tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post2653313125117127713..comments2023-12-20T19:39:29.865+00:00Comments on Munguin's Republic: WHY SCOTS/SNP VOTERS SHOULD NOT BE VOTING TACTICALLY IN THE 2016 SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT ELECTIONMunguinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16475165830302054002noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-5714326585817755062015-06-24T21:33:29.698+01:002015-06-24T21:33:29.698+01:00It's good to argue this topic and I'm one ...It's good to argue this topic and I'm one of the much cursed Greens who think that supporters of independence whether SNP, Green or SSP would be better rewarded with pro independence MSP's if they vote Green or SSP, whatever looks more likely, in the list vote. I find Munguin's explanation a confusing way of presenting the d'Hondt system.<br /><br />We are not in 2011 now, it makes much more sense to look at the 2015 GE figures. It's not hard to put them into a speadsheet (I would attach one if I could) . This shows that the very likely SNP dominance of the constituency seats puts the SNP at a great disadvantage when it comes to getting MSP's from the list vote. The list vote is divided by the number of constutuency seats won by a party plus one. This is going to make SNP list votes maybe 7 times less likely(if they get 6 seats) to elect another MSP than votes for a party which did not stand in the constuency vote. To put it another way it will take maybe 7 times as many list votes to elect an SNP member as to elect a Green member.<br /><br />There are two implications to this. The first is that since most of the Unionist seats will come from the list, voting Green in the list vote is a more efficient way of snuffing out Unionist MSP's than voting SNP. The second is, a one party state is not in anyone's best interests. I thought this even when I was a member of the SNP (i left over the NATO vote). <br /><br />I think polls will continue to show the SNP is heading for a majority in Holyrood; what is at issue is who else will be there. I don't think there will need to be an SNP/Green coalition because the SNP is on a roll, Labour and the LIbDems are so far in a hole all you can see is the spadefuls of earth coming up, and the Tories will have shown themselves to be the party of the rich against the poor.<br /><br />I would point out that Greens who don't have a constutuency candidate to vote for (most of us) will be voting SNP which is a tactical vote. Is that an OK tactical vote?<br /><br />Oh and well done whoever mentioned tardigrades! I had to look them up, fascinating.topherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15534401130755572381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-23705396216032941702015-06-21T21:49:45.034+01:002015-06-21T21:49:45.034+01:00Indeed, if Harvie was likely to win there my secon...<i>Indeed, if Harvie was likely to win there my second vote would revert to the SNP.</i><br /><br />He's not likely to win the constituency, not in this version of reality. The danger you're ignoring is that he gets just enough votes from independence supporters to allow Labour to come through the middle and take the seat. Your trigger for your list vote (never "second" as it's the more important one) to revert to the SNP would be a possible <i>Labour</i> win.<br /><br />What nobody can predict is the actual electoral consequence of different levels of voter defection from the SNP on the list. A guide is the North East list in 2011. At plausible levels of defection, the practical result would have been that an SNP MSP (Mark McDonald) would have been replaced not by a Green MSP but by a Conservative.<br /><br />I've just had a useless Twitter conversation with a Green advocate who triumphantly pointed out that if ALL the people who voted SNP in the NE constitencies had voted Green or SSP on the list (apparently including Alex and Moira Salmond!), it would (on his arithmetic) have delivered five Green or SSP MSPs at the cost of one SNP, with the other four coming from unionist parties. The problem with that is that it's not going to happen. At the level any split voting might realistically happen, the result would be lose one SNP, gain one Conservative.<br /><br />Or consider the thought experiment someone did on Scot Goes Pop. Taking the result of the recent TNS poll and transferring the other way, so all the Green list votes went SNP instead, the result was that the SNP gained more seats than the Greens lost! Do we see the Greens backing that, on the basis of "more pro-independence MSPs"?)<br /><br />You can't predict what a "tactical" list vote will achieve, not without knowing in detail how the constituency seats will fall, <i>and</i> the exact numbers of list votes for all the parties in contention. It's just as likely to let a unionist in as it is to improve the chance of getting an additional Green MSP. If another Green MSP is achieved, it's more likely to be a straight swap for an SNP member, which would facilitate a loss of the SNP's overall majority and the elevation of the Greens to coalition partners.