Posted April 19, 201114 yr comment_113781 So, with the referendum just 16 days away, what's your view? Will you actually vote? (Seeinghow quite a lot people on here aren't eligible to vote due to age, this will probably end up being slightly more hypothetical, but meh).For those who have no clue what I'm on about... On the May 5th, a referendum about whether general elections is happening about whether general elections should switch from the first past the post system to the Alternative Vote (AV). It's binding, so whatever the result, that's the final answer.Personally, I support the yes campaign! Whilst AV might not be the simplest of systems, nor the most proportional, it's a step in the right direction. I'd much rather a slightly more complicated system, that allows us to have proportionality but still create strong governments, than a system that's disproportional but almost always creates secure governments.So yeah, discuss away.
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113783 In my opinion, AV is worst than First Passed the Post, so if I could vote, I'd vote no. What we need is Proportional Representation, not AV.
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113784 I'd be voting no if I could.Besides, even if I were on the 'yes' side, I'd want full PR not just AV. At least AV+, AV won't make enough of a change to be worthwhile.Edit: Beat me Jord!
April 19, 201114 yr Author comment_113785 Whilst I understand that view, I don't want PR.What's the point in having a proportional system that means strong and stable government are out of the question? With PR, I think we'd be seeing more and more of these 'rainbow coalitions' that was discussed at the last general election, which I think is just a step back. Don't get me wrong, I don't think AV is the greatest system in the world, but it's a step in the right direction. If we were to swap to full out PR now, I could only see it have terrible consequences.
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113787 Tbh, it needs to actually be simple enough to explain to those who don't particularly follow politics...This is where it fails...
April 19, 201114 yr Author comment_113788 I agree that it's not the easiest of systems to understand; that is its weakest point. In fact, my Politics teacher at college explained it to us wrongly (twice) and explained it differently to another class (wrongly again!)
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113791 I think the reason PR is less likely to be used is that, although you don't tend to think about it, around maybe 10 seats could go to BNP and other parties with more radical views, making it far more difficult for the government. PR is far more fair though, I don't agree with AV, I can't imagine all people taking into consideration the effect that their second and third choices could make!
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113792 The thing is with AV, people will vote tactically on their second choice, and first choice will be who they want. Which means someone who isn't even wanted by the majority of the population but tactically wanted rather than someone else. Proportional representation represents what the people actually want. It works in Germany. It'll work here.
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113794 Whats the problem with the candidate with the most number of votes in your local area winning and gaining the right to represent the people? AV is just not needed, FPTP is simple and easy to understand and it works fine. Remember there is no perfect system, democracy is not achievable.
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113811 I'm gonna say yes, mainly cos my brother said he'll be voting yes and he's a sensible guy. Also he knows a lot about politics and explained it to me, and going by his explanation, I say yes. I can't remember word for word what he said, and do bear on mind I've been awake 20 hours, just got back from Alton So rather tired! But he was basically saying with the system at the moment, the party with the most votes wins regardless of whether they got 50% or more of the vote. With AV they would have to have at least 50% of the votes to win. Like, this year the Tories had the most seats but didn't get 50% or more of the vote. Exactly :angry2:As I said, don't hold me to that 100% but it was something along those lines. If I'm wrong, please don't get all "Grr" cos I'm far too tired and dehydrated
April 19, 201114 yr comment_113812 Like, this year the Tories had the most seats but didn't get 50% or more of the vote. Exactly I highly doubt it'd change anything though. Overall, people would've voted more for tories than they would for labour... having been in power for 13yrs. AV is a load of bollocks - there's a reason why only three countries in the world use it. It's cos its ****.It's a bit like replacing a nice and sturdy B&M of which we all know, and relatively trust and live with, and replacing it with slammer - good intentions, but a load of ****.
April 20, 201114 yr comment_113814 To all the Tory boys and girls out there:You may be interested to learn that the Conservative Party use AV to select their leaders. Why is the system good enough for them, and not for us?Maybe giving a top five list is beyond the intelligence of Joe Public.Source: Conservative Party, Leadership Elections: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-01366.pdf
April 20, 201114 yr comment_113817 To all the Tory boys and girls out there:You may be interested to learn that the Conservative Party use AV to select their leaders. Why is the system good enough for them, and not for us?Maybe giving a top five list is beyond the intelligence of Joe Public.Source: Conservative Party, Leadership Elections: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-01366.pdfI'm not a Tory boy, but I still disagree with AV. Ed Milliband is the leader of the labour Party thanks to AV, if we're going to have a system that can **** up that much, I don't want it.It doesn't represent what the people want. Only PR does.
April 20, 201114 yr Author comment_113824 It doesn't represent what the people want. Only PR does.Using that logic, out of the given options of AV and FPTP, AV is better as it's more proportional. Unless you're saying that FPTP represents peoples' views...That, or I've completely misunderstood you
April 20, 201114 yr comment_113831 Whats the problem with the candidate with the most number of votes in your local area winning and gaining the right to represent the people? Dave
April 20, 201114 yr comment_113834 As the graph shows - the old political boundaries made it far too easy for labour to gain a winning majority.They've changed these boundaries, but doesn't make it that much easier. Just shows, that it takes a little uncomfort with a tory govt to kick them out, whereas labour has to have done awfully .
April 20, 201114 yr comment_113847 We're voting for AV though, not AV+ are we?Shows what difference AV would've made to the 2010 general election
April 20, 201114 yr Author comment_113848 Yeah, we're voting for regular AV. AV+, whilst more proportional, is more confusing what with the whole preference voting and a second vote for something else (don't know all the details of AV+).What I'm interested to know is when people say they don't want AV, they want 'proportional representation', what system would they like? STV? AMS? I'd much rather have FPTP or AV than systems that rely on silly formulae or quota to decide a result.. And don't get me started on the Regional Party List...
April 21, 201114 yr comment_113908 One vote for one person......Av seems good on paper but really isnt, Additional member system ftw
May 1, 201114 yr Author comment_114822 If your cat is still unsure on how they will vote on Thursday, please ensure that they watch this video.
May 1, 201114 yr comment_114850 http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/5_may/referendum_2011.aspxOr use this thingy - and watch. Why do people want AV again?!
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.