Scottish Parliament election - 5th May 2016

[afleitch]

BBC Forecast

SNP 63
CON 31
LAB 24
GRN 6
LIB 5

SNP Minority

[YL]

Why did the Tories do so well?  Presumably Ruth Davidson is personally popular, but is there more to it than that?

Not bad for the Lib Dems either at least at the constituency level: very clear wins in both Orkney and Shetland, and winning North East Fife and Edinburgh Western back.

And do Dumbarton, Edinburgh Southern and East Lothian have anything in common that anyone can think of?

[Clyde1998]

I'm going to predict the SNP will lose their majority, but will form minority government.

(I'm an SNP member, btw)

As I said...

[reciprocity]

Why did the Tories do so well?  Presumably Ruth Davidson is personally popular, but is there more to it than that?

Not bad for the Lib Dems either at least at the constituency level: very clear wins in both Orkney and Shetland, and winning North East Fife and Edinburgh Western back.

And do Dumbarton, Edinburgh Southern and East Lothian have anything in common that anyone can think of?

Tactical voting and a much more positive profile than LAB.

[Phony Moderate]

Why did the Tories do so well?  Presumably Ruth Davidson is personally popular, but is there more to it than that?

Because the political cleavage in Scotland is now secessionist vs. unionist rather the left vs. right; the Conservatives are the most effective unionist party.

[jaichind]

I find it interesting that in Edinburgh CON LAB and LD all managed to win 1 seat with all of them through anti-SNP tactical voting.  Very strategic voters that can correctly identify the largest opponent of SNP and vote correctly for three different parties to defeat SNP.

[Clyde1998]

I find it interesting that in Edinburgh CON LAB and LD all managed to win 1 seat with all of them through anti-SNP tactical voting.  Very strategic voters that can correctly identify the largest opponent of SNP and vote correctly for three different parties to defeat SNP.

I wonder how strong the other parties' campaign were in these seats, as well.

[bore]

There is no getting around the fact that this was a terrible night for labour and an exceptional one for the tories. But I still think that people are overstating what happened at least from a conservative perspective. Despite everything, for example, labour still received slightly more constituency votes than the tories, the tories did about 3 points better on the list, but even so that doesn't quite fit the narrative. Similarly, 22% is impressive for the tories in scotland, but it's only impressive for tories in scotland (and, like, sunderland) and we shouldn't forget that. Perhaps the most important issue event of the election is the gradual return of the tartan tories to the party in paces like northeast scotland and perthshire, and I think, when the froth of a terrible labour performance and a very popular SNP and Green Party has faded from scottish politics, the lasting impact of this election will be a significantly increased tory share (albeit lower than in most areas in england) based on these votes.

Scattered predictions and hot takes to brag about if I'm right and never mention if I'm wrong:

A mixed bag of predictions, obviously I trusted the polling a bit too much and in particular underestimated tory support in the constituencies.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Right about Edinburgh Southern, wrong about the result but right that East Lothian would be very close unlike most labour seats, wrong about Coatbridge and Chryston and very wrong about Edinburgh North and Leith (Hinds was obviously nowhere near as popular as Lazarowicz). Didn't see Dumbarton coming at all.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I slightly overestimated the SNP and labour (but in seats my prediction wasn't bad), was basically right about the lib dems and the greens, ukip and RISE (lol). The tories were obviously underestimated.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Right about Kelvin, wrong about Central, although a split field does mean anything can happen. While Edinburgh Central is an impressive gain for the tories, 30% is still a very low winning share by most standards.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Switch Glasgow and Edinburgh, but otherwise right. Both votes SNP really screwed the greens in glasgow.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Correct, although I didn't see Northeast Fife (but who did?)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wrong about Ayr, and I didn't see the gains.

[Phony Moderate]

Would it be reasonable to compare the fallback in SNP support in the north to the Lib Dems' SW England fallback between 2001 and 2015? I.e. people were voting for them because they weren't one of the main parties rather than because of any strong support for the policies.

[IceAgeComing]

Possibly?  It could be that they are emphasising their "left wing" side to do better in the Central Belt and that doesn't play well in what was once Tory Scotland

There was an interesting bit of spin on BBC Scotland last night about Labour stressing that the Tories had not overtaken them, but they had undertaken the Tories.  Its got a bit of truth about it, but the Tory vote has gone up quite a bit; a 7% Lab-Con swing is pretty damn big.

Disappointed with a few of the list results; but six MSPs is a good number.  "Both Votes SNP" worked as expected in most regions!

[Clyde1998]

Given that the Scottish Parliament was gaining tax powers (that the parties could actually use), I think it became inevitable that the Conservatives would become one of the two largest parties at some point - as I can't think of any powerful parliament, in terms of taxation, where the two largest parties both identify as centre-left.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in future elections.

[afleitch]

Given that the Scottish Parliament was gaining tax powers (that the parties could actually use), I think it became inevitable that the Conservatives would become one of the two largest parties at some point - as I can't think of any powerful parliament, in terms of taxation, where the two largest parties both identify as centre-left.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in future elections.

