Will common sense prevail?

[CanisMajor]

http://news.sky.com/s...Lead_Over_No_Campaign
Looks like the "NO" campaign are winning the argument. Have the public finally seen through this crackpot idea?

[ladybirder]

I hope so ,but won't be happy until I see the results on Friday.

[Gromit]

Don't think the YES ever had a chance. Low vote 65-35 for no change.

Though AV is flawed so is FPTP. A choice between two very poor systems.

[mike11111]

I doubt you'll see the results on Friday. I read that counting won't begin till 4 p.m. Friday.

[CanisMajor]

But Eddie the stuff about Nth place getting in is not bull it's arithmetically possible and will undoubtedly happen. It will especially favour the minority parties like UKIP/Greens etc. why is it bull?

[Dodger666]

My local MP, a Cabinet Minister, gave her reasons in the local paper last week why we should vote No in the referendum. The main reason she gave was that AV was confusing. I e-mailed her and said if a Cabinet Minister thought it was confusing they shouldn't be an MP in the first place.

Also, in the Daily Politics show today, after PMQs, they stated that both Margaret Thatcher & Tony Blair would have had much larger majorities if AV had been used in their day. How could they say that? As we only had one person one vote there would not have been any preference votes to redistribute.

Are they assuming that the person with the fewest votes would have had their votes given to the person with the most votes? If so they're wrong.

If I'm wrong I'd be grateful of an explanation.

[CanisMajor]

the candidate with the lowest vote is eliminated and their second preference votes are distributed to he other candidates. this process is repeated until someone gets to 50%.

[scotman]

I agree with Dodger. There is nothing difficult about AV. It is certainly not the best system but is better than what exists at present.
Remember - vote early, vote often, vote yes.

[andy-hughes]

Dodger - I suggest that your MP is inferring that the AV system may prove confusing for the 'average' voter, not that she herself finds it confusing.

I think that with the current levels of apathy among the electorate, anything that makes voting even marginally more complex will simply drive down the levels of votes as people simply avoid having to think too hard about their voting paper.

[andy-hughes]

Doubt it Trig.

We have a generation who think that politics and democracy simply does not involve them - and politicians do nothing at all to change that perception.

Church and state are run by those who are so remote from the rest of us that they might as well move to Mars and 'rule' from there.

[classylady60]

I there are only (I think) about 3 counties in the WORLD who use the av system...and one of those (I think) are not happy with it....why should be change from something that has been reasonable enough for us all these years. Until they come up with a much fairer system perhaps people feel "better the devil you know..."

[flip_flop]

I have already voted No - I can't see what's wrong with the simple polarity system: the candidate with the most votes wins. This is by far the best system - OK, granted, the candidate with the most votes may not have the majority of the whole number of votes cast, but the fact is he/she does have the most votes of any candidate.

I think its a case of crap or get off the pot - have a referundum on full PR (which I'd also vote No on) or keep the current system. AV is a half-arsed compromise.

[morleyman]

Can't anyone see that the fringe parties, ie BNP, UKIP, Greens, Independents etc will be the first to go and even the Lib Dems who are usually 3rd in most areas will likely go out ..they certainly would have done in my area. If Av is accepted You can use one vote or several and I believe it will be back to Labour and Tories who will get most seats.

[Old_Geezer]

If that is so, then the whole thing is an expensive waste of time and a complicated count, as more often than not it will change nothing.

[birdie1971]

I feel that anyone who finds AV confusing shouldn't be eligible to vote. The 'No' campaigners have made a big thing about AV being complicated. Indeed it is, if you find your three-times-table a challenge.

Looking at the projected votes, it appears that a great many people find rudimentary mathematics a problem.

Hey, ho. Roll on decades of unrepresentative governance due to apathy and ignorance.

[mike11111]

I thought that your anti-religious posts usually transcended the acceptable boundaries of self-righteous arrogance and intolerance, but this one takes the biscuit!

[Dodger666]

Andy said - "Dodger - I suggest that your MP is inferring that the AV system may prove confusing for the 'average' voter, not that she herself finds it confusing."

Andy, My MP simply said AV was confusing. If she thought it was confusing to the average voter then she was being disrespectul to the people who put her in the job. If she honestly believes it's confusing she should resign. These are the people who govern us for heavens sake.

Birdie said - "I feel that anyone who finds AV confusing shouldn't be eligible to vote".

Birdie, I agree with you completely.

[Booldawg]

most politicians arent backing it - so it must be a good idea.