Antony Green analysis exposed

ABC Electoral Analyst, Antony Green, has been exposed publishing false and misleading information, In doing a comparison analysis between the 2010 Senate and the Victorian upper-house statistics Antony green excluded from his calculation pre-polling and postal votes. This omission has the effect of inflating the ALP and the Green preferences and underestimating the true value of the Liberal Party vote.

In responding to our question Antony Green stated:

GREEN COMMENT: I stand by figures. I have allocated all polling places by which region they lie in, including splitting electorates that lie in more than one region. I didn't include the pre-poll and postal votes because it rarely makes a massive difference.

Well it does make a difference and the margin between the ALP winning a second seat and the Liberal party winning three seats is much closer as a result.  If the Greens, as has been suggested her and on numerous other web sites, issue a split ticket they will be giving the Liberal party a heads up  The analysis provided by Anthony Green of ALP 2, LNO 2. Gen 1) is wrong.

GREEN COMMENT: Why should I allocate a split Green preference ticket? You assert the Greens will do this. If the Greens do issue a split ticket, we will know on Sunday and it will be the biggest story of the election campaign. I see no reason to start off analysis by assuming a flow of preferences that has never happened.

Well Sunday is a bit late the public need to be properly informed.  Antony Green in not publishing in more detail the margin for a change in outcome has mislead the public.  On comparing the Southern Metro to Senate vote the margin is within 1-2% and a split Green ticket would favour the Liberal Party. Anthony Green should know this to be true but he committed to mention this fact. Why?  He makes all kinds of predictions after all is not the swing chart a prediction based on statistical data? To publish an incomplete data set is another issue that only compounds the omission.