{"componentChunkName":"component---src-templates-project-js","path":"/project/our-uc-prediction-got-dunked-on/","result":{"data":{"project":{"id":"-71e77497-d955-5da2-b8f3-c4fde396ad9e","publishedAt":"2019-11-15T08:00:00.000Z","categories":[{"_id":"6e40d903-3845-4d26-9e73-529a3fdeb70d","title":"Article"}],"subjects":[{"_id":"32c1a9c9-8295-4551-8342-1c1be66e849f","title":"Politics"},{"_id":"c4a3e461-ea18-4002-8a56-80500bfe17c2","title":"Campus"}],"relatedProjects":[{"title":"Predicting the 2018 UC Presidential Election Winners","_id":"1a3ccb12-5472-495e-bee9-98b1a8864b1f","slug":{"current":"predicting-the-2018-uc-presidential-election-winners"},"_rawMainImage":{"_type":"mainImage","alt":"Four tickets are running in the 2018 UC Presidential Election.","asset":{"_ref":"image-d2115c715082ae042c19ef25008fec4b01e575a2-1600x1114-png","_type":"reference"}},"_rawExcerpt":[{"_key":"f9c1490d618e","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f9c1490d618e0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"A data-driven election forecast by Manasi Maheshwari and Dasha Metropolitansky"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}]},{"title":"Your 2019 Harvard UC President will be…","_id":"4988d1df-0e23-43af-976f-19aaedb8ec5b","slug":{"current":"your-2019-harvard-uc-president-will-be"},"_rawMainImage":{"_type":"mainImage","asset":{"_ref":"image-87f8847b38dbcd64732da2797306c6d345a147df-1400x700-png","_type":"reference"}},"_rawExcerpt":[{"_key":"224b15ace237","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"224b15ace2370","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We ran the numbers. Here's what we found."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}]}],"mainImage":{"crop":null,"hotspot":null,"asset":{"_id":"image-4ebfa19f712a9423216e2405d73a06239c726174-1400x963-png"},"alt":null},"title":"Our UC prediction got dunked on. Here’s why.","slug":{"current":"our-uc-prediction-got-dunked-on"},"_rawExcerpt":[{"_key":"d6e322ffa4f5","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"d6e322ffa4f50","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Our previous post did not age well."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}],"_rawBody":[{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c5","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c50","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Over the past four years, HODP has taken inspiration from Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight in our approach to Harvard data. This year, we decided to predict presidential elections like "},{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c51","_type":"span","marks":["1a85421f7ff9"],"text":"them"},{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c52","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":" too. HODP "},{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c53","_type":"span","marks":["235a7d9aeed1"],"text":"predicted"},{"_key":"9d2d4581f3c54","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":" that the winners of the Undergraduate Council presidential election would be Sanika and Rushi, but the results were even more unexpected than we could have thought."}],"markDefs":[{"_key":"1a85421f7ff9","_type":"link","blank":true,"href":"https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus"},{"_key":"235a7d9aeed1","_type":"internalLink","reference":{"_id":"4988d1df-0e23-43af-976f-19aaedb8ec5b","_type":"project","_rev":"0HKRM86CFJ4e5MqjEv26b0","_createdAt":"2020-07-31T23:27:50Z","_updatedAt":"2020-08-02T06:43:48Z","body":[{"_key":"25e4d9618763","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"25e4d96187630","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"For the past three years, we at the Harvard College Open Data Project have correctly predicted the winners of the Undergraduate Council (UC) presidential election, but this is by far the wildest election we’ve ever seen. Nonetheless, we hope to bring some clarity through data."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4589c575771a","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4589c575771a0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"There are five candidates vying for the UC presidency this year:"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"0ebf0b06fc87","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"0ebf0b06fc870","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Aditya Dhar (Adams ’21) and Andrew Liang (Adams ‘21)"}],"level":1,"listItem":"bullet","markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"bd67fe00645c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"bd67fe00645c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"James Mathew (Mather ’21) and Ifeoma “Ify” White-Thorpe (Leverett ‘21)"}],"level":1,"listItem":"bullet","markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"a7b3a1e88868","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"a7b3a1e888680","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Prashanth “PK” Kumar (Mather ’21) and Michael “Mike” Raji (Currier ‘22)"}],"level":1,"listItem":"bullet","markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"3db00d5d5860","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"3db00d5d58600","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Sanika Mahajan (Mather ’21) and Rushi Patel (Quincy ‘21)"}],"level":1,"listItem":"bullet","markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"5a74a861beae","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"5a74a861beae0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Thor Larson (Lowell ’21) and Case McKinley (Dunster ‘21)"}],"level":1,"listItem":"bullet","markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"55e92f62281f","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"55e92f62281f0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"This is notably the largest field of candidates since we started predicting the race. This campaign has also taken place under… unique circumstances. To start, this is the first time in recent memory that The Crimson Editorial Board has declined to endorse a candidate, with many of the campaigns refusing to communicate with The Crimson in light of the recent ICE controversy. Like in past years, an experienced UC ticket — Sanika and Rushi — raked in endorsements and became early frontrunners. However, their competition have also received boosts in support. Aditya and Andrew, running a campaign to “Abolish the UC,” have mobilized students that might not typically participate in the UC election process. Meanwhile, James and Ify achieved significant publicity after their campaign video went viral on Twitter, garnering over two million views, 140,000 likes, and 46,000 retweets (including one from retired NBA star Dwyane Wade) as of writing. Altogether, these circumstances make predicting the race more difficult than in years past, but we’ll focus on the fundamentals to drive our analysis."