Wider representation:Explain - EMS well broadly reflect how people voted as in PR systems the percentage number of seats a party wins will roughly be proportional to the percentage number of votes received in the election.Example - In the 2016 Scottish Parliament election the SNP received around 44% of the vote and 49% of their overall seats in parliament. Therefore, an advantage of AMS is that the election broadly reflects how people voted.It retains the link between the voter and representative via the FPTP constituency vote:Explain - this is useful as each voter has an accountable single constituency representative under FPTP which is retained under AMS.Example - there are 73 constituency MSPS elected under FPTP and Scottish Parliament elections and they are directly accountable to voters in their constituency; the constituency MSP for Glasgow Cathcart is James Dornan of the SNP party. Therefore, an advantage of AMS is that it keeps the link between voters and their elected representative.Reduces tactical voting:Explain - this is when you believe your party will not win so you decide you will vote for the most popular closest political party to your own to prevent an opposing, completely different political party winning.Example - in Scotland many people may be Conservative voters and do not like the SNP, further they feel that perhaps the Labour Party has a bigger chance of winning so they may change votes so that the SNP cannot win, effectively giving labour a false vote.Smaller parties more chance:Explain - on the first paper many people would side with their main or the bigger political parties, however on the second paper they have another list of parties which they may decide to vote for a smaller party.Example - The Green party in the 2003 election gained seven seats in the Scottish parliament under AMS, something that would have been incredibly unlikely without AMS and with a system such as FTTP.