I went and had a nap, sorry
been terribly tired for ages now.

My response would be the same as it was in the post above. There is a difference between getting the person you want and a person you can just about tolerate. It's no fairer having a Lib Dem MP because a lot of people can tolerate it, than your first choice of Tory/Labour even though they got more first votes.

In fact if we're talking fairness, wasn't it a LibDem commission that found it was actually even less proportional? Shouldn't that be the direction we're moving in, if we want genuine reform, rather than this half arsed measure?
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:24, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)

You know as well as I do
that if the vote is a No, the Tories will contiune to use this as evidence that people don't want reform.

Most electoral systems change gradually, so this small change to a slightly fairer system is part of (hopefully) a gradual change to a better representation system.

I guess it's difficult for you to see because, as a Tory, I presume you don't really have another party that you might agree with, possibly UKIP I suppose, but you represent the minority of voters. About 30% in the last election.

Most people have a second preference and would like to be able to make that clear, but because you don't have a second preference you feel it's okay to deny others that right.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:29, Reply)

Still more by %'age that the other two polled individually.

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:34, Reply)

So the largest minority
But still a minority.

And with most individual MPs (on both sides) being elected with minority votes. And that's the big change AV would have. It would lead to MPs being more representative of MOST of their electorate, not just the largest minority.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:37, Reply)

Without reference to the AV vote.
I'm not sure I'm that bothered about the largest minority winning, I probably read this somewhere but it's like "you picked the loser, now let's consider your vote".

I do get where you are coming from though. It's a bodge because it formed part of the coalition agreement which gave both parties something and nothing of what they wanted.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:44, Reply)

I'm not sure that making assumptions about peoples preferences is a good argument
I believe change could be good for the voting system, but AV isn't it. AV promotes mediocity over greatness, caution over decisive action and inoffensiveness over interest.

the best argument I can think of against is the disaster that having Ed miliband instead of David has been and will continue to be for Labour.
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:36, Reply)

It's terrible that you associate being able to get over half the people voting to positively aceed to your views with you with mediocrity and inoffensiveness.

(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:40, Reply)

As you've siad yourself up there
many people may have a second choice, but a third, forth or even fifth? People will simply put a cross by anyone who the don't not like, therefore by running your campaign on non contraversial subjects you can win. Mediocre.
( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:43, Reply)

You don't need to give a third or fourth preference, or even a second if you don't want to
Did you not know that?
(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:52, Reply)

labour is its own disaster though
every labour government we've had has ended up in an economic black hole, and the last shower of self-interested lying deceitful cunts was no exception.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:49, Reply)

Al do you mind not insinuating
that just because I'm a Tory, I'm a racist who would vote for UKIP or the BNP? That's just lazy, and rather poor.

Do you really think that getting AV, is a step along the way to a better system? Or do you acknowledge that perhaps the impetus will have faded. I think the chances of it changing some more are fairly slight.

I'm sure as a LibDem your second choice would be Green, with all the bizarrely stupid notions that go with that. Most people do NOT have a second choice that they'd quite like. A large percentage can't even name the parties let alone tell you a policy. Stop making assumptions based on your own political slant.
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:43, Reply)

Are you calling him poor?

(PsychoChomp, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:50, Reply)

He's not poor.
He sands his floorboards ffs.
( girlinthehole, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

CLICK

( Roota zweeeeeoooooowm, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:55, Reply)

I'm not insinuating that at all, UKIP aren't a racist party, and you're the only one mentioning the BNP
I don't like UKIP, but they have clear policies and I can see some of their views appealing to "typical Tory voters".

Without taking the first step, I would be surprised if electoral reform is discussed again for thirty to forty years, and more than likely, it will be the same shit compromise. AV is a small step to a slightly better system, but you know damned well that the Tories would do anything they could to stop any kind of PR system getting into place.

I'm not talking about most people, I'm talking about most people that vote, which, while it ought to be the same, clearly isn't given the depressingly low turnouts.

