UK: AV Referendum, your vote?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=77962
Printed Date: August 09 2025 at 04:46
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: UK: AV Referendum, your vote?
Posted By: Kilgannon
Subject: UK: AV Referendum, your vote?
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:27
|
So, who in the UK is turning out for the vote on AV and what, if you aren't opposed to revealing your choice, are you voting? ------------- 
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Replies:
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:29
|
AV stands for American what now?
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:32
|
Wondered when this would show up here. It'll be the first vote i'm eligible for so I may turn out. If I do vote it'll be No. The campaigns have been incredibly off putting though, especially as my opinion is against AV I don't particularly want to be associated with the ridiculous No Campaign. -------------  
|
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:47
Unfortunately nothing American  , 'tis the 'Alternative Vote' potentially to replace the First Past The Post system, with ranking your choice of party/candidate 1,2,3 etc and your vote gets re-allocated as the voting goes on should your first choice be eliminated (by being the lowest voted for party), subsequent rounds only occuring should no party achieve 50%+ of the vote.^ As for ridiculous campaigning: +1 -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Epignosis wrote:Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:54
|
AV is a crap idea, it's not PR, but it's marginally better than what we've got at the moment. The No campaign is being less than honest and that's what's wrong with politics in this country. When they stoop this low you do have to wonder what it is they are affraid of exactly. I'm voting Yes because I have little choice in the matter - voting No will be taken as a vindication of the First Past the Post system and I cannot allow that. First Past The Post means that whoever gets elected has the support of just over 1/3rd of the country, just under 1/3rd of the country votes for the opposition and about 1/3rd of country votes for people who have no say in how the country is run, and that's a really really crap system no matter how you look at it. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 17:56
|
^ Couldn't agree more, felt the need to wash my hands after reading David Cameron's 'Why I'll be voting No' leaflet that came through the door this morning. So much misinformation and propaganda. -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Ozexpat
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 18:29
|
As an Australian living in the UK, I understand more than many in this country how the Preferential Voting system works. In Oz it is compulsory from your 18th birthday to vote. Australia uses this system and there is nothing to be scared of. The basic premise is that you vote for who you want to win. Then, if they don't gain enough votes to win, your next preference goes to the one you want to win more than the others. It is more representative because, while your first choice might not have enough votes, your next choice may have. It's not a black and white decision between winning and losing. If there are two parties that have similar views to yours, then you can vote for both without compromise. You simply decide between them which you prefer to other parties' policies. Thus you never "waste" a vote ie. voting for the Greens (because you believe their policies) in a solid Conservative seat. Under the current system if you live in a solid Conservative, LibDem or Labour seat, and you don't agree with them, your vote for any other party would be wasted. However, under the AV, your vote for the party of your choice would count. It hands back power to the individual. How many times have you said/heard "well I didn't vote for 'em" ? It doesn't automatically mean that minority parties win but it does send a clearer measage to the major parties as to what the public are thinking. This then effects policy. It's a win-win. ------------- And for a moment when our world had filled the skies, Magic turned our eyes, To feast on the treasure set for our strange device |
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 18:33
|
Agreed, my problem with a lot of the leaflets going round is that they claim it's confusing and unfair; which I feel gives very little credit to the British public. As you say, if I vote Lib Dem (hypothetically) but they come in last place, my vote doesn't then disappear into un-countable oblivion, it gets to be used in a meaningful way between the final two parties deemed most popular by EVERYONE. -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Ozexpat
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 18:42
|
Exactly. Nobodies vote is wasted. The main parties may win but it is very clear where the publics preferences lie. Policy is then structured around this. ------------- And for a moment when our world had filled the skies, Magic turned our eyes, To feast on the treasure set for our strange device |
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: May 01 2011 at 19:18
|
I would be more in favour of them bring Compulsory Voting to this country -------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:30
|
Am voting No. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:44
|
I am against this 100%! I will be mailing in my vote tomorrow. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:52
------------- What? |
Posted By: Badabing666
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:53
------------- 
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:56
Good. For the mailing address I can just send it to "England" right? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 04:59
Better follow instructions and address it to President Clegg just to be sure.
 http://dailyelection.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/say-no-to-president-clegg-poster-no-to-av.jpg" rel="nofollow - ------------- What? |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 05:03
 |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 05:22
Most part ageed. This is no choice at all. Trouble is if you vote for AV and it changes there will never be another vote again in my life time!! aggh! Who was it who decided that the only choice was to be this? At the moment I am tempted to spoil my vote
 ------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: Syzygy
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 07:15
|
I'm voting 'no'. I'm not opposed to electoral reform per se, but this is an unwieldy system that is not a real alternative to what we have at the moment. I would be happy with a single transferable vote (which would make a real difference in marginal constituencies) but under the AV system my vote could (unlikely but possible) go towards the BNP or UKIP, which I'm really not comfortable with. ------------- 'Like so many of you I've got my doubts about how much to contribute to the already rich among us...' Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 07:53
|
I will be voting yes, an absolute no-brainer as far as I am concerned. BTW - votes will not go to UKIP, BNP etc. In fact, this system makes it harder for them to make inroads - that's why they are opposing it. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 07:55
The "BNP" tact is is the electoral equivalent of Godwin's law. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 08:28
 I think you don't understand it. You don't have to vote for any more than 1 party if you don't want... And you don't have to 'rank' any party you don't want to rank.-------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 08:35
|
I just wish we could have a vote about the electoral system in America.
