@Indyposterboy Generally, that's a REALLY GOOD PLAN. If all pro-independence voters followed it, we would, as you say, maximise pro #ScottishIndependence
representation.

You can therefore be absolutely certain the #SNP will sabotage it.

I despair of the party, they will always put tribalism first and independence second.

@simon_brooke @Indyposterboy

Courage mon brave!

No doubt there will be some of what you speak, however the SNP remains a very broad coalition of interests that will ultimately split. Regardless of SNP tactics:

SNP1/SGP2 is the best electoral play on 7th May

@simon_brooke @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy

"Both Votes SNP" is a statement of innumeracy or self-harming political tribalism, or both.

(Except perhaps in parts of the South of Scotland region)

@2legged @simon_brooke @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy
It's nuanced.

Where I am, it's possible the SNP candidate will not win. It'd be reasonable for SNP supporters to also vote SNP on the list vote, since without the constituency MSP, there's more chance of picking up a list seat to compensate, and there's no chance of picking up an *extra* green list seat by voting Green.

I'm not giving anyone advice; I'm probably going to be SNP/Green for similar reasons to Simon. But it's nuanced.

@petealexharris This sort of calculation is based on assumptions of how others will vote. It's an anti-democratic insanity of a system, a reminder of why Scotland should adopt #STV.

But on the maths, so long as the SNP wins more constituency seats than the Greens do, d'Hondt means that an SNP list seat needs a lot more voters than Green list seats. This isn't opinion; it's maths.

@simon_brooke @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy

@2legged @simon_brooke @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy

AMS with d'Hondt is OK, and STV also has problems. It may be insanity to give tactical voting advice that depends on how everyone else votes, but that's not a defect of the voting system. It's just a fool's game.

On the maths you're right. But SNP voters may still *want* an SNP MSP, and IF the candidate loses, the maths is less unfavourable to get a list one. Green might also get one anyway, and voting on the list for *what you want* is best.

@petealexharris AMS with d'Hondt is far from okay. AMS
1/ is gameable, as Alba tried to hack it
2/ punishes independents
3/ creates members with unequal status
4/ invites tactical voting based on multi-layered guesses about the behaviour of other voters
5/ blocks new parties, by not offering transferability
6/ is confusing for voters, who often don't fully understand how the two votes interact.

STV has none of those problems. STV has no #wastedvotes

@simon_brooke @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy

@2legged @petealexharris @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy
7/ Gives far too much power to party managers, who get to decide how to prioritise their candidates on the list.

This is why a multi-member constituency/single transferable vote system, which we're already familiar with because it is what we use in "local government" (Scotland has no local government) elections would in my opinion be preferable.

#ScotPol
#ProportionalRepresentation

I agree, @simon_brooke. STV gives power to the voters rather than parties.

But there is a big caveat: no micro-constituencies. STV requires at least 5 seats per constituency to work well.

Ireland's STV era began in 1921, with mostly 7–9 seaters. But two great gerrymanders (in 1935 and 1947) left 5 seats as the largest, and made 3-seaters common.

In 2013, the Constitutional Convention recommended making 5 the minimum, but the government said no. 😡

@petealexharris @ISawTheWood @Indyposterboy