Who will win the Election of 2016?

Nasania

Nasania

TNPer
Considering this is a pivotal election year like no other. a time of destiny! of decision! of progress! It is therefore imperative we forecast the future! We can go forward or backwards the most pivotal election will be forecasted here right now! Look at this model and I have calculated that Myroria will be the next Great Delegate of the Greatest region in Nationstates! The Model I use is this old thing.. TNP TNP! :cheese: :tnp:

Now first off(and in more seriousness) I started with the eligible candidates so I looked at the past few elections(Judicial April, March and General Elections from most recently to September of 2014) and counted up the names who appeared more than 3 times on the respective lists of eligible candidates.
I also compared the NPA membership as the NPA is crucial to maintaining the support of a delegate and list of voters. Suffice to say only 40-54% of the voter eligible populace consistently votes on average with only about 22-26 votes needed to win the average election(50%+1). This website shows that the voters are between Salience of "This is an issue I care about, but it is not that important to me. I have many more important issues to deal with and so generally would not drop what I am doing to deal with this and generally would focus on something else." and "This is one of several important issues. Others are more important. I would have to drop this if one of those others arose, but otherwise I will try to focus on this issue." For some reason the May 2015 election shot up to " This issue is very important to me. It is certainly one of my most important issues. I would try very hard to reschedule to handle this issue when it arises." The number of voters and participation in elections has been declining since May 2015(which had a high of 77% participation in the vote which was rather unusual). Though I think that was before the change in which only the Regional Assembly were enfranchised to the entire Forum participants, but I could be wrong.
I classified Salience as 'activity' as it seemed appropriate and was based on how many times their name repeated in the lists I compiled. these are rough estimations and does not account for declining running for office, CTE'd or other factors(Grosseschnauzer is basically gone but would automatically be an eligible and high-profile candidate if he ran for office). Anyhow it does list likely candidates in September.

In all likelihood, the candidates will be few on the ballot(less than 5) with 1 or 2 of the big players in the region and the rest some odd random candidates that have no real chance of getting elected. So I would have to trim it down to those candidates and predict it from there for more accuracy.

Below are the numbers from the Spreadsheet I used for this task. Just copy and Paste them to Excel.

The Democratic Republic of Tomb
falapatorius
flemingovia
Malvad
Romanoffia
SillyString
Syrixia
Yrkidding
Bootsie
Elegarth
Eluvatar
Kialga
Lord Ravenclaw
North East Somerset
plembobria
punk d
Andrew
Gracius Maximus
mcmasterdonia
r3naissanc3r
Zyvetskistaahn
Gladio
Great Bights Mum
primeboy1
QuietDad
Sasten
Abbey Anumia
Corporal Clegg
Cronaal
Crushing Our Enemies
Gulliver
mralexgamingstrategy
Myroria
Nasania
Nebula
Nessuno
Piscivore
Sauceistan
Wolfsea
Xentherida
Amerion
Elkhorn_6
Former English Colony
Gradea
Grosseschnauzer
HuAt
Kalti
Kyorgia
Lord Byron
Severisen
stalin1953
The Grim Reaper
dmb615
Egalotir
Lorbank
Mousebumples
nydna
Pasargad
quak1234
RPI
Sanctaria
Thomas Insaniac
Abacathea
Cascadia
Democratic Donkeys
Empire of Narnia
Esplandia
Funkadelia
Helgraf
Lord Lore
Malashaan
midtkandal
PaulWallLibertarian42
Rataca100
Tortoises
YeahJust
Blue Wolf II
Ceretis
Edward Windsor
Flooforia
Guy
James
JhawnathinJ
JhonsJoe
Kaboom
Lord Nwahs
Mister Masses
Morheim
Mr Insanity
New Haven
Space
TheGreatMing787
True Sebland

45
25
40
25
35
40
12
8
15
20
40
5
45
10
20
3
15
30
55
50
40
35
25
10
25
15
10
5
15
30
15
5
25
15
20
3
5
5
5
10
15
10
35
22
45
25
15
10
10
5
20
25
5
15
5
15
2
5
15
15
10
5
25
10
40
20
15
20
15
10
5
5
10
1
3
3
20
15
5
5
5
3
5
10
3
20
15
5
7
5
5
10
10
13
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

45
40
65
35
60
50
50
45
40
50
40
45
60
55
45
30
40
75
54
56
60
50
40
40
40
30
40
25
50
55
45
55
50
70
45
35
45
45
45
60
60
60
55
25
40
50
40
40
60
60
35
60
40
40
60
55
40
60
70
60
60
30
45
40
45
75
65
30
65
60
60
50
60
30
40
40
60
40
60
40
20
25
10
10
10
45
25
45
45
60
45
45
45

Just Multiply Clout and Salience to get power. then in new column multiply Power by Position. Then Sum up each person's power and Powerposition boxes respectively and divide the PowerPosition sum by Power and that gives you the Weighted Average.

The result of the above Game yield 49.86069 which is Myroria's position but is also shared by Gladio, Sillystring, Syrixia, Elegarth, Cronall, Huat. My numbers should probably be shifted to the right about 5 to where Mousebumbles, McM, R3n, North East Somerset, Crushing Our Enemies, Former English Colony I probably overestimated the clout of those to the left or the number of people over there. Note that this doesn't account for extra dimensions and is also dependent on my assessment of the values being accurate. McM for example would likely be re-elected in my personal estimation so my calculation of his clout is probably lower than it should be. Plus 'position' is a bit off as my intel on that is incomplete(though I am aware that Delegates tend to be on the right side of the spectrum with Tomb being the only recent exception). I figure that Flemingovia is likely going to run and probably Grim Reaper as well(who has yet to win because of strong opposition and being too far away from center). Flemingovia would likely beat him in that election. My system also predicts that Mousebumbles and North East Somerset have a good chance to win as well(provided I placed them right).

Anyhow Pundits away!
 
1. How did you arrive at the scores for each category? Is it based off the questionnaire from last year? Your own voodoo magic?

2. I have a feeling I know what you're doing, but you'll have to explain your maths more clearly.
Just Multiply Clout and Salience to get power. then in new column multiply Power by Position. Then Sum up each person's power and Powerposition boxes respectively and divide the PowerPosition sum by Power and that gives you the Weighted Average.
Click to expand...
The 'natural' interpretation of this is (C x S + C x S x Position) / (C x S) which of course is just 1 + Position.

3. As I understand it, you treat the NPA as a political bloc. This is an interesting interpretation.
 
I'm not really sure how to interpret this. Also given other factors - I find it unlikely that either Mouse or NES would even run for Delegate here.
 
Guy:
1. How did you arrive at the scores for each category? Is it based off the questionnaire from last year? Your own voodoo magic?

