I'd help pay for you to get these made :)
(
drimble he'd been white, he'd been black,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:27,
archived)
THAT MONEY WOULD BE BETTER SPENT ON BULLET PROOF MATERNITY WARDS!!BABY KILLER!!!!!!!!1
(
Rico,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 19:50,
archived)
that and what Charlie Brooker said last week on channel 4What I find most offensive about these campaigns, is they don't say who is so shit scared of a change of voting system.
Which parties are behind it, I assume Labour and Conservative, but haven't actually seen anything saying.
(Which parties are behind it, I assume Labour and Conservative, but haven't actually seen anything saying.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:29,
archived)
as far as I know the LibDems are the only party really pushing for the new voting system
(
Paul_P http://www.Paul-hub.com,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:32,
archived)
they are labelledPromoted by William Norton on behalf of No Campaign Ltd... more as I look
Here we go:
blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/11/26/labour-and-tory-establishments-get-behind-no-to-av-campaign/
The President of NO to AV campaign will be Margaret Beckett MP. The Labour patrons are David Blunkett MP, Lord Falconer, Lord Prescott, Lord Reid and Emily Thornberry.
The Conservative patrons are Ken Clarke MP, William Hague MP, Steve Norris and Tory chairman Baroness Warsi.
(Here we go:
blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/11/26/labour-and-tory-establishments-get-behind-no-to-av-campaign/
The President of NO to AV campaign will be Margaret Beckett MP. The Labour patrons are David Blunkett MP, Lord Falconer, Lord Prescott, Lord Reid and Emily Thornberry.
The Conservative patrons are Ken Clarke MP, William Hague MP, Steve Norris and Tory chairman Baroness Warsi.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:34,
archived)
The thing is, if we all vote yes on AVthen these fuckers are still in power until the next election and have it within their ability to make the transition as painful and expensive as possible while pinning the blame on the Lib Dems and saying they were right all along.
(,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:47,
archived)
That's politics in a nutshellSo often it's screw what the people ask for, push through what you think is best for them (or yourself). And when they complain, blame someone else.
(
Tribs 🦇 ↓ dn ʎɐʍ sᴉɥʇ ↓🦇,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 12:34,
archived)
ErmI think a great many people have no idea what a change in the voting system would do to our political system.
This thing isn't just a cog you can replace, but the matrix upon which our entire political system is built.
To suggest that the government would purposefully waste money and time in making it seem like a bad idea is looking past the fact that it IS a bad idea and WOULD take an age to implement correctly.
I don't think many people have any idea what AV actually is or how it works. If they did, they'd realise it's incompatible with our system.
(,
Fri 8 Apr 2011, 16:49,
archived)
This thing isn't just a cog you can replace, but the matrix upon which our entire political system is built.
To suggest that the government would purposefully waste money and time in making it seem like a bad idea is looking past the fact that it IS a bad idea and WOULD take an age to implement correctly.
I don't think many people have any idea what AV actually is or how it works. If they did, they'd realise it's incompatible with our system.
I don't think many people have any idea how the current system works either though, to be fair.
Quijibo Esq. BSc. May contain traces of nuts,
Mon 11 Apr 2011, 0:35,
archived)
isn't that the point......that the system needs to change and the move to AV would provide the foundations upon which said change could be enacted?
(,
Mon 11 Apr 2011, 14:49,
archived)
But how could it be in any politico's interest to have a lucid voting system? The notion is naive. Politics requires evermore opportunity for subterfuge and added layers of deniability. Any political 'solutions' not arising from 'grassroots' demand will inevitably turn out a Trojan Horse of some sort. But- love to have your support for has-been Yanks & our 'Votescam' free-for-all.
(,
Tue 12 Apr 2011, 17:16,
archived)
It's not really a party political issue, the main parties are allowing free reignLibDems are mostly in favour
Tories are mostly against
Labour are split near enough 50/50
Smaller parties are generally for it.
edit/ here www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11609887
(Tories are mostly against
Labour are split near enough 50/50
Smaller parties are generally for it.
edit/ here www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11609887
Wasp Box like a nervous random stranger at a glory hole,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:17,
archived)
Party voting allegiance is less certain these days(
Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 8:53,
archived)
I like these and have click as such
(
Paul_P http://www.Paul-hub.com,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:30,
archived)
big fat clicksthose posters are complete horseturds. it'll be a f***ing travesty if we don't vote for av.
(
Hol[]y - WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:48,
archived)
MAGENTA!
Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:50,
archived)
Can the Afghanis get bullet broof vests too?To help them when trying to prevent a hit and run?
(
Butters and his titanium codsocket,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:51,
archived)
I like these,although I am firmly opposed to AV.
