Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 45 total)
  • Just Say 'No'
  • CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    I’ve given the AV idea some thought and am fairly sure I’ll vote No, thought i’d test the ideas here…

    It strikes me that AV is only useful if, as a voter, you feel you have a viable second choice. I can see how it might suit Lib or Con Voters as they are pretty close to the same thing, in the current environment, and given the coalition we can see that each can tolerate the other. However as a Lab / Left voter. There is no alternative, I don’t want either of the others and can only place one vote. AV then seems to me to provide ConDems the opportunity to vote for twice for their candidates (at the most cycnical, to vote Tory twice). I don’t want them to be able to do that

    What flaw?

    edd
    Full Member

    I agree – I think NO AV is the way forward (ie FPTP).

    wwaswas
    Full Member

    However as a Lab / Left voter. There is no alternative

    Greens seem to be fairly left of centre on a lot of their policies?

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    Onzadog
    Free Member

    Does anyone know why we’re only being offered fptp and av? Why don’t we get the option of pr?

    wwaswas
    Full Member

    Why don’t we get the option of pr?

    because Cameron knew he woudln;t get the rest of the tories to support him if he offered it to Clegg. They think they can win on FPTP vs AV.

    GaryLake
    Free Member

    It strikes me that AV is only useful if, as a voter, you feel you have a viable second choice.

    So do you assume that everyone like you only has one viable choice?

    Luckily, we all get to vote on this for a change!

    scaredypants
    Full Member

    It strikes me that AV is only useful if, as a voter, you feel you have a viable second choice

    No – only if you feel that all other choices are as bad as each other. If you’d rather lib than con, or green than either, AV gives you a small chance of achievig it

    j_me
    Free Member

    Why don’t we get the option of pr?

    Conservatives would never agree to that so the Condems came up with this as a compromise

    A vote for yes could be interpreted as a vote in favour of electoral reform, and may lead to a referendum for PR in the future. A vote for no will be interpreted as a vote in favour of the FPTP system and PR wont be on the table any time soon.

    AV isn’t ideal IMO but it’s a step in the right direction.

    BermBandit
    Free Member

    Why don’t we get the option of pr?

    Appallingly bad negotiation on the part of Clegg perhaps?

    scaredypants
    Full Member

    the argument for PR will come if/when AV shows that the “minor party” vote is actually larger than current voting suggests (but that their supporters are currently making the least worst alternative as their only viable choice undr FPtP)

    Onzadog
    Free Member

    I’ll be voting for av as a stepping stone to pr.

    wwaswas
    Full Member

    I think AV suits people who are ‘Anyone but X voters’ as it means you’re more likley to avoid the candidate you don’t want. Otherwise there’s not much to recommend it.

    uwe-r
    Free Member

    AV is a good thing for all smaller parties as it eliminates tactical voting to avoid splitting a vote. I.e. i would vote green but don’t want the tories or lib dems so i will vote labour.

    or theoretically, I wont vote for new leftwing party as it will split the left wing vote so i stick with labour! AV gives the option to vote for one or two parties without letting in a third.

    If you want to encourage the alternatives to the big parties then AV is better than FPTP

    However for green you could substitute with all the other nutters (UKIP, Galloway etc)!

    Having said that i have no time for the lib dems so am undecided.

    brakeswithface
    Full Member

    If we were offered AV, PR and FPTP, what voting system would be used? If FPTP was used, and 40% voted for FPTP, 30% for AV and 30% for PR, we’d still have FPTP even though 60% voted for reform.

    FPTP is fundamentally flawed as soon as more than two options are available. This sums it up for me very well: http://youtu.be/TtW3QkX8Xa0

    CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    So do you assume that everyone like you only has one viable choice?

    No. I was saying that Cons and Libs have alternatives

    Yes, There are minority left parties, but AV will not win them seats. However will give ConLibs and advantage.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    It strikes me that AV is only useful if, as a voter, you feel you have a viable second choice.

    So do you assume that everyone like you only has one viable choice?
    no he doe snot he clealry states how it could be good for non left wing folk
    I am tending to agree CM

    scaredypants
    Full Member

    Charlie, do you still think lib/con is a natural alliance ?

