Elections and politics in Hong Kong: megathread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:00:29 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Elections and politics in Hong Kong: megathread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8
Author Topic: Elections and politics in Hong Kong: megathread  (Read 17930 times)
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: November 25, 2019, 06:29:26 AM »

In a rare loss in an election where it was a Pan-Democratic landslide, Radical Pan-Democratic and de facto leader of LSD 梁國雄(Leung Kwok-hung) lost his race.  He has been in LegCo since 2004 and was narrowly re-elected in 2016 but was thrown out of LegCo for refusing to take the oath (which included oath of loyalty  to PRC which HK is a part of).  He started in the 1970s as a pro-CCP Maoist and then moved to Trotskyism by the late 1970s and became an opponent of the CCP from the Left and these days represents Radical Left populist opponent of the PRC regime in HK.
Logged
kelestian
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 512
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -2.39, S: 1.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: November 25, 2019, 07:21:07 AM »

In a rare loss in an election where it was a Pan-Democratic landslide, Radical Pan-Democratic and de facto leader of LSD 梁國雄(Leung Kwok-hung) lost his race.  He has been in LegCo since 2004 and was narrowly re-elected in 2016 but was thrown out of LegCo for refusing to take the oath (which included oath of loyalty  to PRC which HK is a part of).  He started in the 1970s as a pro-CCP Maoist and then moved to Trotskyism by the late 1970s and became an opponent of the CCP from the Left and these days represents Radical Left populist opponent of the PRC regime in HK.

He lost to DAB's chairwoman, right?
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: November 25, 2019, 08:11:03 AM »

Wikipedia has the vote share being

Pan-Democratic      57.34%
Pan-Establishment  41.82%
Others                     0.44%

They, correctly, in my view, count Christine Fong(方國珊)'s Professional Power(專業動力) as Pan-Establishment when other count them as Centrist.   Professional Power(專業動力) is really a splinter of DAB and have an economically Rightist position so should really count as Pan-Establishment.  Wikipedia also counted a couple of independents that other label as Others as Pan-Democratic which I also agree with.

If you look at the candidates that make up the 0.44% most of them lean Pan-Democratic so we should really call this election 58/42 in favor of Pan-Democratic Bloc which as I mentioned before is really not that bad for the Pan-Establishment if we assume that this election has been turned into a referendum election where the more disparate Pan-Democratic Bloc is able to fuse behind one candidate (mostly.)
Logged
Joseph Cao
Rep. Joseph Cao
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,151


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: November 25, 2019, 11:55:48 AM »
« Edited: November 25, 2019, 11:59:24 AM by Rep. Joseph Cao »


Yes – about the only silver lining for the DAB in individual races.

Wikipedia has the vote share being

Pan-Democratic      57.34%
Pan-Establishment  41.82%
Others                     0.44%

They, correctly, in my view, count Christine Fong(方國珊)'s Professional Power(專業動力) as Pan-Establishment when other count them as Centrist.   Professional Power(專業動力) is really a splinter of DAB and have an economically Rightist position so should really count as Pan-Establishment.  Wikipedia also counted a couple of independents that other label as Others as Pan-Democratic which I also agree with.

If you look at the candidates that make up the 0.44% most of them lean Pan-Democratic so we should really call this election 58/42 in favor of Pan-Democratic Bloc which as I mentioned before is really not that bad for the Pan-Establishment if we assume that this election has been turned into a referendum election where the more disparate Pan-Democratic Bloc is able to fuse behind one candidate (mostly.)

The assumption is very reasonable considering all the factors differentiating this election from previous council elections (large turnout, increasingly SAR-wide politicisation of races, etc.)
While not the universally held position that some people are claiming it to be, a 16–point gap is still reasonably significant, although it would be more so if district councils’ jurisdiction extended to federal policy. On the other hand, I fully expect pro-democracy boosters to instead talk about the much more impressive–sounding seat count.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: November 25, 2019, 12:39:10 PM »

Wikipedia has the vote share being

Pan-Democratic      57.34%
Pan-Establishment  41.82%
Others                     0.44%

They, correctly, in my view, count Christine Fong(方國珊)'s Professional Power(專業動力) as Pan-Establishment when other count them as Centrist.   Professional Power(專業動力) is really a splinter of DAB and have an economically Rightist position so should really count as Pan-Establishment.  Wikipedia also counted a couple of independents that other label as Others as Pan-Democratic which I also agree with.

