YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,914
|
Post by YL on Aug 26, 2024 18:18:12 GMT
RefUK fielding two candidates - is this a commitment to choice in STV, an inability to decide on one (are they related?), a poor understanding of how the system works or just very confident of a double gain? On the SOPN their surnames are both given as Hanning Jackson so I would be pretty confident that they are related. My guess, though, would be a poor understanding of the system. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Aug 26, 2024 18:45:51 GMT
RefUK fielding two candidates - is this a commitment to choice in STV, an inability to decide on one (are they related?), a poor understanding of how the system works or just very confident of a double gain? They might not be aware of it, but I think fielding 2 candidates entitles you to a spending limit of 50% more than fielding one. I am happy to be corrected. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 26, 2024 18:54:28 GMT
RefUK fielding two candidates - is this a commitment to choice in STV, an inability to decide on one (are they related?), a poor understanding of how the system works or just very confident of a double gain? BallotBox Scotland on Xitter has plumped for a combination of those: that 'to the right of the Tories' is now a cat out of the bag in Scotland so Reform is trying to ride that wave early, but doing so by fundamentally misunderstanding how STV works, as a dual vacancy in England would be fought differently to how they're fought in Scotland. |
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Aug 26, 2024 19:26:16 GMT
Does it actually matter much if you field two generic candidates in a two-seat STV election?
My understanding is that there are three possible mechanisms by which overnomination might hurt you:
1) "wrong way" transfers between candidates, so that your votes stack up on one candidate before they are elected, such that other candidates are eliminated before they can benefit.
2) leakage, where voters preference one candidate from a party and then move on to other candidates, whereas with fewer candidates they would have preferenced (and also all the same one)
3) if you have some candidates who are more transfer friendly and would otherwise get elected, but are eliminated early and the remaining candidates can't attract transfers.
I think the first can't really happen with two seats, and the third is only important if your candidates are very different. I suppose 2 is possible, but with just two seats seems a bit implausible to happen on any meaningful scale without reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Aug 26, 2024 20:12:03 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,803 
Member is Online
|
Post by john07 on Aug 26, 2024 20:20:45 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats. And how many Councillors do Reform have in Scotland? It’s not exactly a hotbed of Faragism. To get two councillors elected in a two-member constituency would surely require 40% of the vote. It’s far more likely that the clowns haven’t an arse clue that the election was using STV! |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Aug 26, 2024 20:26:40 GMT
Does it actually matter much if you field two generic candidates in a two-seat STV election? My understanding is that there are three possible mechanisms by which overnomination might hurt you: 1) "wrong way" transfers between candidates, so that your votes stack up on one candidate before they are elected, such that other candidates are eliminated before they can benefit. 2) leakage, where voters preference one candidate from a party and then move on to other candidates, whereas with fewer candidates they would have preferenced (and also all the same one) 3) if you have some candidates who are more transfer friendly and would otherwise get elected, but are eliminated early and the remaining candidates can't attract transfers. I think the first can't really happen with two seats, and the third is only important if your candidates are very different. I suppose 2 is possible, but with just two seats seems a bit implausible to happen on any meaningful scale without reason. I don't think we have enough examples of 2-seat STV elections or by-elections to test this. Generally, leakage is the biggest risk. In 2017, in Craigentinny/Duddingston in Edinburgh, the SNP fielded 3 candidates in a 4-seat ward. They fielded 3 because of internal disagreements. 2 would have been ideal. They got about 1.8/1.9 quotas. When the SNP candidate with the fewest votes was eliminated, more votes "leaked" to the (elected) Green candidate than the final margin over the 2nd SNP candidate. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,914
|
Post by YL on Aug 26, 2024 20:37:03 GMT
I believe leakage is the usual reason for concern about overnomination. The classic example is West Tyrone in the 2007 Assembly election: the SDLP ended up with three candidates who shared just over a quota between them, but when the second and third were eliminated many of their votes leaked to the Independent Kieran Deeny and they failed to win a seat.
