Well respected non-governmental organisation Pildat and Gallup jointly undertook a survey to forecast the political weather in Pakistan and determine the voting patterns in 300 villages and 200 urban locations with a sample size of 10,000 - well above the normal sample of 3000 or so. The exercise grouped 272 constituencies, carved on the basis of historical voting patterns for the past 20 years, into 11 electoral territories: 3 in Punjab, 2 in Sindh, 4 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 2 in Balochistan.
Each of the 11 territories exhibited some uniformity, especially in terms of key contesting parties; however, each territory had internal similarity though dissimilar from others. The highest scorer was the PML (N) with a consolidated average national score of 37 percent, followed by 16 percent scored by the PPP as well as the PTI. However, the survey does acknowledge that national popularity polls are not a good indicator of which party would win the majority seats in parliament.
To better assess the voting patterns in Pakistan the survey identified and developed three drivers of possible change in conventional electoral patterns: (i) popularity-electability gap defined as the difference between the popularity of the leader and that of the party; (ii) alliance potential index measured by the voters first and second choice in the elections; and (iii) acceptability gap or the measure of a voter's hostility to a particular party with a positive value given to that party where the voter favours a party more than expresses hostility against it.
The scores of all major political parties based on these three drivers of change conclusively indicate that the perception that a large enough coalition would automatically form the next government is no longer applicable. Those political pundits who had regarded Nawaz Sharif's refusal to form coalitions with other parties as a clear indication of his inability to form the next government based on the findings of earlier surveys would now have to revisit their evaluation.
The survey noted the results of the November 2012 survey conducted by the US-based International Republican Institute and the February 2013 poll conducted by Gallup provided a consolidated score: PML (N) scored 32 percent in IRI, 41 percent in Gallup and 36.5 percent in consolidated with PTI in second place at 18, 14 and 16 percent and PPP at third place at 14, 17 and 15.5 percent respectively. PML (Q) had the appallingly low score of 2, 4 and consolidated 3 percent.
In Punjab the scores were as follows: PML (N) scored 49 percent in IRI, 59 percent in Gallup and 54 percent consolidated, followed by PTI which scored 19, 14 and 16.5 percent, while PPP scored 8, 10 and 9 percent respectively. The PPP's position in Punjab is worse if one looks at the voting intention score based on the three drivers of change in North, West and South Punjab with 4, 10 and 18 percent with PML-N's comparable score at 63, 69 and 43 percent. But clearly the lead of PML (N) in South Punjab is less than in other regions and part of the reason may be the PPP's election manifesto to carve South Punjab as another province. PTI scored the second highest in North Punjab with 15 percent but came third in West and South Punjab with 9 and 16 percent scores.
In Sindh, PPP was clearly in the lead and scored 32 percent in IRI, 37 percent in Gallup and 34.5 percent consolidated, followed by MQM 16, 19, and 17.5 percent with PTI in third place scoring 9, 7 and 8 percent and PML (N) 8, 6 and 7 percent consolidated respectively.
In Karachi, Sindh, the voting intention score is interesting with MQM, as expected, clearly in the lead at 45 percent followed by PTI at 11 percent, PPP at 10 percent and all others at a whopping 3.4 percent. There is therefore room for alliance which may tilt the balance in favour of one party.
The voting patterns in the rest of Sindh are also interesting with PPP a clear winner with 51 percent followed by PML (N) and MQM at 5 percent each but with others scoring a whopping 39 percent in Sindh there is ample room for an alliance that can provide a serious opposition to erstwhile coalition partners PPP and MQM.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's scores gave a majority to PTI with 32 percent score by IRI, 28 percent by Gallup and 30 percent consolidated followed by PML (N) with 12, 34 and 23 percent, JUI (F) 6, 10 and 8 percent consolidated, and ANP with 3, 11 and 7 percent respectively. In terms of voting patterns, PML (N) has emerged as a clear winner with 34, 36 and 43 percent vote in KPK South, Valley and Hazara with PTI in second place scoring 33, 28 and 34 percent.
In Balochistan as per Gallup regional parties were the highest scorers at 36 percent followed by PPP's 18 percent IRI score, 17 Gallup score and 17.5 consolidated score, PML (N) 13, 12 and 12.5 percent consolidated, and PTI 8, 3 and 5.5 percent respectively. Gallup polls alone show JUI/MMA's 18 percent score with ANP at 13 percent.
The situation in Balochistan has changed with 5 members of provincial and national assemblies as well as another 17 PPP members having joined PML (N). The change in party by individuals or groups indicate that the survey results may well change even before they are announced and the current set of statistics is not a reflection of the final election results.
The PTI, no doubt, would dismiss these results by pointing out that it was engaged in intraparty elections for an extended period and now that they are complete and the party structure in place it would once again focus on the forthcoming elections. The start of their campaign for the elections would be 23rd March, they argue, and the gauge should be the jalsa at Lahore on that historical date.
In short and as acknowledged by Pildat/Gallup the voting patterns would change and continue to change till the last minute as and when the parameters change. The focus of the PPP and PML (N) leadership based on the numbers changing party loyalties appears to be on luring the electables to their side. The question remains whether the electorate would surprise the parties' leadership as well as the surveys to elect on the basis of past performance and future expectations.
Comments
Comments are closed.