If you look at the candidates that make up the 0.44% most of them lean Pan-Democratic so we should really call this election 58/42 in favor of Pan-Democratic Bloc which as I mentioned before is really not that bad for the Pan-Establishment if we assume that this election has been turned into a referendum election where the more disparate Pan-Democratic Bloc is able to fuse behind one candidate (mostly.)

The assumption is very reasonable considering all the factors differentiating this election from previous council elections (large turnout, increasingly SAR-wide politicisation of races, etc.)
While not the universally held position that some people are claiming it to be, a 16–point gap is still reasonably significant, although it would be more so if district councils’ jurisdiction extended to federal policy. On the other hand, I fully expect pro-democracy boosters to instead talk about the much more impressive–sounding seat count.

Of course 58/42 is a very significant  gap and in most election systems in the world would put it a landslide levels just like this election.  My point harping on the vote share is that this elections is not an unprecedented rebuke of the administration as it merely replicates all pre-2012 LegCo elections as well as the 2016 PR vote.   Furthermore such a vote share result still would most likely produce a Pro-Establishment majority next year albeit a narrow one. 

I do expect the Lam regime to now meet the protesters not half way but perhaps one quarter way.  If they do not take it and the radical fringe continue the violence then there will be for sure a swing toward the Pro-Establishment camp in next year's LegCo. 
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: November 25, 2019, 12:44:48 PM »


Yes – about the only silver lining for the DAB in individual races.


The only other one was the Pro-Establishment managed to beat Eddie Chu(朱凱廸) who is the leader of the Leftist Pan-Democratic Bloc Land Justice League(土地正義聯盟).  His party won almost all their seats but  Eddie Chu(朱凱廸) was defeated in his seat.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: April 06, 2020, 10:33:43 AM »



Level of trust in police slowly rising from its nadir in Oct 2019 although still far from the pre-crisis levels of Jun 2019.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: May 24, 2020, 07:24:08 AM »

Re-posting my preliminary look at the probable candidates for the Sept 2020 Legco elections

Speaking of the Sept 2020 LegCo elections I did start to take a look at the likely candidate list and like I hoped the Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism blocs now risk significant over-nomination of candidates and throwing away their clear vote share advantage.

There are 35 district seats split up into Hong Kong island: 5, Kowloon West: 6,  Kowloon East:5, New Territories West: 9 and New Territories East: 9

Back in 2016 it was Pan-Establishment bloc 16 Pan-Democratic Bloc 13 and Pan-Localism bloc 6.  A good number of Pan-Democratic Bloc and Pan-Localism bloc winners refused to be sworn pledging loyalty to the PRC and lost their seats.

                                          Pan-Establishment    Pan-Democratic    Pan-Localism      Total
Hong Kong island                          3                               2                      1                 5
Kowloon West                               2                               2                      2                 6
Kowloon East                                3                               2                      0                 5
New Territories West                      5                               2                      2                9
New Territories East                      3                               5                       1                9
Total                                          16                             13                       6               35


For 2020, I looked at the candidate list and grouped them into
a) MLC (incumbents or former MLCs)
b) Quality candidate (either a District Council member, or leader of a party or appointed successor of a current MLC)
c) Minor candidates.

If you go with with categorization the candidate list seems to be
                                  
                                    MLC         Quality             Minor         Total
Pan-Establishment           16               2                    4             22
Pan-Democratic               14             21                    5             40
Pan-Localism                    2             10                    6             18

Just like I hoped, the massive Pan-Democratic landslide in 2019 local elections produced a large number of District Council members and are looking take a step up into Legco and leading to an explosion of candidates.  

Back in 2016 the number of candidates by bloc were

                             Total   Quality     Minor
Pan-Establishment   33        21           12
Pan-Democratic       36        23           13
Pan-Localism           15        11            4

It seems the Pan-Establishment Bloc is looking to be be disciplined and will be fighting to keep their 16 seats or perhaps keep their losses to one seat.   It is certain that some of the Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism candidates will drop out but with so many Quality candidates last minute tactical voting might be tough.  

