Is it democratic to exclude Reform from Scottish political talks?

[Thankyounextnext]

FWIW I voted SNP. But I don't understand how John Swinney can be allowed to exclude a party from talks just because he doesn't agree with their politics?

As shown by the results, a not insignificant number of Scots voted Reform - how is it democratic to exclude them but not Labour, who gained the same number of seats? In my opinion this will make Reform voters feel further alienated. I never thought I'd agree with anything Farage said but honestly what is the point in having a vote then excluding a large proportion of voters from having a voice?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cddpevvv97jo

The loony Greens got about half of the Reform votes and the Reform vote share increased pretty much everywhere - that should tell you something. Swinnney is more of an idiot than was previously thought if he ignores them and the people they represent completely - unless he wants their vote share to continue to rise, pf course.

The Party with the most seats can try to form a coalition or pact with whoever they want, it would make no sense for them to form a pact with a Party that they fundamentally disagree with about everything. Why would they?

In the Scottish Parliament anything goes. There are no checks and balances.

All Swinney needs to do is persuade another party to back his election as First Minister and then to back legislation.

He can do this in a case by case basis or form a coalition.

He can include and exclude whoever he wants.

i can’t imagine what the SNP and Reform would agree on

He's not talking about forming a coalition.

It's childish, sixth form politics. No less than I would expect from Swinney.

It isn't undemocratic it's exactly how our democratic system works ..in 2010 the conservatives formed a coalition with the lib Dems, they didn't include labour in those talks. In 2015 the conservative had a supply and demand agreement with the DUP no other parties were consulted even though they had many more seats, before then in the 70s we had the lib/lab pact.
The Reform MSPs will still have their vote on the Scottish parliament and will still have the their role to represent their constituents they just won't be invited to work with the ruling party to form the Government because their views are completely opposite.
That is how our system works. There is no obligation for any Party to include any other Party in talks. It doesn't mean they won't serve all the people or that Reform MSPs can't put their views forward or represent their constituents. Just like the Opposition parties always do.

16% of the vote is proportionally very significant, considering the vote in Scotland was split between 6 parties.
It’s about 1 in 6 of the electorate. The rhetoric made out it was more like 1 in 1000

They got 50% of the SNP's votes, don't forget - and double what the loony Greens got. If anything, they are underrepresented in Holyrood in proportion to the vote share.

Well he did a pretty good job of ignoring the loony Tory contingent in the last session, despite their antics and despite them having more members than Reform will. They achieved absolutely nothing, and their vote has just cratered, so it seems ignoring right-wing fuds and their parliamentary histrionics is a pretty viable approach in Scotland.

If anything, they are underrepresented in Holyrood in proportion to the vote share

No they are not.

The only reason they have any representation at all is because of underlying low-level support in all areas leading to an overly-generous Regional representation, courtesy of the fact they were totally incapable of winning a single Constituency seat anywhere.

They even came up short in Banff where they were dealt almost perfect conditions, and yet still the electorate rejected them.

If you listened to Offord prior to the election it's clear he expected to win at least a couple of Constituencies and have perhaps 20 or so elected members. The fact they couldn't win a single constituency outright is a bit of an embarrassment considering how much Reform cheerleading has gone on over the past while.

Then there is the fact that in a pure FPTP system every single vote they attracted would could for naught as they'd have precisely zero MSP's, so by comparative standards to say, Westminster, they should be thanking their lucky stars they even have 17 MSP's.

Yes they are. I'll repeat - they got half of the number of votes that the SNP did, and double what the green clowns did. Sure, the voting system gives us one thing - but as everyone's vote is equal and carries the same value, it's quite clear that the number of seats they got doesn't represent what the voters are saying. The longer that's ignored (or people like you refer to them as fuds - ffs) the more likely it is that we'll see a steady rise in those numbers.

I'll repeat - they got half of the number of votes that the SNP did

You don't have to repeat it again, you've already repeated it several times, and it's of no more significance or relevance than it was the first time you mentioned it.

The system is the same for every party. Even your "clown" Greens managed two Constituency wins, and even then they still gained a significant number of Regional reps.

Reform didn't manage a single Constituency, so this automatically places them at an advantage re Regional representation.

What "vote share" they tallied relative to the SNP is wholly and utterly immaterial, because you are comparing apples with oranges.

The SNP have support both broad and concentrated enough that they cleaned up on Constituencies. Reform couldn't take a single one because their support is limited to the headbanger element dispersed across the entirety of Scotland, but thankfully not concentrated enough in any single place to give them a solitary directly elected member.

The longer that's ignored, the more likely it is that we'll see a steady rise in those numbers

It's not being "ignored". They got the 17 Regional members the dispersal of their vote share merits. There is no obligation upon anyone to entertain those members beyond that.

The longer that's ignored (or people like you refer to them as fuds - ffs)

You've a brass neck considering you are incapable of using the word "Green" without prefacing it with "loony" or "clown".

Away and have a word with yourself.

You're not getting it, are you? Never mind, it's ok - the voter numbers don't lie.

16%

Half of the SNP, double the Greens

Still wholly irrelevant.

17 MSP's is the pertinent part.

Not irrelevant - but you keep sticking your head in the sand.

Yes it’s designed to not return a majority government.
But that doesn’t mean two parties necessarily have to work together They could try to form a coalition, they could try to have a confidence and supply agreement, they could try to have cross party talks on a case by case basis or they could just try to run as a minority government.

I can’t see any real point in them talking to reform at this point tbh, what would they agree on? It’s not like reform won’t be able to talk in parliament or take part in first ministers questions, their voters still get represented.

Yes, it's irrelevant.

Come back when they've doubled their vote share, have concentrated support, because then they will be a viable electoral proposition. Until then they'll remain nothing but a fringe party for the moron element in the population.

Awaits the inevitable "but 50% of the SNP...."

I can't hear you - there's too much sand in the way.

I didn’t vote reform but thought the same when I saw that story from the SNP. Fundamentally I think it’s poor politics. You will piss of those reform voters and alienate them. You don’t have to agree with any reform policies but you need to deliver a better life for all citizens. You should also try to understand the issues that people have.

I don’t believe the average reform voter is how they’re portrayed. Many people aren’t active in politics and some would have disliked the numbers of immigrants that have come year after year and voted on that single issue without paying attention to much else.

If you are trying to listen to the internet, then I think I'm beginning to understand why you apparently struggle with cognition.

And if you're taking that literally then it explains so much.

You're really taking the election result well, eh? 😊

Was this meant to be a note to self?