Presidential Exit Poll Results: The Embassy a Major Factor - Not a Deciding One

[Lime]

EuroWeekly Febuary 2021 Presidential Exit Poll Results
The Embassy a Major Factor - Not a Deciding One
By Lime
​

EuroWeekly held a February 2021 Presidential Election Exit Poll between the 23rd to the 25th of February. The aim of the poll was to examine why voters made their decision to support a particular candidate in the second round of voting, specifically looking at the potential impact The Embassy scandal had on their decision. The exit poll received 31 respondents, however one respondent who had stated that they had not voted in the February 2021 Presidential Election was excluded from completing the rest of the survey, meaning the “real” number of respondents was 30. At a 95% confidence level, the margin of error is 13% however, like any poll conducted in Europeia this should be taken with a grain of salt, as polls are not conducted scientifically. Graphs displaying Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters shall be displayed on the left hand side, while graphs displaying Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters shall be displayed on the right hand side.

53.3% of respondents said they voted for the Calvin Coolidge/Istillian ticket, while 46.7% said they voted for the Pichtonia/Kuramia ticket. This almost exactly reflects the final result in the second round where the Calvin Coolidge/Istillian ticket won 52.9%, and the Pichtonia/Kuramia ticket won 47.1%. Based on their results here, respondents were redirected to different sections to allow for analysis of each candidate's supporters. When considering the results of the exit poll, it must be remembered that slightly more Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters took the poll than Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters and this may or may not be reflected in the results.

When asked if they believed Europeia was on the right track prior to the election, 85.7% of Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters said they did believe Europeia was on the right track while 14.3% said they were unsure. In comparison, just 62.5% of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian voters said Europeia was on the right track, while 31.3% said they were unsure, and 6.3% said that Europeia was on the wrong track.

These results are not very surprising, those who supported an incumbent’s re-election bid are naturally likely to believe the region is on the right track, while those supporting a challenger are less likely to believe so. What is perhaps surprising, is that a clear majority of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian voters believed that Europeia was on the right track, and yet they still chose to support a challenger. These results suggest that respondents were broadly happy with the direction the region was heading in, and there was no desire for a radically different direction - perhaps a reason why the Forilian/Monkey ticket received little support.

Supporters of both tickets viewed most of the same issues are their most important issues in the election, with a few exceptions. Foreign Affairs was the top issue for both ticket’s supporters, although more Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters viewed it as one of their most important issues. Communications was a far larger issue for Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters than Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters, perhaps highlighting the popularity of Minister SkyGreen, while Interior and Culture were viewed as bigger issues for Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters, two areas of potential weakness during Pichtonia’s term.

The biggest divergence in what supporters of both tickets viewed as the most important issue was the Europeian Republican Navy (ERN). The ERN was a relatively unimportant issue for most Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters with just 35.7% of their supporters listing it as one of their most important issues. This is strongly contrasted with Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters who ranked it as their second most important issue at 68.8%. This strongly suggests that The Embassy scandal was a major issue in the minds of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters, with Calvin Coolidge and Istillian making the argument that the ERN should not have been involved in The Embassy operation, and making ERN policy one of their top issues in the campaign.

Spoiler: Pichtonia/Kuramia Supporters: Why or why not?

In the end, I don't believe either candidate would personally handle the Navy any different this term. Neither presidential candidate is very involved or has displayed any substantial interest in having a say in what the Navy does (maybe Pichtonia a tiny bit), although I'm glad to see Istillian in the higher executive. The public had already pressured Pichtonia into pulling the troops out and it was very clear that he was bowing to the pressure of the public (which is not a bad thing). You'll see that after the embassy situation, nobody will care about the Navy's daily activities besides the people in the Navy, just like before. Try seeing how much the greatest critics will know about what the Navy does this term; you'll be disappointed.

It gave rise to the Calvin/Istillian option, so it made me think

the situation felt extremely overblown

It was a mistake, for sure, but a single mistake shouldn't erase the work of a whole term.

I disagreed with the government's handling of it and in the first round I voted based off it, but then I cooled down and supported Pichto/Kura (I was still unsure though and could as well have voted for Calvin/Ist again)

It was a mistake, but overall it was a good term.

Spoiler: Calvin Coolidge/Istillian Supporters: Why or why not?

Accountability is important and the response was a bit slow.

I was not impressed by how Pichtonia handled the situation.

I personally supported the raid from the start

It didn't encourage confidence in Pichtonia but it didn't affect my decision TOO much.

Calvin's entrance meant I stopped considering the Forilian/Monkey ticket or ROE.

While I was sympathetic to the administration's actions at first, I found Pichto's communication surrounding the events to be incredibly and disappointingly lacking. His statement was fine but it was too little, too late.

Pichto took too long to give an official response, and any response beforehand in the GH thread itself felt like a doubling-down and our involvement wasn't clearly thought-out beforehand either. The response definitely was more damning than the raid and embassy removals themselves, I think.

It was a compounding factor

I felt it was poorly communicated and managed.

Pichto completely muffed the punt, waited way too long to issue a statement. Way too long to do a platform and consistently doubled down on why it was OK to attack The Embassy.