Going district by district it seems that the Pan-Establishment bloc will lose a seat each in Hong Kong Island, Kowloon East and New Territories West due a turnout surge but over-nomination by the  Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism blocs could allow them to get away with not losing them.  On the flip side the Pan-Establishment bloc could potentially pickup a seat in Kowloon West and New Territories East  if the Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism blocs do not coordinate their vote well.  Looking at the way the Pan-Establishment bloc nominated so far it seems they are looking to make gains in  Kowloon West and mostly given up making gains in New Territories East.  In Kowloon West the Pan-Establishment bloc actually saw a vote share surge relative to 2012 but did not nominate enough candidates to take advantage of it.  This time they are calculating that part of their vote share surge in  Kowloon West remain intact to flip a seat despite a worse 2020 environment relative to 2016.

One way to look at the Pan-Establishment strategy is to look at the number of MLC + Quality candidates by district relative to the number of seats it won in 2016

                                                 2016                           2020
                                         Pan-Establishment     Pan-Establishment
                                               Seats              MLC + Quality candidates
Hong Kong island                          3                                3              
Kowloon West                               2                                4
Kowloon East                                3                                3
New Territories West                      5                                5
New Territories East                      3                                3

The number of Pan-Establishment MLC+Quality candidates is the same as the number of Pan-Establishment winners in 2016 with the exception of Kowloon West  where the Pan-Establishment has 4 MLC+Quality candidates versus 2 winners 2016 representing its offensive posture there versus a defensive posture in the other districts.

Of course Sept 2020 is far away so the strategies of all 3 blocs might change.

Unless the Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism bloc can get organized to slim down their candidates into a series of winnable candidates and weed out the vote splinters their clear  advantage will be thrown away when election day comes.

Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: May 24, 2020, 07:51:37 AM »

After I categorized likely 2020 Legco candidates by type (current or past MLC, Quality[District council member, leader of a party, designated successor of current MLC), and Minor)

Now comparing the Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism bloc to get a sense of their strategy.  We already have the Pan-Establishment chart

                                                2016                           2020                         2020
                                         Pan-Establishment     Pan-Establishment         Pan-Establishment
                                               Seats              MLC + Quality candidates     Minor candidate
Hong Kong island                          3                                3                               1
Kowloon West                               2                                4                               1
Kowloon East                                3                                3               
New Territories West                      5                                5                              1
New Territories East                      3                                3                               1

It is clear that the Pan-Establishment bloc is on the offensive in Kowloon West and on the defensive elsewhere hoping to just save their current seats in an environment that will be worse in 2020 than in 2016.

If we cluster Pan-Democratic and Pan-Localism bloc candidates into one Anti-Establishment bloc and look at prospective candidate list we have

                                                2016                           2020                         2020
                                        Anti-Establishment     Anti-Establishment        Anti-Establishment
                                               Seats              MLC + Quality candidates    Minor candidate
Hong Kong island                          3                              11                               
Kowloon West                               4                                7                               4
Kowloon East                                2                                6                               2   
New Territories West                      4                             10                               1
New Territories East                      6                              13                               4

Clearly there is a risk of massive over-nomination and I am sure some of these candidates will forced to drop out or will be victims of tactical voting (mostly for those that are in the Minor candidate camp).  Still overall, their strategy, if you call it that, seems to be very aggressive everywhere except for Kowloon West where the number of serious candidates is not as relatively large compared to the number of 2016 winners.  This is, of course, the mirror image of the Pan-Establishment bloc strategy.

It seems both camps have come to the de facto consensus that the 2016 Kowloon West result of  Pan-Establishment 2 Anti-Establishment 4 does not reflect the total real electoral strength on the ground in 2016 so this time Pan-Establishment bloc is looking to make gains here and the Anti-Establishment bloc is looking to limit losses.  Elsewhere it is the other way around.

There are clear conflict within the Anti-Establishment bloc like between the Pan-Democratic bloc and Pan-Localism bloc. Even within the  Pan-Democratic bloc  there are clear rivalries between the Moderates and Radicals.  Still, in the 2019 Local elections they call came together and mostly fought a 1-to-1 battle against the Pan-Establishment bloc in most of the FPTP seats and winning a massive landslide.

