Quote:
Originally Posted by firebug
A bit of math behind my opinion...
Using the 33/30/30 split from the Leger survey would result in
McIver 165/500 voters
Nenshi 150/500
Higgins 150/500
I applied a follow-through (i.e. showing up to actually vote) metric of
McIver 40%
Nenshi 50%
Higgins 30%
Results:
Nenshi 75/186 voters (40%)
McIver 66/186 (35%)
Higgins 45/186 (24%)
This would result in 186/500 voters actually showing up (~37%) an number far higher than any election in the past decade.
Admittedly, my estimates for follow-through are completely biased, but reflect the level of participation I have witnessed in the electorate.
|
Again, and by all means correct me if i am wrong, Nenshi's big support comes from the 18-34 YO demographic, which historically has been the lowest turnout when it comes to actually going out and voting.
This is why i think his numbers mean less than any of the others in a poll of any size. If I am incorrect, then I would agree he is right there in terms of getting elected, and good for him if it happens and a result I would be happy with if i lived there. I just do not believe, if following past elections, this will be the case. To much history to ignore...though if the 58% of people who staunchly say they are turning out to vote include all those in his demo, then history wont be repeated.