2. I have a feeling I know what you're doing, but you'll have to explain your maths more clearly.

The 'natural' interpretation of this is (C x S + C x S x Position) / (C x S) which of course is just 1 + Position.

3. As I understand it, you treat the NPA as a political bloc. This is an interesting interpretation.
Click to expand...

1.
The scores for Salience were determined by how many times a person's name appeared in a list of eligible candidates. I also took a list of Voters and averaged them to come up with numbers for that and compared the list of people in NPA. Basically I used Averages throughout the whole thing. For Position, I used my Little Quiz as a guide(some of them I guessed based on someone's past statements). Like we know Grosseschnauzer was a Social Democrat lawyer from Germany(he said something along that line years ago). People like Rataca100 are practically unknown so I presumed that person is low clout and the position is something outside the ordinary(establishment folks don't vanish overnight and tend to stick around, look at St. George).

Clout unfortunately I took an educated guess at(nobody would fill out a clout estimation form so I could average it and use that number(a tactic Unibot used in his GP studies years ago). Basically Clout works like this: If someone can convince you to change position they have more clout than you, if not they don't. For example If I am able to convince you of the viability of this model, it means I have enough clout to sway you towards my position, if not then I clearly don't. Probably the latter I'm guessing because you're more established as a Gameplayer than me. Based on McM's popularity I have to assume he's got the highest clout of the region. The Predictioneer's Game website goes into how to adjust the variables if you're interested. It's really easy to do and you can do it in your own spread sheet, in fact i encourage you to do so, I've provided the numbers so all you have to do is copy and paste and set u the equations, then tinker the inputs until they're right based on your knowledge. We can compare notes then.

Since I'm doing this for fun anyway, I really didn't put much effort into the 'Clout' part. Though I could really 'science it up' if you want. :P

To be honest alot of real 'science' lately is based on faulty assumptions(Neoliberalism, the orthodox economic position bases it's entire framework on the assumption of consumers being omniscient/Omnipotent which George Soros criticizes, my govt textbook literally had a "warning:biased book" in the preface, and my law book the two authors were clearly bickering with each other about Kantian Universalism vs Moral Fundamentalism, even some math books have errors in calculation). So I fully understand your response to "Voodoo Math". The model here is Expected Utility and Rational Choice Theory, so criticisms of those systems apply to this model. The system was originally based on Organski's International relations theories in the 1960's and originated as a way of calculating a victor in a war with 'clout' being military resources(population, material, GDP) and 'salience' being degree of application of said resources. Some of the oldest articles about this model are from the US Department of Defense in the 1980s. The CIA gave this model a 90% accuracy rate and was better than their own analysts. So if you know what you're doing, it's good. If not, well...

What I don't like about this model is the inputs can be very arbitrary and it's a junk in/junk out basis. Screw up on an input and the output will likely be wonky. Exhibit the fact that the mean is farther left than it should be(it should theoretically sit right on top of McM's position). He's the Ideological center of this region as we speak and the most popular delegate we've had in recent history.

This Flexible input system is a positive in one sense though in that it allows one to tinker with the numbers and see what scenario one would have to engineer for a desired outcome(Engineering the outcome which Bruce Bueno de Mesquita does frequently, it's his business model). When applying this to RL, it's a little easier to estimate clout thanks to various statistical data. A way to calculate clout for NS maybe is (#of offices held*Popularity*Credibility). Another way is to measure change in position over time and divide by their investment in the issue(this is going at it backwards and would best be done by analyzing a past debate in the region which is what I mainly did).

Here's a pic of the US Election of 2016. The one box predicts Hillary while the other predicts Trump(with altered numbers). It suggests to me Sanders Supporters could be a key deciding faction in this mess and is a deadheat at the moment with a lead for Hillary. Either way, this showcases how it would look in your spreadsheet if you choose to give this a shot.
http://i.imgur.com/9Y6R5yI.jpg

The Long form Calculations are this.

Unravelling BDM's Group Decision Model by Jason B Scholz, Gregory J Calbert and Glen A Smith

There's a 2nd way to do it where I use 2D arrays to rank the person's Clout and Salience relative of each other, then Multiply across the 2D arrays while simultaneously summing them up to get overall score. All I need to know then is factor Position. And standardize the results. I use that method if I want the more nuanced view.

[c]Junta[c]People[c]Dictator[c]Junta[c]3[c]1[c]2[c]People[c]1[c]3[c]1[c]Dictator[c]2[c]1[c]3[c]Sum[c]6[c]5[c]6
Also add across left to right in the above box then divide by 3. It will give numbers 2, 1.67, 2. then multiply those by Salience of 4, 3, 3 respectively(comes from below box) and that gives numbers of 8, 5.01, and 6. Keep these numbers on hand. These numbers are appearances.

[c]Junta[c]People[c]Dictator[c]Junta[c]2[c]1[c]1[c]People [c]1[c]2[c]0[c]Dictator[c]1[c]0[c]2[c]Salience[c]4[c]3[c]3

Multiplying the sums in the 2 above boxes gives the base prediction. The below gives a more nuanced.
[c]Junta[c]People[c]Dictator[c]Junta[c]6[c]1[c]2[c]People[c]1[c]6[c]0[c]Dictator[c]2[c]0[c]6[c]Prediction[c]9[c]7[c]8
Remember those numbers? Use them to subtract from the Prediction row. Should give 1, 1.99, and 2. That is winners and losers so Dictator wins in combination with people weirdly enough. You can then use these numbers to adjust the clout box and set it up to reiterate again. Note how these people give themselves higher scores? That's the rational choice aspect. The multiplying weights is just expected value and you might see that method in a Finance course in a university.

2: Formula is almost right it's (C*S*Position)/(C*S). Here is the formula on Page 19. A weighted Mean calc. You're trying to Isolate the Average Position given the weights in the scenario.

3. Well the NPA does vote in elections so it does matter, and counts towards participation so it seemed logical to count them as part of the selectorate(people who have a say in choosing the leader). Winning Coalition is the fraction of that number you need to win. 1/2 Loyalty norm is Democracy. 4/5 is Anarchy, and 1/4 is Oligarchy and 1/10 is Autocracy. Our Enfranchisement system is democratic but due to the apparent low voter turnout except in times of crisis(may 2015 vote I guess was a crisis moment which still is odd and I have yet to figure out why that was so) makes it in practice oligarchical.

McMasterdonia:
I'm not really sure how to interpret this. Also given other factors - I find it unlikely that either Mouse or NES would even run for Delegate here.
Click to expand...

