Saturday, May 7, 2016

A new podcast, and a new article on why the list ballot narrowly deprived the SNP of an overall majority

A couple more 'quick notes' for you tonight.  I have a new article in The National about how the interplay between voting patterns and the voting system ended up leaving the SNP two seats short of an absolute majority.  You can read the article HERE.

And I also took part in Newsnet's post-election podcast spectacular today.  The other guests are Steven Purcell, Angela Haggerty and Christopher Silver, and the host as always is Derek Bateman.  You can listen to it HERE.

63 comments:

  1. Glasgow Working Class 2May 7, 2016 at 1:34 AM

    Anything that deprives Nat si ism should be welcomed by the working class in any country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't feed the troll, folks.

      Delete
  2. As usual we don't get results here. Where did it exactly end up
    . you would think that with bbc int news, bbc america, and cnn int we would get it, but all we got was crap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill, the final result was -

      SNP 63 (-6)
      Conservatives 31 (+16)
      Labour 24 (-13)
      Greens 6 (+4)
      Liberal Democrats 5 (n/c)

      SNP Government 63
      Combined Opposition 66

      SNP Minority of 3

      Pro-independence parties 69
      Anti-independence parties 60

      Pro-independence Majority of 9

      Delete
    2. Mmm. Pro-independence parties, Anti-independence parties? I really don't think that independence is on the agenda or is even an issue that people care about much. Even SNP voters and elected representatives don't seem bothered about it. It was a bit of a fad a couple of years ago, but people have moved on.

      Delete
    3. Oh grow up, Bill. You'll have to try harder than that.

      Delete
    4. Glasgow Working Class 2May 7, 2016 at 11:18 AM

      It is sad that people were voting on the nationalism issue rather than policies. Middle class Labour voters declaring they voted Tory to stop the Nat sis and Sheridan promoting the Nat sis who are imposing austerity. And meanwhile the likes of myself who can afford to pay a bit extra in tax is getting a tax hike from the Tories supported by the Nat sis. We definitely now have two Tory parties in Scotland and greed has won.

      Delete
    5. Nobody cares what a racist old BNP twat like you thinks Sam.

      Delete
    6. Independence was putting firmly on the agenda by Ruthie.

      It was the first substantive thing she every talked about in every interview, in every debate, after the "strong opposition" thing.

      Labour, led by the gullible Kezia, saw the huge Bear Trap of Independence laid down by the Tories, walked past the large sign in easily read letters saying "This is a Bear Trap for Scottish Labour" and joined in attacking the SNP over a new referendum while sounding weak (and being attacked by Ruth for sounding weak) over the issue.

      The result, Labour Unionist flocked to the Tories.

      Meanwhile the SNP were not strong enough on Independence, not brave enough to rely on the core Independence vote and ended up with too many potential voters sitting at home, unmotivated to get out and vote when Independence seemed off the table.

      Delete
    7. It's quite amazing how Labour keep walking into these Tory traps. Cameron played Darling like a fiddle with Better Together, and now it's happened again. The Tories basically hand SLAB a shovel and ask them to dig their own graves, and SLAB dutifully, and repeatedly, comply.

      Delete
    8. Five More YearsMay 7, 2016 at 3:07 PM

      Bollocks.

      The SNP won a record number of votes on the constituency ballot, topping one million for the first time ever.

      The SNP polled more votes than the two main unionist parties combined.

      The SNP took 59 constituency seats - more than any party has ever held.

      The SNP also won a record percentage of the constituency vote.

      The SNP's share of the constituency vote increased and, while their vote fell in the regional ballot this was because some of that vote went to other pro-independence parties.

      The Scottish Parliament is dominated by pro-independence parties. This remains the case no matter how "creatively" the figures are juggled.

      The SNP has taken all the constituencies in six out of seven of Scotland's cities.

      And all this was done in the teeth of month after month after month after month of incorrect polling indicating an SNP majority. Polling which was splashed across the unionist dominated media every chance it got and twisted into a 'certainty' by the small parties trying to snatch SNP list votes. A dishonest 'tactic' which quite obviously led some SNP supporters to think a majority was somehow a 'done deal'.