<br /><br />As the Greens have been explicit about their desire and intent to oppose the SNP and "hold them to account", I fail to see why promoting a situation where they'd be holding a knife to Nicola Sturgeon's throat in a coalition is supposed to be something SNP supporters would vote for.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-44679981947584715722015-06-21T17:48:56.298+01:002015-06-21T17:48:56.298+01:00People vote for various reasons, and no doubt Patr...People vote for various reasons, and no doubt Patrick Harvie will get some personal votes on the list, just as Dennis Canavan and Margo MacDonald did. I wouldn't criticise people for voting in that way, it that's their priority.<br /><br />My quarrel is with the people, mostly fervent Green party supporters, who are trying to trick core SNP supporters into abandoning their own party and voting Green on the list. My outrage is because of the lies being propagated to achieve this aim, going round twitter again today, pushed by a prominent Green supporter.<br /><br />The lies are based on various false premises about SNP list votes being wasted, and about the strategy being no-risk because it can't let Labour or the Tories through the middle. First, SNP list votes are not wasted, because nobody can predict the point where the party will win no list seats - it's a very narrow band <i>that can't be guessed in advance</i>. Lower, and the party needs list seats to compensate for constituency losses; higher, and another list seat is on the cards anyway. Second, it's easily possible that the strategy could let a unionist party through the middle. If more SNP supporters had voted Green/SSP on the North East list in 2011, the last seat would have gone Tory, not Green.<br /><br />In addition, the Green advocates of the idea speak as if Green and SNP MSPs are essentially interchangeable in Holyrood. This isn't the case. If they get their way the most probable outcome is that the SNP will lose its overall majority, which will in itself be a huge blow to the independence campaign. Then, the Green supporters will achieve their big triumph, of going into government in Holyrood in coalition with the SNP. Not on the basis of genuine popular support for their policies, but because they lied and cheated their way to a disproportionate share of the list vote.<br /><br />This is what they're angling for, without a doubt.<br /><br />It's not hard to see why they're keen on the idea. It's a lot harder to see why SNP supporters should be so keen. In fact, very few SNP supporters would go for it if the proposal were presented honestly. Hence the lies and the misrepresentations being bandied around.<br /><br />This isn't a rant against anyone who decides to split their vote as a personal, considered decision. It's a rant against the people who are lying and misrepresenting to trick other people into splitting their vote.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-26850191727088473692015-06-21T16:03:57.068+01:002015-06-21T16:03:57.068+01:00I have no idea where the:
"I am not advocati...I have no idea where the:<br /><br />"I am not advocating" came from, please ignore it.<br />douglas clarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11422060678908705962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-29942227481342947242015-06-21T16:02:48.797+01:002015-06-21T16:02:48.797+01:00Rolfe,
I do not have a vote in Glasgow Kelvin, so...Rolfe,<br /><br />I do not have a vote in Glasgow Kelvin, so I could not effect the outcome there even if I wanted to. Indeed, if Harvie was likely to win there my second vote would revert to the SNP.<br /><br />My point cuts across the party politics a little. I happen to think that Patrick Harvie is an asset both for Holyrood and the electorate. Was this counter-arguement deployed against Margo MacDonald when she stood as an independent? If it was, I for one, do not recall it.<br /><br />As I said when I first commented on here, my circumstances are probably not shared by very many other people, However, voting for a good friend of the Yes campaign doesn't feel to me like any sort of betrayal of principle.<br /><br />Thanks for all of the advice, it is probably far too early to determine the final outcome of my list vote.<br /><br /><br /><br />I am <i>not</i> advocating douglas clarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11422060678908705962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-66302743917510946072015-06-21T14:14:27.745+01:002015-06-21T14:14:27.745+01:00Absolutely correct Illy.