Like I said before, the main problem now is that a lot of 2019 winners now want to take a step up which adds the explosion  of  Quality candidates many of whom might say "why should I back down? this is not FPTP, but multi-member, 2019 showed was have a massive vote share lead so me being in the race can push up Anti-Establishment turnout by bring my personal vote to the ballot box" 

In the end I suspect they will work something out or else this level of over-nomination without clear organized tactically voting could well see the Pan-Establishment bloc actually gain seats relative to 2016 (namely keep all their seats plus flip a seat in Kowloon West) which would be quite ironic as they will clearly see significant vote share falloff from 2016.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: July 03, 2020, 06:23:00 AM »

Now that the new security law is in place, protests petering out, and localism party 香港眾志(Demosisto) disbanding it will be useful to take a look at the candidate list for the district seats.   

香港眾志(Demosisto) disbanding did not have that much impact as there was only a pro-香港眾志(Demosisto) independent that is in the fray and there does not seem to be any signs he will drop out. 

Using my  categorization of 2020 Legco candidates by type (current or past MLC, Quality[District council member, leader of a party, designated successor of current MLC), and Minor).  The candidate count by type per district are

Pan-Establishment

                                                2016                           2020                         2020
                                         Pan-Establishment     Pan-Establishment         Pan-Establishment
                                               Seats              MLC + Quality candidates     Minor candidate
Hong Kong island                          3                                3                               1
Kowloon West                               2                                4                               1
Kowloon East                                3                                3               
New Territories West                      5                                5                              1
New Territories East                      3                                4                               2

So in New Territories East the Pan-Establishment lane got more crowed.  So for now the Pan-Establishment strategy is to be on the attack in Kowloon West and New Territories East and be on the defensive elsewhere.  In Kowloon West the 2016 Pan-Establishment vote share would justify the Pan-Establishment winning more than 2 out of 6 seats ergo the offensive posture.  Such an argument does not exist in New Territories East so there is some danger of the Pan-Establishment bloc over-nominating in New Territories East.


Anti-Establishment

                                                2016                           2020                         2020
                                        Anti-Establishment     Anti-Establishment        Anti-Establishment
                                               Seats              MLC + Quality candidates    Minor candidate
Hong Kong island                          3                                9                               1                               
Kowloon West                               4                                6                               5
Kowloon East                                2                                6                               1   
New Territories West                      4                             11                               1
New Territories East                      6                              10                               6

As a whole the Anti-Establishment made some progress in driving down the number of MLC + Quality candidates that could split the vote but much more has to be done if the Anti-Establishment bloc is to make the gains it is hoping for.  Also the number of minor candidates went up which means that the Anti-Establishment bloc will have either get them to drop out or do a good job on tactical voting.  4 of the  Anti-Establishment candidates are actually "Plan B" candidates that will run for real if the main candidate is not allowed to run so the situation is not as dire for the Anti-Establishment bloc as it seems. 

If these were the candidate list then I would be very surprises if the Anti-Establishment bloc were to make gains.  Assuming they get their act together my current projection is

District seats
                                   Pan-Establishment        Anti-Establishment
Hong Kong island                         3                               3
Kowloon West                              2                               4
Kowloon East                               2                               3             
New Territories West                    4                               5
New Territories East                     3                               6
Total                                         14                             21

District Council (second)              2                              3
(de facto party PR seats)

Functional seats                         20                            10

Total                                         36                             34
 
For Functional seats the Anti-Establishment bloc will for sure District Council (First).  The Anti-Establishment bloc could flip Tourism, Sports/Performing Arts/Culture/Publication, and Wholesale/Retail.  The  Pan-Establishment is likely to flip Engineering (the incumbent Pan-Establishment who won it in a by-election)  and have a very thin chance of flipping Health Services and Social Welfare.  My medium projection is for the Anti-Establishment bloc to flip 3 seats and the Pan-Establishment bloc to flip 1 seat.  So 2016 functional seats breakdown of 22-8 edge for the Pan-Establishment will become a 20-10 edge.  Note one of the Anti-Establishment bloc functional seat MLA is more neutral that could vote with the Pan-Establishment bloc under some circumstances.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: July 10, 2020, 06:43:05 AM »

Anti-Establishment parties are holding "primaries" this weekend to try to widdle down the number of candidates in the fray.  This move is very necessary because as it the anti-Establishment camp have way too many candidates in the field and risk massive vote splitting in light of the Pro-Establishment strategy of a conservative nomination approach.  Main problem here is that this primary is not binding and if turnout is low the losing candidates will cry foul and continue to run. 