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Davidf60
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 09:40
| I shall be voting Yes, because I believe it's a better system, (hopefully). |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 11:09
This. I feel the same way, Dean. I'll be voting Yes too. One slight issue with AV I do have is that people won't fully grasp the concept and will just vote for one candidate anyway and secondly, I may find only one or two candidates suitable and I wouldn't want someone I did like's vote going onto the overall vote of someone else I may not like. Unless I've understood something incorrectly? But yes, it's not full PR, which I'd much prefer. -------------   
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 11:49
The AV system is still "one man one vote" ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 11:58
|
The amount of yes votes here is worrying me. I'm hoping that non proggers vote no. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 12:18
From conversations I've had at my workplace I think you've little to worry about - the disinformation and misinformation of the No Campaign propaganda machine has worked its magic and most people really do believe that AV is the work of Satan and all his little wizards. ------------- What? |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 12:22
|
THere's even a bit of propaganda at the top of this page! agggh ------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 12:37
|
^ hahaha yes - not all can see that googleAd of course. Even M@X makes cash on the No Campaign. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:02
I've not really taken any notice of campaigning. What is wrong with the campaign for no? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:07
I know you don't have to rank all candidates and also that you can just vote for one, if need be, I think I mentioned that in the main part of my post, Dean. I thought the least ranked of your votes got transferred to another, so to make up the 50%? That's the part I was querying. So I could rank a Green in 4th, for example and when that candidate gets knocked out, their vote gets added to the one with the most, so that could be a Conservative? Am I wrong in this? -------------
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:17
|
I don't really care as long as they keep this constituency MP system in place. I have used my MP with great effective when I have run my head into red tape and stupidities from the local council. An email or a personal appearance at the MP's constiuency meeting is a very effective tool to kill off any nonsense. In some cases, the MP cannot do anything but to kick the ball to the local councilors. But that kick itself is very effective because the councilors will listen to the MP and work their socks off for me. That if my complaint is a good one. I very much prefer this constituency MP system instead of the party list we had in Norway which did nothing at all for the local constituent. In countries with party lists, you are nothing as a single person and the red tape and the councils will always win in a conflict. Not so here in the UK. |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:23
Shocking scare tactics from a largely reactionary and hostile conservative establishment & media. Getting a Yes to AV will not, as they state, mean a victory for marginal nutters such as BNP or SWP - quite the opposite. And when they say that FPTP has served us well for many years, what they mean is that it has served a Conservative Party very well in keeping them in power for much of the past 150 years. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:40
The AV system is still "one man one vote"
------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:43
However, that is irrelevant if you've not taken any notice of the campaigning - which begs the question, why are you voting "No"? ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 13:48
Because I am happy with the current system and I dislike change. I am anti PR too. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:01
 ------------- What? |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:01
|
Ah good, then I have only one real issue with AV then. This confirm my Yes vote even more.
-------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:16
No ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:30
------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:36
Sometimes the people i vote for win...sometimes they don't. It does favour the two party system of course so if you vote green I guess you got no chance. Would AV change that though? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 14:56
Whether anyone likes it or not (given boggieman Clegg's current unpopularity) we have three major parties in the UK - the Lib/Dems have the support of a quarter of the population yet hold less than 9% of the seats in parliament. I believe AV will go someway to redressing that imbalance.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 15:00
You may have a point. But I don't understand why anyone would want a second or third choice. Do you want to vote for your man or not? I don't really understand "Well if he doesn't get in I suppose he will do" Besides that it still leaves my resitence to change. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 15:02
|
But then if you are of the mindset that you don't want anyone but your first choice, then you can still only vote for one party. -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 15:24
We make these kinds of choices all the time. Have you never said "If you're going to the shops could you get me a bottle of Coke, and if they don't have that I'll have a Tango" or something similar?
------------- What? |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:15
|
Yes but there's a lot of difference between a Socialist candidate and a Right wing candidate.
-------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:39
That is a specious argument. Soft drinks aren't politics. But if I go for Coke, I won't buy something else.(unless it's Pepsi} ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:46
|
The only message I can find in the Yes campaign is that they want AV to combat the problem of not enough people voting. So why not bring in Compulsory Voting rather than reform the whole voting system?
