Yes or No -AV referendum May 2011

[moon23]

Even better, you've outdone a8 - fantastic! Vote yes or you're a racist. Or a fascist.

You are so fucked.

It's not my argument, it's the argument of those who say they are going to vote against AV because a particular party (namely Lib Dems) support it. By logical extension if this referendum is about what party supports or opposes AV then by voting against it you align yourself with the Tories and BNP.

Boiling it down further it means you would rather support the Tories or BNPs aims just to smite the Lib Dems.

My position is this is all entirely daft and it’s about the single issue, I’m not therefore saying people who vote against it are fascist or racist.

 

[moon23]

PR would be a good thing in providing a more credible distribution of seats in line with voters preferences; it is not a solution to the failed politics which dominate debate in the UK.

Louis MacNeice

How would you tackle the problem of parties not being able to deliver their own manifesto in coalitions though? I think given the reaction to the current coalition, most people don’t really want coalition governments in this country.

 

[butchersapron]

It's not my argument, it's the argument of those who say they are going to vote against AV because a particular party (namely Lib Dems) support it. By logical extension if this referendum is about what party supports or opposes AV then by voting against it you align yourself with the Tories and BNP.

Boiling it down further it means you would rather support the Tories or BNPs aims just to smite the Lib Dems.

My position is this is all entirely daft and it’s about the single issue, I’m not therefore saying people who vote against it are fascist or racist.

You say it's not your argument then demonstrate exactly how it is. Then that you'd like to pretend that it's not.

Look, there's been some seriouslyy good informed debate on this thread - positions and counter-positions argued and justified. Go have a look at them.

 

[butchersapron]

How would you tackle the problem of parties not being able to deliver their own manifesto in coalitions though? I think given the reaction to the current coalition, most people don’t really want coalition governments in this country.

Maybe they don't want this coalition of neo-liberal extremist?

If you think 'coalition' is the issue here you're barking.

 

[frogwoman]

It's not my argument, it's the argument of those who say they are going to vote against AV because a particular party (namely Lib Dems) support it. By logical extension if this referendum is about what party supports or opposes AV then by voting against it you align yourself with the Tories and BNP.

Boiling it down further it means you would rather support the Tories or BNPs aims just to smite the Lib Dems.

My position is this is all entirely daft and it’s about the single issue, I’m not therefore saying people who vote against it are fascist or racist.

So what, you know that having PR would basically benefit the BNP, but before the election the Lib Dems were supporting PR (or saying they did anyway). So you're a racist.

See how it works?

 

[moon23]

Maybe they don't want this coalition of neo-liberal extremist?

If you think 'coalition' is the issue here you're barking.

It's an issue to consider, just look at debates on the Continent around small socialist parties and whether they should partake in left-leaning coalitions that continue to support Capitalism. Do you water down your principles in compromise and coalition? It’s a question that all the UK parties would face under PR.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

How would you tackle the problem of parties not being able to deliver their own manifesto in coalitions though? I think given the reaction to the current coalition, most people don’t really want coalition governments in this country.

It's not the coalition that is being objected to as a coalition, but rather what it does.

The 'problem' of parties not being able to deliver their manifesto vanishes when you take off the party blinkers and instead judge the government on it's actions as opposed to the promises of it's constituent members.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Louis MacNeice]

It's an issue to consider, just look at debates on the Continent around small socialist parties and whether they should partake in left-leaning coalitions that continue to support Capitalism. Do you water down your principles in compromise and coalition? It’s a question that all the UK parties would face under PR.

You really don't trust the electorate do you.

Louis MacNeice

 

[butchersapron]

It's an issue to consider, just look at debates on the Continent around small socialist parties and whether they should partake in left-leaning coalitions that continue to support Capitalism. Do you water down your principles in compromise and coalition? It’s a question that all the UK parties would face under PR.

No, it's not.

You've fucked PR anyway. Another achievement.

 

[moon23]

So what, you know that having PR would basically benefit the BNP, but before the election the Lib Dems were supporting PR (or saying they did anyway). So you're a racist.

See how it works?

I haven't called anyone a racist, I’m just pointing out how stupid it is to oppose AV simply because the Lib Dems support it as if you make it partisan and about the parties then you are also saying you would also rather support the Tories and BNP and oppose the Greens (who support AV).

My point is that you shouldn't turn it into a partisan decision, as it’s an important issue in it’s own right and deserves the sort of debate that Butcherapron draws our attention too.

 

[moon23]

Look, there's been some seriouslyy good informed debate on this thread - positions and counter-positions argued and justified. Go have a look at them.

I take it you are not referring to where you call me a Cunt.