Of course one thing to hold everyone in check is the prospect of an Anti-Establishment sweep has dimmed after the protest movement mostly died down in light of new security law which is certain to lead to lower Anti-Establishment turnout.  Turnout in these "primaries" will give us a sense on much enthusiasm has declined in the Anti-Establishment camp.  One more problem is various Localist parties will not have to be very careful on election day slogans as they now face arrest if those slogans seems like an appeal to HK Independence.   
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: July 11, 2020, 06:00:38 AM »
« Edited: July 11, 2020, 06:06:11 AM by jaichind »

Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" is today which is a "open primary."  The organizers are hoping for 10% turnout which would mean around 380K votes.  So far as of 6pm around 137K votes have been cast.  Of course a bunch of votes have been cast over the internet which I am sure has been accounted for.  The primary will go on tomorrow so it is yet to be seen if they will reach their target.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: July 11, 2020, 11:22:40 AM »

Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" first day turnout hits 234K which is fairly impressive given the lull the protest movement has encountered.  Most likely they should hit their target of at least 380K turnout in the second day tomorrow.  It seems they have pass their first hurdle of pruning down their large candidate list to something smaller and avoid massive vote splitting. 
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: July 12, 2020, 09:09:23 AM »

As of 9PM Sunday the Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" turnout reached 582K which is around 13% turnout.   It is not as high as 2010 by-election "de facto referendum on universal suffrage" turnout of around 17% and the 2014 'referendum' turnout of around 800K which was around 22% turnout.  But under the circumstances this turnout is quite impressive.  I think the    Anti-Establishment bloc should be able match their 2016 LegCo turnout surge even if the 2019 Nov turnout is no longer possible.  Now it really comes down if the  Anti-Establishment bloc can get the "primary" losers to really drop out and shift their support toward the winners.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: July 12, 2020, 12:42:43 PM »

 Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" done.  592K voted which is 13.3% turnout which clearly beat the minimum 10% goal.  In that sense the turnout rate should be viewed as a success.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: July 13, 2020, 12:09:59 PM »

Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" results out.  A lot of turnover plus a clear shift to the Localism bloc.

In terms of vote share and nominations won it was

                                          Vote share    Nominations
Moderate Democratic Bloc     49.95%              14
Radical Democratic Bloc        11.62%                3
Localism Bloc                       38.44%                9

Note 8 Anti-Establishment (and not Plan B candidates) choose not to participate in the primary and most likely will run anyway.  5 of them are Localism Bloc (1 of them being an incumbent). 4 of them have experience at the district level so will have some level of support if they do run. 

4 Primary winners (3 Localism Bloc and 1 Moderate Democratic Bloc) have never held political office before or taken leadership roles in a political party.   All of them were associated with the 2014 protest movement.

Other than the 1 Localism Bloc incumbent that refused to participate in the primary, 2 incumbents or former MLA were defeated.  One key one is 梁國雄(Leung Kwok-hung) who is pretty much the leader of the Radical Democratic Bloc. With the Anti-Establishment bloc being radicalized due to recent events the Radical Democratic Bloc vote continue to shift to the even more radical Localism bloc.

The main problem for the Anti-Establishment bloc is that even assuming every candidate that did not win the primary step down (some will not) having a radical slate of candidates is problematic.  This is not just because that might drive some moderate voters toward the Establishment Bloc candidate.   Even if they somehow win a majority with 9 out of 26 district candidates being from the Localism bloc most of them, even if elected, might refuse to take the oath of office which involves swearing loyalty to PRC. Even if they want to they might have to refuse without looking like hypocrites.    But doing so would just hand the majority right back to the Establishment Bloc.