      As for the neverending prognostications of gloom and doom, (mostly an annual ritual of SNPBad from the usual suspects to be sure) well we'll see soon enough since, on current trends, the SNP is on course to sweep the boards at next year's council elections.

      So I would pay it no more heed than the hilariously out of touch westminster bubble Pouters who delude themselves the SNP are somehow right-wing. They are about to get the shock of their lives once the Buffalo moves centre-stage and straight into the firing line.

      Delete
    9. Five More YearsMay 7, 2016 at 3:16 PM

      B.T.W. Thanks to Peter Bell for collating some of that data I've reproduced here.

      Delete
  3. Nudge 1. Ensure Presiding Officer and Depute come from Anti-Independence Parties.
    Result 1. SNP Minority of 1
    Result 2. Pro-Independence Majority of 11

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not going to work. All you'd get is someone with an automatic right to speak and control debate. Assuming there was a tie the convention is the vote for the status quo which wouldn't help anything if they went rogue.

      One SNP and, perhaps, one Torry might be better.

      Delete
    2. Do the deputies give up their party affiliation? I don't think so.

      Delete
    3. Adam Tomkins for PO! ;)

      Delete
  4. More clearly than ever before: it’s us or them. Pro-indy or anti-indy. For Scotland or against it. The constitution will be centre-stage for the next five years, unless brexit brings indy2 quicker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bullingdon Tax Dodgers and Election Expense CheatsMay 7, 2016 at 12:34 PM

      Actually the tories are going to be centre-stage for the next five years now that they are the official opposition.

      We will now focus like a laser on the Buffalo and her party of right-wing prescription charge fanatics. Sure, they are impotent, but now that they are the official opposition even the BBC won't be able to hide the fact that the Yoons have thrown all their eggs into one very foolish basket. A basket case of right-wing unpopular tories, led by some hilariously out of touch posh Bullingdon boys from westminster in the midst of an EU split and internal tory civil war that guarantees even more laughs all the way to the next westmisnter election and beyond.

      What's not to like?

      So if the Buffalo wants to talk about Indy for the next five years then by all means, let her. She'll have to answer for her boss and the westminster Bullingdon boys every step of the way though since that is precisly what she is standing up for and what her opposition to another democratic Indy referendum actually means in practice. Yet more comically inept, corrupt and unfair tory misrule from westmisnter.

      Again, what's not to like?

      Delete
    2. Good points.

      Delete
  5. Has anybody done the seat by seat analysis yet? Would Vanity Vote Johnston have cost Ruthie-Rhom her tainted win by standing in Edinburgh Southern (if she had any reason at all for standing in a constituency when no other green gave people in the entire East of Scotland that choice) where she could have taken the former libdem student vote in just the same way and possibly prevented that labour slimebag from winning.

    Result. A majority of genuinely Pro-indy MSPs. Ruth-Rhom personally humiliated despite the results of her sectarian campaign and labour with only 2 seats in Scotland.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. tainted win

      We couldn't get enough people to vote for us willingly, so the Green candidate should have stood down and forced them to change their vote anyway.

      Because that's democracy!

      Delete
    2. It reminds me of Labour blaming their defeat by the Tories last year on the SNP.

      Delete
    3. I don't see why. The difference in this case is that the arithmetic backs the claim up. Obviously it's silly to use language like "tainted win", but the reality is that the Greens' decision to put up a candidate in that particular constituency has had a certain consequence. They were absolutely entitled to do it, but it resulted in Ruth Davidson as the MSP for Edinburgh Central, and it contributed to the loss of the SNP majority.

      Green sympathisers are very, very touchy when we point that out, and the reason they're so touchy is because they know it's true (as does anyone with access to a calculator).

      Delete
    4. James, at the end of the day, the SNP failed to get 600,000 people who voted Yes in 2014 and 400,000 people who voted SNP in #GE2015 to turn up at the ballot box.

      There's your failure.

      Delete
    5. James: the difference is that you accept that the Greens were entitled to stand. Anon clearly does not, just as Labour argued that the SNP were obliged not to field any candidates in 2015 because the Tories used the prospect of a Lab-SNP coalition in their campaign in England.

      Delete
  6. In case anybody has forgotten the election by now.