Oh NES is THAT NES from Balder I think, Right? Ok. Then his salience needs to be adjusted perhaps since he's distracted by committing his efforts to another region. A big problem with this model is I don't know how to filter people who will run for office and who won't. What this does say is that those people would likely win if they ran for delegate in this region. I've explained how to do the model yourself above if you want to give it a shot. The numbers are probably nowhere near exact as I was somewhat flippant when I threw it all together. I'm not really surprised by Myroria as she is well established, is trusted and looks to be being groomed for some higher position in our government and has Foreign affairs experience. However because she's NPA she most likely will opt out of running(Gladio does the same thing from what I can tell). She was nominated though last election but declined. Might be a Salience Threshold and so multiply that weight to the activity rate. I expect only 2 major candidates at most and 2 or 3 minor ones who will only get 3 votes at most, based on past average pattern.
 
Maybe his salience needs to be adjusted for the fact that he on average only makes 3 spam posts a month as well?
 
Well as the election has started, time to add an update. From what I can tell Plembobria is ahead(he has slighly more clout:142 vs 140 and is more active than Bootsie:4.9 vs 1.9). His Applied Clout then is 695.8 vs Bootsie's 266. The Weighted mean position value considering the knowns so far(Most of the positions I assigned 50 except Lennart who I assigned to the Plem camp as he's endorsed Plem) was 47 to 49 with Plem being position 0 on the spectrum and Bootsie being position 100, a slight win for Plembobria. Now if Bootsie secures the endorsement of someone like Sillystring and McMasterdonia, than the score goes to 56: Clear victory for Bootsie. Either way it's a close race so far. With more clear knowledge for the positions and the voting blocs I could refine this to more accuracy. So far it appears there are 5 major voting blocs(Military, Establishment/Conservatives like McM, Ravenclaw, St. George, R3n, Libertarians like Romanoffia and Plembobria, Libertarian Socialists like Eluvatar and Lennart, Centrists like Elegarth, Gradea, Syrixia). There are of course other persons not in the main blocs above that I'll just call 'Independents', such as the occasional Extremist Libertarian Fundamentalist Hierarchist, or Anti-Capitalist Chaotic Anti-Government Socialists.

Now regarding the Running mates, Something I did not anticipate was Plembobria picking an Egalitarian(Socialist?) running mate. Odd. Bootsie seems to have picked a standard Communitarian running mate, so a consistent ticket. Another new event is Ravenclaw's announcement that he's running as an independent Vice Delegate(an extreme Stabilitarian one at that). Lord Lore is targeting moderate Liberal Conservatives(what the Imperialists/independents usually are) it seems, despite his being a Libertarian Socialist/egalitarian. Granted the positions when I asked the respondents to take my ideology quizzes, shows that Plembobria is a radical Libertarian, while Bootsie hasn't taken it(I suspect Bootsie is a moderate communitarian or egalitarian). Via a Keyword density analysis, here is the summary of the opening posts in the campaign threads based on their references to an ideal of one the ideologies.

Candidate[c]Liberty[c]Equality[c]Stability[c]Bootsie[c]42(23%)[c]49(27%)[c]90(50%)[c]Praetor[c]1(10%)[c]4(40%)[c]5(50%)[c]Plembobria[c]5(13%)[c]11(29%)[c]22(58%)[c]Yeraennus[c]5(17%)[c]17(57%)[c]8(27%)[c]Lord Lore[c]6(32%)[c]4(21%)[c]9(47%)[c]Lord Ravenclaw[c]3(8%)[c]5(14%)[c]29(78%)

Overall both campaigns have done good in their stabilitarian appeals so far as the default setting of the region's establishment is about 20% Liberty, 25% Equality 55% Stability. I didn't cover the Power and Interests scores, though they were mostly the same in that they were positive for power(Bootsie being the highest of 32% vs Plem's 31%, the vice delegates averaged about 20% except Praetor who scored 30%) while Interests was almost silent. 'Interests' was interesting in that Bootsie scored as slightly idealist while all the other candidates scored positive on Interests(save Ravenclaw and Lord Lore who said nothing on Interests dimension). So far Plembobria's page has more views than Bootsie's(812 vs 733) but Bootsie has slightly more pledged support at the moment(4 vs 3 last I counted).

Note: Clout numbers for Bootsie and Plembobria may be a bit different, as I asked a friend to calculate a new set, suffice to say, it really wasn't that different from the original numbers except it showcases the disparities in power more, McM had like 16% vs my numbers which showed him at 5% of the Power in the region, somewhat comparable to RL Mugabe's portion of power over Zimbabwe(29%), not to say that Mcm's a Socialist dictator as he's not, still pretty high number.
 
I can't make head or tails of your various statistics, which seems to be normal for me. So I'm going to try and give my own analysis in a language that makes sense for everyone who doesn't have a degree in statistics.

This election at its heart has:

1. The incumbent Vice Delegate seeking the Delegacy.
2. The Minister of Home Affairs, former Chief Justice seeking the Delegacy.
3. The Minister of Foreign Affairs seeking the Vice Delegacy.
4. Two RP Moderators seeking the Vice Delegacy.
5. The incumbent (but outgoing) Delegate seeking the Vice Delegacy.
6. The incumbent Speaker seeking another term.

Politically, the most influential candidate is myself following eight months of the delegacy, four months of being an advisor, five months of being Minister of Foreign Affairs on top of my history and influence outside of TNP. I'm followed by the incumbent Speaker who has a long history of being a steadfast neutral, thus equalling a lot of stored influence.

The Delegacy candidate who is most likely to get the "pro-Raven camp" vote is Plembobria given that he is my NS-Son (the third one) between McMasterdonia and myself. As a result, we share a lot of connections and ties with others who are influential in the region. (Fun fact, two of my sons have been cabinet ministers and justices.)

That said, both Bootsie and he are using some elements of policies I'd planned on, or openly discussed and not had chance to get around to. Both are influential to different parts of TNP. Plemby has more influence with the legislative areas and Bootsie has more influence with the roleplay areas.

On the other hand, Bootsie and I sought re-election in May on a joint ticket, and he remained the Chief of Staff for the entire second term, which may add up in his favour. Time will tell. He has not been scrutinised on his performance last term, which could good for him, same for Plembobria.

For Vice Delegate in particular;

Lore is the wildcard candidate, given how unpredictable he can be in government, on the other hand, he has more experience than Praetor and Yera. However he's only recently back to the region after a long break, so time will tell whether he has managed to regain whatever influence he had - again, he'll be semi-influential in the roleplaying areas.

Yera is a newbie candidate, new to this aspect of government, and the most inexperienced candidate for the Vice Delegacy. He's also a roleplayer and a RP Moderator like Lore, so his strength will come from roleplayers.

Praetor has a bonus, given he ran for Delegate last time round, and was able to spend four months as part of the Executive Council being taught by me and others about the government and NationStates politics. He's in a fairly strong position, and I'd say he's in a stronger position than Yera and Lore because of that.