You know, I'm person...Absolutely correct Illy.<br /><br />You know, I'm personally not a fan of my SNP MSP, and have toyed with the idea of not voting for her in the constituency. I probably will though, because first, although I dislike her as a person, she is doing things in Holyrood that I approve of strongly, and second, who else would I vote for? Leave it blank? But NOTHING would induce me not to vote SNP on the list, as the SNP is the party I want to form the government.<br /><br />I don't mind if Braco wants Harvie as DFM and so intends to split his vote. It's his vote, he can do that if he likes. What I do mind is the lying about the arithmetic in an attempt to hoodwink SNP supporters into abandoning their own party.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-69866880186608467832015-06-21T10:23:31.418+01:002015-06-21T10:23:31.418+01:00"Therefore, IF come the day of the election, ..."Therefore, IF come the day of the election, the SNP are looking nailed on certainties to sweep the FPtP constituency vote, then by voting Green or SSP (or any other pro Indy party that's polling best in your region) with your list vote, you will most likely deny Unionist parties their consolation prize (and electoral survival) of the majority of list seats."<br /><br />This is the lie, btw. In case you're unsure about what our problem is. The margins for error for this to happen, rather than letting a Labour MSP in, are infinitesimal compared to the error margins normally quoted for polls.Illynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-89636904874475185702015-06-21T10:19:14.062+01:002015-06-21T10:19:14.062+01:00Who you vote for on the list vote *is* the politic...Who you vote for on the list vote *is* the political party you support. That's pretty much the definition of supporting a political party.<br /><br />The only day we have a true idea of the circumstances of an election is the day after.<br /><br />Continuing to try to con people who would vote SNP on the list that their vote would be wasted, and trying to get them to vote Green on the list instead by lying to them about the margins for error in the maths is bad, m'kay?<br /><br />We get it, you want Patrick Harvey to be DFM, because there's no way he'll be leader of the opposition. Just stop lying that that is the probable result of the way you want people to vote.Illynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-43374303545417877052015-06-21T09:40:27.739+01:002015-06-21T09:40:27.739+01:00This is ridiculous Rolfe. I have continually cavea...This is ridiculous Rolfe. I have continually caveated what I am saying and underlined that there is a year to go before we can have the first idea of the true circumstances surrounding the next Holyrood election. Calling me a liar is not going to change any of that.<br /><br />Also, to be absolutely clear for everyone here, I am not a green supporter per se. I have voted SNP most of my adult life and I will carry on doing so until Scotland is Independent. I am not a member of any political party but I am a strong supporter of the Independence movement as a whole and therefore will look to use any electoral tool from within that movement to weaken the Union and bring forward a referendum ASAP. <br /><br />I would prefer to list vote for ANY pro Indy party rather than allow the unionist parties the consolation prize (and electoral life support in Scotland) of them picking up the majority of the regional seats. As will happen if SNP sweep the constituencies as is being forecast in the current polls. These may change and if they do, I will also change accordingly<br /><br />So, IF I look around my region at the point of the next election and the SNP are polling in the 50s and a sweep of the constituencies is a real likely hood, then I will vote accordingly. We disagree on this issue. Fine. Voting rights are the individual's.<br /><br />You know all of the above, as it has been stated over and over again on the Scot Goes Pop thread yet you continue to claim that I am some sort of Patrick Harvie groupie and hardline Green. I have once again had to state bluntly that this is not true. Your accusations toward me are looking more and more like a sad case of projection I am afraid. <br /><br />Munguin's is not the place for a slagging match, and I don't want to get into one, so lets just leave it at that for the moment and see what the future electoral circumstances bring. In fact, had you not gratuitously named myself and Schroedinger's cat as liars in your earlier posts, this conversation would simply not be happening as I had no intention of re visiting this subject or commenting on Abu Haimi's very interesting post.<br /><br />bracoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-36046429155472592012015-06-21T09:10:15.889+01:002015-06-21T09:10:15.889+01:00I'm getting more and more convinced that braco...I'm getting more and more convinced that braco really does think he has psychic levels of prediction and a mind control ray.<br /><br />Oh well.Illynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-71272305127389069112015-06-21T03:29:36.944+01:002015-06-21T03:29:36.944+01:00Apologies for the late reply. My parents and I wer...Apologies for the late reply. My parents and I were hosting a number of people for breaking of the fast. Had to prepare and cook etc.<br /><br />This guest post was drafted as I was intrigued by the abovementioned Scot Goes Pop post and the reaction it provoked. The purpose of this post is two-fold; a) to understand the mechanics of AMS and b) to ascertain the feasibility of tactical voting.<br /><br />As we can see AMS is composed of two types of different voting system; FPTP for the constituency vote and proportional voting and governed by d’Hondt method in the regional/list vote. What this post aims to dispel is the myth of tactical voting can simply be achieved by just voting SNP/GR in the upcoming election. The calculations have shown that AMS is very much misunderstood and more complex, at least to those who haven’t delved to its mathematical mechanics.