    That lying slag Baillie saved her disease ridden carcass by only 109 votes. How many people didn't bother going out to vote SNP because the election was already won and 2nd vote green?

    Does JK want to run a poll on the most revolting MSP in terms of using lies, sleaze, blatant corruption, shroud-waving and general wankiness to get elected?

    JB, WR, RD, AC-H, DJ, TS, LM the worst followed by every other Ruth-rhom party candidate and the Snarl. not necessarily in that order though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glasgow Working Class 2May 7, 2016 at 8:20 PM

      A slag was a term in the old days for a wummin that had loose knickers and was shagged regularly. Are you saying Bailley is such a slag? Or just a slag heap?

      Delete
    2. Sam the BNP bamMay 7, 2016 at 8:42 PM

      What did your BNP party call a woman Sam? Depended on what colour her skin was, didn't it, you racist twat.

      Delete
  7. The end of your National article gets into the nub of the matter.

    At the end of the day it was not Split Votes which cost the SNP their nmajortiy. It was a complete and utter failure of the SNP's GOTV. They simply did not get as many of their supporters (proportionately to the increased turnout and death of SLAB) to get the necessary list seats. Failing to get a list seat in West of Scotland was a huge failure and its a failure of the SNP.

    In hindsight, I think there was a problem where the MSM were very successful in their campaign to convince everyone it was a "foregone conclusion". That was their job for their Westminster backers and, sadly, it revealed the truth about The National and Sunday Herald's supposed "support" for Independence. They are a fifth column happily swallowing the money of mug Independence supporters while still working insidiously for the retention of the Union.

    But the core problem remains. It was not Vote Splits that caused the loss of majority. It was GoTV. The SNP are the only ones to blame for this (you can't blame Unionists for portraying a "foregone conclusion"). The SNP weakness on a second Referendum - for understandable reasons - almost certainly hurt the GoTV and it's difficult to argue that it really brought in new voters.

    The Tories played a blinder, they made the election about Independence and the idiotic half-wit Labour party walked right into it and played along. This motivated a huge movement of Labour voters to desert them and vote Tory. Meanwhile the SNP did not play the Independence card and ended up with 10% of its vote sitting at home.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The end of your National article gets into the nub of the matter."

      Thankyou, but it actually says pretty much the opposite of what you think it says. This wasn't a failure of GOTV - the problem was that a much greater number of SNP constituency voters switched to a different party on the list than was the case in 2011. The 'Both Votes SNP' message was certainly hammered home as much as possible - but it seems it didn't get through to enough people.

      Delete
    2. I guess I misread to some degree.

      My point remains, the split vote was nearly irrelevant in terms of numbers, in fact mathematically, it made no difference in almost every Region.

      The core problem is the lack of GoTV, pro-Independence voters simply did not turn up in the numbers that they should have done while Ruth turned the entire thing into a vote on a Second Referendum (but even then only got 22% undermining any mandate she has to tell people to get "back in their box").

      The SNP cannot expect to motivate their supporters into actually turning up at the ballot box in sufficient numbers without a strong, unequivocal commitment to Independence.

      Delete
    3. Their voters were there in sufficient numbers. If a 47% SNP vote had translated into a 47% SNP list vote, there wouldn't have been a problem. But many of those voters switched to the Greens on the list, hence the loss of the majority. How many of those people were duped by the vote-splitting propaganda campaign is anyone's guess, but it seems very likely that some were.

      Delete
    4. UK wide the Greens have a core vote of around 6%, the idea that the vast bulk of SNP Cons voters switching to Greens on the list are not genuinely green voters is misleading and dangerous.

      Again, the numbers do not support the idea that the SNP lost their majority because of vote splits.

      They lost their majority because 600,000 Yes voters and 400,000 GE2015 voters did not turn up at the ballot box. GoTV is the problem, not split tickets.

      Delete
    5. This should be a provable or disprovable theory though, yes?

      We know the constituency results.
      We know the list votes numbers.
      We could transfer list votes from Green to SNP (the most favourable transfer, I think), restoring the SNP List vote to it's consitituency value, as if SNPX2 had been completely successful.

      Then we can re-run the d'Hont calculations and see how the list turns out?