Of course there is an argument that many of the votes lost by transfer leakage might not have gone to the party in the first place if they had fewer candidates: maybe some of those 1 SDLP 2 Deeny voters would have become 1 Deeny voters.
It will be interesting to see how strong the transfers are between the two Reform candidates in this by-election.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,803
Member is Online
|
Post by john07 on Aug 26, 2024 20:56:58 GMT
In the early days of STV in Scottish local elections, parties would often over-nominate sometimes with the full number of vacancies. Over the years, they have become more cautious with fewer nominations. The last election for Morningside division, there was only one candidate from Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green, and SNP. Also there was one from Alba and one from the Scottish Libertarians.
The first four were elected, as has been the case on all bar one of the Edinburgh elections under STV for the division. It is all too predictable.
|
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by stb12 on Aug 26, 2024 21:58:53 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats. And how many Councillors do Reform have in Scotland? It’s not exactly a hotbed of Faragism. To get two councillors elected in a two-member constituency would surely require 40% of the vote. It’s far more likely that the clowns haven’t an arse clue that the election was using STV! It likely won’t work out for them the way this has been done but based on the general election and polling just out they would win seats in Holyrood and presumably council seats as well (albeit it’s different PR systems) |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,812
|
Post by right on Aug 26, 2024 22:00:56 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats. And how many Councillors do Reform have in Scotland? It’s not exactly a hotbed of Faragism. To get two councillors elected in a two-member constituency would surely require 40% of the vote. It’s far more likely that the clowns haven’t an arse clue that the election was using STV! To me the interesting thing isn't that Reform have a poor understanding of STV, but that they are fielding candidates at all, particularly in an area of historic weakness. One area the Brexit Party did worse than it's UKIP predecessor was standing for council elections - particularly by-elections. That they're taking this seriously is ominous for the Conservatives in next year's County elections. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 26, 2024 22:48:31 GMT
I believe leakage is the usual reason for concern about overnomination. The classic example is West Tyrone in the 2007 Assembly election: the SDLP ended up with three candidates who shared just over a quota between them, but when the second and third were eliminated many of their votes leaked to the Independent Kieran Deeny and they failed to win a seat. Of course there is an argument that many of the votes lost by transfer leakage might not have gone to the party in the first place if they had fewer candidates: maybe some of those 1 SDLP 2 Deeny voters would have become 1 Deeny voters. It will be interesting to see how strong the transfers are between the two Reform candidates in this by-election. I think the normal expected pattern in e.g. Ireland is that under STV each party nominates one more candidate than the seats they expect to win, whereas under SNTV (Japan until recently) parties nominate the same number of candidates that they expect to win. When Solidarity split away from the Scottish Socialist Party, there was a very low rate of transfers between the two: perhaps about 25% |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,043
Member is Online
|
Post by nyx on Aug 26, 2024 23:33:51 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats. The area seems to be prone to voting for independents and having large party swings. The SNP is the only party that has reliably won a significant share of the vote in the last few elections, so given the SNP's recent decline in popularity across Scotland I don't have any confidence in predicting anything here- it'll presumably depend heavily on individual candidates' local popularity. Maybe Reform is onto something with running two people, or maybe they'll come out of it with both candidates having a negligible vote share. Seems like they're both doctors who moved up from England to the Highlands following COVID. www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-66090569 find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09988298/officers |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,803
Member is Online
|
Post by john07 on Aug 26, 2024 23:41:58 GMT
If some of the discussions on my Twitter over the last week or so are any guide, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Reform genuinely think they can win two seats. The area seems to be prone to voting for independents and having large party swings. The SNP is the only party that has reliably won a significant share of the vote in the last few elections, so given the SNP's recent decline in popularity across Scotland I don't have any confidence in predicting anything here- it'll presumably depend heavily on individual candidates' local popularity. Maybe Reform is onto something with running two people, or maybe they'll come out of it with both candidates having a negligible vote share. Seems like they're both doctors who moved up from England to the Highlands following COVID. They are two doctors? It sounds like a Fawlty Towers script? |
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Aug 27, 2024 8:33:35 GMT
Lewes, Wivelsfield (2027). William Coupland (Green) has ceased to be a councillor.