Ideally for the   Anti-Establishment bloc  the primary produces a large super majority candidates from the Moderate Democratic Bloc who then go on to sweep the elections and would be sworn in to take their seats to cement their majority.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: July 13, 2020, 12:22:58 PM »

Almost all of the Localism Bloc candidates that refused to participate in the  Anti-Establishment bloc primary are those linked to or associated to the Localism Bloc Right wing, especially from 熱血公民(Civic Passion.)  Most of them are from the Chinese nationalist Far Right but view the CCP as the devil incarnate leading them to call for an independent HK as a way to eventually overthrow the CCP.  They are all influenced by the ideas of 陳云根 (Horace Chin Wan-kan) who advocated for an independent HK as a base to preserve Chinese civilization and a base to eventually take out the CCP.  Some of the old HK KMT have since merged into this set of political thought.  It seems that one way or another they are going to run.  Other then their view of the CCP (which would match my view in the 1980s) there is a lot of overlap between myself and these guys.  If I were to vote for an Anti-Establishment bloc candidate it would be for these guys.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: July 13, 2020, 03:31:26 PM »

Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute poll in June show the Anti-Establishment Bloc lead over Establishment Bloc declining from 58-22 to 53-29 relative to March



Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: July 13, 2020, 03:40:26 PM »

In the Health Services functional seat, the Anti-Establishment Bloc also held a primary.  The Moderate Democratic Bloc incumbent was defeated by a Localism Bloc challenger.  It is yet to be seen if the  Moderate Democratic Bloc incumbent will step aside.
Logged
PSOL
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,981


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: July 13, 2020, 04:53:17 PM »

How did the LSD do in the primary?
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: July 14, 2020, 04:53:15 AM »

How did the LSD do in the primary?

They ran two candidates.  One,  梁國雄(Leung Kwok-hung), who barely won re-election in 2016 but did not take office due to refusal to swear allegiance to PRC,  surprising lost.  The other, 岑子杰(Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit), won.  Both are Deputy Chairperson of LSD.     The defeat of 梁國雄(Leung Kwok-hung) is a shock because he is always seen as the de facto leader of the Radical Democratic Bloc which LSD is a part of.  A lot of their vote went over to the Localism Bloc.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: July 15, 2020, 01:02:58 PM »

After the Anti-Establishment bloc "primary", as expected, some of those that participated in the primary dropped out but others that came close to making the cut has not dropped out pending negotiations.  If we excluded "Plan B" candidates we can group candidates by camp and weather they are significant (MLA, ex-MLA, made the cut in the Anti-Establishment bloc "primary", holds office at the district level, leadership role in a party) and minor.

Doing that we get            

                                  Establishment Bloc            Democratic Bloc            Localism Bloc
                                  Significant     Minor        Significant     Minor    Significant     Minor
Hong Kong island                 3              1               2                0                3            0        
Kowloon West                      4              1               3                1                2            1          
Kowloon East                       3             0                4                0                1            0      
New Territories West            5              1               4                0                4            0      
New Territories East             5              2               7                0                3            2    
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                 20              5             20                1              13            3

Most of the  Establishment Bloc Minor candidates actually centrists that only slightly lean Establishment Bloc   can could be expected to cut into both Establishment Bloc  and Democratic Bloc.  

All in all the Anti-Establishment bloc primary weeded out a lot of minor candidates that dropped out after not making the cut in the primary.  As of right now the  Anti-Establishment bloc  still has too many candidates for them to sweep the elections even allowing for something like a 60/40 vote share lead.  I do suspect the  Anti-Establishment bloc will work out more deals to cut out a few more candidates.  
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: July 16, 2020, 10:08:56 AM »
« Edited: July 16, 2020, 01:57:32 PM by jaichind »

With candidates aligned with  陳云根 (Horace Chin Wan-kan) and 熱血公民(Civic Passion) refusing to take part in the Anti-Establishment bloc "primary" and insisting on running on their own the split of the Localism Bloc is complete.  The 陳云根 (Horace Chin Wan-kan) and 熱血公民(Civic Passion) should really now be called Polis Bloc.

