Why Do Bbc News Field Reporters Nod...
Film, Media & TV12 mins ago
To AV or not to AV that is the question
47 Answers
Interested to hear some well constructed views and opinions in these final days befor the vote. I'll not say which way I am but I'm sure it'll come out if we get chatting. Of course if you dont have a view or at least a well constructed one, then just maybe we can help you.
Some starters for 10?
- Will it truely create a fairer system of voting?
- Is an election like a horse race?
- Is Rik Mayall still your favourite comedian?
Some starters for 10?
- Will it truely create a fairer system of voting?
- Is an election like a horse race?
- Is Rik Mayall still your favourite comedian?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jezter. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's not that at all arti, it's just that most people are too lazy to vote at all. They don't even want to understand it because they are not going to vote anyway. People in the past suffered to get the vote and as I have said before, Amy Pankhurst didn't chain herself to the railings for nothing as far as I am concerned but other people just don't want to know. You only have to look at the percentages of people who could vote but don't to see that. I makes me really annoyed when people do not use their vote. How can you grumble at the government if you haven't voted. (even if you have wasted your vote in some way, at least try). Rant over.
I agree, Star, wholeheartedly!! Talking of the suffragettes, going off the subject of AV. I remember a few years ago, in Liverpool city centre, some rag-day students set up a campaigning stall, with signs saying 'End Women's Suffrage' and they had a petition. Loads of people signed it. Especially women. They thought it was for battered wives or something.
- Will it truely create a fairer system of voting?
No. How is it far that one person's third choice vote counts as much as another person's first choice vote? Why should voters for minority parties get more votes than voters for majority parties? Why should voters for the third choice party get to choose which of the first two parties wins? How can you say that a candidate has more than 50% of the votes when some of those votes are the third or fourth (or fifth ...) choices of a voter? And so on ...
- Is an election like a horse race?
No.
Is it like choosing whether you're going to a coffee shop or a pub? No. Is it like choosing a meal that isn't on a menu? No. These are both examples I've seen for AV. They're disingenuous.
The only reason to vote AV is because you don't want what we've got - not because you want AV. But a vote for AV is not a vote for something better - it's a vote for AV ...
- Is Rik Mayall still your favourite comedian?
No, but this takes some beating ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLvS_w9gy8g
No. How is it far that one person's third choice vote counts as much as another person's first choice vote? Why should voters for minority parties get more votes than voters for majority parties? Why should voters for the third choice party get to choose which of the first two parties wins? How can you say that a candidate has more than 50% of the votes when some of those votes are the third or fourth (or fifth ...) choices of a voter? And so on ...
- Is an election like a horse race?
No.
Is it like choosing whether you're going to a coffee shop or a pub? No. Is it like choosing a meal that isn't on a menu? No. These are both examples I've seen for AV. They're disingenuous.
The only reason to vote AV is because you don't want what we've got - not because you want AV. But a vote for AV is not a vote for something better - it's a vote for AV ...
- Is Rik Mayall still your favourite comedian?
No, but this takes some beating ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLvS_w9gy8g
It is said that the LibDems will be the main beneficiaries of AV but I am not so sure. I have always maintained that I would continue to vote for one candidate only. However, given the opportunity I would probably vote UKIP first and my mainstream party candidate second. I would never normally vote UKIP under FPTP as it is likely to be a wasted vote. I suspect I am not alone in this. I can see UKIP doing very well out of AV.
I have always really liked Rik Mayall.
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.
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.
IggyB, amusing video but flawed in so many ways. Again, it's disingenuous. It draws a false analogy between cats and dogs and political parties.
If AV is so simple, why are so many (false!) analogies drawn to show how it works? Why isn't it just obvious?
The problem is that when one candidate is chosen to represent 100,000 people, a large number of those people won't feel they are represented by that candidate and could therefore feel disenfranchised (or their vote was "wasted") if that candidate gets in. This problem is not solved by FPTP, AV or any voting system that has one local representative for many people who, by dint of the "local" and "many" qualifiers, are decidedly different...
If AV is so simple, why are so many (false!) analogies drawn to show how it works? Why isn't it just obvious?
The problem is that when one candidate is chosen to represent 100,000 people, a large number of those people won't feel they are represented by that candidate and could therefore feel disenfranchised (or their vote was "wasted") if that candidate gets in. This problem is not solved by FPTP, AV or any voting system that has one local representative for many people who, by dint of the "local" and "many" qualifiers, are decidedly different...
I strongly believe that our voting system needs to evolve and meet the needs of the 21st century. FPTP results of say 18,000 LAB; 18001 CON; 50,000 others; gives CON the seat...even if - when their choice lost - all the 50,000 would have prefered LAB. Thats simply wrong.
Coalitions are not more likely, their is no significant extra cost, no fringe parties suddenly win. All that is pure bull by the no campaign.
Come on, its our oppotunity to make even this slight difference...go on give it a nudge, shake it up a little and make government slightly better - no point waiting for a revolution, this is britian.
Coalitions are not more likely, their is no significant extra cost, no fringe parties suddenly win. All that is pure bull by the no campaign.
Come on, its our oppotunity to make even this slight difference...go on give it a nudge, shake it up a little and make government slightly better - no point waiting for a revolution, this is britian.
Jezter, try a real example, e.g. this one:
http://news.bbc.co.uk.../constituency/c57.stm
Labour held the seat with 38.4% of the vote based on a 55.2% turnout, i.e. they won with only 21.2% of the overall electorate. Seemingly outrageous! But who should have won? Take a look at the table and see what different outcome you think AV should have delivered...
http://news.bbc.co.uk.../constituency/c57.stm
Labour held the seat with 38.4% of the vote based on a 55.2% turnout, i.e. they won with only 21.2% of the overall electorate. Seemingly outrageous! But who should have won? Take a look at the table and see what different outcome you think AV should have delivered...
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles27 mins ago
Man Told He Is Not British After 42...
News29 mins ago
ChatterBank39 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles44 mins ago
