Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
4.
Even though we cannot exclude the possibility of there being other surveys
conducted by other researchers attached to the University of Colombo and other
academic and research institutions on this subject, it would be unfair if such are
quoted or published without the explicit consent of any such researchers, including us,
and more so if the contents are not properly reported so that misleading opinions
could be developed in the minds of the readers.
5.
Since we realise the possibility of these numerous reports quoting out of context
our research and their various outputs, we thought of putting the record straight by
releasing to media the outcomes of our research as it stood at 27th December 2014,
while requesting all concerned to avoid using these for any marketing or propaganda
purposes. We, however, have no objection of anyone or organisation using these for
further research work or for their internal planning and strategic decision making
purposes.
T Lalithasiri Gunaruwan, Senior Lecturer (Economics), University of Colombo, and
D S Jayaweera, Policy Analyst (Currently the DG/SLTDA)
January 01, 2015
SURVEY ON VOTING PATTERNS Presidential Election 2015
(Survey conducted by a research team of the University of Colombo)
Sample :
(a)
Relatively smaller sample (little less than 1000) compared to total population of
little over 15 million. Survey forms were collected at convenience, and therefore,
district-wise or electorate-wise representative sampling could not be realised. The
results have to be perceived having proper understanding of this aspect.
(b)
Over 80% of the sample were Sinhala Buddhists, and thus this sample has that
bias, given that the overall share of Sinhala Buddhist voters is approximately 70% of
the total votes.
(c)
No survey responses were obtained from North (except one respondent from
Jaffna, and two from Mullativu), while much larger number of responses were obtained
from East, North Central, Western and Southern provinces. Only a few responses
were obtained from Central, Uva, Wayamba and Sabaragamuwa Provinces.
(d)
Sample characteristics indicate that it is overwhelmingly biased towards
Mahinda Rajapaksa, as out of those who have cast their votes in the respective
elections, over 75% had voted for MR in 2010 and 2005 elections (when his national
average stood around 58% in 2010 and just above 50% in 2005).
Results:
1.
Around 20% for the first time voters and nearly 13%-15% of the total
respondents are still undecided. This indecision is still substantially high, and means
that a lot could still change, particularly through the events and behavior of parties
over the next two weeks.
2.
Only 1% of the respondents in the aggregate sample pronounced preference to
vote for a third candidate, while nearly 3% would vote for no one. These ratios are 2%
and 7%, respectively, with regard to fresh voters. This indicates the likelihood of
relatively lesser share of votes polled by any candidate other than the two main
contenders, while the cancellation rate also is likely to be relatively low (please note
that this percentage is compatible with what was observed at past national elections).
3.
In the face of it, 44% to 39% split between MR and MS in a highly MR-biased
(as explained in d above) sample points at the highly competitive nature of the
forthcoming election, where the possibility of MRs share going below 50% is
substantial.
4.
The present survey thus adopted a different approach to examine the trends.
The 2015 vote base was divided into new votes and non-new votes; and the share
of votes polled by individual candidates were considered with regard to new votes,
while the shifts away from MR (in 2010) to MS (in 2015) and vice-versa were
estimated and applied on to the population with regard to non-new votes.
5.
As per the survey results, MR would obtain 38% of the new-votes while MS
would obtain 33%. The balance would be accounted under votes obtained by other
candidates, non-voters, and those who are still undecided.
6.
With regard to non-new votes, nearly 28% of those who voted for MR in 2010
would shift towards MS this time and 11% would still be undecided, while 4% of those
who voted for Sarath Fonseka in 2010 would shift towards MR in 2015 while 11%
would be undecided. It is interesting to note that nearly 30% of those who voted for
MR in 2005 Presidential election would deflect towards MS in 2015, and around 9% of
those voted for Ranil Wickramasinghe in 2005 would deflect towards MR in the
coming election.
7.
Applying the basic survey results to the overall population, and using the 2010
election results as the basis for projections, it could be estimated that the chances are
greater for MS to win this election with around 53% of the total valid votes, assuming
that the absentee voter ratio stays unchanged at around 25%.
8.
This pattern was cross examined through an ethnicity based analysis. This
was attempted because the survey sample appeared overwhelmingly Sinhalese, and
any shift calculated based on such a biased sample would only apply to that particular
ethnic electorate. The results indicated the likelihood of MS securing a lead of over 2
lakhs of votes over MR in this electoral block, paving the way for an MS victory with a
likely preference for him in Tamil and Muslim electorates. The survey results indicate
that MS could secure the required 50% of total valid votes if he manages to get around
half of the Tamil and Muslim votes, while MR would require over 60% of the Tamil and
Muslim votes if he is to surpass MS in the overall competition and to cross over the