    Libs were further “left” than nulabour in many respects, IMO

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    key word there is were
    I suspect there core vote has floundered as well as I suspect many are not at all comfortable with this

    BigJohn
    Full Member

    It’s just a nasty Cameron trick.

    The Lib Dems have been (rightly, in my view) asking for proportional representation for years. So a party which has 10% of the national vote will end up with 10% seats in parliament.

    So a demand for electoral reform was one of their negotiation points in the coalition.

    Cameron gave them AV. Take it or leave it.

    Well, AV acts in the opposite way. Minority parties can never be elected. But the Lib Dems would look foolish refusing the opportunity of a vote, so they have to make themselves sound in favour.

    We have to vote Yes to AV, knowing that we mean No to AV, but Yes to further reform. Sounds cock-eyed to me. I’ll be spoiling my paper I think.

    bravohotel8er
    Free Member

    I think it’s just utterly adorable the way some of the old guard still seem to think that Labour are left wing!

    What were you up to from 1997-2010?

    DenDennis
    Free Member

    one thought I just had- but my understanding is that if no candidate gets 51%+, then the lowest scoring candidate gets taken out and the 2nd choice of people who voted for them are counted towards the other candidates.
    This makes it more likely that people who would vote first choice for extreme parties (BNP etc) have a deciding call on the winner, whereas with the current system their voice is rarely heard….hmmmmm interesting….

    What gets my goat on the AV is the campaign- ‘making your MPs work harder’- that only means work harder to be voted in (ie spin) not once they are in parliament- the latter is what is important!!

    schnullelieber
    Free Member

    Charlie,

    Assuming like you do that lib=tory then under fptp the lib-tory vote is being split between 2 candidates and the labour one wins. You’re happy but the majority (for argument’s sake) lib-tories aren’t. Under AV the lib-tory majority get a candidate their happy with, and the labour minority don’t. Which is fairer?
    In the real world i think your lib=tory assumption is misplaced. Even if it were true of Liberal MPs it certainly isnt true of liberal voters. I’d be willing to bet that more lib voters would put labour as their second choice under av than tory. If after the next general election there’s no overall majority in the Commons I don’t think it is safe to assume that the libs would jump back into bed with the tories again. They’ve gone with labour before and i think their core support would be happier to go with labour in the future. I think you have a viable second vote for the libs.

    Ultimately i think you when you decide on the fptp/av vote you shouldn’t be thinking ‘which system is most likely to give the result I want’ but ‘which system is most likely to give a result that most people are happy with’.

    It’s probably obvious which way I’m leaning.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Under AV the lib-tory majority get a candidate their happy with, and the labour minority don’t

    whilst i can see the argument this is where AV falls down for me. Supporters claim this as support but in reality they actually just get a candidate with which they are less dissastisified with [compared to the other one left] rather than one they are ALL actually happy with. Is this fairer or better tbh I am not sure this is an improvement. It depends how far you want to take your principles I assume but for those on the radical wings of the right and left that is not very far so you gain very little TBH.
    My vote would be Green , left wing party , Labour no one else.
    Not really helped me tbh. PR would make my first vote count for the Greens AV makes it not count just like FPTP how excited should I be about this change.
    It seems to me to heavily favour the middle ground as that is where most AV votes will end up being cast

    mudshark
    Free Member

    I think it’s just utterly adorable the way some of the old guard still seem to think that Labour are left wing!

    Well they did the money wasting thing pretty well… 😉

    CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    Ultimately i think you when you decide on the fptp/av vote you shouldn’t be thinking ‘which system is most likely to give the result I want’ but ‘which system is most likely to give a result that most people are happy with’.

    i can see that point of view, but that smacks of moral relativism. I’m more on the side of which system is better for ‘the people’

    CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    I think it’s just utterly adorable the way some of the old guard still seem to think that Labour are left wing!

    What were you up to from 1997-2010?