In short:

Bootsie and Plembobria will start evenly matched but Plembobria's experience in the court and the standing from it will allow him to pull ahead. Bootsie may get a late boost from new citizens who recognise him as the Vice Delegate (ironically, sending out the WADP telegrams more often would have given him a larger boost).

For Vice Delegate, whoever wins will have earned their victory.

For Speaker, Zyvet will win unopposed.
 
Please don't call me a Conservative. That's basically flaming.
 
St George:
Please don't call me a Conservative. That's basically flaming.
Click to expand...
How is that flaming? I didn't say anything bad about conservatives(I consider myself a Conservative, though I'm not exactly a traditional American one). Conservatives come in a broad range of flavors, and certainly not all evil, weird or whatever one would call the 'Bad' conservatives. Your score on my quiz indicated you were a conservative(an egalitarian one at that), After all, Obama is a conservative, and is certainly nowhere near as evil as some of his opponents have made him out to be. Tbh your score is more like Progressive Conservatives that seem to have disappeared in recent years. Besides a Nationstates Conservative doesn't mean one is conservative in RL. Just their counterpart ideology. I didn't call you a fascist, though even fascism has some positive things to contribute(just goes a bit overboard with it). Though if you wish, I'll call you an institutionalist or a stabilitarian.

To Ravenclaw: Noted, but no problem as your analysis and my statistics are in complete agreement.
 
I am enjoying the analysis. Looks like it's shaping up to be an exciting election with so many good candidates in the running. I predict the delegate race will be very close, so every vote counts!
 
[me]blinks

The focus on RL political persuasions confuses me.

As does the inclusion of the NPA as a determining factor without any analysis of whether it has ever been.
 
I figure that Flemingovia is likely going to run and probably Grim Reaper as well(who has yet to win because of strong opposition and being too far away from center). Flemingovia would likely beat him in that election.
Click to expand...

Among recent elections i have stood in, i have lost to a confirmed liar, a convicted felon and a newcomer who urged everyone to vote for me rather than them. I am rather insulted that you think i would be daft enough to run again. I lose to EVERYBODY.
 
SillyString:
[class=attorney_general]SillyString[/class] blinks

The focus on RL political persuasions confuses me.

As does the inclusion of the NPA as a determining factor without any analysis of whether it has ever been.
Click to expand...
In Short: Politics is still politics, no matter where you are at. If there are people, there is politics.
Our regional govt was modeled to some extent on RL political persuasions(Social Democracy to be precise as Grosseschnauzer was a German Lawyer and member of that coalition). Plus our govt is made up of people with ideas, and ideologies are simply a reflection of that. I've seen discussions in our forum debating free speech(Libertarianism) vs maintaining Forum order(conservative stance), along with debates calling for greater Equality vs oligarchy. It's only natural to use the RL counterparts to our NS ideologies. People are still political and their ideologies are going to influence whatever they say or do(unconsciously or otherwise). There is of course need for caution. In RL extremism gets people killed, in Nationstates, it's more annoying than deadly, but in similar manner both can cause harm(emotional vs physical). In delegate administration, it can mean we have a Laissez-Faire hands off delegate, a Delegate focused on promoting diversity and banning nondiversity supporters, or a delegate that is obsessed with forum law, rules, and honorable conduct.

With regards to the NPA, their members vote in elections and they influence our policy. Consider how their influence was crucial in removing illegitimate delegates in years past(especially the Pixiedance incident and other coups). Without an army of organized supporters that will defend him/her, the delegate will be vulnerable to coups(as happened often when Nationstates was first started). The NPA also has a vested interest in how the delegate will handle military policy(our delegate is head of the armed forces). The delegate can order them to zones of conflict and they add some clout to interregional decisions, and the military can unseat the delegate if they do illegitimate things(or in a most extreme scenario, one of our generals decides to play dictator and coup a mediocre delegate, such things do happen in other regions.) It would be unwise, I think, to ignore this bloc that votes in our elections, plus military participation counts to activity and allows me to filter who are the people in the region that will likely vote in the election. NPA members consistently vote in elections I've found. Security council also is included(though they are usually grouped under the establishment header when I do these analyses). Finally some political theory suggests that one cannot truly be considered a citizen if they haven't served in their nation's armed forces(comes from Machiavelli I think). Considering NS history, political theory, and the fact they vote and have interests they seek to protect, it's only wise to count their opinion in political decisions.

Among recent elections I have stood in, I have lost to a confirmed liar, a convicted felon and a newcomer who urged everyone to vote for me rather than them. I am rather insulted that you think i would be daft enough to run again. I lose to EVERYBODY.
Click to expand...
Huh? :o That's quite a list. The Felon might have been very influential as well and (even more important) had a lot of supporters. By my estimates, your constitutional knowledge, friendship with McM and R3n and such make you quite an influential person(enough it should get you elected). That said my analysis and data were still somewhat new when I posted that(I still don't quite have a filter for who's going to run in elections yet(though I can be informed of likely cnadidates from someone with experience, which in this case happened more recently), but when the election is started, I can with a reasonable degree forecast it). Remember that position is an important variable, and TNP and political actors change position over time(along with clout, and activity). What would get you elected today, would not get you elected years ago because of the community position. Consider what your opponents supporters want and how organized they were, and what you support and how well organized your supporters were. Individually you may have clout but your supporters(called the selectorate) may find the other candidate has more going for them. So 7 possibilities that come to mind based on the statistical analysis: 1:the felon bribed them or had a better deal than you. 2:you irked your potential supporters by saying stupid or offensive things, 3:You didn't have many supporters to begin with or they had more supporters than you, possibly by being excellent coalition builders, 4:You are marketing to the wrong group,5: Your supporters just have a habit of being inactive or just not around when you need them, or your opponent just happens to have an army of fanatics, 6:Bad Luck 7:All of the above. I wasn't there, so I have no exact clue what happened in those past elections, I am basing the numbers on the situation now. Finally, there is the possibility you have negative clout, which I hadn't considered beforehand. You'd still be influential, just not in the way you want. Which of the above best matches your situation?
 
Nasania:
Note: Clout numbers for Bootsie and Plembobria may be a bit different, as I asked a friend to calculate a new set, suffice to say, it really wasn't that different from the original numbers except it showcases the disparities in power more, McM had like 16% vs my numbers which showed him at 5% of the Power in the region, somewhat comparable to RL Mugabe's portion of power over Zimbabwe(29%), not to say that Mcm's a Socialist dictator as he's not, still pretty high number.
Click to expand...

:cry:

St George:
Please don't call me a Conservative. That's basically flaming.
Click to expand...

:rofl: we need to change the forum rules to reflect that....