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. Here's some numbers that should make every Independence supporter think.

      #GE2015
      8.5% of the Electorate voted Tory
      32.5% of the Electorate voted SNP

      #SP2016 Constituency
      12.1% of the Electorate voted Tory
      25.9% of the Electorate voted SNP

      I don't see how anyone can look at those numbers and not recognise the core problem for the SNP in #SP2016. The Tories MADE it about the Union. The SNP claimed it was not about Independence every time they opened their mouths.

      Delete
    8. Anon: someone ran those numbers on a previous thread, and found that if all Green list votes had gone to the SNP, it would result in an SNP majority, but no change to the pro/anti-indy balance in parliament.

      Don't know how accurate that analysis is, but no one seems to have disputed it.

      Delete
    9. Sounds about right to me, and thanks for the reference, Keaton.

      Delete
  8. I worked it out that the SNP would've won a majority if 1,037 (or 3%) Green list voters in Lothian and 2,066 (or 12%) Green voters in the West of Scotland had voted SNP on the list. These would've both taken seats away from the Greens.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well go and work it out again...if every single person who voted green there wouldn't make a difference..you're taking the figures post divisor...it's the pre divisor figures you should be looking at which in west are 9 times higher than the figures you are using. Which are flat out WRONG. in you don't understand the system don't comment on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm assuming your referring to my comment, so:

      //Lothian://
      I've said that the SNP would need 1,037 Green voters to gain the final seat (from the Greens):

      Starting Votes For List:
      SNP 118,546 + 1,037 = 119,583 / (6+1) = 17,083
      Con 74,972 / (1+1) = 37,486
      Lab 67,991 / (1+1) = 33,996
      Grn 34,551 - 1,037 / (0+1) = 33,514
      Lib 18,479 / (1+1) = 9,240

      Count 1: Conservative with 37,486 votes
      Count 2: Labour with 33,996
      Count 3: Green with 33,514
      Count 4: Conservative with 24,991
      Count 5: Labour with 22,664
      Count 6: Conservative with 18,743
      Count 7: SNP with 17,083
      ***If there was an eighth count, parties would be on: SNP 14,948; Con 14,994; Lab 16,998; Grn 16,757; Lib 9,240

      //West of Scotland://
      I've said that the SNP would need 2,066 Green voters to gain the final seat (from the Greens):

      Starting Votes For List:
      SNP 135,827 + 2,066 / (8+1) = 15,321
      Lab 72,544 / (1+1) = 36,272
      Con 71,528 / (1+1) = 35,764
      Grn 17,218 - 2,066 / (0+1) = 15,152
      Lib 12,097 / (0+1) = 12,097

      Count 1: Labour win with 36,272 votes
      Count 2: Conservative win with 35,764
      Count 3: Labour win with 24,181
      Count 4: Conservative win with 23,843
      Count 5: Labour with 18,136
      Count 6: Conservative with 17,882
      Count 7: SNP with 15,321
      ***If there was an eighth count, parties would be on: SNP 13,789; Con 14,306; Lab 14,509; Grn 15,152; Lib 12,097

      //Conclusions//
      Feel free to explain how I'm wrong with my figures now I've made it clear how I've got to my totals (which clearly shows I do understand the system) - if 1,037 Green votes went SNP in Lothian and 2,066 Green voters went SNP in the West of Scotland, the SNP would've won two more seats and therefore a majority.

      Delete
    2. You are right, but the numbers are actually closer. I make it 1915 in West and 531 in Lothian. So in these two constituencies any died in the wool SNP folk who voted tactically for Green got Green but could have got SNP. Conversely in Central, The North East and South the SNP were miles from a list seat so a modest switch of SNP voters to Green of 1812, 2047 and 2018 (1-2%) would have ousted 2x Tory and 1x Lab for the 7th list seat in these regions.

      In essence the results show that in your two examples James was proved correct that SNP could be harmed by a reduced list vote and in 3 other examples the advocates of Green list votes were proved correct in that the SNP were miles off a list seat despite taking 100000's of votes.

      I would also reiterate the point however that there is no evidence that tactical voting actually impacted to any great extent and indeed it is most likely the SNP who benefit most from being tactically loaned FPTP votes by natural green voters...