And most people who have left leaning views would probably vote labour or lib dem, or possibly green, but some would like to vote green but since they know in their borough they will only get a few hundred votes, would prefer to see Labour than the Tories.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

UKIP and racism are hardly singing from opposite hymn sheets
the members of UKIP I know, tend to be of the 'send them all back' sort, so I still find it offensive. I'm still not sure why you seem to think their policies and the Tories are allied.

I really don't think that just voting, implies a) an understanding of AV and b) a genuine belief in a secondary political party. Out of interest would Labour be your second choice?
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:56, Reply)

How about you stop being so precious. I didn't call you a racist, you brought that up yourself, I made a guess as to another political party which you might have felt an affinity for if you weren't able to choose a Tory candidate. UKIP occupy the centre right of politics, similar to the Tories but I'm not getting into an in depth discussion of them or their politics.

The point about the preference is that you don't have to give a second preference if you don't have one, but, as has been demonstrated by surveys, a lot of people DO have second preferences.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 16:04, Reply)

Ask the average person how they feel
about being pegged as a UKIP voter and you'll get much the same response. I don't think it's being precious.

As I've already said, neither of us are ever going to convince the other, for all of the reasons we've given. I don't think for a possibly slightly fairer system it's worth all the bad points, and you don't think that the bad points are enough of a reason not to vote for it.
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 3 May 2011, 16:12, Reply)

I can't see the bad points you're talking about.

(Bazongaloid, Tue 3 May 2011, 16:13, Reply)

I think the most important point he makes
Is that if AV doesn't go through, the chances of us moving towards PR will be squashed further than if it does. (This is, I realise, only a bad thing if you are in favour of PR.)

I don't think anybody ever said AV was a panacea to cure the shortcomings of FPTP, but I'd be very interested to see what effect is has if it does go through.
(LongJohnBaldry, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

I would much rather have a proper representative system
than the proposed. This system really isn't going to change who gets in where, as far as I can see and so I'm tending towards a No vote.

Al is right in his point that the Tories are going to wave a successful No campaign in front of Parliament and shout "see? SEE?", which brings me back to a Yes vote, even though I happen to think that this particular proposed change is almost completely without merit.
( Kroney, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:45, Reply)

One thing is for sure,
A no vote will be the last time we gat a chance of change. At least a yes vote sets a precedent that may allow a further refferendum about proportional representation some time in the future.
( Bartleby A dead man on vacation, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:48, Reply)

Who gives a shit, if the man on the street gets a say in the running of the Country it can only be a bad thing

( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

the man on the clapham omnibus?
clearly he lives south of the river and therefore his opinion should be irrelevant
( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:54, Reply)

Oi
Facking leeeeve it aht, you slaaaaag.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:55, Reply)

Yeah that cunt, who the fuck is he, some 1930's caricature who no longer exists that's who

( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:57, Reply)

The man on the street is a cunt.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:56, Reply)

Well that's my point, why bother with demoracy
Every mouthbreathing clueless cunt has a 'say' in the direction of the Country. I don't remember the class mong being consulted on the lesson plan by the teacher
( Light In Chains maker of the ikea sofa, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:59, Reply)

*shakes hands*
Democracy is fundamentally flawed due to the idiocy of the demos.
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 3 May 2011, 16:01, Reply)

How about one person, one vote but.....
If there is a hung parliament, the leader with the biggest willy wins. If the leader is female then second in commmand get's his willy out.

It's a win win situation if you ask me.
( girlinthehole, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:49, Reply)

So we have a single transferable willy system.

( Bartleby A dead man on vacation, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

And happier MP's secretaries.

( girlinthehole, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:52, Reply)

If they had equal size penises
Then perhaps they should have a "Shag off".

Who could adjudicate? Can't think of anyone.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:51, Reply)

Charlie Sheen?

( girlinthehole, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:52, Reply)

Mr Sheen?

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:54, Reply)

Some old hasbeen?

( girlinthehole, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:55, Reply)

Barry Sheen?

( Bartleby A dead man on vacation, Tue 3 May 2011, 15:55, Reply)

To vent your spleen?

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 3 May 2011, 16:02, Reply)