Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
is it me, or is the concept of the FT, of all people, making with the gags a hard one to adjust to?
Yes or No -AV referendum May 2011
- Thread starter articul8
- Start date
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
isn't it more "oh no, yesterday's men, not the new politics".
Equally doomed as an approach, IMO, but...
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
He's using age-ism whilst pretending that he isn't - he did the equivalent of some of my friends are black - to try and paint the vote as one of young thrusting progressives like himself and nick clegg vs old dinosaurs. It's a piece of piss to undermine with minimal effort - but it's another sign of the yes votes utter desperation.
I mean Andrew fucking Rawnsley - is that what passes for radicalism today?
I mean Andrew fucking Rawnsley - is that what passes for radicalism today?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's more than a little amusing that some of the columnists bemoaning "tribal" voting (Rawnsley included) were whining about the death of "tribal" voting in the early to mid-1990s.
Then again, as Emerson said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds".
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
No, but I'm not sure he's a card carrying LD. If forced to guess, I'd imagine is in the same camp as people like Polly Toynbee - sympathetic to the politics of the old SDP and early Blair but not enamoured of the coalition so kind of floating around the media orbit around Labour.
The point is that he's right when he argues that that those (Labourists!) trying to turn back the tide and recreate an era of a two party monolith are harking back to an age that has gone. Their age might explain this, but there will be a minority younger people who want to respond to the failure of the LDs with a misplaced knee-jerk loyalty to the Labour tribe.
Why people like you should be taking their side on this is frankly bizarre.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Still with this argument - no ones buying it. It's looking pretty theadbare.
And Rawnsley was a card carrying member of the lib-dems at Oxbridge at a time when they were trying to destroy the labour party and the post-war Keynesian settlement that formed the basis of their support. This latest piece is just another salvo in that same battle. You're a mug for working for them.
Just join the lib-dems and have done with it.
And Rawnsley was a card carrying member of the lib-dems at Oxbridge at a time when they were trying to destroy the labour party and the post-war Keynesian settlement that formed the basis of their support. This latest piece is just another salvo in that same battle. You're a mug for working for them.
Just join the lib-dems and have done with it.
For the last CUNTING FUCKING TIME, I DO NOT GIVE A SHIT WHO IS COCKING SUPPORTING WHICH ARSING FUCKING SIDE.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
well fuck of out of this thread then.
Have you got noisy tourettes?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
is this your level of argument now? Seriously? The movement for a YES vote will involve lots of people opposed to the coalition. Notice you've not come out with an explanation for why you are taking the view of those trying to turn the clock back to a 2 party carve up.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No you prat, it's me parodying yours. ffs.
Guess what, anger at the coalition is driving the support for the no vote. Now, where's that leave your above argument?
Guess what, anger at the coalition is driving the support for the no vote. Now, where's that leave your above argument?
Some people like it to be a choice between black and white.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
anger at the coalition is leading to support for the position taken by the coalition majority and chief architechts? Is this really a sustainable position? I don't think you've established how a NO vote would in any way be of assistance in getting rid of the Tories from government. So it's a self-defeating position to take.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No, as explained many many times earlier in the thread, anger is leading to people using the AV referendum to make a well judged tactical attack on the coalition at it's weakest point. You have chosen to support the coalition at its weakest point. You have chosen to prioritise you and your constitutionally obsessed circle of pluralists interests over that of stopping the cuts.
Have you even read this thread? It appears not because you come back week after week claiming that the arguments you've put forward have been ignored - they haven't. They've been tackled head on and they have been tacked repeatedly. The good thing though is that each time you come back your position is even worse than the previous time which leads to your repetition becoming ever more transparently desperate and accusatory which then puts off even more people.
If you can't win on a predominantly soft left board like this on which the majority of people support PR, if you can't convince them that AV is a step towards PR and that this is a much more important thing than their own priority of attacking the coalition at its weakest point, and if you can't convince them that a NO vote is not doing this, then frankly you're dead in the water nationally.
Have you even read this thread? It appears not because you come back week after week claiming that the arguments you've put forward have been ignored - they haven't. They've been tackled head on and they have been tacked repeatedly. The good thing though is that each time you come back your position is even worse than the previous time which leads to your repetition becoming ever more transparently desperate and accusatory which then puts off even more people.
