is why I would expect them to get a few rather than 1-2. But if they test the bottom of that range only 15% then they could get nothing when the NDP in the same range is likely to get 6-8 seats.

So at any given support level some parties will be more or less efficient. But the argument being made by pollsters is that the NDP are less efficient at all levels which is nonsensical as it is mathematically impossible to be one or the other at all support levels.

On the predictions -- I think some poeple may want to predict these margins in a volatile races but there is no data to be as precise as people want to be so these are just guesses. When you get to the last few days these guesses may have some data attached. But for now the only science would be in saying if the support level is really x the seats are likely to be y. When both are variables it is all pretend and hoping for luck.

ctrl190

My prediction:

72 - PC

46 - NDP

6 - LIB

0 - GRN

NorthReport
NorthReport

dp

NorthReport
NorthReport

dp

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
ghoris

My guess, from Edmonton:

PC - 68, 38%

NDP, 49, 36%

Liberal, 6, 18%

Green, 1, 5%

Others, 0, 3%

Ciabatta2

PC 72, NDP 41, Lib 11.  Gravelle (TB-SN) will squeak through but Mauro (TB-A) won't --- the Liberals will keep four seats in Toronto --- the NDP won't win both of the two new north-northern ridings --- the NDP will only win one seat east of Oshawa --- the NDP will give the PCs a real scare in Lambton-K-M, Oxford and Elgin-M-L --- the PCs win more Brampton seats than the NDP --- Niagara Centre goes PC but Sarnia goes NDP.  Schreiner still doesn't win Guelph.

KarlL

If you are gloing to cite "TooCloseToCall" then perhaps you have answered your own question in another post as to why would a Liberal supporter (like me) vote Liberal today (or in my case, yesterday, by Special Ballot).  It is because these are all riding-by-riding fights and the province-wide numbers decide nothing.

There are, according to the TCTC model, 21 ridings in which the Liberals either lead or are closer, and in some cases far closer, to the PCs support totals than are the NDP.  Many are lost causes, with inevitable PC wins but it doesn't make much sense for Liberals to switch their votes to NDP candidates who are even further back in these 21 ridings.  If there were some massive and unpredictable last-minute surge underway for the NDP, perhaps - but not otherwise.

Then there are a further 37 or so ridings that are certain victories for the NDP given the margins by which the NDP leads, so Liberals can vote their party affiliation without risk of electing a PC MPP.

There are a further 12, mostly impending PC wins, in which it is not remotely clear cut which is the party most likely to challenge the PCs (i.e., where Liberal and NDP support are separated by less than 2% points).  In some of them, the Liberals are incumbents, with decent ground campaigns.  In many cases, the Liberals and NDP are so far back that it is almost irrelevant, so given the per-voter subsidy, it makes sense for Liberals to vote Liberal.  

Then that are 16 that are so Blue that there is little point in even thinking about them, as the combined Liberal and NDP vote falls short of PC support. And again, there's the per-voter subsidy.

That accounts for 86 ridings.  In the other 38, it makes sense for Liberals to vote NDP.  If enough Liberals did so, there would be an NDP majority.

 

NorthReport

When the results come in tonite just remember to thank yourself and your fellow Liberals for elected Doug Ford Premier.

KarlL

NorthReport wrote:

When the results come in tonite just remember to thank yourself for elected Doug Ford Premier.

It is patronizing to say that "Math is Hard" and I won't, because basic arithmetic is actually pretty easy.

SocialJustice101

4.49% popular vote lead for the winner.

NorthReport

EKOS seat projections

EKOS Seat Projection

 

http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2018/06/ekos-seat-projection-2/

wage zombie

My prediction from Vancouver:

PC: 63 (38.5%)

NDP: 56 (38.5%)

L: 4 (17.5%)

G: 1 (4.5%)

If the youth vote does turn out, I could see NDP winning popular vote even with PC getting majority.

welder welder's picture

Con majority...Then the clown car show begins....

ghoris

Slightly revised prediction: PC 69, NDP 49, Lib 5, Green 1

Eastern Ontario: 15 PC, 2 NDP, 1 Lib
Northern Ontario: NDP 11, PC 3
416: PC 11, NDP 11, Lib 3
905: PC 28, NDP 5, Lib 1
Hamilton / Niagara: NDP 7, PC 2
Southwest: NDP 13, PC 10, Green 1
 

Sean in Ottawa

PC - 71 38%

NDP 47 35%

Liberal 7 19%

Green, 1 4%

I hope I am wrong

 

josh

The hell with it:

NDP 63 41%

Cons  60 38%

Liberals 1  17%

SocialJustice101

josh wrote:

The hell with it:

NDP 63 41%

Cons  60 38%

Liberals 1  17%

I'd like to believe that....

JKR

NDP: 61
PC: 60
LIB: 2
GRN: 1

Unionist

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

PC - 71 38%

NDP 47 35%

Liberal 7 19%

Green, 1 4%

I hope I am wrong

I hoped so too. But you were eerily close. And your Liberal prediction was spot on. How did you do that??

Sean in Ottawa

Unionist wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

PC - 71 38%

NDP 47 35%

Liberal 7 19%

Green, 1 4%

I hope I am wrong

I hoped so too. But you were eerily close. And your Liberal prediction was spot on. How did you do that??

I want to say talent. But it was a guess from a feeling. As you can see I did not even get the total number of seats correct -- I just rushed a prediction based on what I was thinking.

I felt the popular vote was going this way and while I disagreed with the statement about a party being inefficient -- a 4-point gap usually makes the second party inefficient whomever they are. I also thought the Liberals had many volunteers and that they were concentrating their efforts. I actually thought they could get as high as 9.

For the Conservatives I realized that the latest polls showing them having lower income and younger vote increases was scary. This meant that they had the coalition of the greedy and the uninformed. This is almost unbeatable. what is scary is that this was a result of boutique policies and getting away without a costed platform. If the voters won't demand a costed platform they should not expect one. This is an extremely bad development and probably the most enduring damage from this campaign.

Without needing a platform costed the coalition between the uninformed and the greedy will be easier to create in any Canadian election anywhere. This is what happens when you reduce objective facts. You know since the Conservatives are presumed to be the better managers (even when they are not) this will be a double standard. Only the right will get away with this.

Pages