Bollitics: The AV Referendum

[blandy]

The American hospitals may or may not be better, but they get their money from people's (expensive) insurance policies paying for their operations etc.

No insurance, no treatement to a decent standard seems to be the deal over there, ceertainly before Obama's reforms.

I'm not ideologically wedded to the current way the NHS is set up, but I can see that if the people who work in the NHS are against what the Gov't was proposing, even the really moderate people, then the ideas are unlikely to be good. "No top down reform of the NHS was what the tories promised, now they're trying to do exactly that.

The places with the best hospitals and health systems in the world are apparently France and (I think, from memory) Denmark. I don't think both of them are run like our NHS. I've also seen myself areas of our NHS which are good and those which are lamentable, basically.

Anyway, that's all OT.

How on a Aston Villa website, could people not support A.V. ?

[drat01]

Jon that post actually made me shudder, because the way it reads is the abandonment of NHS. (and apologies if that is not the case) Health care is not a privilege based on financial ability and should never ever be. In a simplistic way you seem to be saying that private good, state bad, which is nonsense IMO. So many of the problems that Gvmt's have faces have been as a result of profit led private companies getting massively involved and being massively rewarded by the state, see some of the IT schemes as perfect examples.

My brother lived in the states for a few years and the way that health care seemed to run over there compared to over here is shocking and totally alien to the UK population in general. A leading Tory, one that some on here I know support, his name escapes me at the moment, went on US TV suggesting this and frankly his views were ones of those who couldn't give a shit about anyone but themselves.

But this is all for another debate ...... :-)

[WhatAboutTheFinish]

Have any of the big opinion poll firms released stats on what the results of a general election would be under both systems? It would be interesting to see the comparison, I'd much appreciate any links or info.

[Condimentalist]

Is it me or are the 'no' campaign trying harder :?

[bickster]

tbh Patrick I've yet to see any "Yes" propaganda. I've had loads of "No" propaganda from the evil side of the no campaign

[Chindie]

The 'NO' campaign, from what I've seen, isn't so much trying harder as it is making itself much more easily visible. The campaign has angled itself on very, very simple terms - it's expensive, it'll make us weak, it's complicated, almost no other country worldwide that is a major player uses it, etc etc. Those things, even if a few cases they aren't actually strictly true (cost, by all accounts is a complete red herring and it's the headline act of the anti-AV campaign) explain themselves quite easily and scaremonger and make people wary with little effort. A few ads, some leaflets, etc, and that campaign runs itself. Chuck in the Sun and it's job done.

The Yes campaign defines itself, by necessity, on things that can't be really be broken down in the buzzword-y scaremongering of cost and so on, so it's struggled to engage the public, especially when, to be frank, the public by and large has more important things to worry about as far as they're concerned.

I've had a leaflet sent to me by the 'NO' campaign, the only one in the house.

I'm torn on whether to vote on it at all at the moment to be honest.

[Chindie]

Have any of the big opinion poll firms released stats on what the results of a general election would be under both systems? It would be interesting to see the comparison, I'd much appreciate any links or info.

Any prediction on what the GE would have been under AV would be fairly pointless, as it's impossible to work out terribly accurately. We don't know how people would have placed their alternative votes, if they used them at all. Any prediction on it would be proper finger in the air stuff and most likely wrong because of the assumptions made to make it.

[LondonLax]

Yes it looks like the nos will win pretty comfortably actually.

[Chindie]

'No' will win handily imo.

[Condimentalist]

tbh Patrick I've yet to see any "Yes" propaganda. I've had loads of "No" propaganda from the evil side of the no campaign

Similarly. But the imperative is on the 'yes' campaign to explain to people why AV would be beneficial. Or else they are just relying on an educated few and some protest votes.

What an utter damp squib. And reform will now be off the agenda for decades owing the to the ineptitude of those politicians that claim to want it.

[WhatAboutTheFinish]

Have any of the big opinion poll firms released stats on what the results of a general election would be under both systems? It would be interesting to see the comparison, I'd much appreciate any links or info.

