|
Freakazoid_ posted:Dropping by to say good luck achieving independence, scotland. I think you deserve it.
|
#
?
May 7, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
RIP Alex Salmond, 2% in the list in the one Aberdeen constituency announcing list results so far https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1390680860953874432
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2021 16:01
|
|
|
Also lol at AFU coming behind the Scottish Family Party.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2021 16:02
|
|
|
getting a lot of scottish family party promoted ads on youtube lol
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
vote scawtish fawmly party we need tae stop them teachin the wains about doin it up the bum  
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 14:40
|
|
|
crispix posted:vote scawtish fawmly party https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQkJ0oWORHM
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
64 SNP, 8 Green, and 0 Alba! This is the perfect result tbh, especially since Joan McAlpine has lost, but I do wish John Mason would gently caress off out of the party
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
It is a good result. The Greens have been able to punch above their weight through a friendly-but-arm's-length relationship with the SNP, being firm on sorting out last year's exam fiasco for one when the SNP were willing to alienate all pupils, parents and teachers by failing or down-grading the most put-upon peacetime school year since child labour was abolished. Having the balance of power again as Glasgow hosts the COP26 summit is a good position for them to be in. Also co-leader Lorna Slater may be the first literal circus performer elected to the UK's chambers of power, as opposed to the legions of figurative clowns who preceded her. (Not her day job, she is a renewables engineer. Or was until now.) But! On a high turnout the vote was split close to 50/50 between pro-independence and unionist parties. So in order to progress, it will be necessary to resolve Caledonian antisyzygy itself, transcending all previously-known boundaries of society, its institutions, space, time, and consciousness and thereby realise
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Tam Nairn posted:"Scotland will be reborn the day the last minister is strangled with the last copy of the Sunday Post." Here's the front page of the day's Sunday Post:  Despite this evidence that evolution is possible, we've also seen Justice Secretary Humza Yousef confronted by racist bams at the Glasgow count and the police failing to do much about it, in spite of his efforts in pushing a Hate Crime Bill specifically-targeted at pressing punitive sanctions on such pricks against a ton of pushback.. ACAB forever. More hearteningly, Kurdish refugee and immigration detention abolitionist Roza Salih probably got several hundred thousand votes in Glasgow (strangely hard to pull numbers at the moment; maybe the Greens demanded a recount as they were within a couple of hundred votes of getting another MSP). She has not become a member of the Scottish parliament due to the fact that her fellow Scottish National Party candidates did so well in the city and elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2021 12:05
|
|
|
What were the total number of votes that the fake Green party siphoned from the actual Green party? Was it just a few thousand in total?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 08:30
|
|
|
Kin posted:What were the total number of votes that the fake Green party siphoned from the actual Green party? Was it just a few thousand in total? I think so, but more than the Greens needed for another spot.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 08:37
|
|
|
Kin posted:What were the total number of votes that the fake Green party siphoned from the actual Green party? Was it just a few thousand in total? Yeah, about 2,000. In Glasgow at least. But the Greens were less than 1,000 behind the Tories.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 08:40
|
|
|
Was it just in Glasgow that it happened? One of the things I'm curious about is that despite the tactical voting, how many votes were given to "anti independence" parties that might actually have been by people who still want independence at some point. There was a segment on young folk who voted on the BBC yesterday and a kid said they voted Labour/Green because Labour talked about the NHS in their leaflet. When pressed though she said she'd definitely vote for independence. It might be a small number but the anti independence parties are already starting to dismiss the SNP win by saying that they didn't get a majority and that only 48% of the votes cast were for pro independence parties. Edit: presumably you can do the opposite too for "Labour" voters who switched to Tory to block the SNP and pinpoint a % of Labour voters who are definitely against independence given how different the two parties are supposed to be ideologically. Kin fucked around with this message at 08:56 on May 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 08:52
|
|
|
They also got 1600 votes in South Scotland and I think the Greens were very close to picking up a seat there. Mind, this'd be a moot point if the SNP hadn't selfishly pushed their both votes SNP so strongly.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 09:13
|
|
|