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4024495d4775","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4024495d47750","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"Ticket Composition"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"cb64e2569701","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"cb64e25697010","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Of the students on the five tickets, all are juniors except for Michael Raji, who is a sophomore. Historically, junior-junior tickets have had the best chance of winning, representing 85% of tickets since 2005 and 95% of the winners since 1996. We expect that the advantage for juniors will hold in this election as well."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"f0346eacce7e","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f0346eacce7e0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We also consider whether candidates have both River and Quad appeal. In this election cycle, all candidates except Michael Raji live in River houses. All tickets, except for Andrew and Aditya, are from different houses. We expect that having both candidates from one house could limit support. We also note that Mather is likely to be highly contested this year as it is home to three of the candidates running."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4ebbd8105e96","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4ebbd8105e960","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Established UC representatives generally perform better in presidential elections than new tickets. Previous trends indicate that tickets in which both the presidential and vice presidential candidate have UC experience constitute 55.3% of the total tickets since 2005, yet they’ve won 91.7% of the time. This year, all tickets except for PK and Mike and Aditya and Andrew have some UC experience."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"95ea64ae66a4","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"95ea64ae66a40","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"Social Media"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"f2e71e834669","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f2e71e8346690","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Social media presence has been useful for gauging both name recognition and energy of supporters for tickets in the past. However, in this election, social media metrics do not point in one direction depending on the medium. If we look at Facebook page likes, then Sanika and Rushi are clearly in the lead with 413 likes, followed by James and Ify at 251. Aditya and Andrew did not have a Facebook page, but 125 people marked attending to their “Meat and Eat” Facebook event. Finally, PK and Mike had 80 likes on their Facebook page, while Thor and Case had 8. Facebook page likes are perhaps the best representation of support within the College, but there are other social media measures that swing in other directions."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"a3794deb4cb8","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"a3794deb4cb80","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Most notably, James and Ify’s campaign video went viral on Twitter and received attention from Dwyane Wade, Deray McKesson, and Brittany Packnett Cunningham. The video has been viewed more than two million times, which is orders of magnitude above what we’re used to seeing in a UC race. However, because much of this attention came from sources outside Harvard, and the video did not go viral until midway through the voting period, we did not consider the video too heavily when making our predictions. Meanwhile, on YouTube, both Ify & James and Andrew & Aditya’s campaign videos received close to 2000 views, while Sanika & Rushi’s campaign video received closer to 500 views."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"9cf9756f73c1","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"9cf9756f73c10","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"Our Poll"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"e95d088a3dd5","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"e95d088a3dd50","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Our primary source of information is a poll that we sent out on November 7th and closed on November 13th, the day before the end of voting. We distributed this poll through various house, dorm, and organization email lists in an effort to obtain as representative a sample as possible. While there are the usual concerns about response bias — that people more interested in the election will be more likely to fill out the poll — we believe that these issues are somewhat mitigated because the same types of students who are willing to vote in a survey are also likely to be those that would be most likely to actually vote. However, this may not hold true for supporters of specific candidates, which we will address later."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"In total, we had 237 responses to our survey. This is about 10% of the voter turnout in past UC elections. We asked respondents to rank their candidates in preferred order, as they would do during the actual voting. The election this year uses a Borda count mechanism, where a candidate ranked "},{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf1","_type":"span","marks":["em"],"text":"n"},{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf2","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":" by a voter is given "},{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf3","_type":"span","marks":["em"],"text":"1/n"},{"_key":"1c4c3ae98abf4","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":" votes. We calculate the Borda counts according to our poll, and display them below."