    I think you misunderstand me, I deliberately put it as Lab / Left. I don’t think the current labour party are left wing, though there origins are founded around socially democratic principles. They are however, as left as we get, in British politics.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    ‘which system is most likely to give the result I want’ but ‘which system is most likely to give a result that most people are happy with’.

    So i cant vote green anymore as most people wold be unhappy with them getting into power?
    I still dispute this happy with claim …when you transfer votes you just get the candidate you are least dissatisified with – see the Unions voting for the other milliband despite not really supporting him but disliking his brother more. I suspect many people will be making this sort of choice [voting against lab or tories and therefore rewarding the libs]which is a long from a positive endorsment.

    HermanShake
    Free Member

    Ok, we don’t watch TV or read papers (they severely depress me) so this political issue has crept up on me. I’ve read a little up on it, but I’m not confident I get it.

    I’m quite left in my ideas and as said above feel there isn’t really a left wing party. The Greens seem to be the ‘leftest’ but don’t really have much chance beyond Brighton (where I live btw).

    So feel free to rant/explain/educate, I’m genuinely interested! In an increasingly right wing society, what’s the deal with this issue?

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    basically its rubbish but a bit fairer than FPTP and will lead to PR one day which everyone tends to agree is a good idea. If you vote against it you will kill PR for a generation and it is the only pro argument that makes me think about it tbh.
    Oh yets the nato ads are rubbish
    A few other threads on here actually explain the mechanics if that was what you wanted

    Tenuous
    Free Member

    I don’t know where you get the idea that LibDem voters would put Tories as their second choice, Labour is much more likely. If it was good for the Tories they would be campaigning for it, not against it …

    mansonsoul
    Free Member

    They are however, as left as we get, in British politics.

    Except they’re not. If you have real lefty principles, vote for one of the several real lefty parties. People self limiting their choices to the ‘main’ two/three is what limits our political system to a two and a half party system.

    onewheelgood
    Full Member

    redthunder
    Free Member

    Yes.

    HermanShake
    Free Member

    Isn’t AV a step in the right direction though? This way you can express who you don’t want without the assumption of default votes.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    The Green question would seem to be an advantage of AV I feel. People would probably still cast their main vote as usual but you can put Green, SNP, Plaid etc AS WELL so you don’t have to worry about throwing away your vote.

    This would massively benefit the minor parties who represent many people’s views, including Lib Dem.

    CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    I don’t know where you get the idea that LibDem voters would put Tories as their second choice, Labour is much more likely. If it was good for the Tories they would be campaigning for it, not against it …

    Not sure of this, Any LibDem voters who would not tolerate Cons, should have turned their backs on Libdem by now. The only libdems left would be the Tory leaning ones. It may not be as good for Tories as a FPTP two party system, but it is even worse for Lab,

    schnullelieber
    Free Member

    I still dispute this happy with claim

    I used the phrase ‘happy with’ in the simplified context of CM’s original premise where lib=tory. I may have repeated if after but that was just sloppiness. I’m happy (ahem) to replace it with ‘mostl happy’ or ‘less unhappy’ or ‘least dissatisifed’. I guess t depends on whether you view your ballot box as being half full or half empty. I agree av doesn’t necessarily give a postive endorsement but the same is true with fptp. AV wouldn’t be my system of choice but like Junkyard I think it is a step in the right direction.

    I’m more on the side of which system is better for ‘the people’

    Any suggestions for which system is this?

    CharlieMungus
    Free Member

    Between FPTP and AV? FPTP, I think.

    Bez
    Full Member

    I wish people would drop this “people who vote for the least popular parties get more than one vote” lie. Even Cameron’s signed his name to it. It’s plain wrong. If you vote for the least popular party that vote is binned and you’re told to have another go or give up.

    And as for explaining it, you want this.

    andrewh
    Free Member

    The Lib Dems have been (rightly, in my view) asking for proportional representation for years. So a party which has 10% of the national vote will end up with 10% seats in parliament.

    Hate the idea. I know it’s rare for an independant to get elected nowadays but it does happen. It would be impossible under any sort of party-list system.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 45 total)

The topic ‘Just Say 'No'’ is closed to new replies.