Great Bights Mum:
I am enjoying the analysis. Looks like it's shaping up to be an exciting election with so many good candidates in the running. I predict the delegate race will be very close, so every vote counts!
Click to expand...

I agree - this election is going to be really interesting! I'm a bit disappointed by all the joint tickets though, but unfortunately that idea can be traced back to SillyString and my campaign....
 
Well, you're definitely spot on me about being a NationStates centrist.

Funny how I also happen to be an RL one as well.
 
Nasania:
Plus our govt is made up of people with ideas, and ideologies are simply a reflection of that. I've seen discussions in our forum debating free speech(Libertarianism) vs maintaining Forum order(conservative stance), along with debates calling for greater Equality vs oligarchy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, all of this is tautological.
It's only natural to use the RL counterparts to our NS ideologies. People are still political and their ideologies are going to influence whatever they say or do(unconsciously or otherwise).
Click to expand...
This is where you make an unsubstantiated leap. People are capable of making distinctions in their stances based on the world those stances affect, and it is a common mistake, but a mistake nonetheless, to attempt to tie RL beliefs too closely to a political simulation that derives from different fundamental principles.

Speaking only for myself, for example, I am a fervent democrat (in the sense of pro-democracy) IRL, but regularly dabble in monarchy in NS, and I do not consider this to be a violation of my most dearly held beliefs because NS has monarchs, unquestionably. The Founder is nothing if not a ruler empowered by god, a god named Admin. If they wish it, their control can be absolute. This is simple fact. As such, NS political theory that tries to derive from RL truths, where there are no such people, is flawed, and so are its conclusions.

As another example, I am a big proponent of finding alternatives to court systems. I do not like how they often play out in NS, and I think there are other options which work better and do more good. Pure legalism is often harmful, especially when it is implemented straight from RL with no tweaking or adjusting, and not all communities can survive it. Systems like TNP's fiqh, underutilized though it is, provide an opportunity to experiment and play and test that is invaluable in developing a better way.

Similarly, I became a flemingovian early on, and have remained one, and advocated for flemingovianism being adopted as the official TNP religion - while IRL I find state religions detestably immoral.

I am not the only one whose NS beliefs and actions diverge sharply from RL beliefs and actions, and I think you ignore that at your peril (or, rather, at your analysis' peril).

With regards to the NPA, their members vote in elections and they influence our policy. [...] It would be unwise, I think, to ignore this bloc that votes in our elections, plus military participation counts to activity and allows me to filter who are the people in the region that will likely vote in the election. NPA members consistently vote in elections I've found.
Click to expand...
I'm not questioning whether NPA members vote, or whether they're an important part of the region. I'm questioning whether they vote as a bloc, and whether "the NPA" can actually be called an entity that determines policy or results. NPA members have their own opinions, and they vote for the delegate candidate they think is best - and thus far, you've presented no evidence that they tend to agree on who that is at a rate that is statistically significantly different from the general population, nor that their votes are determined by factors related to the NPA at all.

Finally some political theory suggests that one cannot truly be considered a citizen if they haven't served in their nation's armed forces(comes from Machiavelli I think).
Click to expand...
Talk about cribbing blindly from RL, man.

Please clarify for me: Are you actually suggesting that neither Lord Ravenclaw nor I are "true citizens" of TNP?
 
SillyString:
Please clarify for me: Are you actually suggesting that neither Lord Ravenclaw nor I are "true citizens" of TNP?
Click to expand...
Disappointing, if so.
 
How did you sort people into categories such as conservative, centrist, progressive, etc.?

I'm flattered that the statistics show me as the best person to lead TNP as its glorious Eternal Delegate, but unfortunately I just do not have the time to run in this election.
 
Myroria:
I'm flattered that the statistics show me as the best person to lead TNP as its glorious Eternal Delegate, but unfortunately I just do not have the time to run in this election.
Click to expand...
>_> TAKE MY TIME >_>
 
Sillystring:
This is where you make an unsubstantiated leap. People are capable of making distinctions in their stances based on the world those stances affect, and it is a common mistake, but a mistake nonetheless, to attempt to tie RL beliefs too closely to a political simulation that derives from different fundamental principles.
Click to expand...
I agree they make distinctions based on their particular 'world' so to speak(even in RL, positions change and move about-see Hillary Clinton's rhetoric as a perfect example: for an In game example look at the recent statistic of rhetoric of the buzzwords, all of the candidates, save Yera, OP's were pro-regional govt positions even though their quiz scores and previous rhetoric were vastly different), I disagree on how much they make that distinction. You haven't really substantiated with a census how much of a radical change in ideological position you suggest there is. I have conducted a census of about 300 people in NS, and I asked them to both do RL and IC results on my quizzes(and I have frequently stated that RL stance=/=GP stance). There was a difference, but surprisingly not alot. Elegarth is one example that comes to mind, He scored a little more conservative in his IC stance(He's a centrist in RL). Plembobria, one of the current candidates, scored Anarchist, and on the in game context quiz, scored radical Libertarian.(little more moderate, but not a lot), There was only one person in my quiz-results that actually deviated from the general gravitation to "Stability", an Anarcho-syndicalist who became even more extreme in the IC pov when he took it. How does one do a keyword density analysis? Compile a dictionary with buzzwords used by a particular faction, tally it up, take proportion of what kind of buzzwords they use and that tells you what their bias is. What's the reason for the more conservative/establishmentarian stance in game? Rational Self-Interest: the gamers are in charge in the Game realm, while in RL they're not, and so less establishmentarian in RL. Despite that, NS in general has a left of center bent, with many more anarcho-communists than say conservatives(which might explain why for some bizarre reason, St. George thinks 'conservative' is a bad word). What is the definition of a conservative in the first place? According to wikipedia(in which generally any weirdo can edit)A conservative is someone who desires the status quo, and does not see much value in changing things for the sake of changing them(is this not the very argument used by McM and Flem in the RA on some bills?). Further from wiki, "Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, and pride in one's nation"(in Nationstates context this is region). Socialism believes that Equality should be the priority, and power disparities should be radically reduced to insure a more equitable society(redistribution in NS would not be done economically, it would be done through via political privileges), democracy is good and hierarchy is bad. Communitarians try to marry aspects of Conservatism with Socialism(this is what Zenny is). There is also the Libertarians who prize personal autonomy, individuality, free speech, limited regional govt interference in the lives of a region's residents. Remember ideology is not policy. the two are completely different. We also do have some unique ideologies in Nationstates,(Raiderism believes in the glory of conquest for funzies), Defenderism seems to be focused on some kind of Militarist Pacifism(many defenders do not ascribe to defenderism is one assumption I have, and found one Defender who scored Raider on my quiz). There's Cormac's ideology(my quizzes have successfully typed him in his own words) which is some kind of contrarian extreme Pragmatism(ie Oppositionist opportunism). Imperialists and Independents advocate an ideology straight from Realpolitik, which is in turn based on Liberal Conservative Pragmatism. Then there is Belschaft who's a Libertarian Socialist and heavily Pragmatic.