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"1ca4926329f2","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-178a072896f1e3daa8e3a4175b839e8a7476bc5a-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"2a08ca3ccfa2","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"2a08ca3ccfa20","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We also show the proportion of first place votes that each ticket received, which we believe to be indicative of the number of supporters each ticket has."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"014bb1947bca","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-63aa3f5522f9ab02697fe6c9828939cbdbd5f3d5-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"63377b4bbe0c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"63377b4bbe0c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"If our poll were perfect, then Sanika and Rushi would be the clear winners, followed by Aditya and Andrew, James and Ify, Thor and Case, and PK and Mike, in that order. We also examined results by class year. Among our respondents, 24% were freshmen, 26% were sophomores, 33% were juniors, and 17% were seniors. This goes against the conventional wisdom that freshmen are most likely to vote, and it is possible that they are underrepresented in our sample. Notably, as most candidates are juniors and there is strong competition this year, juniors are likely to vote as they are more likely to know the candidates. However, previous UC presidential election turnout statistics by year have not been released, so we cannot confirm the representativeness of our poll."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"038cc0977c69","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-a6a18c82a4c682ee3714b7c35272a1e4ae952134-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"0683790a15a3","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"0683790a15a30","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Because our poll was open for a week, we also examined how votes changed over time, since any given campaign could have gained traction during the course of our survey. Aditya and Andrew appear to have gained some support relative to the other tickets since the date the poll opened, but the ordering of tickets has remained relatively constant."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"0b074802a3b4","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-657e6361df84b58a17722e896640df4201d01298-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"abd53d020e52","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-1f8cb3067453aec18b802b21b1cc8cbe34aa3704-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"b0034abceae6","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"b0034abceae60","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"A Three-Candidate Race"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"7ece86e4788a","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"7ece86e4788a0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We anticipate that to the degree that this race is competitive at all, it will be a three-candidate race. PK and Mike and Thor and Case are highly unlikely to win the race. Together, they composed approximately 54% of all 4th and 5th place ranks, so in order for either of them to win, our poll would need to be astronomically wrong."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"25b391f3d429","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"25b391f3d4290","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"The Probability of an Upset?"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h3"},{"_key":"ef96e3ab01ff","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"ef96e3ab01ff0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"According to our poll, Sanika and Rushi are the clear front runners. In fact, based on simulations assuming our sample is representative of the true distribution of student voters, Sanika and Rushi have a 98% chance of winning. Meanwhile, Aditya and Andrew would have a 89% chance of placing second, and James and Ify would have a 9.6% chance of placing second. However, the problem with these predictions is that they assume our sample is representative of the true distribution, which it likely is not."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"36429d84b3c0","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"36429d84b3c00","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"To check the robustness of our predictions, we ran tests to see what would happen if voters for Andrew and Aditya, or James and Ify, were a higher proportion of the voting population than they were in our sample. We show below the probabilities of winning for each if the true populations are "},{"_key":"36429d84b3c01","_type":"span","marks":["em"],"text":"x"},{"_key":"36429d84b3c02","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"% higher than in our sample. For example, Andrew and Aditya have 29.5% first choice support in our poll, but we can predict that if their proportion in the population was 10% higher, so if it was at 32.5%, then they would have a 6.8% chance of winning. Importantly, we run these robustness checks assuming that the distribution of other supporters is constant."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"33b566e4217d","_type":"figure","asset":{"_ref":"image-8358a3f52fe10daf9e2fbadf3aa3da8b5864733c-700x525-png","_type":"reference"}},{"_key":"f452453c74e4","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f452453c74e40","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"In order for Andrew and Aditya to have a greater than 50% chance of winning, we estimate that they would need their proportion of supporters in the population to be around 45% higher than in our sample. While we would consider this to be implausible, it may be possible depending on their get-out-the-vote effort."