      Delete
    3. Fair enough, regarding the lower numbers and the additional examples that you showed.

      I wasn't insinuating that people switching to the Greens on the list weren't actually Green supporters (on the whole) - I was just trying to show how close the SNP were from retaining their majority and that 2011 was a "fluke" as I've seen some people suggest.

      Delete
  10. James the vast majority of people who voted green on the list are greens.they didn't switch to green on the list they switched to snp on constituency and switched to snp at westminster.They are our allies and we should work with them.The greens are roughly 5% so the tactical vote was less than 2% points and helped deliver 3 additional green seats...increasing the yes majority from 3 to 9. I was one of them in fife and blocked a nawbag there as did ma wee brother. My brother and cousin members of the snp like me did the same in Lothian and blocked a nawbag there. It was us and the others who split their votes that helped deliver the majority.The well intentioned 3/4 million snp voters in 6 regions...contributed nothing on the last in no small part to bad online advice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you point us to Patrick or any other prominent Greens/Green bloggers advising their voters to vote for the SNP at westminster and on the constituency vote? Because there are reams and reams of 'friendly advice' from the same to SNP voters to switch their vote to Green on the list, lest it be 'wasted' on a 'certain' SNP majority.

      The most obvious and reasonable conclusion is the correct one.

      Delete
    2. About a million polls break down voting intention on constituency and westminster2015 actual votes. Over 70% of those declaring they would vote green on list would vote snp on constituency and voted snp at westminster. The evidence is all there for you

      Delete
    3. In case you somehow haven't noticed, "about a million polls" were wrong and far from the evidence all being there for anyone you've just asserted a figure with absolutely no sign of anything, even a poll, to back it up at all, never mind a million of them.

      Again, where is the advice from prominent Greens to vote for the SNP at westmisnter and on the constituency vote?

      Delete
    4. Methinks you were one of the 751,000 who voted snp on the list in 6 regions with good intentions but totally ineffective and were duped into doing so from bad advice from people like James. I however can work things out for myself investigated how the system actually works and concluded that unless the snp vote is under threat in the constituency like in south and highlands an snp list vote is wasted...so perhaps you should swallow your pride and get it right next time..the data is all there for you..an snp list vote at this election outside of south and highlands was the worst voting strategy in history. I however knew this switched in Fife and helped deliver an enhanced yes majority. You're welcome.

      Delete
    5. I am learning Scottish! Now I know what a "nawbag" is. What would be an example Of a "big fearty nawbag" ? Next on my list..lol

      Delete
    6. Methinks your complete failure to back up a single thing you have said with actual concrete evidence is all the proof anyone needs to instantly dismiss your incredibly far-fetched claims and amusing 'theories'.

      The only Dupe here is yourself if you seriously think using the word "nawbags" and some hilariously unconvincing attempts at a personal anecdotes will distract attention away from the fact that your delusional claims are complete fucking nonsense from start to finish.

      Delete
    7. Care to explain how many seats the people who switched to green on list cost the snp thickie? The answer is none.care to explain how many list seats people who can't think for themselves managed to obtain with your list votes in 6 regions? Same answer.

      Delete
    8. LOL I knew it was you, "Jam." You might want to rethink who the thickie is since I exposed you so fast and can now look up some of your previous 'words of wisdom'.

      B.T.W. You're still asserting the same far-fetched bullshit with zero proof since you clearly aren't bright enough to realise you keep making my point for me.

      Delete
    9. Glasgow Working Class 2May 8, 2016 at 12:28 AM

      Bill, try saying I am a Bawbag and repeat it thrice and you will get the idea what a narrowback Nat si is. AYE.

      Delete
    10. Don't feed the troll, folks.

      Delete
  11. I put it down to turn out. It was lower than I hoped for. Too many Yes voters just didn't get out and vote. If more had gone out and voted then quite frankly then the SNP and Greens I believe would have both won more seats.

    I am not going to waste my time squabbling about the whole vote splitting thing because that is just hides the fact that too many Yes voters either thought it was in the bag or weren't enthused to go out and vote. The Yoons were the ones to benefit from what is patently obvious apathy and complacency.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the Yoons and some embarrassed Greens keep saying. Doesn't seem to be convincing many people given the facts of an increased SNP vote and a far from low Holyrood turnout overall.

