Thread by @BallotBoxScot

Today in equal opportunities reminders - it isn't correct to describe many votes cast in an STV election, as we use for Scottish Councils, as being "tactical". It's not impossible to vote tactically under STV, especially if someone confuses their system, but it is harder.

A tactical vote is, broadly speaking, one which doesn't match a given voter's genuine preference, often because of a perception that their preferred party "can't win". FPTP is well known for inducing an element of tactical voting, given only one candidate can win the seat.

So the classical example would be a voter prefers the Triangle Party, but they are weak in their constituency. That voter really dislikes the Circle Party who hold the seat, but the Square Party came close to beating them last time, so they vote Square.

That's tactical.

Under STV, that voter knows their vote can transfer. So they vote Triangle 1, Square 2, Circle 3.

This isn't tactical, as they haven't in any way broken with their genuine preferences to try and get a "least worst" outcome - they have used the system exactly as it's intended!

Breaking with neutral party names, I most often see this from SNP supporters as "Unionist Tactical Voting".

The Constitution HAS become a huge dividing line, and if someone preferences Pro-U parties ahead of Pro-I, that's not inherently tactical. It's what STV is meant for.

BUT ALSO - It simply isn't the case that people are blanket voting like that anyway. Data from Bridge of Don pending, but here's an example from East Kilbride a few weeks ago, showing where second preferences went. It's a much messier picture.

In that example around as many Labour voters marked the SNP & Greens 2nd as marked Lib Dems & Conservatives. Meanwhile, going the other way, despite some perception that SNP-Green is a closed pool, in reality plenty of voters for Pro-I parties do mark Pro-U parties 2nd.

The short version of this is that, as ever, voters as a whole are a lot more complicated than the hyper-partisan Twitter minority are. Disapproving of the way someone votes doesn't make it "tactical", and STV transfers are far less clear cut than people often assume.

I'd further add that constant accusations of "tactical voting" for using STV exactly as it's intended have the same effect as the denials of the democratic legitimacy of List MSPs - they undermine our perfectly sound democratic systems, and increase the toxicity of our discourse.

Every major party in Scotland has benefitted at some point and in some places from our use of PR systems. More importantly, voters benefit from more reflective representation. In undermining our systems, we all lose out.