blibbax

Oh, did anyone else get the "No" campaigns leaflet through the door? I was planning to vote yes before I saw it, but was probably persuadable either way. Having seen the dishonesty and desperation in that leaflet, there's no way I'm voting no to AV in a million years.

__________________

Judas

yeah that system sounds better

__________________

Jac

I was gonna vote yes just for the lulz.

blibbax

Wrong reason, but right answer, so I'll let you off :P

__________________

IvanV

I'm not a Brit, but it's an interesting system. It helps elect the candidate who is the most acceptable to the largest number of people and it also allows supporters of "alternative" candidates to be braver with their votes. I'd like to see it in my country.

__________________
If anyone has Portal 2 and hasn't played the co-op and wants to do me a favour, let me know (PM me or whatever).

blibbax

I'm pleased to hear that, but fear that "no" will win the upcoming referendum, partly because of conservatives voting no (there is only one significant conservative party, so they do rather well out of FPTP) and partly because of a general fear of change (enhanced by the lie-spewing no campaign - it's apparently not illegal to lie in a referendum campaign in the UK ).

__________________

Jac

What lie are you talking about - the mis-information about the cost of implementing the system? I just took the flyer as conservative propaganda and didn't pay it much attention.

blibbax

1.) That AV will cost millions of pounds due to counting machines. Australia's had AV for ages without using counting machines.

2.) That AV helps extremists parties. There's a reason why the BNP are supporting the No campaign.

3.) That Fiji has AV and is trying to get rid of it. Fiji's system is an AV variant, but it's one where your first choice candidate gets to choose who your second choice candidate is. That's a bad idea, and it's nothing like what we could be getting.

4.) That some votes count for more than others under AV. On the contrary, this system prevents some votes counting for nothing as they do now. This argument is a ploy on the fact that "count" is both an adjective and a verb (under AV we count (verb) some votes twice, but they don't count (adjective) twice, if you get my meaning).

5.) That this is a referendum on Nick Clegg. This referendum could decide our political system for the next century or more. Whether or not you like Clegg (who's dead come the next election anyway) is irrelevant.

6.) That AV is too complex. See above video...

__________________

IvanV

They don't think highly of the electorate, do they? "Order your favourite options from the most appealing to the least appealing", is that really so complicated? Here, fifteen year old kids do just that when they apply for Secondary school.

__________________
If anyone has Portal 2 and hasn't played the co-op and wants to do me a favour, let me know (PM me or whatever).

Judas

I like it when legal documetns and poll system attempt to confuse the reader by applying to many negative/positive and counter negative words into a single sentence so much so that you don't know what your really saying yes or no to...

I hate polls and documents like that..

i've even bitched at our CRA representative about this issue and only after reading it to her... did she realize that she didn't even comprehend what i was supposed to fill in.

__________________

MIG-31

The stupid thing about the AV ... Is constantly listening to the Con/LD coalition say britton is living on debt and have no money to spend... Yet the last time i heard that the AV were part of LD's conditions of the coalition that the AV goes to a public vote..At the cost of £250M.... (and then decide to invade Lybia) All i can say is the days of Thatcher is returning Fast...

Bare in mind (yes slightly offtopic) i would not trust anything Nick Clegg Says at all...He just comes accross as D Camerons Lap Dog.

__________________

Jac

I actually voted LD last election, only for Clegg to jump into bed with Little Lord Dickie Fauntleroy. I think Clegg has fucked up any opportunity the Lib Dems had at increasing vote share.

Unless AV comes to pass that is.

blibbax

The Lib Dems are dead with or without AV. They've lost their core votes of people tactical voting anti-tory and people looking for an "honest" alternative to the two main parties.

MIG: AV won't cost £250 million, and if it did it'd be good value for money. I'd say that saving Benghazi from massacre, if there's even the remotest chance that we did, is good value too. It does however show how fucked up the defense cuts are. The list of hardware used in the Libya campaign reads remarkably similar to the list of hardware due to be scrapped, and the whole thing would have been colossally cheaper had we not just got rid of our fixed-wing aircraft carrier fleet. The only defense cuts we should be seeing are trident, imo, but that's another debate and I'm off topic already

__________________

MIG-31

I have not said £250m of the top of my head... It were mentioned on a few websites (and Highly criticized).. And i think it could be money better spent...And concider it's only the Lib Dems who wanted the AV...Labour & Cons are against it...

