It’s been a while since I’ve have a chance to put virtual pen to paper — the election campaign certainly put paid to any spare time in recent months.
A lot of political water has indeed passed under the bridge since my last article— the AFI proved dead on arrival, and the carefully laid plans of the ISP were brusquely laid to rest, as they had the rug discourteously swept right from under them, as Alex Salmond, the bloggers’ Messiah himself, returned to the political stage as head of a venture known as Alba, the new vehicle for all the…
The latest factoid doing the rounds in the bubble that is indy social media is the correlation being implied that the more constituency seats the SNP wins, the ‘less likely’ it is to win list seats.
The implication made is that the Additional Member System (AMS) d’Hondt algorithm somehow prevents a party overwhelmingly successful in the constituencies winning many, if any, list seats. (This is akin to the false assertion that AMS is designed to prevent a majority government.)
A further ‘argument’ for having an indy list party is that the unionists have a ‘massive inbuilt advantage’ in the Additional Member System (AMS) used for the Scottish Parliamentary elections, because there are three unionist parties (Tories, Labour and Lib Dems) and the indy side has ‘only’ two (SNP and Greens).
Therefore, they claim, it only stands to reason that the indy side should also have three parties too.
In an ‘electoral arms race’, the uncritical thinking is that what they have, we should have too, because there are three of them and they can thus attain many more seats…
The AFI now looks set to appear on the list in next May’s Holyrood election as, to satisfy the Electoral Commission, it has had to change its name from the AFI to… the AFI — or rather from the Alliance For Independence to Action for Independence.
The AFI will join (so far) the ISP on the regional lists in next May’s Holyrood election. While the ISP was originally touted purely as an independence only vehicle to ‘game the system’ and try and win seats (a mantle that the AFI now seems to have taken over), it is clear that this…
Of all the hyperbole about the Additional Member System (AMS) used for elections to Scotland’s Parliament, ‘breaking the system’ must be one of the most commonly made, yet most commonly misunderstood.
The phrase is frequently coupled with the myth that the proportional AMS was a ‘fix’ by Labour to prevent the SNP ever attaining an overall majority.
The most pernicious myth persisting on indy social media about the Additional Member System (AMS) used for Holyrood elections is that an SNP list vote is ‘wasted’ and that #BothVotesSNP is a ‘bad idea’ as it is ‘impossible’ for the SNP to win a majority. The only ‘likely’ scenario, we are told in all seriousness, must therefore be an ‘indy supermajority’ build on seats won by fringe list parties still utterly unknown outside the tiny indy social media bubble.
You can bet good money that no social media discussion on the list vote will happen without someone asserting that ‘the SNP only won four seats in 2016 so a list vote for them is wasted’. This is usually coupled with the claim that the SNP can ‘only win’ in a few regions. This endlessly repeated social media factoid fossilises opinions, preventing those who hold them from looking into the real reasons for the SNP’s 2016 list result.
They singularly fail to understand that the number of list seats won is not limited by having a constituency landslide. Even if…
As we continue our foray into the dense ticket of myths, misunderstandings and misinformation about the Additional Member System (AMS) used for elections to the Scottish Parliament, another factoid that frequently arises is the notion that, to garner more indy seats, it is more ‘efficient’ to vote for a small indy list party instead of the SNP. …
Another assertion frequently made by proponents of the new ‘indy supermajority’ list parties (such as the AFI and ISP), is that you can safely vote for them, as they ‘won’t be competing with the SNP, but targeting unionist list seats instead’.
Anyone with even the slightest familiarity with how the Additional Member System (AMS) seats are calculated will know this is patent nonsense.
The list seat allocation process starts with the regional list votes of each party, divided by the number of constituencies already won in that region plus one (the ‘quota’):
votes / (seats won + 1)
Serial self promoter George Galloway has announced he is returning to Scotland to save The Precious Union.
His ‘Alliance 4 Unity’ party is supposedly to run candidate lists in each of Scotland’s eight electoral regions, with Generalissimo George himself standing in the South of Scotland Region.
The Union is so important to him, that he now has no qualms whatsoever about working with the Tory ‘class enemy’ to thwart Scotland’s right to self determination. Self determination apparently is fine for nations all around the world, but not Scotland.