To be fair, there hasn't been an intelligent, reasonable point made on either side. Hyperbole, sentimentality, celebrity politicans, unsubstantiated claims about one thing or another...
Yes or No to the AV Vote? Page 12
I can't decide on which politicians I hate the most in order to make an informed decision.
However there does seem to be a lot more celebrities endorsing the yes vote which is making me think that it can't possibly be a good idea
Quote: john lucas 101 @ May 5 2011, 10:56 AM BSTTo be fair, there hasn't been an intelligent, reasonable point made on either side. Hyperbole, sentimentality, celebrity politicans, unsubstantiated claims about one thing or another...
True it has been a dismal debate, but the Metro advert, implying that under AV it would be possible for an individual voter to cast eight votes for the late Elvis Presley, plumbs the depths of disingenuity.
Quote: Steve Sunshine @ May 5 2011, 11:03 AM BSTthere does seem to be a lot more celebrities endorsing the yes vote which is making me think that it can't possibly be a good idea
There are a lot of billionaire capitalists endorsing the no vote, which make me suspect that it serves their self-interest rather more than it does mine.
Just pretend you're voting on a more interesting subject like bringing back hanging.
Which of course I am in favour of.
As a dyslexic I was under the impression I was voting to keep the Victoria and Albert Museum
Quote: Timbo @ May 5 2011, 11:08 AM BSTThere are a lot of billionaire capitalists endorsing the no vote, which make me suspect that it serves their self-interest rather more than it does mine.
Ok well if it gets rid of Billionaire capitalists then I shall probably vote
Yes then.
Well ideally the referendum would be on whether to reintroduce hanging for billionaire capitalists, pleasing everyone.
I'm going to vote both yes and no. Surely this is how it should be done by everybody?
Oh wait... 
Quote: Timbo @ May 5 2011, 11:29 AM BSTWell ideally the referendum would be on whether to reintroduce hanging for billionaire capitalists outside the Victoria and Albert Museum, pleasing everyone.
Humphreys was right, or at least a lot closer to being right than Cameron, who is the one who should be apologising.
AV is a means of having run-off elections without the need for physically holding multiple election rounds. The aim of run off elections is to eliminate candidates who have no chance of being elected and then allow everyone to have a chance to choose between electable candidates.
So each elector has their vote counted precisely same number of times (at least up until the point at which all candidates they consider acceptable hhave been eliminated.) Cameron was talking misleading nonsense, as the No campaign have done throughout.
So:
AV gave us Cameron (sort of. He won after four rounds of voting) who doesn't want AV.
Boris who doesn't want AV
Miliband who does.
First past the post gave us:
Nick Clegg, who is a git and therefore his opinions don't count.
And the current government.
No, still don't know which way to jump.
Quote: Griff @ May 5 2011, 12:50 PM BSTI'll be f**king glad by the end of the day that I don't have to hear the "Yes as a first preference No as a second preference" joke any bleeding more.
I voted yes, and I feel very good about it. I'm confident I made the right decision.
Quote: Nat Wicks @ May 5 2011, 2:04 PM BSTI voted yes, and I feel very good about it. I'm confident I made the right decision.
Ditto.
I feel a bit sorry for the Lib Dems. They sold their soul to the devil to get this referendum and if they fail it's hard to see the point of them any more.
Quote: chipolata @ May 5 2011, 2:45 PM BSTI feel a bit sorry for the Lib Dems. They sold their soul to the devil to get this referendum and if they fail it's hard to see the point of them any more.
They'll argue that it wasn't AV that they wanted but PR.
Voted. No happy about having voted the way I did but probably won't be happy if I'd voted the other way.