Are YOU Voting for the Alba Party?

[Burning Barns]

2 minutes ago, HTG said:

The Greens do that.  There was no need for Alba. It's a combination of a vanity party for Salmond and somewhere for a whole bunch of weirdos to park their arse.  Yes, there were some decent sensible people too but far from enough to set the narrative - not whilst the likes of Campbell were actively telling people not to vote for the main indy party in this country. The majority of SNP and Green is more than sufficient. Alba and A4U are 2 sides of the same coin that should be taken out of circulation. 

I disagree with that, I'd say that the SGP position on independence is, as far as I know, broadly the same as the SNP.  ALBA offered a different stance, because they made independence, unashamedly, the basis of the party's policies and campaign.  

I think Campbell's relationship to ALBA has been a wee bit overstated at times.  I've no idea if he's a party member, or if membership is even open to non-residents of Scotland.  If he is, he went against party policy by advocating a vote for anyone other than the SNP on the constituency ballot.  As a nationalist, I can't and won't defend anyone advocating a vote for any English party running candidates in a Scottish election.  Not including yourself, but I think some of the insults thrown at ALBA, by the likes of Pete Wishart, were clichés saved up for when a hypothetical "Wings Party" ever emerged.   That's not what ALBA is, and if it was, I wouldn't have supported it.

I agree totally that an SNP/Green coalition government has the mandate to proceed.  However, what appealed to me other than the ALBA manifesto, was the prospect of unseating as many branch officers as possible in this election.  Lack of knowledge of D'Hondt and unwillingness from nationalists to tactically vote were the stumbling blocks, in my opinion.

[Burning Barns]

14 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

This right here is why nobody voted Alba. Pushing the "vote SNP get unionists" narrative just alienates people. Alba supporters have consistently trashed the SNP and the Greens, not bothering much with the Tories and Labour. 

Add to this, their offer to the public was just some electoral maths, fronted by a discredited leader and surrounded by people wielding their pet grievances. The energy of Alba supporters was spent attacking Nicola Sturgeon and agonising over Trans rights. Honestly, is it any wonder they did so poorly? 

Let me finish with one thing. My parents went both votes SNP. Not because they are desperate for indyref 2, not because they sat and worked out the best mathematical way to get a Yes majority. But because they were impressed with Nicola Sturgeon during the pandemic. As a pair of older voters they thought she did well, and so voted for her. How would you ever hope to persuade folk like my parents to vote for a party that is pretty toxic? 

The fact that approximately one million SNP list votes, returns no nationalist representation at Holyrood, is disconcerting, to say the least.

I can't speak for others, but I have some philosophical and strategic differences with the FM on independence.  Tony Benn disagreed with the decisions made by the leadership of his party for most of his political career.  Was he trashing Labour, by doing so?  

Unfortunately, voting for the SNP on the list did not strengthen the FM's position.  No SNP list members getting in, illustrates this.  People have to learn how D'Hondt works.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

This has election has surely proven the efficacy of another pro-independence party on the list.  Unfortunately, it seems that the message that SNP list votes actually benefit the unionists more than the SNP, just didn't quite "cut through" enough in the limited time ALBA had. 
Because the SNP campaigned saying that voters should give them their list vote, the cause of independence, and therefore, the country, has gained no discernible advantage out of this election.  Obviously, ALBA did not get the desired result.  The Greens had a decent result, however I'd say that they also suffered from "Both Votes SNP" syndrome.
The result of promoting themselves on the list, to the detriment and expense of other pro-independence parties who could actually have taken list seats, is that several unionists MSPs got to quaff champagne on being elected to the Scots Parliament.  

The problem is that the constituencies cannot be taken for granted - some of the majorities are only a few thousand votes - and that can be made up easily sometimes.

If a list vote is not pushed by any party then they lose out if they don't win in the constituencies.

Rock and hard place comes to mind.

[Saltire]

2 hours ago, Burning Barns said:

The fact that approximately one million SNP list votes, returns no nationalist representation at Holyrood, is disconcerting, to say the least.

I can't speak for others, but I have some philosophical and strategic differences with the FM on independence.  Tony Benn disagreed with the decisions made by the leadership of his party for most of his political career.  Was he trashing Labour, by doing so?  

Unfortunately, voting for the SNP on the list did not strengthen the FM's position.  No SNP list members getting in, illustrates this.  People have to learn how D'Hondt works.