Not to defend the horrifying No Campaign, the PR from every side has been ridiculous and will probably put most people off voting -------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:47
What about the right not to vote? As soon as its compulsive I stop. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: topographicbroadways
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:50
What about the right not to vote? It's a democracy why elect our leaders if nobody has to vote? -------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:51
Why indeed. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:51
------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:53
I think I know what he means. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:54
It's far from being a specious argument because it's not an argument - it's an analogy - if the soft-drink analogy doesn't work for you I'm sure you can think of a similar analogy where you give a second option if the first is unavailable. ------------- What? |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:55
I think he's saying that if you went to a shop for Coke you wouldn't come back with a Tango. ------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:55
Ok,it's a bad analogy then. I accept that.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:56
|
^Why would the first be unavailable in an election? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 16:57
Thats it! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 17:19
|
Kind of. I'm saying that Coke and Tango are soft drinks and buying one or the other isn't that important, unless you don't happen to like one of them. Besides, I prefer Pepsi over Coke and you'd have to be a pretty terrible shop to not have any left of one of them. Whilst me voting for a Tory is a very bad idea as I don't agree with hardly anything they have to say. -------------
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:07
|
*sigh* I knew some
 ne would say they didn't like Coke. I f*cking knew it. If you don't like Coke then in the bloody analogy you wouldn't have picked it as your first choice, just as if you only drink one kind of pissing soft drink then in the bloody analogy you would have selected some other commodity like Indian and Chinese food or Vans and Nike trainers or Charmin and Izal bog-roll. Analogies only work at the level they are defined and in the context they are used - disproving the pissing analogy does not disprove the point it's designed to illustrate and the only thing that makes it a bad analogy is allowing room for some joker to arse about with it. Try this one then - you're in a restaurant and you chose something off the menu, the waiter says - sorry chief, that's off - okay, you say, I'll have something else, but the waiter says - oh no sunshine, you only get one choice. Once again: if you don't like Tory policy or don't like the conniving old-school-tie chinless wonder they've selected as your local candidate then you won't be voting for him would you, and you certainly won't be picking him as your first, second, third, forth or fifth choice so no matter what happens your vote will never, ever be counted as a Tory vote. However if you like the Labour policies, but think the Greens make sense and rather fancy the pretty Independent candidate then perhaps you may be able to put those in order of preference and just maybe won't be too upset if your second or third choice wins. ------------- What? |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:20
|
I actually agree with AV, so it's not an issue. I think we usually only get about 5 or 6 candidates anyway. One will be a Tory, so that rules him/her out for me. The independent I usually have no idea about. That pretty much leaves Labour, Lib Dems and Green Party and maybe one other (usually UKIP who I also won't be choosing). So although I agree with AV, I wish there were more choices. Maybe AV will bring in more choices. So I may only be ranking 3 or 4 out of those 6. I guess that might be normal behaviour though, as conversely, a Tory won't be voting Labour. In fact, I can see Tories only voting for the one party, unless there's a Tory-minded Independent. -------------
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:34
|
I so don't know what the hell this is about... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:36
------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:37
Why doesn't that surprise me.  ------------- What? |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:40
|
Is this a referendum to vote on changing audio/video standards for the entire UK population to HDMI or something? -------------
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:44
| It's about who heads up the AV club in Parliament. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:45
|
Yup. For 98% of the population that's exactly what it is. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 20:47
Well, to be fair, there's a lot of Pippa Middleton news they need to be current on. |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 02 2011 at 22:27
Yep. Wasn't Farage an ex-Tory? -------------
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 04:29
Ok, Ok Ok! If I change my vote to Yes will you be happy? The Analogy is I went to buy Coke, they didn't have coke so I said "That makes me so angry" and I bought a bottle of vodka and got pissed instead. You will all suffer my drunken rage due to my second option!!!!! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 04:29
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 06:09
|
^ because they might get eliminated as lowest placed candidate -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 06:19
So if my first choice was BNP but he didn't get first place...it goes to my second choice? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 06:42
Your second choice....... let's say http://www.socialist-labour-party.org.uk" rel="nofollow - Senile Labour Party ; Arthur Scargill's lot. If they get eliminated, it then goes down to a third preference you have noted down, let's say Labour Party. It goes like this until one candidate get's over 50 % of the votes. Simple. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 06:43
|
You could end up with no-ones first choice. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 06:49
|
That's a fair assessment. Today's situation though means you get MPs elected in with 20-40 % of the popular support. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 08:06
------------- What? |
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 11:51