<br /><br />I believe my calculations are correct. If wrong, prove it. If you have a way to overcome it, please share. If you believe the risk is worth, go ahead. If you believe Scottish Green, vote for them. What riles me up was the James Kelly’s comment about his comments on a tactical voting Facebook was removed when he questioned the wisdom of tactical voting. I will not accept this as gospel truth. Offer me a counter-narrative. Rebut my argument at the very least.<br /><br />My dare to those propounding tactical voting; explain this post to wavering/undecided voters and see whether they would be inclined to do the same. If they do, they do it on their own volition. <br /><br />We are in the age where everybody in Scotland is politically aware. This is another facet of that political awareness. The main point is that everybody should be educated on the electoral process. This post would serve its purpose better if it were to be read by the 16 & 17 year olds that are about to vote next year.<br /><br />For me voting for SNP or Scottish Greens is very acceptable. It would be nice to see actual opposition in Scottish Parliament rather that the Bain Principle in action. It is tedious to watch and listen to FMQ every time (at least they did not abstain).<br /><br />However this proposition is similar to OBR’s forecast in relation to Scottish oil revenue. Full of caveats and based only a poll (so far). Look what happened to Labour in England. <br /><br />I am a Nationalist and this is politics of power. A solid majority of SNP MSPs in the Scottish Parliament is always preferable to any coalition with any other party. The SNP got us this far and I see no reason to do otherwise. This election is still wide open. The SNP must hold to their voters and Scottish Greens must find new & expand their current voter base. <br /><br />Speaking as a former advocate, the case for tactical voting is base on too many presumptions and variables. Any advocate would have advised not to vote based on them.<br />ebreahyesscotlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02511849483451733846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-24716009965423898172015-06-21T03:28:07.924+01:002015-06-21T03:28:07.924+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.ebreahyesscotlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02511849483451733846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-46446253423793441432015-06-21T02:48:42.197+01:002015-06-21T02:48:42.197+01:00Addendum:
In proportional representation electoral...Addendum:<br />In proportional representation electoral system, there will always be a minimum threshold for number of votes a party needs to achieve in order for it to gain a seat in the legislature Usually it ranges from 5-20%. However there is no such requirement in Scottish Parliament election but there is a so-called hidden threshold. I believe it is the lowest number of votes casted for a party when the s=0. In our example it is the Scottish Conservative (14,870 votes). Please take note that the lower figures received by SNP and Scottish Labour are ALREADY QUOT (quotients) (s= >1) i.e. votes have been divided by denominator of two (2) or more. If we calculate, the hidden threshold would be a bit more than 7% of all the votes casted in the regional/list votes. Again in deriving this hidden threshold, no figures are available UNTIL the votes are casted. From the 9 June TNS poll, on the assumption that Scottish Greens’ 10% regional/list votes are evenly spread, they should be able to get up to 12 seats. This will not be the case as votes varies from one region to another and the biggest loser will definitely be the SNP as it is their votes being diverted. For example, we take the North East Scotland region. Should the Scottish Greens fail to overcome the hidden threshold whatever they may be, they will not get the seat and the SNP will lose their only regional/list MSP.<br /><br />(p/s: I might be wrong in understanding the concept and/or calculation and am very happy to be corrected)<br />ebreahyesscotlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02511849483451733846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-23984079458887032522015-06-20T23:38:15.658+01:002015-06-20T23:38:15.658+01:00You keep saying this. It's still a pack of li...You keep saying this. It's still a pack of lies.<br /><br />First, there is absolutely no way the SNP can be guaranteed to get 69 or more of the 73 constituency seats. Parcelling out list votes on this assumption is insane. The SNP has got where it is by maximising the number of list seats that can be achieved, and 2016 will be no different.<br /><br />Second, even if the SNP were to get all constituencies in a region, there's still a decent chance it will be in line for another list seat, as in the North East last time. Why should SNP supporters want to make a free gift of these seats to another party?<br /><br />And third, MSPs don't go to Holyrood on a pro-independence ticket. They go as party MSPs. A Green MSP isn't going to take the SNP whip. It's possible, if the SNP is polling very high, that this strategy may cause the party only slight damage. It's well possible that it could cause severe damage, leading to a loss of the SNP's working majority. That is the clear risk being incurred.