Bollitics: The AV Referendum

[Awol]

I'm with Bicks on this. AV is an intentional block to real reform and by putting it to referendum our rulers are ensuring that it's off the agenda for 20 years plus - whilst they all crow about how 'progressive' they are for consulting the public.

Total con job.

[Danwichmann]

I'm with Bicks on this. AV is an intentional block to real reform and by putting it to referendum our rulers are ensuring that it's off the agenda for 20 years plus - whilst they all crow about how 'progressive' they are.

Total con.

I can see this, but will still vote yes for AV. I think the problem is that if we don't vote for AV now, I can't see where something better (or any form of reform) will come from for the next god only knows how long. The Tories and Labour are both happy with the existing system and playing with boundaries to try to gain the upper hand and the Lib Dems have lost all credibility with their own supporters as far as I can see (I think the Lib Dems will be marginalised for some time and in effect we're going to have a two party sysyem for the foreseeable future). So for me it's AV for nothing, and AV is better than nothing.

[mjmooney]

I wonder what the turnout at the referendum will be?

I started this thread because the vote is coming up soon and nobody I spoke to (workmates, frends, family) had any understanding of what it's all about. And they were ALL intelligent, well-educated people.

[Danwichmann]

I guess that most of the media are either on the side of Tories or Labour, and will be against AV. Therefore they're not giving much exposure, hence the lack of understanding and apathy. The most effective "No" campaign will be one that gives the whole issue as little exposure as possible.

[Jon]

I wonder what the turnout at the referendum will be?

I started this thread because the vote is coming up soon and nobody I spoke to (workmates, frends, family) had any understanding of what it's all about. And they were ALL intelligent, well-educated people.

The vote's not until May though is it Mike?

I guess "we" don't really want campaigning on this to run for 6 weeks or so .... that'd be as long as a GE campaign.

It's not a hugely complicated issue, so I'd guess 2 or 3 weeks before will see the real action take place ...

[Stevo985]

Never really thought of it.

I've always found it strange that you can get in without a majority, so it makes sense. i guess I'd have to see some scenarios in which the new system might fail.

On the face of it though, it sounds fairer to me.

[Jon]

On the face of it though, it sounds fairer to me.

It most certainly is fairer than First Past The Post (IMO). It's hard to argue that it isn't fairer/more democratic than that.

The argue FOR FPTP is that it produces (usually) a single, strong government from a single party.

Some argue that AV, whilst fairer than FPTP, isn't fairest, and thus would like to see a purer form of PR. Some won't be voting fopr it on these grounds, whilst some recognise that whilst it ain't perfect, it's much better (fairer/more democratic) than what we have.

FPTP IMO also encourages voter apathy, as very often, your vote simply doesn't count ....

[mjmooney]

AV has less appeal to me personally than it would have done before the last general election. Up until then I would have voted Labour, with the Lib Dems as a second choice (as a perceived "anti-Tory" insurance).

Now, however, I think the Lib Dems are a bunch of words removed, and wouldn't give them the time of day. So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

[Danwichmann]

Now, however, I think the Lib Dems are a bunch of words removed, and wouldn't give them the time of day. So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

This is sadly all too true.

[tonyh29]

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

If I read the report correctly around 40 % of people in the London mayor election of 2004 didn't state a second choice vote

Looking at 2004 London and the AV system

turnout in that election was 36.95%

Ken got 35 % of that vote as his first choice @ 685,000 votes , so out of approx 5.8m people entitled to vote in that election he polled 11 %

with the second votes added his overall vote rose to 828,380 .. so 14 % of voters in London wanted Ken as Mayor in 2004 ..or if you look at it from the other way 86% of people living in London didn't vote for Ken to be Mayor

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

[mjmooney]

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

If I read the report correctly around 40 % of people in the London mayor election of 2004 didn't state a second choice vote

Looking at 2004 London and the AV system

turnout in that election was 36.95%

Ken got 35 % of that vote as his first choice @ 685,000 votes , so out of approx 5.8m people entitled to vote in that election he polled 11 %

with the second votes added his overall vote rose to 828,380 .. so 14 % of voters in London wanted Ken as Mayor in 2004 ..or if you look at it from the other way 86% of people living in London didn't vote for Ken to be Mayor

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

Yes, I believe it does.

[Gringo]

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

No more than it makes fptp redundnant if a majority who would have overturned the actual results didn't turn up

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

Hopefully we won't base such decisions on 'what is good for me'.

