Forum menu
Why are people who voted other than Labour, described as "disillusioned"
Because no one wants a ban for calling them what they really are.
It's hard enough finding one party worth voting for, let alone hold our noses tightly enough whilst voting for another one even less desirable.
I voted Labour in 1997 and regretted it less than 18 months later. By 2003 they exceeded the very depths of my cynicism.
My point is, with AV we may not be tied to a two and a half party state and real choice might force our politicians to perform better.
One man one vote, should mean that
And that is exactly what it means. The electoral system does not "give more value to the votes of different voters". No one is forced to vote the way they do - they do so freely. If there are certain concentrations of votes for one party in a given area, then it is because of the way people have chosen to vote.
I'm sure this is fascinating, bunch of politically minded cyclists going off on one. I'm voting AV. Cos cats told me to.
If there are certain concentrations of votes for one party in a given area, then it is because of the way people have chosen to vote.
It might also be because of the way the electoral boundaries are drawn
I voted Labour in 1997 and regretted it less than 18 months later.
Why did you regret it ? New Labour turned out to be exactly what they promised to be.
I didn't vote Labour in 1997 because I was listening to what Tony Blair was telling me. I'm mystified how people appear to have been confused by Tony Blair.
I'm sure this is fascinating, bunch of politically minded cyclists going off on one. I'm voting AV. Cos cats told me to
Thanks for sharing
The current system allows a candidate to win with significantly less than 50% of the vote. Whilst AV is far from ideal, at least a greater proportion of votes will be reflected by the result.
that's not what I was arguing. I saw something about a candidate with [i]more than[/i] 50% of the vote [i]not[/i] winning. How can that be? under [i]any[/i] system other than Zimbabwean, or possibly Floridian?
It might also be because of the way the electoral boundaries are drawn
No, it's purely down to the way people vote. No one is forced to vote in a certain way because of how the electoral boundaries are drawn up.
ernie, your missing my point completely.
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_Parliament_constituencies ]wikipedia[/url]
Ynys Mon has 49721 voters in 2010 compare this with north west cambridgeshire where electorate is 89,419.
So in both constituencies you get one MP, in one you have less than 50,000 voters the other nearly 90000. The value of the voters vote is not the same.
No one is forced to vote in a certain way because of how the electoral boundaries are drawn up.
Yeah, 'cos that's what i said isn't it?
Wanna try again?
I have already postal voted nooooooooo ... 🙂
ernie, your missing my point completely.
No, you're missing my point. Ultimately it's all down to the way how people vote. Why doesn't the BNP form a government ? .....because practically no one votes for them.......it has nothing whatsoever to do with electoral boundaries.
Overwhelmingly, people who support AV today do so because they are dissatisfied with the way people vote in general elections (which they always blame politicians for). It's as simple as that.
ok, I'll just sit back. read and learn.
Wanna try again?
No not really. If you read back through the posts you'll see that I responding in the context of you responding to my post. Beyond saying that, I can't be arsed.
The electoral system does not "give more value to the votes of different voters"
But it does, depending on where you live your vote has a different value. everything else being equal, if it takes 25000 to get a majority in ynys mon and it take 45000 to get the same result in Cambridge each vote has a different value.
Overwhelmingly, people who support AV today do so because they are dissatisfied with the way people vote in general elections (which they always blame politicians for). It's as simple as that.
Maybe, or maybe they see a system that is not working that does not reflect the desires of most people, it is a system where the majority of seats does not equal the majority of votes cast.
And i think you will find that no one actually wants AV, just a case of that is what we are being given. What should be on the ballot is FPTP and PR.
Well ok then, I'll try once more
If there are certain concentrations of votes for one party in a given area, then it may be because the boundaries were drawn to achieve exactly that. this does not force anyone in that area to vote in a certain way, but it forces an area on those who vote in a certain way.
they see a system that is not working that does not reflect the desires of most people
Why doesn't the BNP form a government every now again then ? .....if it doesn't "reflect the desires of most people".