Sillystring:
Speaking only for myself, for example, I am a fervent democrat (in the sense of pro-democracy) IRL, but regularly dabble in monarchy in NS, and I do not consider this to be a violation of my most dearly held beliefs because NS has monarchs, unquestionably. The Founder is nothing if not a ruler empowered by god, a god named Admin. If they wish it, their control can be absolute. This is simple fact. As such, NS political theory that tries to derive from RL truths, where there are no such people, is flawed, and so are its conclusions.

As another example, I am a big proponent of finding alternatives to court systems. I do not like how they often play out in NS, and I think there are other options which work better and do more good. Pure legalism is often harmful, especially when it is implemented straight from RL with no tweaking or adjusting, and not all communities can survive it. Systems like TNP's fiqh, underutilized though it is, provide an opportunity to experiment and play and test that is invaluable in developing a better way.

Similarly, I became a flemingovian early on, and have remained one, and advocated for flemingovianism being adopted as the official TNP religion - while IRL I find state religions detestably immoral.

I am not the only one whose NS beliefs and actions diverge sharply from RL beliefs and actions, and I think you ignore that at your peril (or, rather, at your analysis' peril).
Click to expand...

That's pretty consistent with my findings, Most folks in NS tend to become much more, what would be called "right wing" in RL in their regional politics. I prefer to use In game scores rather than RL ones-the RL measuring stick allows me to measure how much of a difference there is from RL, otherwise I'm stuck with useless relativism), Regarding how regional govts work, you are correct that a Founder would function as an Absolute Monarch in controlling a region, however that's only important if that region has residents(often times, dissatisfied residents will emigrate and/or found a new region of their own, an example is Nazi Europa and National Socialist Ministries who are practically enemies of each other), then the Regional influence of that Monarch would be "Hermit". Daniel Defoe explored the concept of hermits as being the purest form of Absolute Monarchy in Robinson Crusoe(so you are incorrect that RL could not supply lessons for NS, Monarchism is a RL ideology that readily lends itself to NS politics). In RL, simply choosing to leave an Absolute Monarchy, or some kind of Tyranny is often more difficult(Look at Saudi Arabia, or DPRK) Individuals have a little more clout online, so regional delegates have to be more accommodating to their constituents if they desire to be influential. In addition one can still be a democrat and advocate State Religion(The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was democratic in the sense it got to power, but had a fundamentalist agenda, the very undemocratic Military Coup is much more secular, so Democracy=/=opposing a state religion, if all the people want a state religion, it technically would be undemocratic not to establish one). There are also many Monarchists that advocate the concept of a democratic Monarchy. British Tradition relies on this, Sweden is another example, and there are many Democratic-minded Monarchs in RL and Nationstates, Cerian Quilor was a self-proclaimed Socialist, yet was the King of Kantrias, there is the Queen of Balder who is left-Libertarian etc. It was once called 'Enlightened Absolutism'. All of that said, I use the labels as General categories(it's an average), so it doesn't delve much into one's indiosyncracies, though a way to do it is specify various policy areas and ask for a summary of one's belief in that field, and do a tally of that(which is what most Q&A from voters in Candidate OP's are-a way of zeroing in on position of that candidate).

Sillystring:
nasania:
With regards to the NPA, their members vote in elections and they influence our policy. [...] It would be unwise, I think, to ignore this bloc that votes in our elections, plus military participation counts to activity and allows me to filter who are the people in the region that will likely vote in the election. NPA members consistently vote in elections I've found.
Click to expand...
I'm not questioning whether NPA members vote, or whether they're an important part of the region. I'm questioning whether they vote as a bloc, and whether "the NPA" can actually be called an entity that determines policy or results. NPA members have their own opinions, and they vote for the delegate candidate they think is best - and thus far, you've presented no evidence that they tend to agree on who that is at a rate that is statistically significantly different from the general population, nor that their votes are determined by factors related to the NPA at all.
Click to expand...
[/quote] Well ok here is the results of the NPA voting behavior in General Elections, and some special elections up to January of 2015. Mind you incumbents tend to be re-elected almost automatically(Voting behavior no matter what context it is). In January of 2015 out of the 73 popular voters, 16 were NPA: 11 voted for McM, 71% of popular vote went to McM(he's an incumbent so not a shock, plus an NPA member). Vice Delegate gets interesting. Out of the 75 who participated in that election, 55% of the voters voted for You(6 of your voters were NPA members), while Tomb(an NPA member, since you clarified you weren't) received 63% of the NPA vote(10 NPA soldiers). In February 2015 Special Election, 59 total voters, 69% voted Tomb(70% of the NPA voted Tomb-16 soldiers). The Feb 2015 election there was some splitting of the vote as 2 NPA voted for Eluvatar, one NPA member voted for Cormac(Blue Wolf to be precise). May 2015 Special Election with 54 voters(76% voted for Eluvatar), 2/3 of the NPA for Eluvatar(10 soldiers), while 20%(3 soldiers) voted for Blue Wolf II. September 2015 had 57 voters with You winning with 64% of the vote, was a little more split in who NPA members voted for, there also weren't as many NPA votes in the election in general. Bootsie got 3 votes from NPA members, while you got 5. None of them voted for Sytarenne, even though in terms of the overall popular vote, Sytarenne got the same number as Bootsie. Vice Delegate portion which had 56 voters, had 3 NPA vote for Myroria, 2 for Flem, and 3 formally abstain. January 2016 General Election had 48 voters. Raven received 8 NPA votes, everyone else received no NPA votes. Vice Delegate-wise Bootsie received 6 NPA votes, and Flem received 2. 1 NPA member formally abstained. in May 2016, with 58 popular votes in general, Lord Ravenclaw received 11 NPA votes, and Grim got 1. Ravenclaw received a majority of the popular vote as well. based on the past general election pattern, most of the NPA vote the delegate and VD that wins the popular vote as well, with the exception of the January 2015 election, and if I recall Tomb leveraged his NPA membership in that election. When I classify them as a "Bloc", it's a general label and I assume they can individually pick a position, but I also assume they represent a unique interest group that is different from the rest of the population because of their role in the region. most NPA members don't vote at all based on the statistics. In addition the above statistics are less than 30 people, so measuring something to be statistically significant based on a random sample is nigh impossible in that scenario. There is also a heavy amount of overlap in various roles(Gladio is both a Centrist and NPA, McM is both a Conservative and NPA, And of course there's the various Security Councillors)
.