Sorry Burning Barns, the D'Hondt system works on the basis that it is intended to redress the imbalance of MSPs versus share of the vote in the constituencies. It isn't intended to allow an imbalance of representation by giving voters the chance to artificially inflate representation by introducing "colt teams" to politics.

I'd rather all MSPs were proportionately allocated on a regional basis, more accurately reflecting the views of the whole electorate. Hopefully that will be the case with independence.

[LongTimeLurker]

1 minute ago, Saltire said:

Sorry Burning Barns, the D'Hondt system works on the basis that it is intended to redress the imbalance of MSPs versus share of the vote in the constituencies. It isn't intended to allow an imbalance of representation by giving voters the chance to artificially inflate representation by introducing "colt teams" to politics....

...and if Alba had been successful odds on the Unionist side would retaliate the next time around by also using the alter ego party approach in a way that could mean no more SNP government.

[GordonS]

6 hours ago, Burning Barns said:

I disagree with that, I'd say that the SGP position on independence is, as far as I know, broadly the same as the SNP.  ALBA offered a different stance, because they made independence, unashamedly, the basis of the party's policies and campaign.  

I don't mean this as any sort of insult, but are you aware that you're a fundamentalist? It's fine, most of us are fundamentalists about something (with me it's climate change), but it helps to know how far from mainstream opinion you are. Because if you think Alba had a materially different policy on independence than the SNP, you're right out on the margins.

The only real difference was that the SNP had other policies, as you'd hope from an actual government.

6 hours ago, Burning Barns said:

The fact that approximately one million SNP list votes, returns no nationalist representation at Holyrood, is disconcerting, to say the least.

I can't speak for others, but I have some philosophical and strategic differences with the FM on independence.  Tony Benn disagreed with the decisions made by the leadership of his party for most of his political career.  Was he trashing Labour, by doing so?  

Unfortunately, voting for the SNP on the list did not strengthen the FM's position.  No SNP list members getting in, illustrates this.  People have to learn how D'Hondt works.

First of all it would help if you actually knew the result of the election on which you express such strong opinions. The SNP got two list seats. Had they squeaked over the line in Aberdeenshire West or Dumbarton those would be the reason why they had a majority. On the other hand, had they failed to take Ayr and East Lothian they'd have needed all their list votes in South. The idea that list votes for the SNP don't matter is clearly just wrong.

As for D'Hondt, the purpose of it is to more closely match seats to party votes. You're not looking for voters to learn how it works, you're looking for voters to learn how to get round it. The intention was never to have proxy parties on the list. IMO we badly need to reform the electoral system before the next election, before this gets out of hand.

[Boo Khaki]

4 hours ago, GordonS said:

IMO we badly need to reform the electoral system before the next election, before this gets out of hand.

Can I suggest Scotland simply adopts the same FPTP system used to elect Westminster politicians.

[Lurkst]

13 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

...and if Alba had been successful odds on the Unionist side would retaliate the next time around by also using the alter ego party approach in a way that could mean no more SNP government.

Surely that would only work if Unionist parties start winning more FPTP seats?

 

[Salt n Vinegar]

5 hours ago, Boo Khaki said:

Can I suggest Scotland simply adopts the same FPTP system used to elect Westminster politicians.

I know that the opposition parties' 'history rewriting' analysis of last week's election results doesn't suggest much regard for manifestos, but I'd be wary about trying to change the democratic foundation of the Parliament without making that intention clear before an election.  That would put it off for the duration of this parliament. I'm not taking a view yet on whether it should be changed or not. 

Of course, I could be mischievous and suggest that I'd be happy to keep the present Holyrood system in place if Westminster adopts the same one immediately after the 2024 UK General Election.  Plenty of time to get it in the main UK parties' manifestos. Goose - meet gander. 

[thisal]

Independence movement got a majority of seats despite having slightly less than 50% of the vote. but that still gives them the right to call a referendum.  Weighting the seats with 2nd vote parties would only become an issue if their vote was to fall enough for them to lose the majority of seats. What happens in that case? They still have a mandate to call a referendum, but their popular vote is now lower and they will likely lose the referendum. Lose 2 referendums and independence is gone for a very long time.

[BigDoddyKane]

Thats a good point, to me its clear. That enough voted for Independence parties that won seats SNP/Greens to call a 2nd referendum. The question now is when it should be held with the most chance of a Yes vote being the only concern. Losing Indy2 would imo make it another 20 years until Indy3 as a lot of people will just get fed up talking about it over other daily issues.

