2012 Occupy Wall Street polls: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

2012 Occupy Wall Street polls (view source)

Revision as of 16:20, 11 November 2023

1,510 bytes added , 6 months ago

Replace disabled Graph extension with SVGs from https://vega.github.io/vega-editor/?mode=vega

VisualWikitext

Psephomancy

Bureaucrats, Administrators

1,889

edits

Revision as of 17:23, 23 September 2018 (view source) Psephomancy (talk \| contribs) (→‎Exit poll) Tag: Visual edit ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 16:20, 11 November 2023 (view source) Psephomancy (talk \| contribs) (Replace disabled Graph extension with SVGs from https://vega.github.io/vega-editor/?mode=vega) Tag: Visual edit
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: In 2012, the Politics and Electoral Reform Working Group of [[W:Occupy Wall Street\|Occupy Wall Street]] conducted experimental surveys in New York City to investigate how voters behave under four different voting methods: [[First Past the Post electoral system\|Plurality voting]], [[Approval voting]], [[Score voting]] (0-5), and [[Instant-runoff voting\|Instant-Runoff Voting]] (with a maximum of 3 rankings).<ref name=":1">{{Cite news\|title=Podcast 2013-05-27: Follow-up with Occupy Wall Street's TJ Frawls\|url=https://electology.org/podcasts/2013-05-27_tj_frawls\|work=The Center for Election Science\|date=~~2015~~2013-05-2527\|access-date=2018-09-23\|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web\|title=Results from Occupy Wall Street voting methods study\|url=https://groups.google.com/d/msg/electionscience/1cFXfrwU_CE/aGreAqJh4rYJ\|website=Google Groups\|access-date=2018-09-23\|date=2013-03-11\|last=\|first=\|archive-url=\|archive-date=\|dead-url=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web\|title=Press release: Occupy Wall Street Politics & Electoral Reform Working Group Releases Report on First Voting Experiment Survey Sample, Prepares for Election Day Alternative Voting Study\|url=http://www.paercom.net/downloads/files/Press%20Release.pdf\|date=July 2012\|access-date=2018-09-23\|website=\|last=\|first=\|archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20130728110015/http://www.paercom.net/downloads/files/Press%20Release.pdf\|archive-date=2013-07-28\|dead-url=}}</ref> The polls were taken using custom software on iPads.<ref name=":3">{{Cite news\|title=Occupy Wall Street's TJ Frawley on how to fix the US Electoral System - Manhattan Libertarian Party\|url=http://manhattanlp.org/occupy-wall-streets-tj-frawley-on-how-to-fix-the-us-electoral-system/\|work=Manhattan Libertarian Party\|date=2013-01-09\|access-date=2018-09-23\|language=en-US}}</ref> == Preliminary pilot study == Line 13: * A write-in option No adjustment was made to correct for the unrepresentativeness of the voters; who were primarily OWS participants;<ref name=":2" /> it was just to compare voting behavior under different systems.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news\|title=Podcast 2012-08-20: Interview with Occupy Wall Street’s TJ Frawls on Electoral System Pilot Poll\|url=https://electology.org/podcasts/2012-08-20_tj_rawls\|work=The Center for Election Science\|date=~~2015~~2012-0508-2520\|access-date=2018-09-23\|language=en}}</ref> The Democratic Party won the plurality election by a small margin, with a total of 35% of the votes. The Green Party won under the other 3 methods. Support for third parties was much higher under the cardinal systems compared to Plurality, moving the Democratic party down to 4th place:<ref name=":2" /> <!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400▼ ▲{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400 \|xAxisTitle=Candidate\|yAxisTitle=Votes (% of possible)\|legend=Legend\|type=rect \|y1Title=Plurality Line 28 ⟶ 27: \|y2=48.07, 74.00, 72.10, 60.57, 27.88, 4.33, 10.58 \|y3=51.01, 68.88, 59.90, 58.51, 34.17, 12.31, 11.2 }}--> [[File:2012 OWS party poll.svg]] The first preferences for the IRV election were similar to the plurality election:<ref name=":2" />▼ {{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400▼ ▲The first preferences for the IRV election were similar to the plurality election, though with a little more support for third parties:<ref name=":2" /> ▲<!