Sillystring:
nasania:
Finally some political theory suggests that one cannot truly be considered a citizen if they haven't served in their nation's armed forces(comes from Machiavelli I think).
Click to expand...
Talk about cribbing blindly from RL, man.

Please clarify for me: Are you actually suggesting that neither Lord Ravenclaw nor I are "true citizens" of TNP?
Click to expand...
No I am not suggesting that(I am a bit surprised that you are not an NPA member, but oh well), My RL views and GP views are a little bit different, as anyone's is. I was using that as an example of modern political theory that shows the importance of military in citizen participation of their nation(in Machiavelli's case it was to end the mercenaries' control so they weren't dependent on the arms of another:Mercs would often coup the local princes and were seen as dangerous by him.) My main use of NPA as a 'bloc' is to help gauge activity level(along with list of eligible voters over several election cycles). That way I can figure out who's important in the region and who's not(because let's be honest, out of the 5000 nations in TNP, and the several hundred Forum board members, how many of these people are actually participating in the region in some manner?) When I calculate positions I gauge it based on common interests, who they relate to most, ideology(my quiz and keyword density analysis), policy stance etc. I then proceed to do the weighted mean calculation.

A summary of my objective in using a RL model to NS is to see how well it works in NS context, how NS politics differs from RL(if at all), and see how far it can be applied. In otherwords, it's an experiment.

Eluvatar:
TIL I was a socialist.

Hm.
Click to expand...
Well specifically your rhetoric in documents like "On Regional Sovereignty" was Libertarian Socialist, Liberal Labor, or Moderate Libertarian Liberal. I would call it liberal, but that's not specific enough and would be confused with libertarians. Based on that, you most likely are sympathetic to the Green Party if you extrapolated that ideology to RL. You would disagree with mainstream democrats because they are too conservative for your liking. You might sympathize with left-Libertarians as well.

Myroria:
How did you sort people into categories such as conservative, centrist, progressive, etc.?

I'm flattered that the statistics show me as the best person to lead TNP as its glorious Eternal Delegate, but unfortunately I just do not have the time to run in this election.
Click to expand...
I sort them based on which Abstract Ideal they value in a 5D Cartesian system. I find out their position by either quizzing them, or doing a Keyword density analysis of a document some person on NS wrote. The Buzzwords you choose to use determine your bias. For example, look up Lord Ravenclaw's Campaign OP and tally up the references to Region, Community, Individuals, people, Citizens, enterprise, reason, government, group, freedoms, consent, etc. In other words, it's a methodical version of Buzzword Bingo. The labels I use are for easy look up in wikipedia, and then you can extrapolate what the NS counterpart of that description would be, granted wikipedia isn't the best in describing some things. I also use respondent's self-identity, though I don't necessarily take it at Face-value as many seem to use the labels that are politically expedient/correct/convenient. The first 3 words that pop up for Ravenclaw are Vice & delegate(Irrelevant words for ideological analysis), and Security(55 times actually). Then I find proportion and compare to the Political Objectives Test. About 74% of Ravenclaw's rhetoric is Stabilitarian/legalist(references to the govt, region, citizens, security, law, etc.) 26% is Egalitarian(Community, group, people, etc.) Here's the tool to use. Based on this, he seems to view the Vice Delegate position as being primarily a security position. He also tends to have highly legalistic rhetoric in his statements overall. http://tools.seobook.com/general/keyword-density/

Here is a thread where you can find some charts of the positions in NS.

Shame you're not running, I suspect you'd do quite well in the election.
 
Nasania:
Now regarding the Running mates, Something I did not anticipate was Plembobria picking an Egalitarian(Socialist?) running mate. Odd. Bootsie seems to have picked a standard Communitarian running mate, so a consistent ticket.
Click to expand...

Nasania:
Communitarians try to marry aspects of Conservatism with Socialism(this is what Zenny is).
Click to expand...

St George:
Please don't call me a Conservative. That's basically flaming.
Click to expand...

I think I'm being flamed too. :cry:
 
Praetor:
Nasania:
Now regarding the Running mates, Something I did not anticipate was Plembobria picking an Egalitarian(Socialist?) running mate. Odd. Bootsie seems to have picked a standard Communitarian running mate, so a consistent ticket.
Click to expand...

Nasania:
Communitarians try to marry aspects of Conservatism with Socialism(this is what Zenny is).
Click to expand...

St George:
Please don't call me a Conservative. That's basically flaming.
Click to expand...

I think I'm being flamed too. :cry:
Click to expand...
Umm... I've already explained I wasn't flaming him(or you for that matter)...at least it's not my intent. My apologies anyhow to both of you,. Though I frankly find it rather disturbing that 'conservative' seems to have become a bad word.

It's in one of the lectures above.

I myself am a conservative of a sort(in RL and GP), and sympathetic to communitarians.

Can someone please explain to me why 'Conservative' is being treated as a flame word? I seem to be missing something.
From what I understand conservatives are necessary for a balanced and stable government. Prudence is a virtue that conservatives are good at(at least the moderate ones). I certainly understand the extremists are bad. but it frankly doesn't seem very fair to single out even potentially moderate conservatives as 'bad'.
 
Conservatism in the UK is... not a good thing. It's symbolic with destroying the working classes, manufacturing, hating Europe, social security cuts while protecting banks and nuclear missiles. And a lot of other highly debatable things such as the ATOS Disability Assessments, people with learning difficulties dying alone in a freezing flat with no power, gas or water because they couldn't keep their medication cool and they had been sanctioned for being five minutes late to an interview.

If someone in the UK says you're a Conservative or that "Didn't you vote Tory?", they essentially mean, "I think you're a prick!"
 
Lord Ravenclaw:
Conservatism in the UK is... not a good thing. It's symbolic with destroying the working classes, manufacturing, hating Europe, social security cuts while protecting banks and nuclear missiles. And a lot of other highly debatable things such as the ATOS Disability Assessments, people with learning difficulties dying alone in a freezing flat with no power, gas or water because they couldn't keep their medication cool and they had been sanctioned for being five minutes late to an interview.

