Caribj, Indians are around 43%, the PPP lost 7% to the AFC in 2011 but scored 49%. Is who made up the gap? Your logic does not hold up against the facts!
Please explain why the mixed vote grew by 70% when the total population is only up 3%. This will then suggest to you that the voting age population is much more Indian and African than is the overall population. So the Indian and African vote is more than 43% and 30%. It might be as high as 80% adding both together.
Using your thinking, Africans are 30% of the population, not all voting PNC, and yet the PNC is consistent at 41%.
The mixed and the Amerindians split their votes between the PPP and the PNC, and now the AFC. Indications are that the PPP gets less than 1/4 of the mixed vote. In fact even your fellow Indo KKKite puts the mixed vote at only 27% PPP.
Now with the mixed population expanding significantly how does their rejection of the PPP bode well for them. The Amerindian population is smaller and has a lower turn out, so cannot save the PPP from the demise that an expanding mixed vote will cause it.
Forget about all your WAGs and SWAGs for now. Please tell me, in 2011 Indians were 43%. The PPP lost 7% to the AFC, that leaves 36% to vote PPP of which a few percent will vote PNC. But let's forget that for now. Who were the 13% which gave the PPP 49%?
The PPP tief it.