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400 \|xAxisTitle=Candidate\|yAxisTitle=Votes (% of possible)\|legend=Legend\|type=rect \|y1Title=Plurality Line 39 ⟶ 41: \|y1=34.80, 23.10, 16.50, 7.60, 3.16, 2.53, 12.34 \|y2=31.25, 26.92, 17.78, 11.53, 2.88, 0.01, 8.17 \|colors=#1f77b4, #d62728 }} }}--> [[File:2012 OWS party IRV.svg]] Since no one obtained a majority in the first round, the IRV election proceeded through 13 elimination rounds to find a winner, which was the Green Party. <!-- Though I'm skeptical that they did this correctly; see talk page. --> Line 46 ⟶ 50: == Exit poll == On Election Day, November 6, 2012, they polled 507 voters inside polling places<ref name=":3" /> in Manhattan's left-leaning 69th Assembly District. In this poll, every voter participated in all 4 voting systems.<ref name=":2" /> The candidates were the same as those in the real election:<ref name=":1" /> Line 59 ⟶ 63: No adjustment was made to correct for the unrepresentativeness of the district, though polling only took place in a single district, so that the poll's plurality results could be compared with the results of the actual plurality election in that district. The plurality results were similar for both, indicating that the exit poll was reasonably accurate to the district:<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> <!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400 \|xAxisTitle=Candidate\|yAxisTitle=Votes (% of possible)\|legend=Legend\|type=rect \|y1Title=Actual election Line 66 ⟶ 71: \|y1=88.90, 9.60, 0.81, 0.48, 0.04, 0.03, 0.13 \|y2=85.01, 8.28, 3.16, 1.78, 0.99, 0.39, 0.20, \|colors=#9467bd, #1f77b4 }} }}--> Obama easily won under all 4 voting systems, though Approval and Score showed that there was much higher support for third parties than traditional plurality elections would imply. Romney's position in the overall ranking dropped from second place to last place under the cardinal systems:<ref name=":2" />▼ [[File:2012 OWS vs actual.svg]] {{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400▼ ▲Obama easily won under all 4 voting systems, though Approval and Score showed that there was much higher support for third parties than traditional plurality elections would imply. Romney's position in the overall ranking dropped from second place to last place (ignoring write-ins) under the cardinal systems:<ref name=":2" /> ▲<!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400 \|xAxisTitle=Candidate\|yAxisTitle=Votes (% of possible)\|legend=Legend\|type=rect \|y1Title=Plurality Line 80 ⟶ 91: \|y2=89.9, 13.0, 51.9, 26.8, 31.2, 16.6, 2.2 \|y3=86.3, 24.9, 53.9, 38.9, 42.1, 33.5, 1.7 }}--> [[File:2012 OWS candidates.svg]] The first preferences for the IRV election were similar to the plurality election. Obama won the IRV election without any elimination rounds necessary, so second and third preferences (which favored the Green Party) were ignored:<ref name=":2" /> <!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=600\|height=400 \|xAxisTitle=Candidate\|yAxisTitle=Votes (% of possible)\|legend=Legend\|type=rect \|y1Title=Plurality Line 92 ⟶ 103: \|y1=85.01, 8.28, 3.16, 1.78, 0.99, 0.39, 0.20, \|y2=83.8, 8.5, 3.9, 1.4, 1.2, 1.2, 0.2 \|colors=#1f77b4, #d62728 }} }}--> [[File:2012 OWS candidates IRV.svg]] In the IRV election, 29% [[w:Bullet voting\|bullet-voted]] for only one candidate, while the others selected two or three candidates (the maximum allowed):<ref name=":2" /> <!--{{Graph:Chart\|width=200\|height=150 \|xAxisTitle=Number of candidates ranked\|yAxisTitle=Voters (%)\|type=rect\|showValues=format:.2r \|x=1, 2, 3 \|y=29.2, 12.4, 58.4 \|colors=#d62728 }} }}--> [[File:2012 OWS rankings per ballot.svg]] The polling group concluded that "Any of the alternative methods we tested would be better than the method we currently use for our elections."<ref name=":3" /> == References == {{Reflist}} ~~http://manhattanlp.org/occupy-wall-streets-tj-frawley-on-how-to-fix-the-us-electoral-system/~~ ~~http://web.archive.org/web/20130728110015/http://www.paercom.net/downloads/files/Press%20Release.pdf~~ [[Category:Score voting elections]] [[Category:Approval voting elections]]