If you can't win on a predominantly soft left board like this on which the majority of people support PR, if you can't convince them that AV is a step towards PR and that this is a much more important thing than their own priority of attacking the coalition at its weakest point, and if you can't convince them that a NO vote is not doing this, then frankly you're dead in the water nationally.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
If this board represented anything like that national electorate there would never be a Tory government ever again. Sadly, that is not what we're facing. The Tories have made a very deliberate effort to hold hands with the few useful idiots who want PR but think that's a reason to attack AV. Since you avowedly don't give a shit either way, and the very limited electoral force you did show an interest in appear to have left the stage (IWCA) then I don't not why you persist in making your utterly marginal tiny minority viewpoint known. You might have tried to make a case for a NO weakening the coalition, but it hasn't been convincing (given that LD MPs have already factored in such a prospect).
For the legitimate concerns of people who would like to see something better than AV - I'd point out that the major national organisations that take that view (not just LD's, but many in Labour, Greens, ERS, Unlock Democracy - hell even UKIP) will be backing AV *tactically*.
For the legitimate concerns of people who would like to see something better than AV - I'd point out that the major national organisations that take that view (not just LD's, but many in Labour, Greens, ERS, Unlock Democracy - hell even UKIP) will be backing AV *tactically*.
bolshiebhoy
socialism leinster drink
Pardon me if I don't put voting with UKIP ahead of a chance to smack the coalition in the gob.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Is an - admittedly deserved - smack in the gob for Clegg worth handing the Tories what they - apparently unanimously - want? Are the LDs really that important - that our attitude to their short term mistakes trumps what is in the interests of voters for the next few decades?
Some people here seem to think they are mightily important by the sounds of it...
Corax
Luke 5:16
Having read absolutely none of this thread, would anyone be kind enough to summarise the arguments for me?
In a referendum, I'd plan to vote Yes to AV. Not because I think it's much good in the slightest, but because it's maybe, possibly, slightly less shit than FPTP. If the wind's blowing in the right direction and Saturn is in Uranus. Or something.
Are there any good arguments for doing otherwise? Is it actually worse than FPTP? Or should I be abstaining because they need a certain turnout or else they'll have to give us a proper PR option or something?
Sorry - I'm sure this is all covered in the thread. It's just that after reading all about Foxy's work colleague who likes to share a tube home with her I'm not sure I can bear wading through 28 pages of Urbanz right now.
In a referendum, I'd plan to vote Yes to AV. Not because I think it's much good in the slightest, but because it's maybe, possibly, slightly less shit than FPTP. If the wind's blowing in the right direction and Saturn is in Uranus. Or something.
Are there any good arguments for doing otherwise? Is it actually worse than FPTP? Or should I be abstaining because they need a certain turnout or else they'll have to give us a proper PR option or something?
Sorry - I'm sure this is all covered in the thread. It's just that after reading all about Foxy's work colleague who likes to share a tube home with her I'm not sure I can bear wading through 28 pages of Urbanz right now.
bolshiebhoy
socialism leinster drink
Voters have no interests. Classes do. And defeating this referendum could bring this nasty little government down. Which can only be a good thing for my side.
articul8 is not on our side though, his interests are now bound up fully with those of the ruling class, albeit it's "left" or progressive wing.
Really!?
You should stop now before cementing your reputation as the most clueless poster here.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Way to late for that for the Pooteresque old fart.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
yes, right. So when I organise in my local anti-cuts campaign, I am being an agent of the ruling class?! Is John McDonnell also part of this ruling class conspiracy when he calls for a YES vote? Don' be daft.As far as defeating the government I think a NO vote would have precisely the opposite effect - binding the LDs into it for the full term and making another term of Cameron led government (with or without LD help) more likely.
I wonder how that will be viewed historically, people don't tend to imagine outcomes of referendums that go onto affect generations are decided on the partisan issues of the day.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
As the great political betrayal of 2010-11? I can't think of anything else that would deserve that title - can anyone else?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Amazing, you're now thinking of you and the lib-dems as one single group.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
what, for demolishing that laughable argument about voting 'yes' on the grounds of not wanting to be associated with the leaders of the 'No' campaign? gimme a break!
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
eh? how? But if you live in a Con/LD marginal then under FPTP you are completely disenfranchised with FPTP. But under AV you could show your opposition to them (say by voting Tusc 1, Green 2, Labour 3, LD 4) but still have your vote count against the Tory. Under FPTP anything you do (stay at home, vote Labour, whatever) just makes the Tories stronger.
The Tories are the main enemy and the currently pro Tory leadership of the LDs. But don't make the mistake of assuming that anyone who has voted or might do so in future has been unveiled as a secret tory.
Similar threads
