#BothVotesSNP

[Peppino Impastato]

 

Whoosh . . . .

Did you miss the wink?

The wink just made the post smarmy, didn't change its meaning.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

 

The wink just made the post smarmy, didn't change its meaning.

Oh did I upset poor wee Fuzzy?

[Ray Vaughn]

It's difficult to say. My votes were wasted in Edinburgh West and on the Lothians list*, but if the SNP had fared as badly across Edinburgh, my list vote would have counted.

Equally you could argue that if more people voted SNP x 2 then they'd have got a couple more on the list.

Perhaps naïve, but I wondered last night why the SNP didn't set up a branch office pro-indy organisation that purely sat as list candidates.

* Edit: technically I suppose my individual vote has always been 'wasted' in the sense that it's never made a difference to the result.

I did my own analysis of the list votes to see how close SNP were to getting any list seats outside of the Highlands and Borders:

[Ray Vaughn]

Are the figures online anywhere or is it from the excellent spreadsheet that was available to download on here?

Here is the 2016 List (AMS) Seat allocations with working. Enjoy.

I know Flure understands this system as he gave a presentation on it to his local SNP branch but we disagree about how to use your 2nd vote. It is a fact that in some regions an SNP list vote was worth a tenth of a list vote for another party.

#UnderstandYourVotingSystemToKeepTheTories Out!

[Thumper]

It is a fact that in some regions an SNP list vote was worth a tenth of a list vote for another party.

 

It's arguably the fact about the list system.

 

Assuming the SNP don't look to be losing their constituency advantage next election, #bothvotessnp will be a very hard sell to people who watched a hundred thousand votes in Glasgow count for nothing. I'd expect a significant shift to alternative second parties.

[HomelandsOur]

It's arguably the fact about the list system.

Assuming the SNP don't look to be losing their constituency advantage next election, #bothvotessnp will be a very hard sell to people who watched a hundred thousand votes in Glasgow count for nothing. I'd expect a significant shift to alternative second parties.

Most people don't watch this though, or understand it.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

It's arguably the fact about the list system.

Assuming the SNP don't look to be losing their constituency advantage next election

Or look to be doing so well that they might get past 65% and get an additional list seat.

Criticising tactical choices with the benefit of hindsight is easy to do as a quick look at the tail end of any match thread will demonstrate.

[Wee Willie]

It's arguably the fact about the list system.

 

Assuming the SNP don't look to be losing their constituency advantage next election, #bothvotessnp will be a very hard sell to people who watched a hundred thousand votes in Glasgow count for nothing. I'd expect a significant shift to alternative second parties.

But Scotland is more than just Glasgow.

I'm in John Swinney territory and I gave both votes to the SNP.

What do I do the next time?

 

Most people don't watch this though, or understand it.

That's me tae a T

[Thumper]

Criticising tactical choices with the benefit of hindsight is easy to do as a quick look at the tail end of any match thread will demonstrate.

 

It wasn't exactly unheard of for people to point out that giving the SNP second votes in regions where they'd likely nail nearly all the constituencies would be ineffective. There were two parties using that as their literal primary campaigning point.

 

But Scotland is more than just Glasgow.

I'm in John Swinney territory and I gave both votes to the SNP.

 

Huh? John Swinney territory, namely a region where the SNP picked up all but one constituency seat, is precisely where the diminishing returns make your vote weigh vastly more if given to an alternative party. The SNP got a hundred and twenty thousand list votes in Mid Scotland and Fife and no seats for it.

[Wee Willie]

It wasn't exactly unheard of for people to point out that giving the SNP second votes in regions where they'd likely nail nearly all the constituencies would be ineffective. There were two parties using that as their literal primary campaigning point.

 

 

Huh? John Swinney territory, namely a region where the SNP picked up all but one constituency seat, is precisely where the diminishing returns make your vote weigh vastly more if given to an alternative party. The SNP got a hundred and twenty thousand list votes in Mid Scotland and Fife and no seats for it.

Fair do's but which other party is worthy of my vote?

