Yeah, Rach's Platform Is Pretty Late

HEM

former
Jorts Connoisseur
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
Pronouns
he / him / his
"Yeah, Rach's Platform Is Pretty Late"
HEM Tiberius
ENN Publisher

There's been a lot of complaining in #EuroChat about the lack of platforms. President Rach's platform was posted tonight after seemingly endless days of speculation and waiting. Her platform now comes only 3 days before polls open

But was Rach's platform really late, or did it just feel late?

To answer that question, we consulted the history books. Looking at all modern Presidential runs (defined as 2014 through present day) we collected the election date and compared it to when the winning candidate posted their platform.

We only collected the winning candidate's standing date because (1) it was an easy way to eliminate outliers (i.e. joke candidates) and (2) because Rach is the likely winner it makes sense to compare her to what other winners did.

Here's the five number summary of the data gathered:

Minimum: 3 Days Before Voting Starts
1st Quartile:7 Days Before Voting Starts
Median:9 Days Before Voting Starts
3rd Quartile:10 Days Before Voting Starts
Maximum:11 Days Before Voting Starts


When we put that in a visual form, we get this box-and-whisker plot:


Looking at the data, there isn't much of a doubt that Rach's platform is, objectively, pretty late in the election cycle. The median number of days before the election that a winning candidate posts their platform is 9 days before election day. Roughly 75% of future Presidents post their platform at least 7 days before voting starts. This means, the overwhelming majority of the time, Europeians get at least one week to examine the victorious candidate's platform.

Rach isn't alone in the loser's circle here. She is joined by President Trinnien*, who only gave voters 3 days to review his platform in June 2016, and by chronic procrastinator President Anumia, who only gave 4 days and 5 days respectively in his two 2014 races.

The star student? In his six runs, President Writinglegend gave voters an average of 9.33 days before an election to review his platforms. In his "worst" performance he waited 3 days after standing opened to post his platform.

Update:

One thing I just thought of: it's actually a little unfair to base all these assessments on "days before election day the platform was posted", because the election period can be shorter or longer depending on how the Chancellery declares it.

But if we instead look at the data as "how many days after standing opened the platform was posted", it doesn't change the bottom line a time. As a matter of fact, Rach's 8 days after standing actually makes her a statistical outlier (ouch!).

It does however allow some, like President Aexnidaral, who had shorter total election periods to meet the median, though:

Five number summary:

Minimum: 0 Days After Standing Opened
1st Quartile:1 Day After Standing Opened
Median:2 Days After Standing Opened
3rd Quartile:3 Days After Standing Opened
Maximum:8 Days After Standing Opened


##​

*It should be noted, the author of this piece was running with Trinnien in that election.
 
Frankly, this was an unacceptable delay. We really need that week to properly analyze and question.
 
Calvin Coolidge said:
A very timely piece. Well done, HEM. It'd be fun to see the data on this.
Hm, you might actually be the true star student Pandaman. In two victorious Presidential runs, you posted 10 days before polling opened both times.
 
Scout's Motto comes to mind...
 
I think it's not solely the fact that Rach didn't post her platform in a timely fashion that makes some people view it as disappointing. It is the fact that she didn't really post an explanation to why it was posted late. I think a good explanation would have ended some of the dissatisfaction expressed, at least to an extent.
 
Good piece. I agree with the general sentiment here.

I think an interesting question would be the time gap between standing and posting the platform. A late decider (someone who decided to run later during the standing period) might be more likely to be forgiven for not posting a platform earlier.
 
She is joined by President Trinnien*, who only gave voters 3 days to review his platform in June 2016
Was'nt this the election Trinn decided to jump in last minute anyway? It isn't like he was the incumbent.

This is a great piece to put the discussion into context.
 
I imagine standing early in the cycle also produces a strong crowding out effect - particularly as the incumbent. I understand that the incumbent shouldn't wait until their platform is necessarily ready for prime time because some delay in standing could cause political uncertainty.. but at the same time my understanding is that elections in Europeia occur at regular intervals and every major political player has the ability to count forward to know when elections are.
 
