Yes/No to AV - Urban Votes

[fractionMan]

yeah strung out, how could you be so stupid.

 

[butchersapron]

My argument is a long one. Its pretty much summed up here http://gowers.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/is-av-better-than-fptp/ .

Those more than 50% of labour MP's voting for FPTP are just scared of losing their seats. Thats all. They want to keep their job, can you blame them? They are voting in their own interests, not the parties and certainly not the countries. Ed Milliband see's this and why he is campaigning for yes.

All the arguments by the NO campaign are stupid, invalid or very very unlikely to happen. Whilst all the arguements against FPTP are true, hit home and make sense.

Oh yeah and opinion polls mean fuck all, when have they ever meant anything? Just look at the opinion polls over the past 100 years compared to the actual results.
My arguement is summed up in this

The labour leader is campaigning for labour MPs to lose their seats?

Yes, opinion polls mean nothing and you can't muster up even the ghost of an argument for your case. You lib-dems disgust me. Fight for your life at least.

 

[FaradayCaged]

Funny that I vote Plaid hey.

 

[butchersapron]

All the arguments by the NO campaign are stupid, invalid or very very unlikely to happen. Whilst all the arguements against FPTP are true, hit home and make sense.

You might as well have painted that shit on the YES campaign boar with Stephen Frey, Ianiaccui, Firth, Izzard and any other cunt who touched the anti-celeb, anti posh cunt button.

 

[butchersapron]

Funny that I vote Plaid hey.

Not really. It fits. The same lazy unexamined politics.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

My argument is a long one. Its pretty much summed up here http://gowers.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/is-av-better-than-fptp/

I read that piece, and here's what I said about it on the other AV thread:

There's one major-league blunder with that blog post - yer man argues against FPTP for not being proportionate, then suggests that AV be adopted, even though it's not proportionate. And his major contention tht AV discourages tactical voting is blown out of the water by an Australian commenter, who provides a real-life example to illustrate that AV is used tactically. Finally, he is labouring under the impression that Labour ar a progresive party - nah, that went out wih Neil Kinnock. Very flawed analysis, made worse by trying to blind the reader with over-complicated mathematics.

 

[gosub]

All the arguments by the NO campaign are stupid, invalid or very very unlikely to happen. Whilst all the arguments against FPTP are true, hit home and make sense.

A lot of the YES argument have been bollocks also. Why NO looks likely to win, is because there is a a sizeable section voting primarily on how to damage the coeltion. The big poll surge for NO is down to Chris Hulne squealing like a piggy

 

[butchersapron]

These people clapped huhne - the mugs.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

These people clapped huhne - the mugs.

TORY mugs at that.

 

[Streathamite]

I'm to tired to take apart MDmawotsit's posts right now,so I'll do so tomorrow first thing if no-one else has done so

 

[danny la rouge]

This.

I would prefer PR but AV is better than FPTP. Who cares if the LIb Dems are campaigning for it, thats not the point is it.

Anyone voting for FPTP just because they dont like the Lib Dems are doing it for all the wrong reasons.

1. You need to define "better", if you mean even less proportional and less fair than FPTP*, then, yes it is "better".

2. We don't have an option to vote for FPTP, only to approve of or reject AV.


*Jenkins Commission verdict on AV: http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm40/4090/chap-5.htm#c5-a
Report on AV in Australia: http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esy/esy_au

 

[Bob]

The BNP want you to vote No.

So do the Conservatives.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[danny la rouge]

The BNP want you to vote No.

So do the Conservatives.

Draw your own conclusions.

Daft "argument":

The Liberal Democrats want you to vote Yes.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

The BNP want you to vote No.

So do the Conservatives.

Draw your own conclusions.

The BNP want full PR. Therefore if you want PR, you're a Nazi.

60% of Labour MPs are voting No to AV -no doubt they're closet Nazis too!

 

[joustmaster]

my facebook stream is awash with yes votes. in fact there are no people voting no.
all of whom are libdem haters.

 

[kabbes]

my facebook stream is awash with yes votes. in fact there are no people voting no.
all of whom are libdem haters.

Incredibly, the majority of the population still doesn't use Facebook or Twitter.

 

[scifisam]

my facebook stream is awash with yes votes. in fact there are no people voting no.
all of whom are libdem haters.

Mine too - on both counts. I expected more nos. I still haven't decided and might well just not vote on it at all.

 

[editor]

AV was met with such disinterest in Australia that they had to introduce compulsory voting.

 

[editor]

Daft "argument":

The Liberal Democrats want you to vote Yes.

That's enough to make any sane person vote for no option.

 

[Maggot]

not necessarily. It keeps smaller parties locked out, funnels votes to the big 3, encourages the tories to use dog-whistle tactics over race, immigration and europe, and only really helps the LDs

Smaller parties can't be any more locked out than they are under FPTP.



AV will lead to less Tory seats, and for that's good enough for me to vote Yes.

 

[strung out]

Smaller parties can't be any more locked out than they are under FPTP.

yes they can. under AV the greens wouldn't even have one seat.

AV will lead to less Tory seats, and for that's good enough for me to vote Yes.

fewer blue tory seats, more yellow tory seats!

 

[Maggot]

Why is it? And how is it?

 

[butchersapron]

Smaller parties can't be any more locked out than they are under FPTP.



AV will lead to less Tory seats, and for that's good enough for me to vote Yes.

Yes, they can. Av moves the threshold for small parties to 50% plus rather than 35% plus.

The Tories won't win less seats either, as they will be propped up and prop up lib-dem voters, plus they've insured against a yes vote by redrawing boundaries and getting rid of a huge number of seats.

Can you answer my question as to why AV is fairer please.

 

[stethoscope]

yes they can. under AV the greens wouldn't even have one seat.



fewer blue tory seats, more yellow tory seats!

Exactly.

 

[strung out]

i'm looking forward to all the whines after the election from yes voters about how we've ruined democracy

 

[Steel Icarus]

I'm just pleased to have contributed in some small way to Clegg's imminent embolism.

 

[kabbes]

Smaller parties can't be any more locked out than they are under FPTP.

Yes they can. Under FPTP they can get voted in on the basis of 35% of the vote.

 

[fractionMan]

i'm looking forward to all the whines after the election from yes voters about how we've ruined democracy

me too

 

[editor]

The more I read about AV, the more I'm convinced a NO vote is the only option.

 

[fractionMan]

The more I talk about AV with friends the more I realise how astonishingly naive they are politically. I fully expect some of them to vote libdem again, for progress.