Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

Taff you are right!!!! Twinky you are Wrong!!!!

On 24 Apr 2011 at 8:24am Thruth teller wrote:

On Thu 21 Apr at: 08:26 Taff wrote:
But if you vote for one person only and that person does not achieve the 51% then your vote no longer counts!
Please tell me I am wrong?
On Thu 21 Apr at: 08:36 Twinky wrote:
Its OK, you are wrong...
If you vote for one person only, then your vote for that person is valid up to the point where that candidate either wins, or is eliminated as having the fewest votes of the remaining candidates.
So if you vote for Labour in a 3 way race, but Labour only get 35% of the vote, with the Tories 25% and the Liberals 40%, then the first party to get eliminated is the Tories.
Your vote will still be relevant at this stage, even though your party only got 35% of the vote. The second preferences of the Tory votes will then be added to the existing Liberal or Labour votes, so that one party will get more than 50% of the vote.

ACTUALLY Simple maths here!!!! AV promotes that 50% of the voter turnout will decide the winner.
In that case if ANYONE only votes for one candidate that can not happen.
Take Lewes... 10,000 (out of say 100,000) people ONLY vote for the green party, And in round 2 the Greens fall out and their votes arent re-distributed cause they ONLY VOTED ONCE. 10% of the voters can not now be counted.
So at the final round Conservatives have 42% of the vote and Lib Dems have 48%. Thats Still not a 50% majority and there for the vote is Void! cause under AV it guarrentees that 50% of the voters get their choice!!
Its BU11 5hit! unless of course you then drop the conservative vote out and recount with just the Lib Dems...
SO NO AV DOESNT EVEN WORK UNDER THE RULES THEY WANT TO INDRODUCE IT WITH!!! laughable!!!!

On 24 Apr 2011 at 10:10am MC wrote:

The rather crucial point you've missed is that anyone who voted for a minority party will (in 99% of cases) add another choice for a party that has a chance of winning.

The scenario you paint is never likely to happen (and I sure there will contingency rules written in small print just in case it should happen).

On 24 Apr 2011 at 10:16am Expat two wrote:

Yes but also, under this (incredibly unrealistic) scenario, the worst thats happened is that AV has returned the same result as FPTP. Which we all know is generally going to happen anyway. What is there to lose by going with AV?

On 24 Apr 2011 at 11:04am Please Clarify wrote:

If AV is implimented, is there ANY way that my vote will go to a labour party candidant?

On 24 Apr 2011 at 11:14am MC wrote:

If you do not add Labour as a choice your vote will never be counted as a Labour vote. If you really hate Labour you could add every other candidate "but" Labour as a choice. This ensures that your vote would always be cast against Labour. In this way AV allows you to express your dislike of a candidate.

The amount of misconception and misunderstanding surrounding AV is astonishing. The No to AV lobby have done very well to confuse people so thoroughly. AV really is very simple. There are two threads below that explain it very well. Reading the first post in one of them should clarify matters for you.

On 24 Apr 2011 at 5:15pm supporter wrote:

what nobody mentions is the cost of implementing this crazy system.
The money could be better spent on more doctors,nurses and the like.

On 24 Apr 2011 at 6:02pm MC wrote:

The No to Av campaign *have* been mentioning the crazy cost of it. This is another of their untruths. Think about it. Where is the extra cost? A little more adding up in marginal constituencies? Not an arm and a leg is it? It certainly cost nothing when compared with the wasteful cut/spend Tory/labour cycles that we suffer from under FPTP.

On 24 Apr 2011 at 6:17pm Twinky wrote:

...tiny problem TT.. "Thats Still not a 50% majority and there for the vote is Void!"...no, the vote ISN'T void. The winner is the one with 50% majority of the remaining votes. So in your weird scenario the Lib Dems would win.