Candidate
|
Election
Result
in PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain Nov 8
|
Clinton (D)
|
47.61
|
16,771
|
52,344
|
312.1
|
5,847
|
53.5
|
Trump (R)
|
48.83
|
44,222
|
6,394
|
14.5
|
31,160
|
238.6
|
Johnson (L)
|
2.39
|
764
|
47
|
6.2
|
33
|
4.5
|
Stein (G)
|
0.82
|
542
|
55
|
10.1
|
49
|
9.9
|
gap between D and R
|
1.22
|
27,451
|
-45,950
|
-297.65
|
25,313
|
185.03
|
correlation with Result
|
0.85
|
0.66
|
0.58
|
0.73
|
0.74
|
The election is now over. Now the process of what the result all means now begins. I have been posting on the Facebook followings of candidates for nine races in Pennsylvania. I collected data from the candidates pages on the followings (those who click like on the page), the number and % engaged (those who click on, like or share posts from the page), and the number and % gain in followers since the day after the second presidential debate. Above is a summary of the Presidential election result for Pennsylvania and the data from the state campaign Facebook pages for the four major presidential candidates collected on the morning of November 8. The gaps between Clinton and Trump for each measure are presented in the first row in bold. The bottom row in bold shows the correlation of each Facebook (FB) measure with the election result. The variable with the strongest correlation with the result was the total number of followers at 0.85 (the correlation coefficient is on a scale of -1 to +1 with the number being further away from zero suggesting a stronger relationship). The tables below summarize the US Senate Race and several other down ballot races for the US House, State Senate, and State House.
US Senate
|
Election
Result
in PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Pat Toomey (R)
|
48.94
|
156,446
|
16,276
|
10.4
|
3,849
|
2.5
|
Katie McGinty (D)
|
47.21
|
25,291
|
13,155
|
52.0
|
3,750
|
17.4
|
gap between D & R
|
1.73
|
131,155
|
3,121
|
-41.61
|
99
|
-14.89
|
The senate race between Pat Toomey and Katie McGinty was narrowly won by Toomey by 1.73%. He had a big advantage in FB followers (by 131,155), net gain in followers and number engaged. McGinty did have an advantage in % engaged and % gain in FB followers.
US House 12th
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Keith Rothfus (R)
|
62.1
|
12,748
|
143
|
1.1
|
22
|
0.2
|
Erin
McClelland (D)
|
37.9
|
3,720
|
1,799
|
48.4
|
217
|
6.2
|
gap between D and R
|
24.2
|
9,028
|
-1,656
|
-47
|
-195
|
-6
|
The US House race in the 12th district in PA was won by incumbent Keith Rothfus (R) by 24.2%. He had an advantage in FB Followers but his opponent Erin McClelland had the advantage in the engagement and the gain in followers.
US House 9th
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Bill Shuster (R)
|
63.42
|
6,589
|
3,488
|
52.9
|
401
|
6.5
|
Art Halvorson (D)
|
36.58
|
2,909
|
2,573
|
88.4
|
705
|
32.0
|
gap between D & R
|
26.84
|
3,680
|
915
|
-36
|
-304
|
-26
|
The US House 9th District race was won by Bill Shuster by 26.84%. Shuster had the advantage in followers and in the number engaged. his opponent Halvorson had the advantage in % and net gain as well as the % engaged. As an aside my cousin Casey Contres was managing Shuster's campaign.
State Senate 35th
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Wayne
Langerholc (R)
|
62.54
|
1540
|
320
|
20.8
|
64
|
4.3
|
Ed Cernic (D)
|
37.46
|
498
|
347
|
69.7
|
146
|
41.5
|
gap between D & R
|
25.08
|
1,042
|
-27
|
-48.9
|
-82
|
-37.1
|
The State Senate race in the 35th district, like the Presidential, race had no incumbent. Wayne Langerholc won with 62.54% of the vote. He had a 3 to one advantage in Facebook followers. Cernic (who, in the interest of full disclosure, I had worked for) had an advantage in the number and % engaged and in the net and % gain in followers.