If someone in the UK says you're a Conservative or that "Didn't you vote Tory?", they essentially mean, "I think you're a prick!"
Click to expand...
So in otherwords, the UK conservatives have become a bunch of Far Right Tea Party extremists. That's sad. I was aware they had gone insane but not to that extent. I view the Tea Party and groups like them to be closer to Anarchist Fundamentalists(like the Neo-nazi National Anarchist Movement). Well suffice to say my use of conservative is much older than them and not meant in hostility. It's basically the “don't rock the boat” or “if it isn't broke, don't fix it” ideology. Check out this article on Red Tories and Communitarianism. It's closer to what I mean by conservative. Red Tories are actually the more traditional conservative as they date back to the progressive era. They tend to support the Social Safety Net for Common good-Noblesse Oblige reasons, and realize that destroying the social safety will send the masses to extremist leftists that will provide their needs(Bismark practically invented the Welfare State for this reason). Red Tories basically like traditional stuff(Monarchy, religion, sensible government etc.) but also like New Deal type programs as well. Historically they were also opposed to Free Market absolutism that characterizes the Thatcherite crew these days, sometimes advocating Mercantilist stances. In short Red Tories are leftist conservatives or conservative wing of the labour party. Moderate Center-Right is another word for it. Bonapartism is also within that overall space(Napoleon's rhetoric is like that of a Communitarian). QE2 is also a communitarian and tries to balance left and right wings. Problem that communitarians often encounter is being called far right by extreme leftists and called communist by extreme right(reactionary High Tories). They sometimes get mistaken for centrists by some moderates. Anarcho-Capitalists and anarcho-syndicalists(think Ayn Rand) are communitarians and left-conservatives most outspoken opponents.
 
I was joking. :P

Frankly it doesn't matter what people call me as it doesn't change what I am. :shrug:

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the Delegate debate and hopefully the Vice Delegate debate.
 
Nasania:
A summary of my objective in using a RL model to NS is to see how well it works in NS context, how NS politics differs from RL(if at all), and see how far it can be applied. In otherwords, it's an experiment.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

Color me highly skeptical, but I suppose that is part of the point.
 
I have an absolutely 100%, totally accurate and entirely correct psychic prediction as to who will win the race for Delegate!

Someone will will. :lol:


Roman, World Famous Psychic, widely renowned for Predicting The Past!

I predict that George Washington was elected first President of the United States. (See? I am absolutely correct!)
 
Well we have gone through the debates and voting has begun. So time to give my opinion on the debates. And for those interested, I have already cast my vote for the candidates I think will best represent our region. Be sure to go out and vote this weekend!

I would have to say Bootsie won the debate (and for a brief moment had more views on his campaign page than Plembobria). Bootsie responded to questions much quicker and coherently than Plembobria(especially in regard to NPA matters). I suspect this is due to Bootsie already having some experience in govt as having served as Vice Delegate under Lord Ravenclaw. Plemb's answers though were much shorter in written content. Plembobria also a took a more hardline stance regarding interregional relations(particularly regarding coups in other regions). A Keyword Density Analysis also reveals that Plembobria was more hardline in the debate: Liberty-18%, Equality=20%, Stability=62% and Bootsie was Liberty=21%, Equality=24%, Stability=54%. As of right now the two candidate views on their threads are about even, with Plembobria slightly ahead. I still suspect that Plembobria will win the Delegate election with the support of Establishmentarians bringing along many of the other voters, but it's going to be close. Libertarians might be the ones who decide this election, and many of them I think are going to vote for Plemb. Bootsie will capture many egalitarian, centrist, and communitarian voters effectively, balancing the vote.

In the second debate, I'd say it's a Draw, but considering that Lord Ravenclaw is a strong candidate, I'd say the other candidates did well in the debate. Ravenclaw's was as expected, in that he referenced his experience repeatedly throughout his portions(about 13% of the time). Praetor also emphasized security during the debate, though he is more of a communitarian in his overall stance based on what he said in the Bootsie/Praetor Ticket OP. The most interesting was Yeraennus, who I fully expected to use populist "Vice Delegate of the People rhetoric", but instead seemed to have gone with a rather Liberal stance in his positions, and didn't emphasize security nearly as much in his rhetoric. Considering Plemb's libertarian stances in the past, makes sense, I'd take a bet that Yeraennus is a Left-libertarian based on the recent data. In his rhetoric here he was a centrist Libertarian-Establishmentarian. Because he has a Joint ticket with Plemb, I suspect this will enable him and Plemb to capture Libertarians in the region(though Romanoffia and Lord Lore will capture a few votes from Libertarians as well I suspect), and maybe even some egalitarians on their ticket as a whole. Most Egalitarians and some centrists will vote for Praetor.
Here are the Keyword Density numbers.
Lord Ravenclaw: Liberty=13%, Equality=8% Stability=79%
Praetor: Liberty=16%, Equality=18%, Stability=66%
Yeraennus: Liberty=34%, Equality=29%, Stability=37%
My prediction for the VD winner is Lord Ravenclaw due to his establishment position and consistent support he's had throughout the last 8 months as delegate. Praetor and Yeraennus have good ideas, but aren't as well known.

However, my prediction could be off, but what we can say is as Romanoffia has indeed foreseen, someone will indeed win. lol
 
Well the election is over, and Plembobria is indeed the winner as I predicted 2 and a half weeks ago, and not far off in the proportions I expected(Plemb beat Bootsie by only 9 votes). Lord Ravenclaw I didn't anticipate casting his hat in the Vice Delegate race, but his win with 45 votes is no surprise to me(comparable to the R3n prediction for Delegate). They both got establishment support and Plemb was a little more active in getting votes(Plemb did a last minute "vote for me!" telegram to the region, while Bootsie didn't), and Ravenclaw is part of the regional Establishment. Basic Gist of what happens in elections, just replace money with some other goodie or privilege. Here is article outlining the basic mechanism

I am little surprised that this election was more active than it has been over the past few cycles(83 this cycle vs the usual 50 something we've been getting).
Those who got 2nd Place were Bootsie(in the Delegate Election), Praetor(in the Vice Delegate Election), and the Mysterious RON for Speaker.

Also here is a pic showing how my calculations work. Here is a pic of the TNP situation Notice here is a New Clout, which is based on quak's numbers he supplied, and he's been of great help in calibrating the information and I wish to give appreciation. Give him applause. :clap: There were others that were also helpful in supplying input(PM and on this thread) that helped me calibrate the situation(even if they were totally lost in how to do the calculation aspect, but did supply inputs) and I wish to give my thanks to them as well. *Give them applause* :clap:

Now I am going to supply pics that I hope will clarify how the methodology works. This picture shows how I calculated who's names will be on the Player list and hence be factored into the prediction calculation, basically it asks "how many times did their name appear in TNP compiled lists of eligibile candidates, NPA rolls, citizen rolls etc?" Here's a pic of method 2 Which involves ranking people according to their preferences and doing some multiplication across arrays. A short example is provided in this post under "1: Spolier; Long explanation about scores;Spoiler:2nd Method" Hopefully this clarifies things so others can do these calculations and independently verify the results.

Anyhow, I can collect my winnings from my bet. :2c: :shifty:

I wonder who's going to run in the election 4 months from now? The sooner I have of list of potential candidates the sooner I can forecast it.

If you know of any ongoing diplomatic conferences, or developing situations, please post below so I can investigate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top