Cable Forum - To AV, or not to AV?

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - To AV, or not to AV? (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33677382)

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35229248)

Yes, why is the vote on AV done under first-past-the-post system?

Who said it was ;)

As there are only two choices, then one of the choices will get at least 50% of the vote (which is the whole reason for AV)

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35229402)

I understand where you are coming from (and agree), but I believe most of them were in extremely safe seats (Labour and Tory) where they weigh the votes, not count them, so I am not sure if this is a valid proposition.

True in many cases but not all, I suspect a certain recently jailed MP would have been out on his behind if av was available in his constituency. Robin Cook held mostly 5 figure majorities but I think Devine was down to a couple of thousand. Some tactical voting by Libs to SNP would have got rid of his sorry tail.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

I am opposed to AV purely because i firmly believe in one person one vote and this system would give some more then one vote or more to the point their one vote would count more then others thats not fair and it isn't democracy. Lib dems of course will support this they would support flick of a coin if they thought it would give them more mp's.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35229228)

Can't believe we've not had a thread on this. Or perhaps it's not so surprising, as very few people outside of the Westminster village seem to give a smeg.

What are your views? Will you vote on it today?

We did have a thread...you even posted in it ;) :)

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/20...al-reform.html

I'll be voting "Yes".

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35229253)

I had an open mind on this and have listened to the arguments for and against. I would really prefer to have true PR but otherwise I'll be voting to keep FPTP. AV is just too complex for most voters to understand and can have unintended consequences.

I normally vote first thing when going to get the paper but it started raining here, only a shower so I'll get out later.

What's so complex about ranking candidates in order of preference? Are people too stupid to count past 1?

If you'd prefer PR, then voting No seems strange to me. Yes, AV is not PR, but it's a step in the right direction. If the result is a "No" (which is likely), it will probably completely close the door on any future chance of electoral reform...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

I there are plenty of valid reasons to vote No. However the No campaign has been an utter disgrace, making up complete fabrications in their posters it's a wonder they got away with it. They made up the cost of the Â£250 million to switch to AV (And then had posters with babies saying they needed medical care and not a new voting system) when they included the cost of the referendum itself, voting machines that won't be needed, and invented another Â£50 million from heaven knows where.

Yup. The No campaign has been awful, IMO.

AV will cost Â£250 million? Wrong...

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/...ost-of-av/6410

AV will help the BNP? Wrong...

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/...r-the-bnp/6273

Australia wants to get rid of AV? Wrong...

http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/...tive-vote.html

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

tbf, the "Yes" campaign have sometimes been a little flexible with the facts, re "The Tories elect their leader under AV".....

Neither side have covered themselves in glory, imho.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35229390)

What if there isn't (in my eyes) a suitable second choice...

Then you simply put a "1" against your first choice and that's that.

Quote:

...does that mean that someone else has more choice than me?

No. It just means that they have decided to rank more than the one candidate.

Quote:

I want to vote for who I support, not someone who I really don't support...

Fine, but that shouldn't mean that others shouldn't have that choice :)

As I said, I think the point is that if you don't get your first choice then isn't having your second or third choice better than having no say at all?

Indidentally, this is merely a theoretical discussion for me as I have no real interest in Politics.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35229452)

It's also not true. Your vote isn't worth more than others, not will anyone have more than one vote.

---------- Post added at 14:44 ---------- Previous post was at 14:41 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35229390)

What if there isn't (in my eyes) a suitable second choice - does that mean that someone else has more choice than me? I want to vote for who I support, not someone who I really don't support, which means there will be a lot of tactical voting (2nd and 3rd choices against a party, rather than for).

Lots of tactical voting now. I often don't vote for the party I want to win because it's wasted, I look at who has the best chance of unseating my current MP and vote for them.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35229228)

Voted no

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

I haven't voted and have no intention of doing so.

Given how rarely we get plebiscites in the UK the mere existence of this referendum, it being part of a political power sharing deal rather than anything to do with issues the public do actually care about and want their voices heard on, is an affront.

I'm voting no to having plebiscites for political reasons and have reiterated demand for one on an issue which the public do want to speak about but the politicians don't want to listen to because they know the answer and won't like it.

No to AV, no to the AV referendum. Waste of time and money, if it were full PR sure, this joke of a compromise utterly pointless and a complete waste of 90 million of taxpayer's money.

---------- Post added at 17:22 ---------- Previous post was at 17:19 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErnieBean (Post 35229295)

Which ever wins, the working class will pay, that's those who keep the rest

Cheers for that baseless incitement for class warfare. Actually the middle class and above will pay, that's those who pay the majority of the taxes but ho hum.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Hmmmm, funny business with votes. Couldn't have seen that coming...

http://order-order.com/2011/05/05/av...al-commission/

Quote:

The Electoral Commission has received a large number of complaints from Lancashire amidst claims that voters are not automatically being given referendum ballots along with local election papers.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

We're not very good at referendums here, once they're elected politicians tend to not give a crap what we think about anything.

No local elections in London and the turnout appears to be laughable.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

I'm voting No for the reason that it should be one person one vote.

Pick the candidate you want to vote for and not a few others you might like just in case.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35229653)

No local elections in London and the turnout appears to be laughable.

There was a moderate turnout when I went to vote, mostly the older generations who seemed to be struggling with the 2 votes needed for the Scottish local election voting paper let alone ranking candidates in order of preference.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

Three people who are voting No: David Cameron, Anne Widdecombe and NICK GRIFFIN.

Three very good reasons for me to vote Yes.

Re: To AV, or not to AV?

I need to complain to someone, I registered for postal voting before the last election, since then I get nothing in the post at all, not even the traditional polling card.