There is a dramatic difference between Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters, and Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters when asked if The Embassy situation impacted their decision making when considering who to vote for. The majority of Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters said that it had no impact on their decision making, while yes than a quarter said it did make an impact. 14.3% said that it might have had an impact on their decision making, while 7.1% said it had an impact on the first round of voting, but not on the second. In sharp contrast, three quarters of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian voters said that The Embassy situation did have an impact on their decision making process, while just 12.5% said it had no impact. Another 12.5% said that it may have an impact on their decision making.

The evidence here, combined with the results of the previous question suggests that The Embassy situation was a major issue in the minds of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters, while it was not such a large issue in the minds of Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters. The qualitative data also appears to support this theory, with many Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters saying they felt the situation was “overblown” while most Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters said they thought the situation was “mishandled” by Pichtonia. Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters appear to have viewed The Embassy situation as an overblown political scandal, and therefore it had little impact on their decision making. Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters however, clearly viewed it far more seriously and therefore it had a far great impact on their decision making.

Spoiler: Pichtonia/Kuramia Supporters: Why or why not?

It did impact my choice but not to that extreme

Pichto had an excellent term besides that one misstep

Well, it did, probably because Calvin and Ist wouldn't even have run at all if the situation didn't happen. Otherwise, before the situation I was seriously considering Forilian/Monkey and after that they kind of lost that momentum in my mind because both other tickets are so experienced, plus there was no point in voting for F/M because I knew they'd just siphon votes off other candidates anyway

Spoiler: Calvin Coolidge/Istillian Supporters: Why or why not?

It was a factor but not the deciding one.

I don't believe in voting against a candidate because of one mistake they made.

I was not planning on supporting Pichto/Kuramia before the election.

It definitely played a part. It's possible I would have voted Calvin regardless based on platforms/debates but up until The Embassy I was pretty sure I would have voted for Pichto.

Well, The Embassy situation caused Calvin to run, whose overall strong platform and firmer position on The Embassy incident ultimately combined to cause me to vote for Calvin over Pichto.

It definitely impacted things, but Pichto's platform was also surprisingly late and not as inspiring as I'd hoped. Calvin provided a vision that was both innovative, and it proactively approached the real issues we're facing.

The platforms were the main reason for my decision.

Pichto should have listened to the region, not whatever voice in his head told him that all of this was a good idea.

However, just how impactful The Embassy situation was in actually changing the decisions of voters is less clear. The overwhelming majority of Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters said it did not change who they decided to vote for, with just 7.1% saying it did, and another 7.1% saying it may have. A plurality of Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters said that it did not change who they decided to vote for, however it fell just short of a majority at 50%. 37.5% said that it did change who they decided to vote, while 12.5% said that it may have changed who they decided to vote for.

This further shows that The Embassy scandal had little impact on most Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters, while it was a far larger issue for Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters. Enough Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters said they did change their vote to cost Pichtonia the election (7), however we don’t know if these respondents were ever Pichtonia/Kuramia voters - they could have been Forilian/Monkey or ROE voters. We do that the Embassy situation did at least cost Pichtonia/Kuramia two voters (it likely cost them more), however it is impossible to definitively say that The Embassy situation cost Pichtonia/Kuramia this election. The evidence suggests that The Embassy situation was a major factor for a large number of voters, it did play an important role in the decision making process of many voters, and it did change some voters minds.

The evidence does not point to The Embassy situation being the sole factor for Pichtonia/Kuramia’s loss, nor does it appear to have been the main factor for their loss, however it was undoubtedly a major factor for their loss. It seems likely that Pichtonia/Kuramia were far weaker incumbents than many people believed, their re-election appeared inevitable until The Embassy scandal surfaced, however The Embassy scandal alone seems unlikely to have been capable of ending their re-election bid. Other underlying factors had to have played a role to cost them the election.

Spoiler: Pichtonia/Kuramia Supporters: Any other important factors that affected your vote in this election?

One platform had substantial integration plans, the other didn't, but I think both choices were great in the end and am not at all unhappy about the result.

Pichto's platform was far superior to Calvin's. If Calvin had an FA plan, I probably would have voted for him but he doesn't.

I was lobbied by someone before the second round, plus Pichto was the only one who GotVed me. I liked his history camp idea as well, I hope it still happens at some point

Spoiler: Calvin Coolidge/Istillian Supporters: Any other important factors that affected your vote in this election?

Platform quality, platform timeliness

Pichto/Kuramia’s lateness in submitting their platform

Pichto/Kuramia's late platform.

Pichto's platform was very late, and, again, communication was poor as to why.

A return to competent politics was a big factor in my vote.

While this exit poll focused mostly on The Embassy scandal, and the potential impact it had on voters, it did still ask for other factors which influenced voters decision making. It provides clues as to the other underlying factors which cost the Pichtonia/Kuramia ticket re-election. Overwhelmingly both here, and when asked why or why not The Embassy situation changed their votes, Calvin Coolidge/Istillian supporters listed issues with the Pichtonia/Kuramia platform. Respondents criticised both the timelessness and quality of Pichtonia/Kuramia’s platform, although the timelessness was criticised far more heavily.

