On 2 May 2011 at 9:42am Paul Newman wrote:
A collection of polls shows the Yes vote closing to within 8 points so its going to be close.I know many people are bored stiff with the whole thing but its vital that people get out and vote against this appalling system
Conservatives - The race is not won and as the late Lord Jenkins said in his royal commission on constitutional reform of Blair's thrashing of Major:
'A 'best guess' projection of the shape of the current Parliament under AV suggests on one highly reputable estimate the following outcome with the actual FPTP figures given in brackets after the projected figures: Labour 452 (419), Conservative 96 (165), Liberal Democrats 82 (46), others 29 (29). The overall Labour majority could thus have risen from 169 to 245.'
Remember it could be closer than it looks .Turnout will be low, but how low will depend on where you live. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales are having elections for their devolved assemblies. So they will vote more and they do not like the Conservatives It is entirely possible that we could have AV imposed on England by Counties with their own devolved assemblies
Get out and vote NO save democracy
I will deal with why Labour Green and others must vote no leading up to the big day .The only winners are the Lib Dems .
On 2 May 2011 at 11:57am jrsussex wrote:
The greatest danger does indeed come from Wales and Scotland, I do not believe Northern ireland will vote Yes. The other deciding factor for those wishing to achieve a Yes may will be a low turn-out in England. What will those who argue that the FPTP system often gives success to the minority vote say if a low turn out hands victory to the Yes campaign?
On 2 May 2011 at 12:09pm supporter wrote:
give it a bloody rest
On 2 May 2011 at 5:04pm MC wrote:
Hopefully the underfunded, people-supported Yes to AV campaign will win out but it seems unlikely when pitched against the extremely well funded and secretive No to AV campaign. Nothing to hide there... or no, not much.
It's hard to imagine a system more damaging. more conservative and less likely to change than first past the post.
On 3 May 2011 at 9:40am jrsussex wrote:
What are posters thoughts on making the casting of your vote obligatory? It would put to bed all the arguments of parties elected with a small percentage of the total electorate. At present one can hardly blame the political parties if for example they win on a 41% of the votes cast if the overall turn-out is say just 67%. If it were obligatory it would remove the necessity for AV or PR and presumably give us the party that had obtained most votes. I am not necessarily for legislation forcing people to use their vote but had a very interesting discussion last night with people who think that is the way forward, which may be right but being compelled to vote is not British, or is it?
On 3 May 2011 at 10:50am Paul Newman wrote:
Most of Australia is has compulsory voting and you also have to fill in all your preferences. Arguably it is this rather than AV itself that makes their elections so negative and idiotic. What people forget is that there is a reason for this.The problem compulsory votes is supposed to solve is this one :
Take Party A and B -Say Party A get 55% and Party B 45% of votes cast on a 60% turnout. Party A wins
Now add loony tunes Parties C D E . They get 2.5 % each
Now Party A has not got over 50%
Now the single thing that matters most is who can attract the second choice of loony tunes little Party extremists.
It is felt by some that it is not fair that the views of extremists are not more important than those who do not vote all all and that these are the last people who should be deciding who represents everyone. It is also felt that the relative indifference of Parties to getting voters out as opposed to attracting extremist second choices is a bad thing.
This is especially a POV of the Labour Party who object to the least likely to vote ( The poor ) getting ignored completely under AV.
Under the AV system we are offered you get the advantage of less stupidity and negativeness , probably, but the disadvantage of the non voter being ignored . In practice this means the Labour Party ignoring its lost working class vote . The poorest will suffer under optional AV which is why , despite its draw backs Austrlia mostly has Compulsory AV
Optional AV attacks the poor . This does not concern the Liberal Party whose vote is middle-class
On 3 May 2011 at 11:18am Vote Yes! wrote:
I found an article over the weekend that details who is paying for the No campaign and how it's majoritively Tory MPs and their associates but can't find it again now.
However here's an interesting A-to-Z article of how all the No reasons are nonsense
Check it out here »
On 3 May 2011 at 11:32am Paul Newman wrote:
A lot of that is incredibly weak, for example it would not especially benefit the Lib Dems . Of course it would as they are a second choice centrist Party . The it would not produce hung Parliaments .
Of course it would because it would give the Lib Dems more power Incidentally although the BNP Party are against the majority of BNP voters support AV .
On 3 May 2011 at 11:57pm Frak wrote:
So how come it is ok for the tory party leader elections, but not for the country?
On 5 May 2011 at 1:25am independent thinker wrote:
Bet nobody reads this now, but just for the record I'm voting yes to AV. When someone reacts as violently as Mr Newman here, you know they have an axe to grind. I believe we should have as democratic a system as possible and AV is undoubtedly more democratic than FPTP. AV gives voters one vote but a number of ways in which to express their wishes. The counting process results in a clearer picture of what voting intentions really are. Simples.
On 5 May 2011 at 9:28am Paul Newman wrote:
What do you mean violently ?Despite endless personal abuse ( some of which has been removed ) I have resolutely played the ball and made the case as best I can.
To be honest I have been quite shocked at the intolerance of other POV`s when Liberal are the majority .
If you want to see what a relatively informed and discussion of the issues looks like then follow the link under vote yes . If you want to continue throwing out snide slurs then carry on as you are .
On 5 May 2011 at 12:27pm MC wrote:
You have been rude and aggressive to many people on this forum, myself included. If I had time I'd trawl the threads and copy the examples. You might have been a touch more tolerant of late, but it takes a while for people to adjust. It's going to take me quite a while.
The Vote No to AV lobby have prosecuted a campaign based on provision of disinformation, tactics that don't tend to encourage reasonable discussion.
I'll be voting yes to AV for many reasons, not the least being to reduce the overwhelming power of the two main parties.
On 5 May 2011 at 1:34pm Grrr wrote:
Funny how this forum has gone quiet on polling day.
Strikes me that the overwhelming majority of posters on this site must be politically motivated, which makes me less inclined to bother reading it in future.
I was under the impression that the majority on here were general, community-minded individuals with a wealth of views. But it turns out it's just a mouthpiece for party politics and those seeking to lord it over us plebs.
On 5 May 2011 at 2:07pm Smiler wrote:
Hear hear, but then it's up to you if you want local issues on this forum, start some local discussions and hopefully Nobman won't mess them up with his Tory indoctrinations