Join the new world

Even with the shortened time allowed to complete the survey before we move on to Sunday's Country Presidential elections, 56 Canadians made the effort to participate.

Total 112 citizens took part over the course of the three polls.

The last two surveys cost $7,850 (the first being free). About 10% either didn't want the donation or returned it. There have been 16 people sponsoring the work (ranging from those returning the $50 to huge donations in the 4 and 5 digits). A big thank you to all contributors for your answers, your time, your feedback and the funds.

I do not plan to keep any of the money for myself, every dollar collected will go to the work being done. The next survey will have draws based on participation numbers for increased amounts. All participants will qualify with the exception of Trenton Rendell who "does not need my whore money". Just a little something extra made possible by this Community's generosity.

Activity Pattern.

As usual I will start with a little demographic breakdown (in this case that relates to activity and party membership). I was saddened to see that I had lost the casual players. This could be due to different factors; timing and days of the week, tighter deadline, disinterest in the media. We won't know for sure, only that they can't be measured this time.



Because they were a small sample however, it means the rest of the data remains fairly coherent and comparable to previous results.

Party Membership.

An interesting thing happened here, there is an almost even split. Alone, the differences between the top and the bottom category (excluding Norsefire) is actually not statistically significant. One of the things I will be watching for on the 5th is the impact of the 'silent' Rolo factor.



What we expect to see when the real numbers come in on Sunday is that candidates who polled well amongst the top 3 party will do even better. Although with that being said, parties are not homogenous entities, as you will see.

Who is your first choice?

Amongst a large field mixing popular candidates with official ones, Kronos Q was doing well with a slight lead over Simon Boucher-Ruest. What would happened once that list got pared down to only potential official candidates? Would the lead hold?

The answer is yes and it did so in a major way. Those surveyed responded that they intend to support Kronos Q by such a large margin that as long as no surprises happen in the EPIC primaries, this race appears to be all but over.



The only race left is who will place 2nd to 4th. There is no way to measure Rolo Tahmasee's support accurately and the results have him currently in 4th but well within striking distance of Simon Boucher-Ruest and Octavian_F.

As for the later two, the key may end up being presence on voting day. It may also hinge on strategic voting.

The soft vote.

A very large proportion (69.6😵 say they are locked in. This certainty plays in the hands of the frontrunner and means the potential for growth of the other candidates is limited.



The rest is up for grabs for strategic reasons (voting against somebody) or because the voter reserves the right to make his or her mind up at the last minute. It is that soft vote that will decide who finishes 2nd and who finishes 3rd.

Can you purchase victory?



In tight races where the participation totals are lower, the answer is yes. Unfortunately for the trailing politicians, the national trend of being against vote buying (58.9😵 is also present in those waiting to make up their minds. Only 18.7% of the soft vote reported being more likely to vote for a candidate that offers them a gift. If you include those that say it would have no impact, that proportion becomes 50%.



What is more telling is that people will accept gifts, but they get their backs up when it comes to trickery. 76.8% of Canadians would have a negative reaction to a candidate or party trying to trick them into voting for them, a statistics that is identical in the soft vote group (75😵.



The citizenship question.

We also asked a question outside the scope of the election per say but that is an important debate in our society today (and therefore something the incoming President will inherit). Do you agree with the practice of selling citizenship?



Almost 2/3 of you responded that you opposed the practice although it was one of the topics that generated a fair amount of feedback. Multiple participants responded that even though they opposed it, they could support it given the right circumstances/guidelines governing it.

Polls are often black and white, this ethical/mechanics debate is filled with shades of grey.

Where the hard line appears to be drawn however is when asked if evidence of profiting from your elected/named position would affect voting intentions in the future. Canadians are willing to listen if rules are put in place but they don't accept rogue attempts of making your own procedures and laws.

It is the opinion of this publication that when the light of history shines on the consecutive terms of outgoing President Addy Lawrence, it may be this point and his defense of it that affects his legacy the most. Bonuses and colonies come and go but the perceived defense and support of actions or individuals that put Canada in a bad light remains for many.

What helped you decide?

There was a clear demarcation in the factors that people chose to select when sharing what impacted their decision making process. Personality came up the most often. This could be interpreted as a 'likeability' factor, or a perception on how the candidate handles stress, debate and opponents.

Experience came in at number two. We've had a single voice leading us for 4 months and it seems like the electorate, in its wisdom, realizes that we may best be served by hiring an old hand during the transition that will follow (a transition well under way due the inactivity of the current office holder).



Finally we should never underestimate media presence. Campaign articles, including platforms, was a close third. People do want to know, need to know, what you think. If you don't tell them what you plan, they will look elsewhere. This can also be called the policy card or innovation card. Articles are your best chance to show that you are different.

The shocker in this list was that party affiliation was only selected by 8.9% of respondents. So although we wear our party hats during Congressional election (although that has yet to be measured, it seems a safe bet), we remove that hat for the big show. It is a refreshing statistics in that a community of independent thinkers is often a more dynamic one.

It also seems to fly in the face of an old elite controlling the minds and voting intentions of the masses. If a vast majority of Canadians make up their mind on what they are presented (personality, experience and articles) as opposed to what they are told to do/follow (party whip), that can only work in our favour right?

Finally I want to focus your intention on the following article. It has a lot of nice graphs and stats... the theme? Canada is actually doing quite well Worldwide.

Thank you for your time and support.

BONUS

The profile of someone voting for Kronos Q is that he can come from any party. He has generally made up his mind though is more likely than any other group to change his mind and vote strategically. Prefers not to accept gifts and almost universally dislikes trickery at the voting booth. Also almost universally opposes selling citizenship and would not support future candidates that have been shown to profit from their past positions. Personality and experience were the most important factors.

The profile of someone voting for Octavian_F is that predominantly comes from the CPP, smaller parties or Independents (not members). Almost universally does not accept gifts or support selling citizenship. Unanimously opposes trickery. Campaign articles was the biggest factor.

The profile of someone voting for Rolo Tahmasee is that he can come from any party. He is as likely to have his mind set as vote strategically. Will almost universally accept gifts but is against trickery. Is split on the topic of selling citizenship but would not turn away from a candidate that profited from his position in the past. Experience and personality were the most important factors.

The profile of someone voting for Simon Boucher-Ruest is primarily a member of the MDP but with strong support in the CPP and TCO. Mostly has not made up his or her mind. Almost universally is against accepting gifts or its practice, trickery or the selling of citizenships. Is split on whether they would support candidates in the future that profited from their positions. Personality was the most important factor.