"NACTA poll" . . .

 

Yuji's prediction of 53 percent for the PPP at national Elections will be the most accurate prediction on GNI.

 

PNC and AFC can pack their tent and go home.

Since leaving office in 1981,

the 39th president of the USA has busied himself

traveling the globe

to improve the quality of life of citizens

living on virtually every continent.

No sooner than he left the White House,

Carter mobilized to build houses for the poor.

After launching Habitat for Humanity,

he and teams of volunteers constructed homes

they gave to citizens that might otherwise never own property.

 

Perhaps he was motivated by the fact

he is the only president to have

ever lived in public housing,

he identified with the plight of not owning a dwelling

and relying on government subsidies in order to survive.

 

One year after serving

in the highest capacity of leadership in America,

President Carter and his wife Rosalyn

founded the Atlanta-based Carter Center

which has helped to improve the quality of life

for people in more than 70 countries.

 

Committed to advancing human rights and

alleviating unnecessary human suffering,

they have relentlessly exemplified

the motto of the Carter Center —

“Waging Peace. Fighting Disease. Building Hope.”

 

This week the 90-year-old former president —

from 1977 to 1981 —

will lead an observer mission

to monitor the May 11

regional and national elections in Guyana.

 

They will be joined by a larger delegation

of election observers next month and

for the fourth time the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner

will lead the monitoring team.

 

“I look forward to leading our delegation

to observe Guyana’s elections on May 11,”

the former president said.

 

The election is regarded as a contest

between the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C)

which is seeking to extend its

more than two decades hold on power

 

and the coalition alliance

comprising the main opposition,

a Partnership for National Unity (APNU)

and the small Alliance for Change (AFC).

 

“The Carter Center has a long history in Guyana

and great respect for the Guyanese people.

 

These will be the fourth elections

we have observed there since 1992,

and we trust they will be

peaceful and inspire hope for the future.”

 

It was Oct. 5, 1992

when Carter’s Council of Freely Elected Heads of Government

observed presidential elections in Guyana.

 

Two years later, on Sept. 28, 1994

the Carter Center opened an office in Georgetown, Guyana

to support the country’s efforts for economic development,

electoral reform, and preservation of the environment.

 

After that, the former Plains, Georgia,

peanut farmer met with Guyana President Cheddi Jagan

on April 23, 1996

to discuss implementation of Guyana’s comprehensive

long-term development strategy.

 

Earlier that year he headed delegations to

Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic

and  prior to that Guatemala, Liberia,

Ethiopia, Guinea, Sudan, China,

Chile, Burkino Faso, Nigeria,

Mozambique, Uganda and

numerous countries in the sub-Saharan regions of Africa.

 

Perhaps, best remembered

for returning the Panama Canal Zone to Panama,

the one-term Democratic president

has been actively involved in

eradicating diseases throughout Africa.

 

In partnership with the Organization of American States (OAS)

Carter as head of the Center

also monitored elections in Belize, Haiti and Jamaica.

 

Once again invited by the Guyana government to monitor the polls,

the Carter Center along with collaborating groups

will assess the voting,

counting, and

tabulation processes.

 

In a statement released by the Atlanta-based organization,

reportedly the core team of experts

will be joined this week by six medium-term observers,

together representing nine countries.

 

The Center’s observers will meet regularly

with representatives of the

Guyana Elections Commission,

political party candidates,

civil society organizations,

the international community,

and citizen election observers

to assess electoral preparations

and the pre-electoral environment,

 

including election administration,

campaigning,

voter education

and other issues.

 

Catch You On The Inside!

 

PRESIDENT CARTER,

A TRUE FRIEND OF GUYANA,

VISITS AGAIN.

 

AFC-APNU welcome

President Carter to Guyana

 

 

xxxxxxxxxx

 

Committed to advancing human rights and

 

alleviating unnecessary human suffering,

 

they have relentlessly exemplified

 

the motto of the Carter Center —

 

“Waging Peace. Fighting Disease. Building Hope.”

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

My Friend Rev

 

President Carter

Coming to Guyana to

“Waging Peace. ....Peaceful Elections

Fighting Disease..... Jagdeo Thiefing

Building Hope.”....Swearing in New Govt

 

54% popular vote to the PPP.

By others he meant AFC/Moses.