State Senate
41st
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Don White (R)
|
68.32
|
966
|
4
|
0.4
|
9
|
0.9
|
Tony DeLoreto (D)
|
27.42
|
874
|
770
|
88.1
|
328
|
60.1
|
gap between D & R
|
40.9
|
92
|
-766
|
-87.7
|
-319
|
-59.1
|
The state Senate race in the 41st district was won by incumbent Don White with 68.32% of the vote. He had a slight advantage in Facebook followers on his State Senate page (I couldn't find a campaign FB page for him). Challenger DeLoreto had an advantage in the remaining categories.
State House 71st
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Mark Amsdell (R)
|
41.23
|
268
|
50
|
18.7
|
117
|
77.5
|
Bryan Barbin (D)
|
58.77
|
404
|
23
|
5.7
|
-
|
0.0
|
gap between D & R
|
-17.54
|
-136
|
27
|
13.0
|
117
|
77.5
|
The state house 71st district (my district) was won by incumbent Bryan Barbin with 58.77% of the vote over Mark Amsdell. Barbin had the advantage in followers on his district page. He had no campaign page. Amsdell had the advantage in the remaining categories.
State House 72nd
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Cecelia Houser (R)
|
42.29
|
684
|
566
|
82.7
|
236
|
52.7
|
Frank Burns (D)
|
57.71
|
1266
|
150
|
11.8
|
15
|
1.2
|
gap between D & R
|
-15.42
|
-582
|
416
|
70.9
|
221
|
51.5
|
In the 72nd State House district, incumbent Frank Burns won with 57.71% of the vote over Cecelia Houser. Burns had the advantage in FB followers on his district page while Houser had the advantage on the other categories. Like Barbin and DeLoreto, Burns just had a FB page for his district, not a campaign page.
State House 73rd
|
Election
Result
in
PA (%)
|
FB followers
Nov 8
|
FB engaged
Nov 8
|
% engaged
Nov 8
|
Net gain
Nov 8
|
% Gain
Nov 8
|
Tommy Sankey (R)
|
71.2
|
639
|
262
|
41.0
|
52
|
8.9
|
Fred Weaver (D)
|
28.8
|
812
|
867
|
106.8
|
185
|
29.5
|
gap between D & R
|
42.4
|
-173
|
-605
|
-65.8
|
-133
|
-20.6
|
The final race I followed was the one in the 73rd State House district. Incumbent Tommy Sankey defeated challenger Fred Weaver by 42.4% of the vote. Weaver had the advantage over Sankey's FB campaign page. Sankey had more followers on his district page with more than 1,730 total followers on election day.
Of the nine races I looked at in Pennsylvania, eight of them were won by the candidate with more followers on their Facebook page for the candidate with more followers on their campaign page. This gives a percentage of 89% with a margin of error of +/- 6.12%. If the incumbent had a district page and a campaign page, I used the campaign page in the analysis. In each case the incumbent may not have needed a campaign page as the incumbent won in each case.
The advantage in Facebook followers in confounded with incumbency. The two races with no incumbent (President and State Senate 35th district) followed were also won by the candidate with the larger FB Following. Below I looked at the gap variables between the D and R candidates to see how they were correlated with the gap in the % of the vote. The strongest relationship I found was between the % gain in FB followers and the gap in the % of the vote. This was a negative correlation that was borderline statistically significant
(p=0.051) accounting for 44% of the variability. This suggests that as the gap in % gain in followers increases, the gap in the popular vote decreases. This is summarized in the graph below. Trump had a very large increase in his FB following in PA which may have been a factor in his winning PA.
The size of a candidates FB following can be an indicator of the strength of his or her campaign. Being races from PA for President and Senate and local races for West Central PA, this is admittedly a biased sample but it is relatively easy to select your own sample to see how the selected candidates' FB page followings correspond to their support on election day.
**Update**
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg posted on his FB page that the false stories on the site did not influence the outcome of the election but they will use truth filters in the future (the Full post can be read here). He claimed that 99% of material is authentic. This post did not look at the veracity of the posts by the different politicians pages. It only looked at the engagement with the posts. Since many of the top pages pay Facebook to improve their circulation would it pay for Zuckerberg to rigorously block content from these pages?
**Related Posts***