If anything the presence of the Tories as the opposition will push the SNP further left (which the Tories want if they want a shot of dislodging the SNP in the future from their old heartlands) In a left v right battle, particularly over spending, Labour will have to be careful. It's self destructive anti-SNP streak can't be seen to be at odds with pursing a mutual 'left' response to economic matters.

Furthermore GB Labour have to work out what to do with the SNP, especially if they become entrenched in Scotland. Labour's only path to a majority may lie through some sort of arrangement with the SNP that will have to be settled long in advance of the next general election.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Lol at the RISE hype party being beaten by Tommy Sheridan's Solidarity.

[IceAgeComing]

Lol at the RISE hype party being beaten by Tommy Sheridan's Solidarity.

that's not the most pathetic bit

they got less votes that the scottish christian party

[Clyde1998]

Lol at the RISE hype party being beaten by Tommy Sheridan's Solidarity.

that's not the most pathetic bit

they got less votes that the scottish christian party

Could be worse: The Women's Equality Party got about half the amount of vote RISE got, and they only stood in two regions (RISE stood in all).

[Clyde1998]

I've had a play with the numbers and worked out that the SNP should remain the largest party in 2021, baring another huge shift in Scottish Politics - could effectively be 19 years of SNP Government by the end of that term...

Labour require a direct swing (direct from SNP voters on both ballots, assuming other vote shares don't change) of 11.3% from the SNP to win more seats than them; Conservatives need 12.9% swing direct from the SNP. The Conservatives need a direct swing of 21.5% from the SNP to win a majority; Labour need a 25.5% direct swing.

For comparision, the swing from Labour to the SNP between 2003 and 2011 was 12.3% on the constituency ballot and 13.1% on the regional ballot.

[Clyde1998]

My 'debate' with a commenter on ScotGoesPop: https://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/a-new-podcast-and-new-article-on-why.html#comment-form

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wonder what there defence will be, if at all.

Feel free to pick holes in my comment, now I've said that

[Clyde1998]

Partick Harvie puts the independence question back on the table, saying that the Greens will support another referendum if Scotland is dragged out the EU against its will: http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/14481294.Harvie__Greens_will_back_referendum_if_Scotland_dragged_out_of_EU

[IceAgeComing]

That's not particularly shocking, I'm pretty sure that he's mentioned that before.

I've done some maths; and I'm pretty sure we can credit at least two of the Green gains to the Lib Dems gaining a constituency seat.  Pat got in easy in Glasgow (I think the last seat was between Labour and the Greens, I haven't checked) as did Alison in Lothian; and John Finnie got back in the Highlands comfortably, although benefitting from two easy Lib Dem seats.  In Lothian had the SNP held Edinburgh Western the Lib Dems would have taken the last list seat by about 900 votes which would have denied Andy Wightman the last seat; while in Mid Scotland and Fife the Lib Dems would have taken the Mark Ruskell's list seat if Rennie hadn't gained North East Fife.  Also, I'm pretty sure that Jackie Bailie can be credited for getting Ross Greer into the Scottish Parliament; which certainly annoys a certain group of people.

This makes me think that its much harder for smaller parties like the Greens (and the Lib Dems in much of Scotland) to get representation on the list if one party sweeps an entire region; because the other major parties don't have their votes divided meaning that they'll take most of the list seats before their votes divide enough to let smaller parties have a shout at a seat.  Its the system working in the way that it should, but it does create a bit of a farcical situation where Green voters (or UKIP, or other smaller parties which don't really contest constituencies) should vote tactically for parties that they might totally disagree with since the effect isn't that party having more seats in parliament; but the Greens getting an extra seat.  I don't know if this is something that needs to be solved; perhaps it could be if you add a few more list seats or move to Sainte-Lague or something: although the latter makes it much more likely that odd parties with 2% of the vote get in and the former isn't something that's likely to be popular.  My position on this is certainly effected by my political leanings; so you probably shouldn't listen to me.

[Illiniwek]

If England dragged Scotland out of the EU, then I'd probably support independence. But Scotland should know that its potential membership in the EU would be far from guaranteed.

[joevsimp]

That's not particularly shocking, I'm pretty sure that he's mentioned that before.

I've done some maths; and I'm pretty sure we can credit at least two of the Green gains to the Lib Dems gaining a constituency seat.  Pat got in easy in Glasgow (I think the last seat was between Labour and the Greens, I haven't checked) as did Alison in Lothian; and John Finnie got back in the Highlands comfortably, although benefitting from two easy Lib Dem seats.  In Lothian had the SNP held Edinburgh Western the Lib Dems would have taken the last list seat by about 900 votes which would have denied Andy Wightman the last seat; while in Mid Scotland and Fife the Lib Dems would have taken the Mark Ruskell's list seat if Rennie hadn't gained North East Fife.  Also, I'm pretty sure that Jackie Bailie can be credited for getting Ross Greer into the Scottish Parliament; which certainly annoys a certain group of people.