      Delete
    2. The SNP need to make sure their core message - a vote for the SNP is a vote for Independence is not watered down. They made that mistake and their voters didn't leave the house to vote.

      That is the core problem.

      Ruthie didn't shut up once about the Union - it was her core message and she was never shy to state it. As a result their voters turned up in droves (and attracted many from the dead parrot SLAB).

      Delete
  12. Glasgow Working Class 2May 7, 2016 at 6:27 PM

    The mistake you Nat sis made in the last referendum was not giving the English a vote.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sam the BNP bamMay 7, 2016 at 8:36 PM

      Can't you take the hint Sam? We don't give a toss that you're banned from Stormfront Lite and can't peddle your racist BNP views there. Stop wasting your time as all you are proving is how badly you want to humiliate yourself . You aren't scottish, you certainly aren't Labour of any stripe and you aren't about to convince those of us who know who you are otherwise.

      Delete
  13. Middle Scotland has roared, and they've said the SNP shall not be trusted with another majority. They've said, stop bleating on about separatism and get on with reforming education and the issues which matter.

    They also said, we're putting Ruth in the mix to ensure you stay honest.

    How the SNP, having lost their majority, can press ahead with forcing Scotland to 'vote again' and (to their narrow minds) 'get it right second time' circa indyref2 is anyones guess.

    All I know is this: the SNP lost their majority, and the Scots Conservatives are now breathing down SNP necks.

    12%+ swings across Tayside, SNP majorities in the region being halved or more by insurgent Tories.

    If the SNP decide to 'carry on regardless' and continue to keep going on about indyrefs, the Tories shall finish the job we started in 2016.

    Scotland is roaring, and it's turning blue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here we see the amusing and tragic result of someone letting the Daily Mail do all their thinking for them.

      "All I know I this: The SNP lost their majority"

      Well you clearly don't know much then because if you understood how Holyrood works then you would have known that only really matters if every unionist party outnumbered the SNP.

      They do not.

      The opposite is the case.

      The SNP hold more seats than all the other unionist parties combined.

      SNP 63
      Unionist Parties 60

      You're also being delusional if you think the Green Party are going to help the tories make up the difference to that number any time soon.

      As for the wet tory fart that you think is a roar, we outnumber the tories more than 2 to 1 in MSPs and while you cherry picked some places there are plenty of others like Ayr where that trend will be made crystal clear at next years council elections.

      But you are accidently right in one sense, we aren't going to just carry on regardless. We're also going to switch from our main focus being on Labour to it being on Cameron's little helpers in Scotland.

      Now, I know you think the tories are popular, but when we highlight every single policy Ruth's boss and the Bullingdon boys in westminster have enacted and planned then you better hope Ruth has a better answer than another photo op with a Buffalo or shrieking about the next Indyref.

      If you thought bringing back prescription charges in Scotland was a laughably bad idea, you ain't seen nothing yet from the tories.

      Assuming of course you still have something even close to a coherent tory party at all once you really start losing the plot with your impending civil war over your inevitable Europe split.

      So I'll leave you to your amusing delusions and the more pertinent electoral facts the Daily Mail didn't tell you about.

      The SNP won a record number of votes on the constituency ballot, topping one million for the first time ever.

      The SNP polled more votes than the two main unionist parties combined.

      The SNP took 59 constituency seats - more than any party has ever held.

      The SNP also won a record percentage of the constituency vote.

      The SNP's share of the constituency vote increased and, while their vote fell in the regional ballot this was because some of that vote went to other pro-independence parties.

      The Scottish Parliament is dominated by pro-independence parties. This remains the case no matter how "creatively" the figures are juggled.

      The SNP has taken all the constituencies in six out of seven of Scotland's cities.

      Delete
    2. Glasgow Working Class 2May 8, 2016 at 1:01 PM

      However the Scots voted NAW in the referendum by over half a million. All your words are wasted entirely. If the Brits vote to leave the EU corrupt gravy train you will struggle to get another referendum through Parliament.

      Delete
    3. Chin up, 24.

      Delete