Ealing, Hanger Hill (2026). Gregory Stafford (Conservative) has been removed from the list of councillors. He is the new MP for Farnham & Bordon.
Ealing, Northolt Mandeville (2026). Deirdre Costigan (Labour) has been removed from the list of councillors. She is the new MP for Ealing Southall.
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Aug 27, 2024 11:01:28 GMT
I think the normal expected pattern in e.g. Ireland is that under STV each party nominates one more candidate than the seats they expect to win, That's been the case in Ireland and Northern Ireland, with practice in Scotland settling in that way. However in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory parties nominate a full slate - partially because of requirements for grouping on the ballot paper, partially because mid-term vacancies are filled by countbacks instead of by-elections or co-options but also because voters there are much more likely to stay within the group. And in Malta parties sometimes nominate more candidates than there are vacancies. For all the lambasting of RefUK as though this decision was taken based on how elections work in England they could just as easily have followed Australian practice (given their love of Aussie immigration policies) or even thought it was party list like the old EU Parliament elections. Or they could have been listening to the ERS and other STV advocates going on about candidate choice. Or even they're just going for a higher expense limit for a multi-candidate slate. |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,847
|
Post by Crimson King on Aug 27, 2024 12:06:56 GMT
I considering the reasons, would it be reasonable to assume that there is no refuk “branch’ there, and no central organisation as such giving advice (though presumably there is a dno) and these are just two (possibly the only two) members moved there wanting to do their bit
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 27, 2024 13:21:05 GMT
I think the normal expected pattern in e.g. Ireland is that under STV each party nominates one more candidate than the seats they expect to win, That's been the case in Ireland and Northern Ireland, with practice in Scotland settling in that way. However in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory parties nominate a full slate - partially because of requirements for grouping on the ballot paper, partially because mid-term vacancies are filled by countbacks instead of by-elections or co-options but also because voters there are much more likely to stay within the group. And in Malta parties sometimes nominate more candidates than there are vacancies. For all the lambasting of RefUK as though this decision was taken based on how elections work in England they could just as easily have followed Australian practice (given their love of Aussie immigration policies) or even thought it was party list like the old EU Parliament elections. Or they could have been listening to the ERS and other STV advocates going on about candidate choice. Or even they're just going for a higher expense limit for a multi-candidate slate. In NI there's more variance, and a lot of times parties only nominate the number of candidates they expect to win. SDLP tend to nominate more candidates and SF fewer, but it's hard to tell how much that is strategy and how much is the SDLP overestimating their support and SF underestimating theirs. |
|
|
|
Post by kevinf on Aug 27, 2024 14:25:15 GMT
I think the normal expected pattern in e.g. Ireland is that under STV each party nominates one more candidate than the seats they expect to win, That's been the case in Ireland and Northern Ireland, with practice in Scotland settling in that way. However in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory parties nominate a full slate - partially because of requirements for grouping on the ballot paper, partially because mid-term vacancies are filled by countbacks instead of by-elections or co-options but also because voters there are much more likely to stay within the group. And in Malta parties sometimes nominate more candidates than there are vacancies. For all the lambasting of RefUK as though this decision was taken based on how elections work in England they could just as easily have followed Australian practice (given their love of Aussie immigration policies) or even thought it was party list like the old EU Parliament elections. Or they could have been listening to the ERS and other STV advocates going on about candidate choice. Or even they're just going for a higher expense limit for a multi-candidate slate. Talk me through the Malta example… |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Aug 27, 2024 14:43:13 GMT
On Friday Cllr David Walsh (Labour, St Michael's Ward, Coventry) will be resigning to take up a new job. I'm posting this now, rather than then, because it's already mentioned in the published papers for next week's full council. It's likely that the by-election will be called for October half term.
|
|