The precise figures on the Independent Green Voice poo poo are listed in this twitter thread - two seats likely lost to it and almost a third: https://twitter.com/mehall/status/1391123337762545666 As for the popular vote thing, the pro-union parties got slightly more in the constituencies and slightly less in the list, and the margins are so small it's hard to conclude much other than the country remains evenly split on it.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 11:47
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Mind, this'd be a moot point if the SNP hadn't selfishly pushed their both votes SNP so strongly. why would any party not do this
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
I heard that SNP was 0.17% away from winning the last seat they needed for the majority, which is pretty wild.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 19:20
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:why would any party not do this Because if you're angling for a majority of independence parties then splitting the vote between regional and constituency lists makes more sense in some seats.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 19:57
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:why would any party not do this the system is designed so that no matter how many list votes you get, you don't get many seats if you sweep the constituencies which is what happened so they got 62 constituency seats, 41% of the list vote, and 2 list seats
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Because if you're angling for a majority of independence parties then splitting the vote between regional and constituency lists makes more sense in some seats.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:why would any party not do this Because you claim to want a pro independence majority and that means accepting tactical voting is a reality with AMS, it was a system chosen with the idea that it meant the SNP couldn't get a majority except in extremely exceptional circumstances. 133,917 votes were for SNP in Glasgow Region, netting 0 MSPs because they predictably won every constituency seat. The unionist parties netted 6 seats for 110k votes. If just 914 SNP went Green then there's 1 more Tory loss, 1 more pro indy gain. If all of them go Green then there could be as many as 3 or 4 more and it changes the narrative.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 21:45
|
|
|
oh yeah that's a lovely system, thanks
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:oh yeah that's a lovely system, thanks The system is unwieldy & hard to predict & harder still to explain to most people, but honestly I like the end result? If we had a First Past The Post system like Westminster there'd be 62 SNP, 5 Tory, 2 Labour & 4 Lib Dem, which honestly reads like a tinpot dictatorship, & that's not unique to 2021, go back to 1999's first Holyrood election & if it was just the constituency vote then there'd be 53 Labour, 12 Lib Dem, 7 SNP & 1 independent. Any system that reduces the proportion of Lib Dem representation (because they tend to be very popular in a select few areas & an after thought everywhere else) is a system that works. Instead with the list, Labour ended up with 43% of the seats with 38% of the vote, SNP had 27% for 29% of the votes, Tories had 14% of the seats for 15% of the votes, etc. It also meant both the Scottish Socialists & the Scottish Greens were able to get elected in 1999: the SSP imploded under the weight of Tommy Sheridan's ego (a tale as old as Trotskyism), the Greens have only gone from strength to strength. But it does mean you can get more "bang for your buck" if you vote for a smaller party on the second ballot though, especially in an area where one party are expected to win almost or all of the constituency seats in a region. Like every region except South Scotland forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 22:42 on May 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
i was just under the impression that the list seats were off of a nationwide proportional vote, not the region system. that makes polling really hard and challenges the basic assumption any party would want: as many people voting for it as possible. in a hypothetical race among like 3-5 parties with a polling tie, a turnout battle would still be appropriate. but with the SNP and the large polling lead, you have to pay attention to marginals and play a tightrope between traditional turnout and endorsing an ally. that sucks and makes polls more important than they should be
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 23:04
|
|
|
I had to stop and read about the AMS system now, and ... huh. It seems like an interesting way to try to get both the "personal" representation of the English system and the proportional representation of something like the Norwegian system - though yeah it is a bit odd that the levelling is done per region instead of nationally. For comparison, we (Norway) do a single vote, for a list in our region. Each region elects a number of MPs, split proportionally. There is then a single extra seat per region (so 19 of the 169), allocated at the end to make the complete parliament as close as possible to what you'd get if there was just one big region. Never mind that the number of representatives per region is slightly weighted by land area to overrepresent the large empty northern regions, and that you are only eligible for those last seats if you get over 4%. (It's always exciting to see which of the multiple small parties manage to claw their way above the border for an extra MP or two). The clear downside compared to the English or even Scottish system is that I didn't really vote for any single person, just for an amorphous collective - there is no single person who is "my" representative.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