[mjmooney]

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

No more than it makes fptp redundnant if a majority who would have overturned the actual results didn't turn up

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

Hopefully we won't base such decisions on 'what is good for me'.

We will, though.

[Jon]

Now, however, I think the Lib Dems are a bunch of words removed, and wouldn't give them the time of day. So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

This is sadly all too true.

Green FTW?

Indy FTW?

I actually voted Lie Dem at the last GE, and they have seemingly been all too happy to abandon "almost" all of their "principles" in order to get in bed with the devil.

I feel betrayed, and certainly won't be voting for those feckers anytime soon, that is even if they survive as a party too long anyway. They've shat on there core support for a taste of "power", and that really is a tad foolish.

But, that won't put me off the principle of PR or AV, which at its core is sound.

I have voted, Labout, Lie Dem and Green in the past. Now i'm just down to Labour and Green, so this would work for me. Or a decent Indy.

Very much an ABC man, although also ABBNP and ABUKIP.

[Jon]

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

No more than it makes fptp redundnant if a majority who would have overturned the actual results didn't turn up

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

Hopefully we won't base such decisions on 'what is good for me'.

We will, though.

I don't vote on "what is good for me". (i'd guess you do the same Mike?)

I vote on a belief on "what is good for the country".

Might be misguided, but that's my general voting ethos.

not sure about the rest of the populace though. I guess there may be more of a selfish calculation going on for some?

[Danwichmann]

Green talk a bit of sense but I don't really see enough from them that I agree with. Could possibly be worth a second choice vote but at the moment I don't think I'd be able to put down a first choice! I liked the Lib Dems, but as you rightly say they well and truly shat on their supporters, then rubbed it in for good measure, then shat again. Independent seems a waste of time to be honest. Pfff, **** it, let's just scratch everything and start over?

[tonyh29]

I actually voted Lie Dem at the last GE, and they have seemingly been all too happy to abandon "almost" all of their "principles" in order to get in bed with the devil.

out of interest and slightly OT , how many Principals did Liebour break in their 13 years in office , and how many did the Cons break in their previous stint before that

tis a tad unfair to single out the libs for abandoning principles when on the face of it not one single party has any

[Stevo985]

On the face of it though, it sounds fairer to me.

It most certainly is fairer than First Past The Post (IMO). It's hard to argue that it isn't fairer/more democratic than that.

The argue FOR FPTP is that it produces (usually) a single, strong government from a single party.

Some argue that AV, whilst fairer than FPTP, isn't fairest, and thus would like to see a purer form of PR. Some won't be voting fopr it on these grounds, whilst some recognise that whilst it ain't perfect, it's much better (fairer/more democratic) than what we have.

FPTP IMO also encourages voter apathy, as very often, your vote simply doesn't count ....

Cheers.

Your last point is a good one. I've certainly felt that in the past.

I'm someone who gladly admits to having not much knowledge of politics.

I vote, but I feel a bit bad doing it because, despite some effort last time, i don't think I know enough to make a reasonable decision.

Because of that, I've often thought "I don't know why I'm bothering, it won't matter anyway"

[Danwichmann]

I actually voted Lie Dem at the last GE, and they have seemingly been all too happy to abandon "almost" all of their "principles" in order to get in bed with the devil.

out of interest and slightly OT , how many Principals did Liebour break in their 13 years in office , and how many did the Cons break in their previous stint before that

tis a tad unfair to single out the libs for abandoning principles when on the face of it not one single party has any

Maybe, but the Lib Dem's haven't just abandoned their principles or failed to deliver promises, they've actually helped the party who their core support see as "the enemy" do in many cases the complete opposite of what the Lib Dems supposedly stood for.

[mjmooney]

so does that make the principal behind AV redundant if people don't bother to turn up and vote ?

No more than it makes fptp redundnant if a majority who would have overturned the actual results didn't turn up

So I have no viable second choice, and the system is no use to me.

Hopefully we won't base such decisions on 'what is good for me'.

We will, though.

I don't vote on "what is good for me". (i'd guess you do the same Mike?)

I vote on a belief on "what is good for the country".

Might be misguided, but that's my general voting ethos.

not sure about the rest of the populace though. I guess there may be more of a selfish calculation going on for some?

Yes, I should perhaps clarify.

I meant that the proposed AV system would not affect my voting as there is now only one party that I could in all conscience vote for (and that is not a total wasted vote under FPTP or AV, such as the Greens).