The Polis Bloc is Right wing, socially Conservative anti-CCP populists that is for HK autonomy as a way to make the HK a base to overthrow the CCP on the Mainland.  We can retroactively take the 2016 LegCo results district results by candidate type and come up with vote share for each Bloc/Sub-bloc

                                            Contested     Won     Vote Share
Establishment Pro-Beijing              9              3          8.17%
Establishment Economic Right      19            13         32.02%
Establishment Centrist                   7              0          4.74%
Democratic Moderate                   23            11        28.58%
Democratic Radical                      11              2          7.53%
Localism                                     10              5        11.85%
Polis                                            5               1          7.11%

Establishment Pro-Beijing are economically Leftist, socially conservative/Chinese traditionalist and Pro-Beijing
Establishment Economic Right are economically Right, socially moderate conservative, and Pro-Beijing
Establishment Centrist are economically Right, Socially liberal and lean Pro-Beijing
Democratic Moderate, Democratic Radical, and Localism are all economically Left, socially liberal, and anti-Beijing
Polis is economically Right, socially conservative/Chinese traditionalist, and anti-Beijing



So you can take the different cleavages using the 2016 vote shares.

Economically Right: Establishment Economic Right, Establishment Centrist, Polis: 43.87%
Economically Left: Democratic Moderate, Democratic Radical, Localism, Establishment Pro-Beijing: 56.13%

Socially Conservative/Chinese traditionalism:  Establishment Pro-Beijing, Establishment Economic Right, Polis: 47.31%
Socially Liberal/Western: Democratic Moderate, Democratic Radical, Localism, Establishment Centrist: 52.69%

Pro-Beijing:Establishment Pro-Beijing, Establishment Economic Right, Establishment Centrist: 44.93%
Anti-Beijing: Democratic Moderate, Democratic Radical, Localism, Polis: 55.07%
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: July 18, 2020, 05:53:44 AM »

After some late ballots came in and recounts took place the final result of the Anti-Establishment are as following

                                          Candidates     Nominated      Vote share
Democratic Moderate bloc          25                 15                50.21%
Democratic Radical bloc              5                   3                 11.74%
Localism                                  12                   8                 38.05%

All the candidates that did not make the cut, even those that were close, all dropped out.  Overall given the final turnout of around 605K and that all losers dropped out this primary should be seen as a relative success.  The slate of candidates are more radical than expected but given the events of the last year this does make sense.  Also the Polis bloc candidates and some Anti-Establishment bloc rebels who refused to take part in the primary will also run which will split the Anti-Establishment vote.  But overall the Anti-Establishment forces did pass their first test to avoid a total election day disaster with their vote hopefully split.

The number of candidates per bloc (both significant and minor are)

                                                       Significant              Minor
Establishment Pro-Beijing                         5                        1
Establishment Economic Right                 12                        1
Establishment Centrist                             1                        3  
Democratic Moderate                             15                        3
Democratic Radical                                  3                        0
Localism                                                 9                        2
Polis                                                       4                        2

There are 3 Plan B candidates in the fray. Since it seems they will stay on until election day in case the Plan A candidates are disqualified last minute I count them as Minor candidates as they will be on the ballot and most likely will win some tiny number of votes.  

The Establishment Centrist bloc are running separately and not really coordinated with the Establishment Pro-Beijing and Establishment Economic Right bloc.  But they only have 1 quality candidate and all things equal they are expected to pull in some marginal Anti-Establishment votes as well.  For the Anti-Establishment primary blocs (Democratic Moderate, Democratic Radical, Localism) all Minor candidates are rebels or plan B candidates and all Significant candidates are those that passed the primary except for one Localism candidates who holds a District council office and refused to take part in the primary.

All signs are then that the Anti-Establishment vote most likely come out in force for the Sept 6th election so the Establishment bloc has to hope that their turnout are also high.  If turnout on both sides are high (like Nov 2019) then the Establishment bloc with their even more Conservative nomination strategy should beat back the Anti-Establishment surge and barely keep their majority.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: July 19, 2020, 07:49:34 PM »

Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute poll in June show the Anti-Establishment Bloc lead over Establishment Bloc declining from 58-22 to 53-29 relative to March




Same poll also shows a decline in support of the protest movement from 59% in Dec 2019 to 58% in Mar 2020 to 51% in Jun 2020,  Mostly mimics decline in the Anti-Establishment vote





Also HK independence is not a vote winner with around 21% support.  The Establishment bloc will plan to tied the Anti-Establishment bloc to HK Independence to rope in the Centrist voter.



Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.08 seconds with 11 queries.