Yes/No to AV - Urban Votes

[MellySingsDoom]

You notice a pattern here - Oxford, Cambridge, Brighton, "bits" of London - meccas for comfortable liberals. Those nasty, nasty proles and their uncouth ways. We're so glad that Clegg is teaching them all a lesson by making their feckless work and stopping their smelly children from going to Uni. It's all because we care.

 

[ymu]

Looking at that it's just poncy Guardian reader types who voted Yes basically.

Yes. The ones that care more about electoral reform than the cuts.

Morons.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

wtf are you on about? How do you jump from voting yes in this referendum to 'caring more about electoral reform than the cuts'? You've been reduced to ern levels of imbecility with that comment.

 

[ernestolynch]

wtf are you on about? How do you jump from voting yes in this referendum to 'caring more about electoral reform than the cuts'? You've been reduced to ern levels of imbecility with that comment.

Ah, go and tweet you whingeing liberal.

 

[ymu]

wtf are you on about? How do you jump from voting yes in this referendum to 'caring more about electoral reform than the cuts'? You've been reduced to ern levels of imbecility with that comment.

We're talking about a specific demographic group. I believe, as a broad generalisation, my observation about them is correct.

 

[8115]

So you really think that people did (and should have?) voted on a massively important question just to express their discontent with the Lib Dems? I think that people voted the way they did because the referendum was pretty much swept under the carpet and there was very little good concrete information around. The reason why the places that voted yes voted that was was more to do with the (successful in those areas) branding of AV as a hip intelligent choice in my view.

 

[ymu]

So you really think that people did (and should have?) voted on a massively important question just to express their discontent with the Lib Dems? I think that people voted the way they did because the referendum was pretty much swept under the carpet and there was very little good concrete information around. The reason why the places that voted yes voted that was was more to do with the (successful in those areas) branding of AV as a hip intelligent choice in my view.

Well, yes.

For a start, parse the AV question properly and it reads:

Do you want the Liberal Democrats to be king-makers every time we have a hung parliament, and for smaller parties to have no chance of winning an MP?

We answered NO on perfectly rational grounds, regardless of other circumstances.

But the other circumstances are important. The coalition dies with the first party to falter. Given a choice of which one to hurt for maximum effect, of course you're going to go for the weaker target. The Tory base is rock solid - the Lib Dems have lost 70% of their voters. Which one do you think will blink first?

 

[articul8]

You notice a pattern here - Oxford, Cambridge, Brighton, "bits" of London - meccas for comfortable liberals. Those nasty, nasty proles and their uncouth ways. We're so glad that Clegg is teaching them all a lesson by making their feckless work and stopping their smelly children from going to Uni. It's all because we care.

Brixton, Tottenham and Hackney - comfortable liberals? Turnout nails the myth that no-one gave a shit.

Just hope that Labour and left voters who backed a No vote find that hands majority to the Tories at the next GE. Hope all the PR supporters saw Reid, Beckett and the Tories crowing about how this "put the issue to bed" and was a positive endorsement of FPTP.

 

[Refused as fuck]

Turnout nails the myth that no-one gave a shit.

What?

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Brixton, Tottenham and Hackney - comfortable liberals? Turnout nails the myth that no-one gave a shit.

Just hope that Labour and left voters who backed a No vote find that hands majority to the Tories at the next GE. Hope all the PR supporters saw Reid, Beckett and the Tories crowing about how this "put the issue to bed" and was a positive endorsement of FPTP.

David Lammy was a big Yes to AV man in Tottnham, so that would have had an impact on the community, he being a popular MP and all that. Brixton and Hackney - liberals a go-go (certainly the case with Brixton - I live near enough to the place to know!)

As for your 2nd point - Cameron is gerrymandering consitituency boundaries to his benefit, with the full consent and knowledge of the Lib Dems. The fix will be in, and AV would have made piss-all difference anway. 10-15 more Orange Book Tory MPs? No thanks. I'd rather deal with an honest cunt than a two-faced, self serving one.

 

[articul8]

What?

People were saying that London would see turnouts of 15% in the absence of other elections. Didn't prove to be the case.

 

[ymu]

There is no way on God's green earth that the Tories are going to win an outright majority at the next election, you tool. And it's now more likely that they would under AV than it is under FPTP.

If you can't examine the possibility that you might be wrong about something, you can never learn anything. Learning things is good. Try it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There is no way on God's green earth that the Tories are going to win an outright majority at the next election, you tool.