Edited May 10, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[LongTimeLurker]

38 minutes ago, Lurkst said:

Surely that would only work if Unionist parties start winning more FPTP seats?

 

What they could do is combine on the constituency poll with a shared Unionist party (they could win a lot of seats this way given the SNP is often winning with well below 50% in this context) then do the lists as three seperate Alba style alter ego parties (the shared Unionist party would not be part of the d'Hondt calculation but the SNP would be) and form an anti-SNP coalition afterwards with a comfortable majority. There are ways for both sides to game the system to their advantage so Alex Salmond was playing with fire.

Edited May 10, 2021 by LongTimeLurker

[GordonS]

7 hours ago, Boo Khaki said:

Can I suggest Scotland simply adopts the same FPTP system used to elect Westminster politicians.

It would be hilarious watching them try to oppose it.

1 hour ago, Salt n Vinegar said:

I know that the opposition parties' 'history rewriting' analysis of last week's election results doesn't suggest much regard for manifestos, but I'd be wary about trying to change the democratic foundation of the Parliament without making that intention clear before an election.  That would put it off for the duration of this parliament. I'm not taking a view yet on whether it should be changed or not. 

That's why I think it needs to be discussed in a totally non-partisan context now - because by the next election we could have genuine proxy pro-independence and pro-union list parties, each getting dozens of members returned, at which point it might become impossible to change the system. It's not out of hand yet, but one more election could get it there.

52 minutes ago, thisal said:

Independence movement got a majority of seats despite having slightly less than 50% of the vote. but that still gives them the right to call a referendum.  Weighting the seats with 2nd vote parties would only become an issue if their vote was to fall enough for them to lose the majority of seats. What happens in that case? They still have a mandate to call a referendum, but their popular vote is now lower and they will likely lose the referendum. Lose 2 referendums and independence is gone for a very long time.

Pro-independence parties got a majority of the regional vote, which is surely a much better measure. It's massively less prone to tactical voting, and only 4 parties contested more than 12 constituencies.

For example, there are many constituencies where Labour and/or Tories got under 10% of the constituency vote but upwards of 20% of the regional vote, purely because of tactical voting in the constituency ballot.

[SandyCromarty]

Total rejection by the Scots for Alex Salmond and his Alba party.

Sad to see him go out with a whimper like this but he has brought it on himself.

No doubt he will again try to promote himself in the council elections next year but I'm afraid that will be another lost cause.

Better that he just fades away into gardening in Strichen.

[Ira Gaines]

I don't find it sad at all. f**k him. He's brought it on himself. 

[Michael W]

When you think that he once held high office (and regardless of your opinion of him in that role), it is pretty sad that he's degenerated into an enabler of total moonhowlers. 

However, this is all being done purely to feed the Alex Salmond ego, which one would hope has now been suitably crushed. There are few things that can really hit someone with an ego like Salmond, but he has been given a resounding f**k off, not only from the electorate as a whole, but also from those that previously admired him. If that doesn't make the penny drop I can't think of what else might. He is a joke figure and this election confirmed that. 

He is a horrible man whose conduct marks him out as someone entirely unsuitable for public office in addition to being a complete OFTW. f**k him.

 

[madwullie]

Interesting to see alba supporters on twitter going on about how they were the only party standing up for women's rights, and they're 50% of the population etc. 

How come hardly any women voted for you then meights? 

[Michael W]

3 minutes ago, madwullie said:

Interesting to see alba supporters on twitter going on about how they were the only party standing up for women's rights, and they're 50% of the population etc. 

How come hardly any women voted for you then meights? 

Meanwhile their party leader views them as sex objects for his own gratification; an irony that I am sure is totally lost on them. 

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

How long before Alex Salmond replaces Jim Sillars as the SNP leader the unionist press roll out when they need a SNPBad comment.

[Burning Barns]

20 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

 

 

The problem is that the constituencies cannot be taken for granted - some of the majorities are only a few thousand votes - and that can be made up easily sometimes.

If a list vote is not pushed by any party then they lose out if they don't win in the constituencies.

Rock and hard place comes to mind.

 

I see where you’re coming from, however no-one was predicting the SNP’s constituency vote would drop during this election.  The SGP running against the SNP in several seats was realistically the only thing that could have prevented gains in the constituency.