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4c43dcd650ff","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4c43dcd650ff0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"James and Ify, however, have a bigger challenge. In order for them to have a greater than 50% chance of winning, they would need 110% more supporters among students than in our sample. We believe the only way this is possible for James and Ify is if their recent internet popularity drastically increases their popularity on campus. However, we think that the viral nature of their video will have limited impact on voting, which had already started by the time the video went viral and which may not correspond to increased support among Harvard students. Especially since James and Ify are more traditional UC candidates, both with some form of experience on the UC, we find it unlikely that they would have a base of support that is voting for them but not filling out our survey."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"cc3db427a6dd","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"cc3db427a6dd0","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"The Bottom Line"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"a87be718ce1c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"a87be718ce1c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"This is one of the more uncertain predictions we’ve done due to the unique nature of this year’s election. Nonetheless, based on the data, we predict that Sanika and Rushi will be the next President and Vice President of the Harvard Undergraduate Council and that the order of results will most likely be:"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"024e9e6746a3","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"024e9e6746a30","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"1. Sanika Mahajan (Mather ’21) and Rushi Patel (Quincy ‘21)"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"6f0bbbb7f64d","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"6f0bbbb7f64d0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"2. Aditya Dhar (Adams ’21) and Andrew Liang (Adams ‘21)"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"f04b15a9686b","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f04b15a9686b0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"3. James Mathew (Mather ’21) and Ifeoma “Ify” White-Thorpe (Leverett ‘21)"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"05975e347645","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"05975e3476450","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"4. Thor Larson (Lowell ’21) and Case McKinley (Dunster ‘21)"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"740e535a60e7","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"740e535a60e70","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"5. Prashanth “PK” Kumar (Mather ’21) and Michael “Mike” Raji (Currier ‘22)"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"e3998f5825d8","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"e3998f5825d80","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Voting closes at noon today, and the results will be released this evening. Best of luck to all the candidates!\n"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}],"categories":[{"_key":"ca86b50674d1","_ref":"6e40d903-3845-4d26-9e73-529a3fdeb70d","_type":"reference"}],"excerpt":[{"_key":"224b15ace237","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"224b15ace2370","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We ran the numbers. Here's what we found."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}],"layout":"default","mainImage":{"_type":"mainImage","asset":{"_ref":"image-87f8847b38dbcd64732da2797306c6d345a147df-1400x700-png","_type":"reference"}},"members":[{"_key":"ddedfb8c883c","_type":"projectMember","person":{"_ref":"f1d8a445-a169-4864-89c4-ce8e17e295d4","_type":"reference"},"roles":["author","developer"]},{"_key":"e3734a026f0b","_type":"projectMember","person":{"_ref":"e8320214-6421-47b0-a196-ab007c70aebb","_type":"reference"},"roles":["author","developer"]},{"_key":"d287dfb38c5d","_type":"projectMember","person":{"_ref":"3b25d6c4-0aad-4260-9df1-b9d0f8d9cf93","_type":"reference"},"roles":["author","developer"]},{"_key":"e0fe7e900873","_type":"projectMember","person":{"_ref":"e836e2a5-caf2-4377-a0a1-0b74df80ce40","_type":"reference"},"roles":["author","developer"]}],"publishedAt":"2019-11-14T08:00:00.000Z","relatedProjects":[{"_key":"5220f83ef57e","_ref":"1a3ccb12-5472-495e-bee9-98b1a8864b1f","_type":"reference"},{"_key":"59a39ccb3d9f","_ref":"2a57e151-b55a-4b8c-aae9-ea0489df4a2e","_type":"reference"}],"slug":{"_type":"slug","current":"your-2019-harvard-uc-president-will-be"},"subjects":[{"_key":"daa8cdbe1146","_ref":"32c1a9c9-8295-4551-8342-1c1be66e849f","_type":"reference"},{"_key":"7870ceb5f143","_ref":"c4a3e461-ea18-4002-8a56-80500bfe17c2","_type":"reference"}],"title":"Your 2019 Harvard UC President will be…","id":"-42f8c3ee-45c5-5fa9-85d8-1023d9254bb3","children":[],"internal":{"type":"SanityProject","contentDigest":"c4d0264533d4728b1ab57c5963a8efc1","owner":"gatsby-source-sanity","counter":298},"parent":null,"__gatsby_resolved":{"slug":{"current":"your-2019-harvard-uc-president-will-be"}}}}],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"78e768f5f8e8","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"78e768f5f8e80","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"We noted that this was the most uncertain election that we had predicted to date due to the unusual nature of the campaign. However, our main concern was that Aditya and Andrew, who ran a campaign to abolish the UC, would mobilize voters who would not typically vote in the election and who would not fill out our survey. We believed that if a ticket was going to upset Sanika and Rushi, it would be Andrew and Aditya. We were wrong about that too."