(
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:54,
archived)
What did I do?! Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:01,
archived)
My tash is neither a bee nor dumb, thank YOU very much, Sir! Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:08,
archived)
I saw some graffiti in hackney onceit said "if voting worked, it would be illegal"
( camp freddy well, would you look at that!,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:55,
archived)
I might have scrawled that while sleepwalking.George Carlin on the matter: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
( Butters and his titanium codsocket,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:00,
archived)
excellenthere, here!
( Thor_sonofodin has done things, terrible things on,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 10:57,
archived)
^ this.Completely this.
(
J Peasemould Gruntfuttock Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:04,
archived)
You should email these to 38 Degrees. They'd be bang up for doing something wih them.Awesome stuff.
www.38degrees.org.uk/
(www.38degrees.org.uk/
barryheadwound Mul-ti-pass? Multipass!,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 11:10,
archived)
I'm not from UKBut I like it, I think it's very clever the choiche of the subjects, the colors and the message, if I was an owner of an advertising company I will want to hire you.
(,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 12:15,
archived)
what a handsome soldier i don't want him to die from lack of bulletproof vests!
(,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 17:34,
archived)
I concur. I'd like him to die of exhaustion,in my sex-dungeon.
( Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 21:12,
archived)
I'll wager he's never taken an afghan suicide bomber in the face.... Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 8:54,
archived)
:DThey're both stupid. Let's not forget that the No campaign is headed by the president of the Tax-Payers Alliance, Matthew Elliott, who probably think that the NHS is a waste of money anyway and would rather we had Pre-Obama US style healthcare.
But I REALLY don't get the top one. First of all we spend a larger proportion of our GDP on our armed forces than almost every other member of the EU (only Greece and Bulgaria spend a larger slice - Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union)
Second of all, why fight wars at all if we can't afford armour? You'd assume it's rather vital for soldiering and pretty much near the top of the checklist of "things not to go into battle without" alongside a gun and some bullets.
(But I REALLY don't get the top one. First of all we spend a larger proportion of our GDP on our armed forces than almost every other member of the EU (only Greece and Bulgaria spend a larger slice - Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_European_Union)
Second of all, why fight wars at all if we can't afford armour? You'd assume it's rather vital for soldiering and pretty much near the top of the checklist of "things not to go into battle without" alongside a gun and some bullets.
Rico,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 20:16,
archived)
![[challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif "Challenge Entry: Old Time Adverts"){kind=small}
I think...we need an AV referendum compo. One I knocked together in Paint:
(,
Wed 6 Apr 2011, 23:17,
archived)
If......we had less wars we could pay for the maternity units.
Just sayin'.
(,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 0:27,
archived)
Just sayin'.
Yeah thats fine, but preferential voting systems are much better than First-past-the-post.
(,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 8:32,
archived)
I (politely) suggest you carefully re-readthe posters you've commented on.
( Tab Hunter Make this useless process end and so, begin again,
Fri 8 Apr 2011, 20:36,
archived)
My interpretation was that they were rejecting the spending of money on a campaign, rather than addressing which voting method is superior. I do see the "No to No on AV" tagline, but I'm not sure this is the same as "Yes to AV"?
(,
Tue 12 Apr 2011, 6:30,
archived)
This is frickin excellent well said that man / woman / ladyboy?
(
charlie brown doesn't have a dog but still enjoys shitbagging,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 8:57,
archived)
nicebut of course, a different voting system won't make the slightest bit of difference to elections.
( Spunky McPunk not dead yet,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 12:48,
archived)
Australia......we have preferential voting here and I'm not a fan. Too many deals done where certain parties trade with each other to get the preferential vote.
That said, you don't have to nominate your preference.
Not voting is illegal here too which sucks even more.
(,
Thu 7 Apr 2011, 13:34,
archived)
That said, you don't have to nominate your preference.
Not voting is illegal here too which sucks even more.
nah - compulsory voting is the only way to ensure the vote is representative. In a non-compulsory system, not-voting is completely rational, but skews the sample when non-voters are a significant group. It probably seems a bit too radical a change when people are used to the old system (i see some people above opposed to AV, god knows why).
Incidentally, in Aust you do need to nominate your preference, otherwise its invalid.
(,
Fri 8 Apr 2011, 7:42,
archived)
Incidentally, in Aust you do need to nominate your preference, otherwise its invalid.
Joopiter......not sure where you live but nah, you're wrong. In Australia nominating your preferences is not compulsory in all states and territories. We have had Optional Preferential Voting in Queensland state elections since 1992 and the same applies to the New South Wales Lower House.
(,
Fri 8 Apr 2011, 14:48,
archived)
Ah yep - got me there - I live in the West where full preferences are required, which is also the case in federal elections (the relevant comparision with the UK proposal).
Incidentally, i think optional preferences is the way to go (as you cant reasonably expect people to be informed about the policies of all the various parties that contest).
(,
Tue 12 Apr 2011, 6:26,
archived)
Incidentally, i think optional preferences is the way to go (as you cant reasonably expect people to be informed about the policies of all the various parties that contest).