How will you vote if you want neither FPTP nor AV

[Lord Camomile]

Yes, yes we do need another one of these

I know it's been covered on other threads, but it's the specific issue that's most concerning (and confusing) me in the whole debate, so I thought a specific thread might be useful (basically I want it so I'm doing it - that's democracy!).

So, if you do want the voting system to change, but to something other than AV, will you be voting "yes" or "no" on 5th May? For the record, the question put is:

At present, the UK uses the 'first past the post' system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the 'alternative vote' system be used instead?

 

[skyscraper101]

Add a poll: yes to AV, no to AV, spoiled ballot, won't vote, comedy option

 

[Lord Camomile]

My comedy option was truncated by the character limit, which is also why it took longer to add

The 'official' comedy option is: "This poll does not use a voting system I approve of and so I refuse to take part, while fully acknowledging I am fundmentally undermining my own point by voting for this option".

Feel free to give SNL my contact details.

 

[lopsidedbunny]

I do not want FPTP or AV and will be voting "no" on 5th May.
I do not want FPTP or AV and will be voting "yes" on 5th May.

 

[joustmaster]

I don't know what to do - FPTP system seem a bit unfair, AV seems a bit silly and PR seems to be the right kind of option (but that isn't an option for some reason). I have no interest in voting to piss off either Clegg or Cameron, as that seems childish and not forward thinking.

It feels that If I vote for FPTP I am saying "I am happy with this system, lets not bother changing it ever" , which I is not my opinion. If I vote for AV it feels like that they will make that one change then not change it again for a century, which is just as bad.

 

[Onket]

Exactly^

I was leaning towards voting 'No', or possibly spoiling my ballot paper (but I don't really approve of doing that).

 

[Santino]

I'm putting No as first preference, abstaining as second preference, and Yes as third preference.

 

[Lord Camomile]

I don't know what to do - FPTP system seem a bit unfair, AV seems a bit silly and PR seems to be the right kind of option (but that isn't an option for some reason). I have no interest in voting to piss off either Clegg or Cameron, as that seems childish and not forward thinking.

It feels that If I vote for FPTP I am saying "I am happy with this system, lets not bother changing it ever" , which I is not my opinion. If I vote for AV it feels like that they will make that one change then not change it again for a century, which is just as bad.

Yup, that's pretty much my dillema in a nutshell.

 

[Garek]

When it comes to changing the voting system the Titanic and something to do with deck chairs springs to mind.

I won't be voting.

 

[butchersapron]

Yup, that's pretty much my dillema in a nutshell.

Well, in that case if you oppose the cuts vote for whatever option you think would best help that aim.

 

[joustmaster]

Why haven't they put forward the option of PR?

 

[killer b]

Why haven't they put forward the option of PR?

because they didn't want to.

 

[Onket]

I'm putting No as first preference, abstaining as second preference, and Yes as third preference.

Yeah, like I said, spoiling the ballot paper is an option.

Hardly worthy of a :farcepalm:

 

[Santino]

Why haven't they put forward the option of PR?

Because Clegg accepted the offer of PR in a desperate attempt to get into power.

 

[joustmaster]

Because Clegg accepted the offer of PR in a desperate attempt to get into power.

?

 

[skyscraper101]

I really don't know which way to vote. I've gone from yes, to no, to spoiled ballot, but now think I may vote yes as I dislike FPTP more than I dislike AV. Personally I favour some kind of D'Hondt method PR but I don't see how voting 'No' will get us there anytime soon, and I don't necessarily buy that AV will prevent this ever happening. So right now I'm voting 'Yes to AV'

 

[skyscraper101]

Because Clegg accepted the offer of PR in a desperate attempt to get into power.

?

he means AV

 

[Santino]

Yeah I did.

 

[magneze]

I really don't know which way to vote. I've gone from yes, to no, to spoiled ballot, but now think I may vote yes as I dislike FPTP more than I dislike AV. Personally I favour some kind of D'Hondt method PR but I don't see how voting 'No' will get us there anytime soon, and I don't necessarily buy that AV will prevent this ever happening. So right now I'm voting 'Yes to AV'

A No vote is not a vote for FPTP, it's a vote against AV. Whereas a Yes vote is a positive endorsement of AV. IMO of course, people will tell you otherwise but I am totally right.

 

[joustmaster]

I guess I will sack it off.

 

[Streathamite]

Why haven't they put forward the option of PR?

because wimpmeister clegg bottled it

 

[Onket]

I guess I will sack it off.

If everyone did that it will look like people aren't bothered.

 

[Lord Camomile]

A No vote is not a vote for FPTP

While this is of course true, I can't help thinking fans of FPTP might just spin it another way.

But I'm such a cynical little chappie.

 

[Streathamite]

I guess I will sack it off.

a better idea; vote 'no' to really fuck nick clegg up

 

[joustmaster]

If everyone did that it will look like people aren't bothered.

I guess that leaves going down there and burning the place down then

 

[Onket]

Start a Facebook campaign.

 

[Onket]

a better idea; vote 'no' to really fuck nick clegg up

See, I don't really get this. There is a much bigger issue here, and whatever the results are on the night, they seem to be able to be spun to 'prove' that the public want something that they actually don't/might not.

 

[kabbes]

See, I don't really get this. There is a much bigger issue here, and whatever the results are on the night, they seem to be able to be spun to 'prove' that the public want something that they actually don't/might not.

There is no bigger issue than the systematic dismantling of our welfare state.

 

[Streathamite]

See, I don't really get this. There is a much bigger issue here, and whatever the results are on the night, they seem to be able to be spun to 'prove' that the public want something that they actually don't/might not.

AV - as kabbes has said - is not a bigger issue. On the one hand we have a tiny, footling change to the voting system - a change so far short of real PR that Clegg himself described it as "a miserable little compromise" and one that leaves our sclerotic system intact, and still basically all about the 3 main parties - and on the other, a wholesale dismantling of the welfare state, and a ferocious, all-out assault on the lives, and welfare, and life chances of the poorest 1/3rd in the country, whilst also putting through laws 7 rules that amount to the biggest ever let-off for the rich and the big corporates. In short, thatcherism x about a billion.
This may be stopped by voting 'no', in that it may trigger a coalition break-up, courtesy of a full-on civil war in the LDs - it will certainly cause unrest, as the membership wonder ever more why they're in this coalition. It's worth that chance.
if this was real PR, I'd vote yes. But it isn't.

 

[Onket]

It seems a bit of a leap to say that voting 'no' will stop the systematic dismantling of our welfare state.

But I do appreciate a 'yes' vote certainly won't, and therefore 'no' is the much better vote.