Any prediction on what the GE would have been under AV would be fairly pointless, as it's impossible to work out terribly accurately. We don't know how people would have placed their alternative votes, if they used them at all. Any prediction on it would be proper finger in the air stuff and most likely wrong because of the assumptions made to make it.

I was thinking more along the lines of "If there was a general election today how would you vote under system A, then system B" kind of opinion poll as opposed to retrospective guessing.

I am surprised neither side has tried to put these kind of statistics forward to support their argument, which maybe suggests it's not really going to change any results at all?

[tonyh29]

the research I saw showed under AV the tories would still have been the biggest party but it was a lot closer ..from memory it was something like

Tory 281

Labour 262

Libs 79

other 27

I guess in theory Clegg would still have followed his pledge to talk to the party with the clearest mandate to lead ( even if all along they were talking to Labour and would have done that deal had Brown not been so arrogant )

so we would have had a Tory /Lib coalition but an even more fragile one

[blandy]

tbh Patrick I've yet to see any "Yes" propaganda. I've had loads of "No" propaganda from the evil side of the no campaign

Similarly. But the imperative is on the 'yes' campaign to explain to people why AV would be beneficial. Or else they are just relying on an educated few and some protest votes.

What an utter damp squib. And reform will now be off the agenda for decades owing the to the ineptitude of those politicians that claim to want it.

The imperative point is a good one, and not one I'd thought of. Agree with the rest of the post, as well.

Part of the reason why there's much more publicity for "No" is funding - they've got more money - the established political elite have rich backers who want to keep things the way they are, for their own interests.

They've also concentrated on slagging off the Yes idea, rather than promoting why their system is better (in their view) to a large extent.

Negative campaigning works more often than not. And while the Yes system is better, it's not massively better, os it's a hard job to keep the uncommitted interested in the detail as to why it's (a bit) better. Most people, I guess won't care.

A lot of this country's population is conservative (with a small "c") - fear prevails over hope, basically - "what if it goes wrong" rather than "how good would it be if it went right".

I live in a Tory stronghold, and the twunts were out at the weekend with their blue rosettes and their leaflets, no sign of anyone for the Yes campaign.

[drat01]

Seems like Cameron has been telling lies again

FactCheck

and Clegg :-)

[wiganvillain]

Seems like Cameron has been telling lies again

FactCheck

and Clegg :-)

My God, NO

Politicians lying

And you're surprised!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[drat01]

:-) - I just find it amusing that both Cameron and Clegg, who are supposedly on differing sides telling lies to try and win the battle and then have to sit next to each other drinking Pimms on the lawns of Number 10 :-)

[mjmooney]

:-) - I just find it amusing that both Cameron and Clegg, who are supposedly on differing sides telling lies to try and win the battle and then have to sit next to each other drinking Pimms on the lawns of Number 10 :-)

Indeed. Some of the Tory local campaign material that has come through our door has been pretty virulently anti-Clegg/LibDems.

[bickster]

Seems like Cameron has been telling lies again

FactCheck

“If the last election was under AV, there would be a chance, right now, that Gordon Brown could still be Prime Minister.”

Not being funny about this, but that isn't a fact that can be worthy of checking. It is quite clearly, an opinion. Thats fail number one for the blog.

Labour and the Lib Dems would have had 337 seats between them, giving them an overall majority, and in theory allowing Mr Brown to remain Prime Minister in a coalition government. But the Conservatives would have been the largest party, on 283 seats (35 more than Labour), and there would have been constitutional uproar if Mr Brown had stayed at No 10.

Quite simply, no there wouldn't

[bickster]

:-) - I just find it amusing that both Cameron and Clegg, who are supposedly on differing sides telling lies to try and win the battle and then have to sit next to each other drinking Pimms on the lawns of Number 10 :-)

Indeed. Some of the Tory local campaign material that has come through our door has been pretty virulently anti-Clegg/LibDems.

SAme here with the Lib Dem's about the Tories

[CVByrne]

PR works in every country that uses it. It lets me give a vote to every candidate on the sheet so that in some way my vote counts against vile parties like Sinn Fein. Over there it'll help BNP or whatever from getting a seat.

It works.