<br /><br />If a voter thinks that a Green/SNP coalition, with Patrick Harvie being obstructive every step of the way, is a better way to independence that an SNP overall majority, then fine, they should split their vote. The lying comes when you refuse to acknowledge this possibility (indeed probability) and go on pretending that Green and SNP MSPs are interchangeable in the Holyrood benches.<br /><br />It is all pretty well explained on Scot Goes Pop (including the fact that for certain distributions of the vote, all Green supporters voting SNP on the list gets more extra SNP MSPs than it loses Greens). It's just that every time it is, Braco and a few others emerge and repeat the same lies as before, regardless.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-34907321174926076682015-06-20T23:26:58.027+01:002015-06-20T23:26:58.027+01:00I think you might have done. They're like the...I think you might have done. They're like the bloody Terminator. I won't believe they're dead till I see the stake through the place where the silver bullet went, and the holy water has been sprinkled over the garlic.<br /><br />They still got 25% last month. They managed to hold on to Glasgow in 2012. They got 2 MEPs in 2014. I hope there's a wipe-out next year and they're down to LibDem levels of representation, but I won't believe it till I see it.<br /><br />In particular, they won't die until the smaller pro-independence parties stop trying to win a bigger slice of people who are pro-independence already, and go after the voters who are still voting Labour.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-89409362016349221062015-06-20T23:21:38.790+01:002015-06-20T23:21:38.790+01:00Douglas doesn't need anyone's permission, ...Douglas doesn't need anyone's permission, but it's probably best if he actually understands the consequences of his vote. Consequences you seem reluctant to let him discover.<br /><br />If a voter values having Patrick Harvie in Holyrood above having a working majority for the SNP then that's entirely their decision. But they need to realise this isn't a have-cake-and-eat-it situation.<br /><br />What if Patrick Harvie gets enough votes in Kelvin that might otherwise have gone to the SNP, to allow the Labour candidate to come through the middle and take the seat? Could happen. If it did, and SNP supporters have voted SNP on the list, the party will pretty certainly get another list seat in consequence. But if too many have lost sight of what all this is about and voted Green on the list, that won't happen.<br /><br />If enough SNP supporters vote Green on the list, the likeliest outcome is that Ncola Sturgeon will be humiliated by winning fewer Holyrood seats than Salmond did, she will have to go into coalition with the Greens, and Patrick Harvie will be DFM. Goodbye independence.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-68104019755391953692015-06-20T23:15:48.337+01:002015-06-20T23:15:48.337+01:00But you are lying. That you deny it then go on re...But you are lying. That you deny it then go on repeating the lies is hardly our fault.<br /><br />You totally misrepresent the possible outcomes of the various possible spreads of the vote. You're playing with fire, and I can only imagine you're so desperate to promote Patrick Harvie and his party you've lost sight of any other goal.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-62341611718955343832015-06-20T23:13:06.932+01:002015-06-20T23:13:06.932+01:00Ask Cynog Dafydd about co-operating with the Green...Ask Cynog Dafydd about co-operating with the Greens. He's the Plaid candidate who stood on a joint Plaid/Green ticket in the 1990s. By the end of the term he never wanted to see a Green party member again. He said they were entirely obstructive and prevented him doing anything for the constituency for his entire Westminster term.<br /><br />This is the risk we take if we're suckered into handing Patrick Harvie political power in excess of what his party's actual electoral support warrats.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-80931722277365884142015-06-20T23:09:23.312+01:002015-06-20T23:09:23.312+01:00Winning votes by putting forward impressive polici...Winning votes by putting forward impressive policies is one thing. Touting for the votes of committed supporters of another party by lying to them is something else.