Interestingly, Pichtonia/Kuramia supporters listed the Pichtonia/Kuramia platform as one of the factors influencing their vote complementing different sections of it. While there is no quantitative data on the subject, the qualitative data appears to suggest that issues surrounding the Pichtonia/Kuramia platform, particularly the timelessness of it, was one of the other important factors contributing to their loss.

 

[Olde Delaware]

+1 for muffed punt, that's a great reference.

 

[Maowi]

These are interesting results, thanks for this analysis Lime.

 

[Le Libertie]

This was really informative! I'm glad someone collected data on this.

 

[McEntire]

This was a very well done poll and breakdown of the analysis, although I'd argue that the Embassy clearly was the deciding issue. Without it, Calvin may never have entered the race. And given the narrow margin, the voters who swung because of that one issue were probably decisive. I will say, I can't think of another issue that has single-handedly defined a Presidential race. Further, there is some evidence from this poll that Pichto gained significant ground in the days leading up to the election. So if the timing had been different, if Calvin had entered the race prior to when he did, if Pichto had a couple more days to catch up, things could be very different. This was an issue that peaked at exactly the wrong time for Pichto, I think. But it was decisive, in my view.

 

[Lime]

This was a very well done poll and breakdown of the analysis, although I'd argue that the Embassy clearly was the deciding issue. Without it, Calvin may never have entered the race. And given the narrow margin, the voters who swung because of that one issue were probably decisive. I will say, I can't think of another issue that has single-handedly defined a Presidential race. Further, there is some evidence from this poll that Pichto gained significant ground in the days leading up to the election. So if the timing had been different, if Calvin had entered the race prior to when he did, if Pichto had a couple more days to catch up, things could be very different. This was an issue that peaked at exactly the wrong time for Pichto, I think. But it was decisive, in my view.

I think in all likelihood The Embassy was the deciding issue, and I think the evidence does point in the direction. Ultimately I don't think there is enough evidence to definitively say that The Embassy was the deciding issue, and that's why I decided to say that it was a major issue. However, I also don't think it's too out there to come to the conclusion that The Embassy was the deciding issue.

 

[Lethen]

This was a very well done poll and breakdown of the analysis, although I'd argue that the Embassy clearly was the deciding issue. Without it, Calvin may never have entered the race. And given the narrow margin, the voters who swung because of that one issue were probably decisive. I will say, I can't think of another issue that has single-handedly defined a Presidential race. Further, there is some evidence from this poll that Pichto gained significant ground in the days leading up to the election. So if the timing had been different, if Calvin had entered the race prior to when he did, if Pichto had a couple more days to catch up, things could be very different. This was an issue that peaked at exactly the wrong time for Pichto, I think. But it was decisive, in my view.

I can't think of the last time one singular issue swung so many players decidedly into or out of a candidate's camp. Like when was the last time people got so fired up about something that the publicly and avowedly said "I am not voting for Pichto anymore because of this?"

The Embassy was definitely a big factor in my vote, but not the primary one.

 

[GraVandius]

I think this continues to back up my theory that the Embassy was merely the final and compounding blow to Pichto's re-election campaign. That 50% of Calvin Voters that said it did not effect their choice pretty much had to be Forillian/ROE voters who were dissatisfied with the pre-embassy problem, Pichto's super late platform. We have on record an instance where a late platform cost a popular incumbent 30-40% of the vote in the last time it happened. A significant chunk of the populace was clearly already annoyed Pichto's platform was late and then add in the people who were pissed off by the Embassy situation? It's a 1-2 political punch for the ages.

 

[Olde Delaware]

I think this continues to back up my theory that the Embassy was merely the final and compounding blow to Pichto's re-election campaign. That 50% of Calvin Voters that said it did not effect their choice pretty much had to be Forillian/ROE voters who were dissatisfied with the pre-embassy problem, Pichto's super late platform. We have on record an instance where a late platform cost a popular incumbent 30-40% of the vote in the last time it happened. A significant chunk of the populace was clearly already annoyed Pichto's platform was late and then add in the people who were pissed off by the Embassy situation? It's a 1-2 political punch for the ages.

This is how I feel as well.

It seemed like it was destined to become a perfect storm. There was The Embassy, then there was the substantial lateness of the platform. History will wonder if Pichto had submitted a platform sooner and there was a public debate could he have swung public opinion back to his side. Pichto is a talented debater, to be honest I think he could have done it. The X factor in all of this was the really slow response to The Embassy. Had there been a statement sooner and some kind of pledge to do better does Calvin enter the race, does Fori poll at 40% to Pichto's 33%, does the slow burn over the issue stay isolated to one thread on the forums?

 

[GrandfatherClock]

Having not seen too many, this analysis definitely confirms it for me that this election was a little out of the ordinary, and an exciting one for sure. Personally, based on the opinions that were expressed at the time, I would have expected even more divided results, but I am always one for surprises. Thanks for this, Lime!

 

[Klatonia]

Very, very nice analysis. Thank you Sir.