stv.vote // Clackmannanshire, Scotland Clackmannanshire South

The Clackmannanshire, Scotland May 2022 was held on May 5, 2022. 4 seats were filled using Single Transferable Vote from 7 candidates over 5 rounds.

In STV, candidates who reach the quota (761 votes) are elected. Surplus votes above the quota are transferred to voters' next preferences. When no candidate reaches the quota, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their votes are transferred.

Elected candidates:

  1. Kenneth John Earle
  2. Ellen Forson
  3. Bryan Quinn
  4. Craig Holden

Votes needed to win: 761 votes 3,8034+1+1\left\lfloor \frac{3,803}{4 + 1} \right\rfloor + 1

Votes needed to win: 761Kenneth John EarleElected in round 1Ellen ForsonElected in round 1Bryan QuinnElected in round 2Craig HoldenElected in round 6William MarlinEliminated in round 5Hugh van LieropEliminated in round 4Matthew ReillyEliminated in round 3

STV Rounds

This Sankey diagram shows the votes of each remaining candidate at each round, as well as the breakdown of votes transferred when each candidate was elected (surplus transfers) or eliminated.

Note that the tabulation (but not the winner) may differ from the official count. You can read more about why this is.

Round 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Kenneth John EarleEllen ForsonBryan QuinnCraig HoldenWilliam MarlinHugh van LieropMatthew ReillyExhausted23.1%21%19.5%16.9%16.5%20%20%20.2%18.3%16.7%20%20%20%18.4%16.7%20%20%20%18.9%16.8%20%20%20%19.7%17.6%Kenneth John EarleEllen ForsonBryan QuinnCraig HoldenWilliam MarlinExhausted

Candidate Clustering

This visualization shows candidates positioned based on second-choice transfers. Candidates whose voters frequently rank each other appear closer together, forming natural "clusters" or voting blocs.

Distance is based on the First Alternate table below — if voters who rank candidate A first often rank candidate B second (and vice versa), they'll appear close together. In STV, proportional representation means winners should be distributed across different clusters, representing diverse voter preferences.

Circle size indicates first-round vote share. Green circles are elected candidates. Hover over candidates to see their top second-choice transfers.

EarleForsonHoldenMarlinQuinnReillyLieropLegendElectedNot elected

Pairwise Preferences

For every pair of candidates, this table shows the fraction of voters who preferred one to the other. A preference means that either a voter ranks a candidate ahead of the other, or ranks one candidate but does not list the other. Ballots which rank neither candidate are not counted towards the percent counts.

Note: In multi-seat STV elections, pairwise preferences show overall voter sentiment but don't directly determine outcomes, since votes transfer through multiple elimination and surplus rounds.

Less-preferred Candidate
Preferred Candidate
Kenneth John Earle
Ellen Forson
Craig Holden
Bryan Quinn
William Marlin
Hugh van Lierop
Matthew Reilly
Kenneth John Earle0%47.5%46.6%48.7%69.2%84.4%84%
Ellen Forson52.5%0%54.6%54%65.8%78.1%89.4%
Craig Holden53.4%45.4%0%55.1%67%78.4%89.9%
Bryan Quinn51.3%46%44.9%0%66.8%82%88.1%
William Marlin30.8%34.2%33%33.2%0%63.7%64.9%
Hugh van Lierop15.6%21.9%21.6%18%36.3%0%53.7%
Matthew Reilly16%10.6%10.1%11.9%35.1%46.3%0%

First Alternate

For every pair of candidates, this table shows the fraction of voters who ranked one candidate first ranked the other candidate second.

Second Choice
First Choice
Kenneth John Earle
Ellen Forson
Craig Holden
Bryan Quinn
William Marlin
Hugh van Lierop
Matthew Reilly
Exhausted
Kenneth John Earle0%8.8%11.1%20.3%20.8%8%2.1%29.1%
Ellen Forson3.6%0%83.1%8.4%0.3%0.5%0.6%3.5%
Craig Holden5.9%77%0%7.6%0.6%0.9%0.6%7.3%
Bryan Quinn22.6%26%19.9%0%8.4%5.1%2.7%15.2%
William Marlin43.4%0.5%1%11.3%0%10.7%1.1%32.1%
Hugh van Lierop20.6%2.9%19.1%19.1%17.6%0%7.4%13.2%
Matthew Reilly13.6%15.9%22.7%15.9%0%20.5%0%11.4%

This report was generated by stv.vote and may be reproduced under CC-BY. Learn more about stv.vote.

card