Also take note that the many cuts the New Government are making,It's easy for them to waste money while others are struggling to get by let alone the many people who HAVE already lost there jobs...

No Government is Perfect in the rule,But however when we have a country run by Millionaires who have not got a "Clue" about real Life issues on how to live..or to get by...

The point is stop Wasting the TAX Payers Money. !

And i'd place a bet that don't include Expenses... (Cough Cough)

__________________

blibbax

It's a made up figure that includes non-existent voting machines and the referendum itself.

That's fair enough, but imo how we choose who rules our country is a pretty damn important issue, and £250m, while it seems like a lot, is chicken feed compared to what we blow on some stuff (Trident renewal: £40bn).

I think you'll find that AV was in Labour's general election manifesto, and that the current party leadership is pro-AV. Labour are split on the issue because some Labour MPs feel (mostly wrongly) that it may put their seats at risk.

Agreed. I don't agree with the speed or method of the cuts, however.

There's always going to be a debate about what counts as a waste (for example you think that this referendum's a waste, I don't), but I agree wholeheartedly with this last bit in principle.

__________________

MIG-31

Blib.... A few good point you have made there so,Heads up on them.

Im against the AV as i don't see it being aimed as a + towards the uk as i see it..

But this is now the third Government i have known in my life... I have and will always support Labour...

Im against the Con/Libs because nearly everything they both promised pre-election they have backed out of in power... (no different when John Major were last PM) Always Lied there way into power.And the biggest of all were Nick Clegg with the Tuition Fees..

__________________

blibbax

I'd agree with your sentiment there, so:

If you're not convinced that AV is fairer, or the right thing to do, then look at it this way. You don't want another tory government. There is only one conservative party in the UK (two at most, counting UKIP), with the progressive vote split between Labour, the LibDems and Green (currently - there's also countless smaller parties such as Plaid Cymru, the Social Democratic Party, the Liberals, the Pirate Party...). Now those parties stand for very different things, but they're closer to each other than they are to the conservatives.

Under FPTP it doesn't matter that 60% of the UK's population most of all don't want a conservative government, they can still win. Under AV it would be much harder for the tories ever to achieve a majority (save some massive ideological shift in the electorate).

__________________

Matth

Love the video!

But the useless LibDems should have made proportional representation (or at least THAT as the referendum choice) their price, and not this (in Nick Clegg's own words) "miserable little compromise".

__________________
Mary had a little lamb,
Her father shot it dead
Now Mary takes her lamb to school,
Between two crusts of bread

blibbax

I'm not actually as convinced by PR - it would lead to weaker governance. Take a look at Belgium, broke the Iraqi record a while ago for longest time failing to form a government after an election.

__________________

MIG-31

Another blow for the Lib (Lying through the teeth) Dems....

The AV has got No Vote as it looks...

My vote were No... I just like the simple way that has worked for countless years..And to me it should not change...

As for the Coalition in the uk..Libs have been hammered in the local Council elections i don't see how Nick Clegg is going to stand (already calling for him to stand down) it looks like the UK Politics is going to be screwed up for some time.

__________________

blibbax

I think the result is a bit of a disaster to be honest - especially as the crushing defeat will push reform of the cards for a long time to come, and keep British politics backwards. People said that we shouldn't change the system that had worked for so long when we, for example, introduced universal suffrage. Nobody (seriously) regrets that now.

On the up side, the Libdems did get a hammering. I kind of feel sorry for the old SDP members in there (e.g. Vince Cable) who are being dragged through all this by their Liberal colleagues.

The crushed Libdems will, however, give me some of the result I wanted - the progressive vote isn't going to be as split as it has been recently for some time, so we might be lucky enough not to get another century dominated by conservative (note the small c - I mean the ideology, as opposed to the party) governments.

EDIT: Just saw this - local election results for Labour: "54 councils (+24) 2,130 councillors (+711)"

Makes my point, perhaps :P

__________________