British Comedy Guide

Yes or No to the AV Vote? Page 5

I think I'm going for the No vote. Some of the arguments for the Yes camp are hopelessly emotive.

Quote: Ben @ April 8 2011, 5:27 PM BST

Can someone please sum up the change to me in a few sentences as I can't be arsed looking into it. I promise to shower the one who shows me the light.

;) What with??

1 First past the post who ever has the most votes wins.

2 AV You rate your choices of candidate 1-5
If you win 50% of the vote you win.

Otherwise you miss out the fewest votes candidate and redistribute their votes according to second preferences.

If this still doesn't give a clear 50% majority, you miss out the 3rd candidate and so on till some one has 50%

I don't get the point of marking more than your first and second candidate.

Quote: sootyj @ April 8 2011, 5:36 PM BST

1 First past the post who ever has the most votes wins.

That's PR

First past the post sounds good in theory, but surely some candidates winning bigger areas are going to get more votes than smaller areas? Or are all the areas distributed fairly evenly?

Quote: Griff @ April 7 2011, 10:21 AM BST

AV allows parties to win a seat even if NOBODY votes for them as first preference, but large numbers of people choose them as second or perhaps third preference. i.e. parties that nobody actually wants enough to vote for, but don't have a strong antipathy towards.

This does not seem democratic to me. If you like a party that much, give them your main vote.

A bit misleading there Griff. You get elected under AV because more people actively vote FOR you. If you don't like enough candidates to pick 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc then you don't have to (and shouldn't be encouraged to). To be elected, candidates must register positive votes.

Also, FPTP encourages many people to vote for people they DON'T really want, because they are in constituencies where their real preference has no chance of winning. Under AV you would be more able and inclined to vote for the person you actually want. This seems a bit more democratic to me.

As for AV giving minority parties too much power, anyone care to look at the make-up of the current Government (FPTP)?

For me there are only two possible reasons against voting yes: firstly, to give Nick Clegg and his cronies a good kicking (but they'll get that in the local elections anyway, so no real need); and secondly because it will totally ruin election night TV coverage. The latter point is a very convincing argument for "NO" but on balance I'll be voting "YES".

I think The Now Show summed up the whole thing best: in terms of saying "Yes" or "No" what you are actually saying is: "Now who do I want to annoy more; Cameron or Clegg?"

Personally, I'd rather annoy Cameron.

Having read through the thread now, I think I understand it a bit better. I'll be voting YES!

On polling day I shall be mostly masturbating, eating Gregg's steak bakes and NOT voting or watching any of the coverage.

Quote: TopBanana @ April 8 2011, 8:31 PM BST

On polling day I shall be mostly masturbating, eating Gregg's steak bakes and NOT voting or watching any of the coverage.

;) An ordinary day for Top Banana then.

The problem with the voting system in the UK is not the method that the votes are cast under but more the presence of a third party which splits the left/liberal vote and allows in the Tory party, which is not so much a political party as a pressure group for the rich.

Although it is a shithole jammed with c**ts, the U.K. is not a conservative country naturally - not in the Cameron sense of conservative anyway.

Instead of voting for an electoral change we should be organising the seppuku of the smaller third party.

Regarding the proposed AV change the logical thing to do is vote YES as it will make it harder for the Tories to get elected, but AV is fundamentally undemocratic and even idiotic. Nobody should be forced to give support (no matter how small) to parties that they do not believe in.

The change should be for a single transferable vote, along with compulsory voting and some training for people in political and democratic theory.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ April 9 2011, 3:32 AM BST

Regarding the proposed AV change the logical thing to do is vote YES as it will make it harder for the Tories to get elected, but AV is fundamentally undemocratic and even idiotic. Nobody should be forced to give support (no matter how small) to parties that they do not believe in.

But isn't that precisely what happens under the current system? From preference I would vote Green, on the basis that on the big issues facing the economy they are ultimately right, but under FPTP I would be obliged to vote Labour if there was any hope of unseating the sitting Tory MP (which under FPTP there isn't, though under AV there might be). Under AV I get to vote for the party I believe in AND I have a back up position that prevents the party I actively abhor from gaining power.

You are right though that the reason the Tories are throwing their weight behind FPTP is that it allows in a sort of moderate extremism that does not have the support of the country as a whole (the reason some on the left of the Labour party also nostalgically support it.)

It's a bit depressing that the biggest thing AV has going for it that we can use it to stick it to the people we hate.

Quote: chipolata @ April 9 2011, 1:07 PM BST

It's a bit depressing that the biggest thing AV has going for it that we can use it to stick it to the people we hate.

Well the people we elect should do their jobs better.

Quote: chipolata @ April 9 2011, 1:07 PM BST

It's a bit depressing that the biggest thing AV has going for it that we can use it to stick it to the people we hate.

Not so much sticking it to the people you hate as ensuring that the people you hate can't stick it to you.

Share this page