drat01 Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I was thinking of a more diplomatic reply than yours, but if it walks like a duck... Bollox - :-) Come on then Jon, even you must admit that this is a once in a lifetime chance to change the voting system. A No vote will mean that no further time or monies will be invested in asking the public. Basically the FPTP system, a totally flawed one, will remain along with the changes that Cameron is introducing to reduce the number of MP's and fixed term parliaments (neither of which were voted on by the public). You keep bleating on about democracy being eroded, or you did when Labour were in power, but the tune now has changed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted May 5, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted May 5, 2011 Could those who voted No give their reasons? I'm not being facaetious, I'm genuinely curious. It's not too late to sway my vote! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I would be delighted old bean. Suffice to say that to state that a NO vote in this referendum will mean that PR will never happen is just ridiculous. There is no way that you can possibly know that. IIRC it has long been an ideal of both Labour and the Lib Dems. The No vote will win, not because of the succes of the NO campaign, but because the YES campaign don't really want it. Nick Clegg doesn't want AV, and neither do the Labour Party. FPTP suits Labour in some constituencies just as much as it suits the Tories in others. The only party that really benefits from AV or PR are the Lib Dems - and the Lib Dems know that AV makes **** all difference, they'd still be the third minority party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted May 5, 2011 Author VT Supporter Share Posted May 5, 2011 I disagree that a "no" vote rules out any further change. That's just as much emotional blackmail as the nurses and soldiers bollocks that the "no" campaign has been using. If people really want PR enough they will campaign for it. AV is not PR, it's just an unneccessarily complicated FPTP. I would have said "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" - but I acknowledge that it IS to some extent broke. It's just that AV wouldn't fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I'm voting no. Refunding losing bets is something paddy power do, not something the electoral system should. I just can't equate voting in an MP to parliament as placing a bet. It should be a more democratic process than that. Every vote should count IMO. OK, so it still may not under AV, but it has a greater chance of doing so than under FPTP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I was thinking of a more diplomatic reply than yours, but if it walks like a duck... Bollox - :-) Come on then Jon, even you must admit that this is a once in a lifetime chance to change the voting system. A No vote will mean that no further time or monies will be invested in asking the public. Basically the FPTP system, a totally flawed one, will remain along with the changes that Cameron is introducing to reduce the number of MP's and fixed term parliaments (neither of which were voted on by the public). You keep bleating on about democracy being eroded, or you did when Labour were in power, but the tune now has changed No Ian, I will continue to "bleat" about a lack of democracy I just don't thnk AV is the answer. I've stated my view several times that we need the right to recall MP's and open primary elections for candidates in order to get people in who represent their constituents first and foremost - on pain of getting pulled back and sacked. AV does nothing to break the patronage of the leaders putting MP's in hock to party interests above the interests of those who elect them. FPTP isn't perfect but neither is AV, I don't even think it's incrementally better. Also your statement that it's AV is bust is, as the man said, bullshit. You don't have a crystal ball and if the public give enough of a crap about changing the system - which they seemingly don't - then they'll get another chance to switch from FPTP to something worth changing to in the future. If they choose the dogs arse AV option then they are stuck with something no better than what they have. * * I do understand that disagreeing with the YES camp means I'm clearly stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Under FPTP every vote DOES count. The only people whining that their votes doesn't are those who support parties that lose..... or conversly, the ones who fewer people actually support. I fail to see how an electoral system based on giving power to the person that most people don't mind is going to help at all. The idea is that you vote for the person you feel is best placed to represent your constituency - whoever that maybe and whatever party they support. If more people support someone different to your preferred candiate then I'm sorry tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Also your statement that it's AV is bust is, as the man said, bullshit. You don't have a crystal ball and if the public give enough of a crap about changing the system - which the seemingly don't - then they'll get another chance to cahnge FPTP to something worth changing to in the future. It is not BS, as with all thing's on forum's its an opinion. No I don't have a crystal ball, like the same way your financial predictions of people needing to take their savings out banks and no cuts on front line services from a Tory Gvmt, people base their opinions on experience and belief. I am old enough to realise that opportunities to change voting systems do not come around often, and abandonment of any sort of change will lock away the change for good. AV is a step in the right direction, away from a totally flawed system and one that encourages power corrupting actions like those Cameron is forcing upon the people with fixed term parliaments and the reduction in number of MP's. You will not see a chance to change the way the people who ru(i)n this country are elected again for many years. * I do understand that disagreeing with the YES camp means I'm clearly stupid. Not clearly ........ :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted May 5, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted May 5, 2011 I would be delighted old bean. Suffice to say that to state that a NO vote in this referendum will mean that PR will never happen is just ridiculous. There is no way that you can possibly know that. IIRC it has long been an ideal of both Labour and the Lib Dems. The No vote will win, not because of the succes of the NO campaign, but because the YES campaign don't really want it. Nick Clegg doesn't want AV, and neither do the Labour Party. FPTP suits Labour in some constituencies just as much as it suits the Tories in others. The only party that really benefits from AV or PR are the Lib Dems - and the Lib Dems know that AV makes **** all difference, they'd still be the third minority party. Was this directed at my request for reasons you'd voted no? Because, no offence, but that's a terrible explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Under FPTP every vote DOES count. Nonce sense. and if you are an intelligent man, you'd know that. Voting in a safe