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"ad0d7562786a","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"ad0d7562786a0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"The results of the election were as follows:"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"c2d27f3a7f7c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"c2d27f3a7f7c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"1. James Mathew and Ifeoma “Ify” White-Thorpe"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"2aaf3de372c7","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"2aaf3de372c70","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"2. Aditya Dhar and Andrew Liang"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"e89dd134377c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"e89dd134377c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"3. Sanika Mahajan and Rushi Patel"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"f0a97769e52b","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f0a97769e52b0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"4. Prashanth “PK” Kumar and Michael “Mike” Raji"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"11129b7879f9","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"11129b7879f90","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"5. Thor Larson and Case McKinley"}],"level":1,"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"0ff5a7c78ad1","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"0ff5a7c78ad10","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"On the bright side, we were correct about Aditya and Andrew placing second. Unfortunately, that was pretty much the only thing we were right about. We managed to get the fourth and fifth place finishers flipped, and we obviously got the winner and third place incorrect. Clearly, a lot went wrong, but we believe there are three main reasons why our predictions missed the mark."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"50ed059d72b2","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"50ed059d72b20","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"What went wrong"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"fa71d181addf","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"fa71d181addf0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Our sample was unrepresentative — garbage in, garbage out."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h3"},{"_key":"7be9021feecf","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"7be9021feecf0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"The first, and maybe simplest, explanation for why we got it wrong is that our poll drastically undersampled the number of James and Ify supporters. In our sample, James and Ify received approximately 19% of all first place votes, while in the actual election they comprised approximately 28% of first place votes. This means that the actual distribution of James and Ify supporters was about 40% higher in the population than in our sample."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"ee89d4b98905","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"ee89d4b989050","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"However, this was far from the only issue with our sample. Even if James and Ify had 40% higher support than our sample predicted, Sanika and Rushi supporters would still have comprised 37% of our sample. In the actual election, Sanika and Rushi received only 26% of first place votes. This suggests that our sample highly overrepresented Sanika and Rushi supporters. We anticipated that James and Ify would need to more than double their levels of support in order to win, but this was holding the support of other candidates constant. The combination of overrepresenting Sanika & Rushi supporters and underrepresenting James & Ify supporters led to a result that we entirely did not anticipate."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4ea5cebf5d5d","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4ea5cebf5d5d0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"While some missampling is expected in any polling, this degree of missampling suggests deeper issues with our poll. One possible reason is that we misunderstood James and Ify supporters. At face value, James and Ify ran a more traditional UC campaign, but it is possible that they also mobilized voters who would be less likely to fill out our poll. The second possible reason is that Sanika and Rushi supporters were disproportionately more energetic, and therefore more willing to fill out the poll, but less common in the overall voting population."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"df44d9e9a070","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"df44d9e9a0700","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Strategic voting."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h3"},{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"The second possible reason our poll was inaccurate is that while voters have no incentive to vote strategically in our poll, they do have an incentive to vote strategically in the actual election. This is due to the nature of the Borda count, the voting mechanism used in the UC presidential election. In a Borda count, a candidate ranked "},{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc1","_type":"span","marks":["em"],"text":"n"},{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc2","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"th by a voter receives 1/"},{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc3","_type":"span","marks":["em"],"text":"n"},{"_key":"e6e6c233e8dc4","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":" votes from that voter. This mechanism is particularly susceptible to strategic voting."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"94cfcaba9713","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"94cfcaba97130","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Suppose that a voter believes that some candidate is in first place. In this case, the general perception based on social media activity and UC endorsements — many of the same indicators we used to make our prediction — likely held that Sanika and Rushi were the frontrunners. If supporters of other candidates strategically voted, they would have an incentive to rank Sanika and Rushi last, even if this did not accurately represent their preferences."