Germany and New Zealand (and maybe other places idk) use the same system but they call it MMP instead of AMS. There are separate wikipedia articles for MMP vs. AMS and I have no idea why because I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 03:02
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Germany and New Zealand (and maybe other places idk) use the same system but they call it MMP instead of AMS. There are separate wikipedia articles for MMP vs. AMS and I have no idea why because I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same. Not exactly, Germany (no idea about NZ) uses a variation where the list/proportional votes are the sole determinant of the relative number of seats a party can gain, irrespective of local/constituency votes. So if party X gets 40% of the list votes, they get 40% of the seats in the respective parliament, irrespective of the constituency results. The constituency votes just decide which particular party members get to fill those seats, and once all constituency winners have been placed the remaining seats are filled from the list. If a party wins more constituency seats than they would be entitled to from the list vote, the size of the parliament is increased with additional seats to the other parties so that the proportion of seats for each party stays the same.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 08:54
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Germany and New Zealand (and maybe other places idk) use the same system but they call it MMP instead of AMS. There are separate wikipedia articles for MMP vs. AMS and I have no idea why because I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same. In addition to what Perestroika said above, the Scotland system gives more room for a bit more disproportionality than the German system, because the regional vote caps out at some point. In a German-style system, the SNP would have likely gotten a few fewer seats than 64 (probably closer to the mid 50's, but it would depend on wasted votes on parties <5% and I don't want to do the math). Greens would have gotten about 10 or 11 seats though total, so it'd probably be a narrow majority between the two. EDIT: This also assumes a nationwide PR vote, so tactical voting at the region vote level may or may not change the above as well. JosefStalinator fucked around with this message at 09:23 on May 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 09:19
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Not exactly, Germany (no idea about NZ) uses a variation where the list/proportional votes are the sole determinant of the relative number of seats a party can gain, irrespective of local/constituency votes. So if party X gets 40% of the list votes, they get 40% of the seats in the respective parliament, irrespective of the constituency results. The constituency votes just decide which particular party members get to fill those seats, and once all constituency winners have been placed the remaining seats are filled from the list. If a party wins more constituency seats than they would be entitled to from the list vote, the size of the parliament is increased with additional seats to the other parties so that the proportion of seats for each party stays the same. right, thanks for articulating that. germany (and i believe mexico) use what i was thinking of originally. if not nationally, then multi-member regions decided on PR and like you said irrespective of constituency results. i didn't expect scotland to be big enough to incorporate the region model and totally didn't understand the cap based on constituency results i say swears online fucked around with this message at 09:40 on May 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 09:37
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:right, thanks for articulating that. germany (and i believe mexico) use what i was thinking of originally. if not nationally, then multi-member regions decided on PR and like you said irrespective of constituency results. i didn't expect scotland to be big enough to incorporate the region model and totally didn't understand the cap based on constituency results Mexico uses a parallel voting system, as do most mixed PR/FPTP systems. What makes Germany's unique is that they have no set limit on the number of MP's - they keep increases the size of the parliament until the seat count most closely matches the PR vote percentages. Mexico, Scotland, and most PR/FPTP places still have a set max amount of PR seats, leaving more room for disproportionality.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 09:55
|
|
|
Wings has completed his transformation into a corncob and completely quit. I give it a few weeks until he's back on the grift but it'll be a nice respite for the trans and disabled people he constantly harassed.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
crossposting from the UKMT: anyone in Scotland under 30 should do this asap https://twitter.com/rohan_21awake/status/1396737699848019968?s=19
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2021 13:41
|
|