The Greens who abstained from voting for Nicola to be FM - I dinnae think so.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

If the SNP really wants to distort the results and get significantly more seats than their support in the country justifies then they should splinter of a second party (The "National Scottish Party") that only runs in the regions while the SNP only runs in the constituencies. That way a 45% support would get them most of the constituencies for the SNP and around 30 more list seats for the NSP

The resulting SNP-NSP coalition would have a clear majority based on a clear minority of the votes just like a Westminster government.

That would of course be gamesmanship, probably cheating and possibly illegal.

But if you're looking at this from a purely "what's best for the SNP" angle it's worth considering.

[Mr Bairn]

If the SNP really wants to distort the results and get significantly more seats than their support in the country justifies then they should splinter of a second party (The "National Scottish Party") that only runs in the regions while the SNP only runs in the constituencies. That way a 45% support would get them most of the constituencies for the SNP and around 30 more list seats for the NSP

The resulting SNP-NSP coalition would have a clear majority based on a clear minority of the votes just like a Westminster government.

That would of course be gamesmanship, probably cheating and possibly illegal.

But if you're looking at this from a purely "what's best for the SNP" angle it's worth considering.

 

And..... lawsuit

[topcat(The most tip top)]

And..... lawsuit

As I say the legality of such a ruse is doubtful and if it is legal it bloody well shouldn't be but I wasn't actually suggesting it as a serious course of action. Possibly I should have used a smiley.

The less jocular point is that this whole thread is based on some SNP types being angry that the greens aren't the NSP and are doing their own thing.

Of course there remains the possibility of a genuine, as opposed to strategically created, splinter faction from the SNP emerging and deploying that strategy but I can't see that happening any time soon

[Thumper]

The Greens who abstained from voting for Nicola to be FM - I dinnae think so.

 

If tribal loyalty is the limit of your politics then so be it. It'd be nonsense for the Greens to unconditionally vote for an SNP FM at first asking: they campaigned for Yes, not for the fucking SNP.

[Thumper]

If the SNP really wants to distort the results and get significantly more seats than their support in the country justifies then they should splinter of a second party (The "National Scottish Party") that only runs in the regions while the SNP only runs in the constituencies. That way a 45% support would get them most of the constituencies for the SNP and around 30 more list seats for the NSP

The resulting SNP-NSP coalition would have a clear majority based on a clear minority of the votes just like a Westminster government.

 

This is precisely what Labour used to do.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

This is precisely what Labour used to do.

Could you elaborate

[Mr Bairn]

This is precisely what Labour used to do.

 

No, no, that never happened.

[invergowrie arab]

If tribal loyalty is the limit of your politics then so be it. It'd be nonsense for the Greens to unconditionally vote for an SNP FM at first asking: they campaigned for Yes, not for the fucking SNP.

Ermmm

That's the point.

[Ray Vaughn]

Labour had a plan to put up candidates as Co-operative candidates a while back but it was knocked back on the rules as they were still Labour members or something like that.

I'm sure if the candidates are not members of the SNP technically then a "Coalition for Independence" umbrella could be used.

Someone suggested it was hindsight making us wise after the event us saying you were wasting your List SNP vote but if you look at the thread I started the night before the election, it was quite clear what was likely to happen from the similar set of stats (an opinion poll from two weeks before the election which I worked through and then did a second version where 10% switched from SNP to Green. In that 2nd version the greens were up 10 seats with Labour/Tories and SNP losing three seats each and the LibDems losing one seat. All in all an increase in 7 MSPs who supported indepemdence.

It is fair to mention South Scotland went very differently to the prediction and the SNP failed to get four constituencies but got three back on the list so it cushioned the blow.

[Thumper]

Ermmm

That's the point.

 

Sorry, I misunderstood. Yes, if you are tribal SNP then you're free to continue wasting your second vote. Encouraged to, really, because it's another tenth of a vote that the yoons need to claw back. The point is that the majority of SNP supporters at this time aren't tribal SNP, do support left-wing politics, and due to the way certain parts of the country look now in the constituencies it should be much easier next time for the Greens and whatever becomes of RISE to illustrate why they should get people's second vote.