What is good, no split of the Afro/APNU votes noted.  The split of the Indian vote will x PPP when faced with the predicament of strengthening the PNC led opposition.  Many of the split votes may turn back to the PPP.

 

Pity for the opposition, Region 11 don't count.

Reasonable predictions.

Africans not splitting their vote.  Indians splitting their vote. Mixed people tend to vote similarly as Africans, and yet NACTA suggests the PPP is ahead?

 

What are they smoking.

You are getting upset as your beloved Afrocentric racist PNC is going down.

 

Ha Ha !

His poll assumes Indians at 42%.  Africans not splitting. Given that mixed votes will break at least 70-80% for the coalition how is this a PPP win?

 

Let me break it down for you.  10% of the votes will represent non Indians voting PPP. 38% represent Indians voting PPP (using his 42%).   PPP gets 48%.

Only through fraud.

Breaking out NACTAs numbers PPP=48%.  I told you why in the previous post.  Note he said Indians splitting, Afros not splitting.  Mixed people usually vote lots like their black cousins.

If that was so, last time around PNC would have won in 2011.  6-8% of PPP base went to AFC and they still got 49%.  Please explain with Indians being 42-43% of the population, depending on your definition of "Indian".

17 year olds will be voting for the dead.  BTW, Indos are now down to 39%.

PPP not depending on the Indian only vote like the PNC for Afro only.  PPP garnering may non-Indians, duglas and some Afro.

I have stated many times that Indians are not 40% of the voters.  It is amazing that a supposedly intelligent person like you cannot understand that if the mixed population has increased 70% in the last 20 years, then it must be because of rampant "douglarization".

 

It is therefore obvious that the demographics of the population which is  under 18 is very different from that over 25, where most of the votes will come from.

 

So I happen to disagree with the premise that Indians are only 42% of the vote.

 

I merely repeat what your pollster is saying and applying his logic, the PPP loses. 

 

He categorically stated that Africans are NOT splitting the vote. 

 

Nagamootoo brought in about 1/3 of the votes which the AFC won last time, meaning that about 50% of the votes that the AFC received came from the African and mixed.  We know that almost all of the APNU votes last time were AFrican and mixed. 

 

So if the African and mixed votes that APNU and AFC accounted for 44% of all votes cast and 5% came from Indians (implying 2% from Amerindians) clearly the PPP gets relatively few mixed votes. 

The election is very close with the PPP/C slightly ahead in popular support.
The poll’s projections relating to popular support and overall total seats will be released in a subsequent report. NACTA will continue its tracking poll to determine final projections.

 

hahahahahahahaha dis pole need more dan viagra......

Assuming arguendo that this is a real poll, here are my thoughts.

 

There is almost no polling methodology that I can think of that would lead anyone to be able properly ascertain a projection of the so-called Geographic Seats. To properly project the awarding of Geographic Seats, one must be able to within an obscenely high degree of accuracy be able to project actual turnout (not percentages but actual numbers) plus the the breakdown of that number into party support.

 

Geographic seats are awarded based on the regional vote with the Largest Remainder Hare Quota. For example, in Region 1 in 2011 APNU had a total vote of 887 votes while the PPP/C had a total of 3,472 and the AFC got 787 votes total. GUESS WHAT? PPP/C only picked up 1 of the 2 Geographic seats while APNU got the other Geographic Seat for a mere 887 votes. Sounds great right? Not really. It didn't help APNU because APNU had that one "overhang" seat charged against it's national total as our parliamentary allocation formula dictates. NO PARTY CAN WIN MORE SEATS THAN ITS NATIONAL VOTE PERCENTAGE except under the extreme and unlikely possibility that a small party captures 1 or 2 Geographic seats in a low turnout region and wins a disproportionate (as in less) amount of the total national vote. For example, Party A wins a Region 1 Geographic Seat and no "National Top Up Seat". This is an overhang. If Party A wins 1 Geographic Seat and 5 "National" seats then GECOM awards it 1 Geographic Seat plus 4 National Seats because Party A is limited to 5 seats. Every Geographic seat won by a party MUST BE subtracted from its national total in allocation. That's called proportional representation.

