Forum
AV (Alternative Voting)
Created 3rd May 2011 @ 22:50
Locked Pages: « Previous 1 2 3 ... 5 Next »
‘no benefit great enough’ – i guess you would want some persuasion then? But more importantly, if it’s a fraction better, then yes is what you should vote for. The only cost of introducing AV post-referendum is on voter re-education (no2av estimate 30m, which will not be funded by cuts). So it is simply about which is a better system – the issue should not be weighted by preference towards the status quo, rather the merits are the most important.
Also, didn’t know communists were for AV (because they’re not). Socialists are also divided on the issue (between those who want a better system and those who want the labour party to do well). Greens are for, sure, but most of Labour is against (1/2 MPs, 2/3 Peers, 4/5 councillors). So really socialists are split.
Not to mention how just because socialists want it (in theory), that this justifies you voting for a worse system.
labour arent socialist
Quoted from kuma
Yes to AV only because it may potentially lead to PR. Voting No seems like it will close that door forever.
This to be honest. The STV system in Scotland seems to be the nicest in terms of compromises (It’s effectively PR, but with a portion of the seats being decided by FPTP for the sole purpose of actually having someone to go to on local issues).
Regardless, given the utter trash that has come through the mail recently addressed to me, and knowing that every single other stupid person in my whole city has received the same thing, I don’t really see it going through. :(
Well, several of them are, but the official stance is more centrist even if their actual ideology isn’t what they say. The left wing of the party does include socialists, I’m sure you agree, and it is reasonable to say that the majority of them against based off the majority of the entire party is against. Or at the least you can say is that part of the party is divided.
Skyride: STV is effectively AV for local elections, but in multi-member constituencies. The system in scotland is AMS, 50% FPTP 50% regional party list.
Last edited by Imperium,
internet arguments
Quoted from Imperium
Did you know, in the last 100 years, Britain has actually had several coalitions under FPTP? Did you know there was 5 hung parliaments between 1910 and 1928? Did you also know there was a coalition during WWI, WWII, today’s economic crisis, gvts extended the right to vote *and* started the foundations for the welfare state? Political instability, eh? The idea of permanent coalitions was clearly common here if there were so many in such a short period of time.
The hung parliaments between 1910 and 1928 are irrelevant due to the rising Labour Party establishing themselves. Pretty sure I know who’s in government currently as well :DD
I can’t even reply to the rest tbh, your words confuse me. I may not be reading it properly, or my intelligence sucks (which means I’m fucked in aspirations of future career) or it makes no sense. IDK :'((((((((((((((
I think we’re going into parties now not reasons :|
Edit: I don’t think I can even grasp your sarcasm, think i need to go to sleep…
Last edited by Squeak,
How does it make it irrelevant? All it means is that there was a transition between the 3rd and 2nd largest party, in pure electoral terms there was 2 large parties and a small one (sound familiar?). There was a split vote between 3 parties, like there is now. Why is it incompatible? In the end, it’s the same electoral system to a similar scenario. My main point, however, focussed on the effectiveness of coalition government, as shown by the various policy implemented.
I cba to re-write, but if there’s any specific wording problems just quote it.
Its hard enough voting for even one of the lieing cunts tbh, let alone order them ¬_¬
AV lets you put them in order of least bad to most, though.
Yeah but its hard enough to get enough info on who i want running the country, let alone who would be my second choice party for running the country. And you always get the labour/tory fan boy fags that vote for either party reguardless of agenda/leader and will probably put the other party last. Will this lead to the smaller party’s getting alot more seats? I’d say so
Quoted from Tapley ❤
Will this lead to the smaller party’s getting alot more seats? I’d say so
Is that a problem though?
Chris is an absolute genius.
http://a.yfrog.com/img620/6271/tmh.png This may help you understand AV.
Quoted from the bm man
The old system is fine and the new one offers no benefit great enough to warrant such a change
i also hate socialists and communists so its natural to hate the latest thing they support
The actual socialists and communists think that “AV is a pill of poo” and will be voting against it since it isn’t true proportional representation. This may be because they are a bunch of idealistic dreamers who can’t see the benefits of making short term comprises for a long term gain. These have always struck me as worryingly true to life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P2jJdrz9bY
Most of the arguments I’ve seen made against AV by the no campaign are lies, the abuse of statistics or calling the entire population idiots. The good arguments against it as such have been sadly ignored. Although that may be because they more or less point out you need to take electoral reform further and put in place a system that produces a parliament which more directly reflects what the people vote for.
Did you know the Tory (scum) party elect their leader by AV and as such David Cameron is in power today thanks to it? Odd that he hates it so much and doesn’t want the country to get it yet has done nothing to remove it from his own party.
Scotland has had a coalition or minority government after every election since we got our devolved parliament (in 1999 with elections every 5 years). Free further education, prescriptions, eye tests and care in old age have been four of the terrible things this has resulted in our cripplingly weak governments producing. Hard to see why some people want independence and the ability to do more of that sort of dithering on our own to be honest.
Last edited by Krakyn,
To anyone thinking of voting no, FPtP is not a suitable system when there are >2 parties. See http://fakkelbrigade.eu/chris/images/avb.png . People vote for parties that may have very similar goals (go to a pub) but ultimately the more parties representing a broad position, the more diluted it becomes — coffee wins because there’s only one shop nearby. This is not real democracy.
How anyone can say this isn’t a problem is completely beyond me.
Last edited by octochris,
Locked Pages: « Previous 1 2 3 ... 5 Next »
content rss