Really? They did in 1983. Their vote held up this week despite everything they've done and are planning to do. Not a bad result for a sitting govt instituting unpopular policies early on in its term. And despite the libdem collapse, half the vote last week still went to one or other of the governing parties.

 

[Refused as fuck]

People were saying that London would see turnouts of 15% in the absence of other elections. Didn't prove to be the case.

Completely irrelevant. What was the average turnout and how does it prove opposite of reality (i.e. "nailed the myth that no-one gave a shit").

 

[frogwoman]

Some areas did get less than 15% iirc.

 

[articul8]

where?

 

[Refused as fuck]

Completely irrelevant. What was the average turnout?

 

[articul8]

About 40% - not bad at all given that there where no other elections in London and other areas like Cornwall.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Really? They did in 1983. Their vote held up this week despite everything they've done and are planning to do. Not a bad result for a sitting govt instituting unpopular policies early on in its term. And despite the libdem collapse, half the vote last week still went to one or other of the governing parties.

Their vote holding up doesnt equate to a majority, though. The Lib Dems have lost a huge amount of their support and a lot of this will have gone to Labour.

 

[Refused as fuck]

About 40%

So that's a massive majority who don't give a shit. Thanks, now fuck off.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Their vote holding up doesnt equate to a majority, though.

You wouldn't particularly expect it to at this point in the electoral cycle.

 

[articul8]

So that's a massive majority who don't give a shit. Thanks, now fuck off.

About the same percentage who turned out to vote in local elections against the background of the biggest attack on w/c living standards since Thatcher. So you fuck off.

 

[ymu]

Really? They did in 1983. Their vote held up this week despite everything they've done and are planning to do. Not a bad result for a sitting govt instituting unpopular policies early on in its term. And despite the libdem collapse, half the vote last week still went to one or other of the governing parties.

I'm not doing this on two threads with you.

But don't post another fucking word about this until you've had a look at UK Polling Report. You are talking out of your fucking arse. Maggie never won an election where Labour were predicted a 50-90 seat majority in the polls. Major never won an election where Labour were predicted a 50-90 seat majority in the polls.

You're using an incomplete mental model in your desperation to prove that you haven't been suckered twice in a year by the yellow Tories. If you spent more time thinking about what other people said, you might not make so many fucking damaging errors in the first place.

 

[Refused as fuck]

About the same percentage who turned out to vote in local elections against the background of the biggest attack on w/c living standards since Thatcher. So you fuck off.

Completely irrelevant to the point you were making and yourself proved wrong because you're now agreeing that a massive majority of people are disengaged from bourgeois democracy.

 

[ymu]

About 40% - not bad at all given that there where no other elections in London and other areas like Cornwall.

People were that desperate to give Clegg a kicking. You'd normally expect mostly enthusiasts to turn out - and that massively favours AV.

If you could magic up a 100% referendum, it would probably look even worse for AV.

 

[ymu]

You wouldn't particularly expect it to at this point in the electoral cycle.

"This point in the electoral cycle" is rapidly becoming the "election announced, official campaigns underway" point in the electoral cycle.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You're using an incomplete mental model in your desperation to prove that you haven't been suckered twice in a year by the yellow Tories. If you spent more time thinking about what other people said, you might not make so many fucking damaging errors in the first place.

What the fuck are you talking about? Suckered by the yellow tories? You think I supported the libdems last year? You really don't read much of what I post, do you?

Fuck me. Someone posts that they think AV is a slightly less bad system than the current one, and you come out with all this fucking shit about what they supposedly think. Pathetic.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

But don't post another fucking word about this until you've had a look at UK Polling Report. You are talking out of your fucking arse. Maggie never won an election where Labour were predicted a 50-90 seat majority in the polls. Major never won an election where Labour were predicted a 50-90 seat majority in the polls..

As for this bit, so what? Thatcher was defending big majorities that would have required a huge swing to see a change to Labour with a 50-90 seat majority. What does an analysis of swings tell you? You're lecturing me as if you understand something I don't. Show me this is the case - why have you not provided an analysis of swings here and instead gone for this particular statistic?

 

[ymu]

I'm pointing you to a fucking analysis of swing you moron.

That's why I'm asking you to go to UK Polling Report before you destroy this fucking thread and half a dozen others with your fucking stubborn determination to be right when you could not be more wrong.

Fucking do your homework next time.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Tell me what swing that represents, then, and tell me why you didn't talk about swings in your post. How does that particular swing stack up against swings in the past?

While you're at it, you might like to show me where I posted anything but derision about the libdems last year. Back up your accusations or take them back.