This makes me think that its much harder for smaller parties like the Greens (and the Lib Dems in much of Scotland) to get representation on the list if one party sweeps an entire region; because the other major parties don't have their votes divided meaning that they'll take most of the list seats before their votes divide enough to let smaller parties have a shout at a seat.  Its the system working in the way that it should, but it does create a bit of a farcical situation where Green voters (or UKIP, or other smaller parties which don't really contest constituencies) should vote tactically for parties that they might totally disagree with since the effect isn't that party having more seats in parliament; but the Greens getting an extra seat.  I don't know if this is something that needs to be solved; perhaps it could be if you add a few more list seats or move to Sainte-Lague or something: although the latter makes it much more likely that odd parties with 2% of the vote get in and the former isn't something that's likely to be popular.  My position on this is certainly effected by my political leanings; so you probably shouldn't listen to me.

England and Wales Green party policy is generally in favour of STV, but I'm not actually sure that it would help us that much at Holyrood. Afaik the Scots Greens have no real appetite to change the voting system (except for Westminster) now that STV is bedded in for local govt and MMP gives reasonable results

[Clyde1998]

That's not particularly shocking, I'm pretty sure that he's mentioned that before.

I've done some maths; and I'm pretty sure we can credit at least two of the Green gains to the Lib Dems gaining a constituency seat.  Pat got in easy in Glasgow (I think the last seat was between Labour and the Greens, I haven't checked) as did Alison in Lothian; and John Finnie got back in the Highlands comfortably, although benefitting from two easy Lib Dem seats.  In Lothian had the SNP held Edinburgh Western the Lib Dems would have taken the last list seat by about 900 votes which would have denied Andy Wightman the last seat; while in Mid Scotland and Fife the Lib Dems would have taken the Mark Ruskell's list seat if Rennie hadn't gained North East Fife.  Also, I'm pretty sure that Jackie Bailie can be credited for getting Ross Greer into the Scottish Parliament; which certainly annoys a certain group of people.

This makes me think that its much harder for smaller parties like the Greens (and the Lib Dems in much of Scotland) to get representation on the list if one party sweeps an entire region; because the other major parties don't have their votes divided meaning that they'll take most of the list seats before their votes divide enough to let smaller parties have a shout at a seat.  Its the system working in the way that it should, but it does create a bit of a farcical situation where Green voters (or UKIP, or other smaller parties which don't really contest constituencies) should vote tactically for parties that they might totally disagree with since the effect isn't that party having more seats in parliament; but the Greens getting an extra seat.  I don't know if this is something that needs to be solved; perhaps it could be if you add a few more list seats or move to Sainte-Lague or something: although the latter makes it much more likely that odd parties with 2% of the vote get in and the former isn't something that's likely to be popular.  My position on this is certainly effected by my political leanings; so you probably shouldn't listen to me.

England and Wales Green party policy is generally in favour of STV, but I'm not actually sure that it would help us that much at Holyrood. Afaik the Scots Greens have no real appetite to change the voting system (except for Westminster) now that STV is bedded in for local govt and MMP gives reasonable results

I think the only change that should be made to the Holyrood system is an additional two list seats per region, making it 73 constituencies and 72 regional seats, to make the system as close to a 50-50 split between constituency and regional MSPs as possible.

For 2016, that would've produced:
SNP 68 seats (+5 on actual result)
Con 34 (+3)
Lab 29 (+5)
Grn 9 (+3)
Lib 5 (NC)

The only real change to the outcome of any previous election would've been 2003, where the Labour-Liberal coalition would've been two seats short of a majority:

2011: SNP 74 (+4), Lab 42 (+5), Con 19 (+4), Lib 6 (+1), Grn 3 (+1), Oth 1; SNP Majority (+2)
2007: SNP 53 (+6), Lab 50 (+4), Con 20 (+3), Lib 17 (+1), Grn 3 (+1), Sol 1 (+1), Oth 1 (NC); SNP Minority (-20)
2003: Lab 52 (+2), SNP 31 (+4), Con 21 (+3), Lib 19 (+2), Grn 9 (+2), SSP 9 (+3), Oth 4 (+3); Lab/Lib Coalition (-2)
1999: Lab 60 (+4), SNP 43 (+8), Con 21 (+3), Lib 18 (+1), Grn 1, SSP 1, Oth 1; Lab/Lib Coalition (+10)

[Clyde1998]

If England dragged Scotland out of the EU, then I'd probably support independence. But Scotland should know that its potential membership in the EU would be far from guaranteed.

It's not 100% guaranteed, but I think that most EU countries would welcome Scotland in, especially if this should this happen. To be fair though, most EU countries would do whatever France and Germany tell them to do - both were quiet during IndyRef.

[Clyde1998]

Ken Macintosh is the next Presiding Officer:

First Round:
Murdo Fraser (Con) - 23
Johann Lamont (Lab) - 23
Ken Macintosh (Lab) - 58
John Scott (Con) - 17
Elaine Smith (Lab) - 7
Total Votes - 128

Second Round
Murdo Fraser (Con) - 26
Johann Lamont (Lab) - 26
Ken Macintosh (Lab) - 60
John Scott (Con) - 15
Spoilt - 1

Third Round
Murdo Fraser (Con) - 31
Johann Lamont (Lab) - 26
Ken Macintosh (Lab) - 71