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"82a7eb9b8a58","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"82a7eb9b8a580","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Data provided by the UC Election Commission supported this hypothesis. Sanika and Rushi also received the most 5th place votes of any ticket, and nearly as many 5th place votes as 1st place votes. Aditya and Andrew suffered similarly. They received the second most 5th place votes, and the fewest 2nd place votes. This suggests that supporters of other campaigns either strategically voted, or heavily disliked the two perceived leading candidates."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"f475b4c9591a","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f475b4c9591a0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Viral video."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h3"},{"_key":"8d88e07ea7ac","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"8d88e07ea7ac0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Last but certainly not least, halfway through the election period, James and Ify’s campaign video went viral on Twitter, receiving several celebrity endorsements and more than two million likes. We didn’t place much weight on this video when making our prediction, and this may have been a mistake. It’s possible that the video brought greater attention to the UC election and turned out students who otherwise would not have voted. Voter turnout was substantially higher than we anticipated, increasing by nearly 900 votes over the year before. If the video did turn out a large number of voters, then it’s unsurprising that our poll results were wrong, since these students would not have been following the election as passionately or had the time to have responded to our survey. After all, our survey also closed very shortly after the video went viral, so we probably could not capture the video’s full effect."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"d37d380bed2c","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"d37d380bed2c0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Like so many NBA players, we were dunked on by DWade."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"708f91627dcc","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"708f91627dcc0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Our communication of results."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h3"},{"_key":"a1c57c7ad02a","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"a1c57c7ad02a0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Perhaps our greatest mistake was the manner in which we calculated our results. We wrote that Sanika and Rushi would have a 98% chance of winning "},{"_key":"a1c57c7ad02a1","_type":"span","marks":["strong"],"text":"if our sample was representative"},{"_key":"a1c57c7ad02a2","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":". In this scenario, sampling error would be the only degree of variability. While we expressed concerns that our sample was not representative, we believe that we did not communicate those concerns effectively. In hindsight, this method of presenting the probability likely led to the impression that Sanika and Rushi were nearly guaranteed to win, when this was not the case."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"d4475f44001d","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"d4475f44001d0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Some interesting data about this election."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"f7d756ec37ff","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"f7d756ec37ff0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"If there is one thing we were right about, it was the unusual nature of this election. The turnout, at 3762, represented 56% of the Harvard College population. This is the first time since HODP’s founding that a majority of undergraduates have voted in the UC presidential election."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"4e4e16de2578","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"4e4e16de25780","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"This election is also by far the closest in recent memory. This year, James and Ify led Aditya and Andrew by just 72 points, and Sanika and Rushi by 92 points. Only 98 first place votes (2.6% of all votes) separated Aditya and Andrew, who received the most first place votes at 1063, and Sanika and Rushi, who were in third place. By contrast, in 2018, Sruthi and Julia led their nearest competitors by over 600 points; in 2017, Cat and Nick won 55% of first choice votes; and in 2016, Yasmin and Cameron received close to 300 more first place votes than their nearest competition."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"},{"_key":"af55ec31558d","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"af55ec31558d0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"Congrats!"}],"markDefs":[],"style":"h2"},{"_key":"bb728cb760cb","_type":"block","children":[{"_key":"bb728cb760cb0","_type":"span","marks":[],"text":"But all of this belabors the point. We were wrong, and we will be looking for ways to improve our predictions for next year. In the meantime, congratulations to UC President-Elect James Mathew and Vice President-Elect Ifeoma White-Thorpe! We hope they will work to increase data transparency and data-driven decision making at the UC."}],"markDefs":[],"style":"normal"}],"layout":"default","members":[{"_key":"380dafb2e11f","person":{"image":{"crop":null,"hotspot":null,"asset":{"_id":"image-f68212d904198eb8ad69ca69a0c323ead65cf55e-200x200-jpg"}},"name":"Kevin Bi","slug":{"current":"kevin-bi"}},"roles":["author","developer"]},{"_key":"48fcf092c828","person":{"image":{"crop":null,"hotspot":null,"asset":{"_id":"image-ecb492226a26c5d8fa92df41659dbe5c64f426bd-1416x1406-png"}},"name":"Lucy Li","slug":{"current":"lucy-li"}},"roles":["author","developer"]},{"_key":"dcc37ea95178","person":{"image":{"crop":null,"hotspot":null,"asset":{"_id":"image-eaa57875846281f6a25e045d81ebd364a0ac6c4b-1370x1370-jpg"}},"name":"Seth Billiau","slug":{"current":"seth-billiau"}},"roles":["author","developer"]}]}},"pageContext":{"id":"-71e77497-d955-5da2-b8f3-c4fde396ad9e"}},"staticQueryHashes":["2744905544","300934582","727047668"]}