constituency for a minority party in that constituency is akin to lobbing your ballot paper down the loo. How does a vote for a losing candidate count again? What a thoroughly dissapointing post Sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I would be delighted old bean. Suffice to say that to state that a NO vote in this referendum will mean that PR will never happen is just ridiculous. There is no way that you can possibly know that. IIRC it has long been an ideal of both Labour and the Lib Dems. The No vote will win, not because of the succes of the NO campaign, but because the YES campaign don't really want it. Nick Clegg doesn't want AV, and neither do the Labour Party. FPTP suits Labour in some constituencies just as much as it suits the Tories in others. The only party that really benefits from AV or PR are the Lib Dems - and the Lib Dems know that AV makes **** all difference, they'd still be the third minority party. Was this directed at my request for reasons you'd voted no? Because, no offence, but that's a terrible explanation. No it was directed at drat. I'm voting no because no one really wants AV, and a system that selects our leaders on the basis that most people don't mind them seems to be a bit silly. Also, its a massive lump of cash wasted to effect very little actual change. It won't prevent "safe" seats in most cases - it will mean there are slightly fewer of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Under FPTP every vote DOES count. The only way every vote can count is PR, pure and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Under FPTP every vote DOES count. Nonce sense. and if you are an intelligent man, you'd know that. Voting in a safe constituency for a minority party in that constituency is akin to lobbing your ballot paper down the loo. How does a vote for a losing candidate count again? What a thoroughly dissapointing post Sir. If you chose to vote for a minority party thats your prerogative - and I would happily fight to defend your right to do so. However, if you choose to vote for a party that less people support, that is your decision and you must accept that a greater number of people would like to be governed by someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted May 5, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted May 5, 2011 I would be delighted old bean. Suffice to say that to state that a NO vote in this referendum will mean that PR will never happen is just ridiculous. There is no way that you can possibly know that. IIRC it has long been an ideal of both Labour and the Lib Dems. The No vote will win, not because of the succes of the NO campaign, but because the YES campaign don't really want it. Nick Clegg doesn't want AV, and neither do the Labour Party. FPTP suits Labour in some constituencies just as much as it suits the Tories in others. The only party that really benefits from AV or PR are the Lib Dems - and the Lib Dems know that AV makes **** all difference, they'd still be the third minority party. Was this directed at my request for reasons you'd voted no? Because, no offence, but that's a terrible explanation. No it was directed at drat. I'm voting no because no one really wants AV, and a system that selects our leaders on the basis that most people don't mind them seems to be a bit silly. Also, its a massive lump of cash wasted to effect very little actual change. It won't prevent "safe" seats in most cases - it will mean there are slightly fewer of them. Fair enough (on the directed at Dart bit) But isn't the money effectively a sunk cost? Wasn't it the referendum that cost all the money, not AV itself? That's hardly AV's fault is it? Surely the only extra cost will be paying the ballot counters a bit more? Which is a small price to pay for (what I consider) a fairer system. Again, genuine questions, I happily admit I'm not upto speed on political issues. A political n00b I am! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Also your statement that it's AV is bust is, as the man said, bullshit. You don't have a crystal ball and if the public give enough of a crap about changing the system - which the seemingly don't - then they'll get another chance to cahnge FPTP to something worth changing to in the future. It is not BS, as with all thing's on forum's its an opinion. No I don't have a crystal ball, like the same way your financial predictions of people needing to take their savings out banks and no cuts on front line services from a Tory Gvmt, people base their opinions on experience and belief. I am old enough to realise that opportunities to change voting systems do not come around often, and abandonment of any sort of change will lock away the change for good. AV is a step in the right direction, away from a totally flawed system and one that encourages power corrupting actions like those Cameron is forcing upon the people with fixed term parliaments and the reduction in number of MP's. You will not see a chance to change the way the people who ru(i)n this country are elected again for many years. * I do understand that disagreeing with the YES camp means I'm clearly stupid. Not clearly ........ :-) Is there any danger, just for once in your life, you can look at something as important as the constitution without trying to shoe horn party politics into the issue? Seriously, it's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 It won't prevent "safe" seats in most cases - it will mean there are slightly fewer of them. AV reduces the number of safe seats and increases the number of marginals to a reasonable degree. There is a great link to "prove" that on this very thread somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 It won't prevent "safe" seats in most cases - it will mean there are slightly fewer of them. AV reduces the number of safe seats and increases the number of marginals to a reasonable degree. There is a great link to "prove" that on this very thread somewhere. Can I ask what the problem is with majority seats - surely that just means that the majority of people in that area want to be represented by that particular candidate. Why is that a bad thing? Isn't that afterall what democracy is all about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Can anyone please tell me which political party put a referendum on AV into their election manifesto? What's that, even Clegg said it was a load of shite? Oh, so he did! FFS, this is the price of LD participation in the coalition gov' and has the square root of FA to do with what is best for the country, just what is best for a bunch of power hungry politicians. I'd say the people that can't see that are the frickin' stupid ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 However, if you choose to vote for a party that less people support, In a great many constituences, MP's are returned despite most people who voted, voting against them (or not for them). Democracy my arse. Under AV, at least the MAJORITY of voters are pretty happy with the returned MP, not the MINORITY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Isn't that afterall what democracy is all about? Don't be so bloody stupid, democracy is about making sure the tory majorty can't have a tory government! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts