browser icon
You are using an insecure version of your web browser. Please update your browser!
Using an outdated browser makes your computer unsafe. For a safer, faster, more enjoyable user experience, please update your browser today or try a newer browser.

First preference poll

The results are in!

I have tabulated the ballots that you marked in class today. I used the Eric method of vote counting. The table below lists the parties in increasing order of their totals. The Party for the People is at the top of the list. Does that mean its platform is most popular? Or the least offensive?

This page also practices the unit of discourse I keep emphasizing. Above is the main assertion or claim (“The Party for the People … least offensive”). The table below is the evidence that supports that assertion. Below the table is the explanation, a discussion of how the evidence relates to the main assertion.

Now that you know about the unit of discourse, you’ll begin seeing it everywhere.


 upper
tier
(1)
middle
tier
(2)
lower
tier
(3)
total
points
The Animal Rights Party134124
The Blue Party117025
Party for the People117025
One Green Kingdom117025
Say Less, Do More117025
The Don't Bully Party115227
The Stoic Independence Party99027
The Democratic Republican Party104430
LGBT People's Party103531
The Community87331
The Turn Around Party102632
American Soil Party78332
The Jade Party85533
Softly Spoken Party69333
American People Party58536
People First Party65737
Bald Eagle Alliance55839
The Underdog Party39639
total votes cast15511158
48%34%18%

You marked the ballots either with a 1, 2, 3, or with a system that I could convert to 1, 2, 3. There were 18 ballots.  The lowest score possible would be 18, which would occur if everyone marked that party a 1. In theory, every party could have a score of 18.

The highest possible score would be 54, which would occur if everyone marked that party a 3. Again, in theory, every party could have a score of 54.

As it turned out, the scores range from 23 to 39. Of special importance is how many 2’s a party got. They are the persuadable voters who should be the primary audience for that party’s position papers. The parties who got the most 3’s should also look carefully at their positions to see what might have been so many voters’ deal breaker.

The cluster below 30 means that those scores are very soft. Look at the totals in the bottom row. Almost half the marks were ones. The voters awarded three times as many 1’s as 3’s. However, on the final ballot, the voters will have to assign eighteen numbers, not three numbers. So some of those 1’s are going to become 12’s and 13’s.

In other words, parties may be in that top cluster not because they got so many 1’s, but because they got so few 3’s. The job of those parties is going to be distinguishing themselves from the others in the top cluster. Several of those parties are single-issue parties. Who could be anti-firefighters? However, if that party wants to stay high on voters’ 1-18 list, it might want to broaden its appeal by adding some platform positions that make it stand out.