PhDre said:
every major political player has the ability to count forward to know when elections are.
r u saying that minor players can't count?

...

wait

this is tru

cari on
 
Le Libertie said:
I think it's not solely the fact that Rach didn't post her platform in a timely fashion that makes some people view it as disappointing. It is the fact that she didn't really post an explanation to why it was posted late. I think a good explanation would have ended some of the dissatisfaction expressed, at least to an extent.
Also, it shows a real lack of preparedness from an incumbent candidate. There's no excuse for Rach not having a platform ready to go; the norm over the past few years has been for prepared candidates, incumbent or not, to have platforms at the ready within 1-2 days of standing being opened and/or elections being called.
 
I seem to remember posting a manifesto 24 hours before an election, and doing alright in that election.

Meanwhile Rach gives about 3 days, and she gets a ENN article questioning her move. Perhaps expectations have tightened up since the old days, but I remember there were quite a few rumblings back then even.

Maybe I just had more charm... :ph43r:

I don't see the manifesto timing as an issue. The elephant in the room is the lack of credible opposition, although again that isn't unprecedented, it has happened before.

 
North East Somerset said:
I seem to remember posting a manifesto 24 hours before an election, and doing alright in that election.

Meanwhile Rach gives about 3 days, and she gets a ENN article questioning her move. Perhaps expectations have tightened up since the old days, but I remember there were quite a few rumblings back then even.

Maybe I just had more charm... :ph43r:

I don't see the manifesto timing as an issue. The elephant in the room is the lack of credible opposition, although again that isn't unprecedented, it has happened before.
This article examined Presidencies in the last three years, of which yours was not one.

This ENN article just stated statistical truths. And the fact is that posting 8 days after standing opens is an outlier.
 
While I expect Rach will do alright in this election, given the competition, I will point out that NES has the right elephant in the room and the crowding out effect of Rach's strong incumbency as mentioned by PhDre.
 
GraVandius said:
She is joined by President Trinnien*, who only gave voters 3 days to review his platform in June 2016
Was'nt this the election Trinn decided to jump in last minute anyway? It isn't like he was the incumbent.

This is a great piece to put the discussion into context.
Yeah, if I'm not conflating elections, that's accurate. I think the incumbent's platform was slow to be posted at that time (though I haven't double checked), and that's what made Trinnien consider a run.
 
Mousebumples said:
GraVandius said:
She is joined by President Trinnien*, who only gave voters 3 days to review his platform in June 2016
Was'nt this the election Trinn decided to jump in last minute anyway? It isn't like he was the incumbent.

This is a great piece to put the discussion into context.
Yeah, if I'm not conflating elections, that's accurate. I think the incumbent's platform was slow to be posted at that time (though I haven't double checked), and that's what made Trinnien consider a run.
As the incumbent in that election, I can say my platform was released early in the cycle (confirmed by HEM's numbers). Trinn ran for other reasons. :p
 
Calvin Coolidge said:
Mousebumples said:
GraVandius said:
She is joined by President Trinnien*, who only gave voters 3 days to review his platform in June 2016
Was'nt this the election Trinn decided to jump in last minute anyway? It isn't like he was the incumbent.

This is a great piece to put the discussion into context.
Yeah, if I'm not conflating elections, that's accurate. I think the incumbent's platform was slow to be posted at that time (though I haven't double checked), and that's what made Trinnien consider a run.
As the incumbent in that election, I can say my platform was released early in the cycle (confirmed by HEM's numbers). Trinn ran for other reasons. :p
Didn't HEM's data only look at when the winning candidate posted their platform?

Not disputing your recollection - it might have been a delay in responding to questions on the platform? It's been a few years, and I'm not eager to dig through old Skype logs from a few laptops ago, but the why doesn't really matter, I suppose, at this point. :baghead:
 
Back
Top