If your first choice was BNP your vote wouldn't move to your second choice unless BNP got eliminated. So, your votes go 1) BNP 2) UKIP 3) Conservatives The votes are counted for round 1, and are as follows Labour 25% Lib Dems 18% Conservatives 18% BNP 17% UKIP 15% Green 7% Green gets eliminated, their votes get redistributed to their second choices. YOUR VOTE is still BNP. The second round is counted: Labour 32% Lib Dems 18% Conservatives 18% BNP 17% UKIP 15% UKIP eliminated, votes distributed, yours still BNP, third round: Conservatives 33% Labour 32% Lib Dems 18% BNP 17% BNP eliminated, votes redistributed including yours, your second choice is UKIP, but they've been eliminated so they look to your third choice, and allocated accordingly, fourth round: Conservatives 50% Labour 32% Lib Dems 18% Lib Dems go, votes redistributed, yours now with Tories, last round: Conservatives 51% Labour 49% Tories win. -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 11:52
This! ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 11:55
Thank you. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 11:57
Pleasure  -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 12:01
Cider Country......Somerset? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 12:23
|
I'm applying for a UK citizenship so I can vote No and get discounts on Arsenal games... -------------
|
Posted By: Kilgannon
Date Posted: May 03 2011 at 12:47
Bristol, still much cider  -------------
http://www.last.fm/user/r3m3dylan3" rel="nofollow - last.fm Profile |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 10:49
Also this. |
Posted By: refugee
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 13:06
|
While far from perfect, I prefer proportional representation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation" rel="nofollow - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation Still AV seems better than FPTP. ------------- He say nothing is quite what it seems; I say nothing is nothing (Peter Hammill) |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 13:29
|
These adverts on this site for no to AV are realy f**king pissing me off! Say no to Nick Clegg expensive complicated etc. Makes me more likely to vote Yes
Can we get rid please?
Just cos people don't like Clegg they shouldn't use that as a reason to vote No to AV. And too complicated? they think we're all too stupid! f**kers!
------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 13:32
 Too right!. On issues such as this, the site should either not bother, or include a reference to the other side for the sake of balance.I will be voting yes as one of those utterly fed up with being taken for a stupid f**ker. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 13:43
|
Aha! They've gone! (Thank you!) .
Is that just me?
Edit: No the f**kers are back again!
Anyway its either Yes or spoiled ballot time! (Which is a vote in my book fo PR)
------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 14:15
Trouble is, those ads will be automatically selected via keyword detection - the admin don't individually select which ads will appear. The No campaign have had a LOT more money than the Yes campaign to spend on advertising and other forms of aggressive campaigning which is why you won't see Yes ads on this page any time soon. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 14:29
|
Dumb American question time. Is AV going to be used to declare which party will form a government (who will be the PM, etc)? I mean, you'll still be able to have multiple parties represented in Parliament (for example if you want a Lib Dem as your MP)? |
Posted By: VanderGraafKommandöh
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 14:36
|
Not to select a PM, no, they do that at Party level but they actually use AV already for that, I gather. Tell me if I'm wrong here? Of course, that depends on which party wins the General Election, which I believe would use AV it was brought in. However, if it does come in, it'll be used to select councillors and MPs in local elections. -------------
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 04 2011 at 21:17
| So basically you're to be left with two parties in Parliament with AV. |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 04:52
No, there'll be about as broad a spread as there currently is (mostly Labour and Tory, a reasonable chunk of Lib Dems, a scattering of MPs from Irish, Welsh and Scottish parties and, if we're lucky, a Green or two). AV is a system which will certainly benefit the major parties more than the minority parties, but not to the same ludicrous extent as FPTP, where an MP can win their seat on less than 30% of the overall vote. |
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 06:21
Because of all the garbage being broadcasted on the matter recently, I've been avoiding this thread, but that said, many thanks to Dean in this post:
Just about sums up my feelings on the matter - don't ask me why, or ask me to justify my views; in either case I will refer you to my far more articulate colleague  ------------- 
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 07:44
|
FPTP doesn't work in any other situation except (general) elections. Using FPTP principles the Tory party "won" the most seats in parliament so should have formed the Government without the help of the Lib/Dems. But they couldn't do that because they didn't have a majority and could lose every house vote since more MPs oppose them than support them. On reflection that strikes me as a "good thing" because that is the result of the FPTP voting system anyway - more people oppose the elected candidate than support him so it seems logical that any bill, white paper or statute that he presents to Parliament should be met with representative (proportional) opposition. Perhaps a solution is that every MP's vote is only worth the same percentage as his winning electoral vote - perhaps then MPs would see the logic of AV a little clearer. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 07:48
Too late for more thoughts on the issue for me. I already voted. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 07:53
Sorry, I was being a bit obtuse yesterday. I see that all this does is insure whatever MP gets elected in a "district" or whatever you call it gets a majority vote as a result of AV. Doesn't seem like that bad of an idea, what are the pitfalls that you guys see with this? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 05 2011 at 08:02
That's the catch - there are no apparent pitfall. The No campaign has made some wild claims, but none of those have stood up to scrutiny. ------------- What? |