Well ok then, I'll try once more
If there are certain concentrations of votes for one party in a given area, then it may be because the boundaries were drawn to achieve exactly that. this does not force anyone in that area to vote in a certain way, but it forces an area on those who vote in a certain way.
just say it, the political map has been gerrymandered.
Ernie, are you just doing this for the sake of argument? Mrmo didn't say "doesn't reflect the desires of most people, in every respect" Yes, the BNP not being in power reflects the desires of most people. Do you think this is evidence of a system which, generally reflects the desires of most people?
Why doesn't the BNP form a government every now again then ? .....if it doesn't "reflect the desires of most people".
maybe because they represent the desires of almost no one?
No one is saying that the parties in power have no popular backing, they certainly don't have the bakcing amongst the population that the electoral results give.
For the OP, you don't have to vote is you don't want to, you do have the right not to care.
quote charliemungus [i]Yes, the BNP not being in power reflects the desires of most people. Do you think this is evidence of a system which, generally reflects the desires of most people?[/i]
just explain that please... for simple folk like me
Gerrymandering is a pretty serious allegation mrmo, and illegal. So presumably they will also, if necessary, be falsifying the results of the AV vote ?
The truth is mrmo, if the AV vote is passed, you are going to be so disappointed in future general elections - because people will still vote "incorrectly". And you and all the others who constantly whinge about politicians, will continue to whinge incessantly about politicians. And of course it will never be the electorate's fault - just the politicians.
You can play around with the system as much as you like, but there are no alternatives to voting correctly. You cannot save people from the political decisions which they have taken.
i just type the truth.
ernie, AV is no better than FPTP. I expect no difference, the point is to make a point, the current system is broken where you live reflects the value of your vote.
and yes the UK is gerrymandered. look at the voting results i gave earlier. Labour constituencies are smaller than tory. Labour needs a smaller share of the electorate to gain power.
OF course people will vote "incorrectly", people vote for self interest and not national interest. That is human nature. But a system where people are not told why things are the way they are doesn't help. A system where being northern or welsh means you vote in a smaller constituency than if you are a shire dweller. It might be fair to arrange the system in that manner, but where is the justification?
Maybe i am odd in that i want to vote for something and not vote against something. Tell me why you want to do something, don't just tell me the other lot are crap.
Just to reiterate, i don't want AV, but i don't want FPTP either. The choice is change or status quo. I vote change. We may never get PR, but vote for FPTP and the chance is even slimmer.
charliemungus at least I've got your number. You're real. or a comedy act. Ok, it's a start. so, we'll work o this act? I'll give you 15% and the rest to bill hick's biographers.
I am voting yes. current system is broken. Really want PR but AV will be a step in the right direction.
CharlieM - from Andrew Marr show this morning...
AM - Will a No vote put an end to electoral form for a generation?
Dave - (some waffley caveat)...Yes
I don't care how people vote in General Elections. I don't mind if the BNP manage to get an MP (they wont, actually), because even though I think they are nasty fascists, they are a legal and democratic political party who have some support but no representation in parliament. That situation is wrong.
What matters is the quality of our democracy. FPTP is only fair when there are just two parties. UK politics has changed and the voting system must move with the times too. AV is not a panacea, but it's fairer and progressing toward the proportional system we need.
Vote "YES" for fair votes!
I am voting yes. current system is broken. Really want PR but AV will be a step in the right direction.
This. AV is a crap compromise but it's no worse than the status quo, and a vote against will be taken as a vote for the status quo.
This is the bit of the yes campaign I don't get. Why hasn't your vote counted?
just because your chosen candidate didn't win, doesn't mean that your vote didn't count does it?
Yes it does - because of who happen to be lumped in with in completely arbitrarily drawn up boundaries. If you live in a marginal seat your vote has much more power than that of a voter in a safe seat - hence why all this banging on about 'one person one vote' is completely disingenuous.
they are a legal and democratic political party
You don't know much about the BNP if you think they are a democratic political party. Central to the entire philosophy of the BNP, is a unwavering commitment to deny whole sections of our society their democratic rights. They might well be legal, but they are most certainly not democratic. The fact that they use the democratic processes to further their own hate based philosophy doesn't count.