 

The distribution of Geographic seats are further subject to the ironclad law of Proportional Representation which dictate that Parliament MUST be apportioned according to the National Vote. This means that in English that winning 51% of the vote guarantees you 51% of Parliament regardless of the Geographic Seat wins and losses. GECOM is even empowered to enlarge to size of the National Assembly to prevent a disproportionate allocation of seats. This means the Assembly can go from 65 to 66 or even 67 seats based on the election results.

 

Anyways, as Caribj mentioned Indians are not 42% of the vote. They're significantly higher than 42% so a slight lead by the PPP even considering that low pool of Indians surveyed may show a more significant PPP lead.

 

I am somewhat puzzled that NACTA chose not to release a projection of the parties support as part of the national vote and instead opted for this convoluted nonsense about Geographic Seats. Guyana is a straight up national vote country. The only reason why I would care about this poll is if there was a small party that was performing well in a low vote Region while under performing nationally. That does not appear to be the case so this is an exercise in stargazing.

P.S....In 2011, the PPP managed to win 13 out of the total 25 Geographic seats. That's 52% of the total Geographic seats that went PPP, yet they ended up with 48% of the national vote and 48% of the National Assembly.

Winning most Geographic seats does not mean winning a majority of Parliament. Especially in this year where the winner is favored to win a majority in the National Assembly.

To assume anything is  real that this ***** Bisram puts out is folly.

 

Bisram predicted a mudslide in 2011 e ***** run and hide after the PPP lose.

 

Jagdeo fire him and hired a pollster from North America.

 

You're a member of a cult so I can't expect you to understand nuance.

 

It is not only important what Bisram said but what he didn't say. Bisram did not release NATIONAL numbers most likely because the parties are in a statistical dead heat with a small number of undecideds and they don't wanna panic their supporters and the regime soupies. Almost anything can and will decide the outcome of the election at this stage.

APNU Rally in full swing.

 

 

Another typical Horse-Co*k-in-Head response with a pretty picture to a political discussion.

 

"Me nah know whah dem a taak about suh me guh daab wan pitcha pon de tread."

shaitaan bai, i'm beginning to be really concerned when u start talking about Bisram "releasing National numbers" and ting

 

this alternate universe where NACTA is a real organization doing real polls DOES NOT EXIST !!

 

meh nah know how better to say am . . . sheesh!

 

Assuming arguendo that this is another fake poll from a fake organization, we still have the fact that Bisram did not make a case for some great PPP lead in the national vote.

 

Instead, he made the most measured most limited prediction of 13 Geographic Seats for the PPP out of 25 total, which is even an even lessor fraction when viewed in terms of the 65 seats of the Assembly.

 

No majority was predicted. No landslide. Nothing. Just 13 seats for the PPP out of 65.

in an obviously tight race, Bisram would be outright laughed at if he predicted a "landslide" for the regime . . . people like u would be hard put to "assume arguendo" and bless his nonsense

 

so he takes the smarter approach of 'sufficient credibility' in the pre-election psychological war

 

i have it on good authority that you're an old political hand . . . playing the simpleton fits u like an off-the-rack suit one size too small

 

this exchange is boring, circular, and inceasingly a waste of my time

 

Please Dear God, I'm making a very very limited point that Caribj seems to have articulated as well. I'm just saying that Bisram is not regaling us with tales of a PPP victory in the bag. He's just saying that 13 Geographic Seats is likely to go PPP. I can buy that and still see them losing the election. In 2011, they won 13 Geographic Seats and still ended up in the Minority. This time. 13 Geographic Seats and the Minority national vote means hauling ass to the Opposition benches for the PPP.

 

I get it. Redux doesn't like NACTA/Bisram. I don't see what that has to do with analyzing what Bisram has said and more importantly in this instance what he has not said.

 

Lastly, I thank you for noting my longevity in this field. I began as a mere Intern to Congressman Floyd Flake at age 12 attached personally to the Chief-of-Staff. (They took me on assuming I was 18 by accident and kept me when they found out I was just a 12 year old in a suit who had some brains). I was taken off copying duties within a week and given real political work. That was a little over two decades ago and I've been consistently involved since. So yes I have a significant amount of experience in this field. And not just in Queens either. Rarely have I ever been accused of hiding my light under a bushel so I can assure you I'm not playing the simpleton here. I never ever said Bisram published a real poll. His poll doesn't have to be real. He told me all I need to know whether or not this is real or faked.