<br /><br />Why should committed SNP supporters agree to give up SNP seats in the mere hope that the Greens might get them? It's insane. It carries the serious risk that the SNP will lose its working majority and be forced to rely on the Greens to continue in government. Anyone who thinks the SNP is a sure thing for 69+ constituency seats is way too drunk on big numbers.Rolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17849975010197698907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-43705645630719916632015-06-20T18:10:57.610+01:002015-06-20T18:10:57.610+01:00Not the argument Anon. The actual argument being, ...Not the argument Anon. The actual argument being, as shown in the post above, that if the SNP get anything like the current polling 56 to 60% constituency vote at the next Holyrood election, then the d'Hondt voting system will make the SNP list vote worth far, far less than that of the equivalent, next most popular pro-indy party (when it comes to how it is counted on the night). <br /><br />Therefore, IF come the day of the election, the SNP are looking nailed on certainties to sweep the FPtP constituency vote, then by voting Green or SSP (or any other pro Indy party that's polling best in your region) with your list vote, you will most likely deny Unionist parties their consolation prize (and electoral survival) of the majority of list seats. <br /><br />This is because each of those pro Indy non-SNP list votes will be considered and counted as being of equal value to the unionist party votes. In contrast the SNP list votes in a region where they have swept the board in the constituency vote of say 10 constituencies for example, will be considered to be worth exactly one tenth of the value of the equivalent Unionist party list vote. <br /><br />This is the electoral system. We are just proposing that how our electoral system works, plus the actual circumstances surrounding the election at the time (a year from now!), should be taken into account when pro indy people are contemplating the best way to use their votes.<br /><br />That's the general argument. If anybody is really interested in exploring the full argument (both sides), then they should have a good read of the Scot Goes Pop thread referenced in my earlier post. It really was fully explored then, considering our current knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the in a years time election (certainly unknowable until much closer to the time).<br /><br />braco Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-30277100885528814042015-06-20T16:08:55.903+01:002015-06-20T16:08:55.903+01:00Greens SSP etc will get mostly nowhere in unionist...Greens SSP etc will get mostly nowhere in unionist occupied Scotland, list votes or no list votes. I'd have thought it glaringly obvious that the absolute top and only priority (for the Greens - that is if they actually do support independence - and for the SSP as well as everyone else who has Scotland's interests at heart ) is to break from Westminster and achieve an independent Scotland and the only game in town for that is the SNP.<br /><br />I don't like everything about the SNP, for example I think that they have a tendency towards a nanny state ethos which I personally am not keen on but for me independence is much more important than that. Anyone who genuinely supports Scottish independence MUST vote SNP and SNP only, constituency and list, until such time and by whatever means we achieve independence.<br /><br />Then and ONLY then will the likes of the Greens and SSP start to come into their own in Scotland.<br /><br />As for SLAB, did I miss the funeral?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-83139217967986966472015-06-20T11:38:55.311+01:002015-06-20T11:38:55.311+01:00"So you're voting for an SNP/Green coalit..."So you're voting for an SNP/Green coalition, rather than an SNP majority?"<br />There won't be a coalition. if current polls are right then the SNP will win a majority on constituency seats alone. If the polls change closer to the day then we will be able to decide how to respond to that.<br />"They cannot do it by stealing SNP ones."<br />The SNP are not entitled to people's votes and they are not entitled to seats. Saying that winning a seat by democratic vote is theft is as ridiculous as those unionists who said the SNP MPs would not be legitimate and the people who say SNP supporters 'owe' their votes to the Greens. <br /><br />"Unless you have *psychic* levels of result prediction, it's the only sensible way to act."<br />That's not true. The polls tend to be fairly accurate, enough to make an informed choice about which party to cast your second vote for.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-65682886725356171312015-06-20T10:13:57.643+01:002015-06-20T10:13:57.643+01:00I am sure douglas is grateful for your permission....I am sure douglas is grateful for your permission.<br /><br />bracoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-61343550740448809182015-06-20T10:11:37.623+01:002015-06-20T10:11:37.623+01:00What? The only folk predicting anything here witho...What? The only folk predicting anything here without caveats or reference to possible future circumstances, (with a year still to go before the actual vote) are those on your side of the argument. Calling fellow committed and thinking pro-indy supporters lyers and worse, for disagreeing with you and having the temerity to defend that view is not what the YES movement became famous for and I don't think it's a productive way to advance now.<br /><br />braco Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092475090824666694.post-64927692685974776042015-06-20T09:58:36.916+01:002015-06-20T09:58:36.916+01:00So you're voting for Patrick Harvey for DFM an...So you're voting for Patrick Harvey for DFM and an SNP/Green coalition in Hollyrood?<br /><br />That's fine if that's what you want to do.Illynoreply@blogger.com