 

[butchersapron]

Let's not allow moon to pretend that AV is PR btw - it's not. It's a more aggressive form of FPTP. Relentless in its majoritarian demands.

 

[frogwoman]

I'm not the one saying that not voting for lib dem policy makes you a supporter of the BNP or at the least happy to jump into bed with them. How the hell is that not partisan?

 

[butchersapron]

I take it you are not referring to where you call me a Cunt.

I am referring explicitly to that. I called you a clueless cunt btw

 

[moon23]

You really don't trust the electorate do you.

Louis MacNeice

What makes you say that?

 

[butchersapron]

I haven't called anyone a racist, I’m just pointing out how stupid it is to oppose AV simply because the Lib Dems support it as if you make it partisan and about the parties then you are also saying you would also rather support the Tories and BNP and oppose the Greens (who support AV).

My point is that you shouldn't turn it into a partisan decision, as it’s an important issue in it’s own right and deserves the sort of debate that Butcherapron draws our attention too.

What's it like up on that cloud? Getting a bit turbulent?

 

[moon23]

I am referring explicitly to that. I called you a clueless cunt btw

Yea I’m off now, got more important things to do then be insulted by idiots on web forums.

 

[butchersapron]

Get out there and be insulted on the street.

 

[Lock&Light]

Get out there and be insulted on the street.

Do you call that "winning the argument"?

 

[butchersapron]

Er... no. I call it a deserved parting shot.

Why are you here?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

What makes you say that?

Your willingness to lie to them, to do deals that renage on promises made to them, your promotion of electoral reformal that seeks to entrench your party advantage at the expense of meaningful voter choice...that sort of thing.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Lock&Light]

Why are you here?

I was allowed back like, er, you once were.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

I take it you are not referring to where you call me a Cunt.

The problem is you lost the argument pages back (as did articul8 for different reasons) but neither of you have stopped with your relentless and tedious reassertions. We do not have to deabte anything with you on this subject. You lost the argument now move on, and leave further discussion to the adults.

 

[Lock&Light]

You lost the argument now move on, and leave further discussion to the adults.

How patronising is it possible to be?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Can I ask a question, given that people on this board are generally unfavourable towards the current Coalition has this made anyone more weary of PR which would result in the electorate returning coalitions all the time?

There's a difference between the current coalition (a marriage of convenience in what is, in effect, a tripartite political system) and coalitions formed by governments under PR systems, in that parties operating within a PR system expect to have to form coalitions rather than to govern as a majority party (which happens occasionally, but not often).
Conflating the two shows a degree of political naivety unknown outside of personality cults.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I have to applaud you on the vote for us or you're a racist approach though. You can't even see what harm you're doing.

Shut it, you racist!

 

[ViolentPanda]

PR would be a good thing in providing a more credible distribution of seats in line with voters preferences; it is not a solution to the failed politics which dominate debate in the UK.

Louis MacNeice

Which is precisely why the Lib-Dems want, in fact need AV (or to retain FPTP) rather than a fully PR system. Under PR they'd dissolve like gelatine in hot water.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How would you tackle the problem of parties not being able to deliver their own manifesto in coalitions though? I think given the reaction to the current coalition, most people don’t really want coalition governments in this country.

Parties that operate under PR tend to operate on a system of "wishes" (i.e. "we'd like to pass a law allowing dog-felching if we can get our coalition partners to support it"), rather than of manifesto commitments, as is common with parties that operate within FPTP systems, so there'd be unlikely to be the sort of issues about manifestos that you're imagining.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So what, you know that having PR would basically benefit the BNP, but before the election the Lib Dems were supporting PR (or saying they did anyway). So you're a racist.

See how it works?

The fact is that people like moon are using the possibility that under PR unsavoury parties might win a handful of seats as a way of dissuading people away from PR and toward a system that is basically just FPTP with bells on: AV.
Any sensible person wouldn't, of course, worry about unsavoury parties achieving a handful of seats under PR. Their ability to legislate on anything that resembled their own core policies would be virtually non-existent. It needs to be borne in mind by people like moon that the hard right, even in a nation such as Austria, where they had a significant number of seats, were unable to present much legislation that went anywhere toward forwarding their core agenda. To imagine that a handful of BNP/NF/EDL malcontents would be able to present (or block, for that matter) legislation is juvenile.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's an issue to consider, just look at debates on the Continent around small socialist parties and whether they should partake in left-leaning coalitions that continue to support Capitalism. Do you water down your principles in compromise and coalition? It’s a question that all the UK parties would face under PR.

Any "socialist" party that takes the electoral route is, by it's actions, reformist, and has already made an accommodation with Capitalism. That being so, they wouldn't be compromising their principles by engaging in coalition.