Florentine_Pogen Posted August 14 Share Posted August 14 1 hour ago, MazzyStar said: Don’t know if this is the most relevant thread for this but lmao https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy54np2wxy3o Charles Laughton Quasimodo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDuffman Posted August 15 Share Posted August 15 Was looking at my MSP's the other week and found this. I had no idea that twat was one of my Regional MSP's https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/search-results?postcode=g67 2en Just shows how bad the AMS Formula is as there is no way that Central Scotland would vote in 3 Tories, 3 Labour & 1 Green. What is the point in regional voting when the Party you vote for doesn't get the seats and numpties like Kerr & Murdo get jobs for life without ever winning anything. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houston_bud Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 I completely forgot this leadership campaign was going on, I'm someone who takes a reasonable interest in politics but I have no idea about some of these folk putting their name forward On 15/08/2024 at 11:29, MacDuffman said: Was looking at my MSP's the other week and found this. I had no idea that twat was one of my Regional MSP's https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/search-results?postcode=g67 2en Just shows how bad the AMS Formula is as there is no way that Central Scotland would vote in 3 Tories, 3 Labour & 1 Green. What is the point in regional voting when the Party you vote for doesn't get the seats and numpties like Kerr & Murdo get jobs for life without ever winning anything. What do you mean? They were voted in. I take your point about not knowing who some of these people are, but they got the votes to get the seats. The alternative (or at least one alternative) is FPTP which just saw Labour get a thumping majority on less than 35% of the vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDuffman Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 I disagree that they got the votes. If you look at this description the SNP clearly got the most votes in the Regional Vote but as they won the Constituency Vote they end up having less Members - how is this what people voted for. I understand its about fairness & Proportional Representation but how can the Party that get the most Regional votes end up getting the least or no MSP's - its as if they are being punished for winning the Constituency vote. My Area was the same - SNP got the most votes but there are no SNP Regional MSP's - totally out voted by Tory/Labour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houston_bud Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 (edited) 55 minutes ago, MacDuffman said: I disagree that they got the votes. If you look at this description the SNP clearly got the most votes in the Regional Vote but as they won the Constituency Vote they end up having less Members - how is this what people voted for. I understand its about fairness & Proportional Representation but how can the Party that get the most Regional votes end up getting the least or no MSP's - its as if they are being punished for winning the Constituency vote. My Area was the same - SNP got the most votes but there are no SNP Regional MSP's - totally out voted by Tory/Labour. What you're arguing for is the SNP to get c.100% of the seats on c.50% of the votes. Edit: on a slightly different issue, I've never understood why we need two votes. Surely they could just use the Constituency votes to allocate the list seats. Maybe someone more intelligent than me can explain it. Edited August 16 by houston_bud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 What is being complained about is literally the point of any proportional representation system. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 4 minutes ago, houston_bud said: Edit: on a slightly different issue, I've never understood why we need two votes. Surely they could just use the Constituency votes to allocate the list seats. Maybe someone more intelligent than me can explain it. The constituency votes are for a specific candidate, the list votes are for a party. Many smaller parties won't stand individual candidates in seats due to the cost but will still put people on the list. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houston_bud Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 Just now, craigkillie said: The constituency votes are for a specific candidate, the list votes are for a party. Many smaller parties won't stand individual candidates in seats due to the cost but will still put people on the list. True. Although, I have a slight issue with parties campaigning purely for second votes. The greens are the only ones who've been successful at it right enough but they part of the reason they got seats was that they were happy to give the SNP a free run at constituencies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 (edited) The Greens do stand candidates in seats where they think they can get a decent share of the vote, mainly in the cities or wealthier suburban towns. They have benefited on the list (as every other party have) from the SNP hoovering up most constituency seats, but I think their vote share is broadly from people who support their policies rather than just SNP voters lending a vote. Edited August 16 by craigkillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houston_bud Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 (edited) 13 minutes ago, craigkillie said: The Greens do stand candidates in seats where they think they can get a decent share of the vote, mainly in the cities or wealthier suburban towns. They have benefited (as every other party have) from the SNP hoovering up most constituency seats, but I think their vote share is broadly from people who support their policies rather than just SNP voters lending a vote. You're right. Although these same people are encouraged to vote a certain way in the constituencies. Both Alba and Galloway's bunch of mutants tried similar with little success but it's not to say them, or other, parties couldn't be successful in the future. I'm not particularly vexed about it and your point about constituencies being for a candidate and list for a party has probably won me over to two votes being better. Edited August 16 by houston_bud 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 23 minutes ago, houston_bud said: Edit: on a slightly different issue, I've never understood why we need two votes. Surely they could just use the Constituency votes to allocate the list seats. Maybe someone more intelligent than me can explain it. You could simply group constituencies in regions, total up the votes, then assign seats to make it proportionate... argument is that hurts 'smaller' parties as people don't tend to vote for them in constituencies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 I don't think it's right that a candidate can stand both for the constituency and the regional party list. If they're rejected by their constituency they shouldn't get to sneak in the back door by people who likely don't know who they're voting for. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Khaki Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crlrde3rx08o Shambles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clangers Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 11 hours ago, MacDuffman said: I disagree that they got the votes. If you look at this description the SNP clearly got the most votes in the Regional Vote but as they won the Constituency Vote they end up having less Members - how is this what people voted for. I understand its about fairness & Proportional Representation but how can the Party that get the most Regional votes end up getting the least or no MSP's - its as if they are being punished for winning the Constituency vote. My Area was the same - SNP got the most votes but there are no SNP Regional MSP's - totally out voted by Tory/Labour. It’s called proportional representation for a reason! The region vote is designed to off set the disparity between the seat votes! It’s really not that complicated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btb Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 (edited) Politician plots & schemes - is that a big story? Anyway Ida thought DRs endorsement would be the kiss of death these days. ****************************** Looking a bit rough for 41! Edited August 17 by btb 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Bully Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 21 hours ago, MacDuffman said: I disagree that they got the votes. If you look at this description the SNP clearly got the most votes in the Regional Vote but as they won the Constituency Vote they end up having less Members - how is this what people voted for. I understand its about fairness & Proportional Representation but how can the Party that get the most Regional votes end up getting the least or no MSP's - its as if they are being punished for winning the Constituency vote. My Area was the same - SNP got the most votes but there are no SNP Regional MSP's - totally out voted by Tory/Labour. That’s the whole point of the system - overall it gives a proportional return. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houston_bud Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 (edited) 19 hours ago, welshbairn said: I don't think it's right that a candidate can stand both for the constituency and the regional party list. If they're rejected by their constituency they shouldn't get to sneak in the back door by people who likely don't know who they're voting for. It's a fair point but the issue is that parties don't have enough candidates. I'd argue the concept of being 'rejected' by the electorate is subjective too. Someone could win a seat with 35% of the vote, not exactly a ringing endorsement, yet another candidate in a different constituency getting 40% might not win their seat. I like how this thread has become a discussion on the merits of AMS, rather than the pathetic leadership race in the Scottish Conservative party. Edited August 17 by houston_bud 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laid Back Maverick Posted August 18 Share Posted August 18 https://www.removepaywall.com/https:/www.thenational.scot/politics/24525190.andrew-tickell-douglas-ross-turned-off-even-rabid-tories 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarrbridgeSaintee Posted August 18 Share Posted August 18 On 14/08/2024 at 18:51, Cheese said: Hoping Gallacher wins purely so I can just post this everytime she opens her mouth. I see she has pulled out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.