Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) Yes I know there was a thread, but I just wanted a nice clean one without much debate in it yet so that anyone unsure could find somewhere to easily explain AV, and hopefully make an informed choice and ensure they vote tomorrow(I don't care if people still want to vote for FPTP, just as long as they understand both and don't waste their vote then complain how the country is run). So, to make it simple, here's a literal(actually just under) five minute video that explains the difference simply and impartially. Or if you'd rather read a pdf(i think this one is a bit pro-AV but still quite informative) there you can find one following, again like a 5-10minute read; http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/downloads/AV%20FAQ%20web.pdf ------------------------------------------------------------------- Personally I am in the AV camp, cos you can continue to vote like you used to by only putting a number 1 preference if you so choose. Also I think it will make our politicians more involved with the people, to ensure they can have a 50% majority of the people. I think this could lead to good things, but this is really our only opportunity to begin a big change, imo. Also a quick pdf case for AV - http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/downloads/Why%20AV%20web.pdf(kinda repeats points in the FAQ tho) Edited May 4, 2011 by Rummy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I will be voting for AV, though I doubt too much'll change. If it manages to keep the Conservatives out for a few years, it's all good in my book. Though I do think it will lead to all the parties running to the middle ground to attract as many second and third votes as possible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 From what I understand, the Conservatives are doing this to keep the Lib Dems quiet yet this has absolutely nothing to do with the changes that the Lib Dems wanted to make with the voting system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I won't be voting. Not through choice, just because I forgot to register at my new uni address. Although I may have a ballot slip at my old halls address. Might go and check. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I won't be going for Alternative voting. If they did it for just the nationwide vote and kept the local vote winners their place I'd consider it. Granted it may result in the Prime Minister's party having less seats in Parliament, but the people have spoken. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I think I'll vote yes to AV, but either side haven't done much to really convince me, just that the NO side seem more annoying and being stupid by posting leaflets that are clearly just to confuse/mislead the masses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I shall be voting for FPTP. It's a system I agree with most, I see positives in AV, but I don't agree with a system that allows someones 3rd or even 4th choice vote to count towards the winning candidate. One x, one vote, brah. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) I'm for AV after a bit of indecision, as it formally simulates the outcome of tactical voting while eliminating the guesswork, and benefits candidates with more nuanced views. The best thing I've read on this is Timothy Gowers' discussion (there's also a shorter version here). Anybody have any idea what the post is? I shall be voting for FPTP. It's a system I agree with most, I see positives in AV, but I don't agree with a system that allows someones 3rd or even 4th choice vote to count towards the winning candidate. One x, one vote, brah. It doesn't give you multiple votes, because your first (or whatever) candidate has already been ruled out - useless votes just get made useful. Allowing you to put your most favoured candidate first, even if you think they're unlikely to win, as you can then choose more likely candidates for your later choices. Also, that video is somewhat misleading in that the example vote distribution for AV would lead to a hung parliament in FPTP, but a different vote distribution was used for the FPTP example. Ah well, it's clear enough, although it labours away at the AV explanation so much that it adds to the myth of its complexity. Oh, and this is the best poster: Edited May 4, 2011 by Supergrunch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Definitely AV. Wouldn't be able to play my games consoles without it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Definitely AV. Wouldn't be able to play my games consoles without it. That's the worst component of a joke I've ever heard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 That's the worst component of a joke I've ever heard. I disagree. I think it's a fairly composite joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I agree more with the "Yes for AV" than the "No for AV" group, so i'm voting for AV. Plus, if the ads are true, then if it goes through i should be seeing a lot more candidates wandering around in the future. All i see at the moment are reps for the Labour candidate, no other parties. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Voting yes. I think it's fairer. Simple as. It's possible it will lead to a slow down in governance... But I think we should always move towards a fairer representation; with the system changing to better handle that. But fuck it, this is really just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what I want reforming. I want full constitutional reform, separation of powers, both chambers fully elected and removal of the monarchy. Will never happen. I will just move to the USA! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 It doesn't give you multiple votes, because your first (or whatever) candidate has already been ruled out - useless votes just get made useful. Allowing you to put your most favoured candidate first, even if you think they're unlikely to win, as you can then choose more likely candidates for your later choices. I get what you're saying, but for me when I vote I don't have a list of candidates I'd prefer. I assess all the campaigns and choose the candidate that best matches my way of thinking/political stance. I get under AV I could just vote for one person, which would be fine. But I feel other people might just number all the boxes when they don't really prefer the others. It could (and this just my brain thinking here, no facts or evidence) lead towards people being even lazier in their research/decision making of their ideal candidate. Like I said before I see the benefits of AV, I just don't think it suits me personally. But should the country decide its a good idea, then great because we've all had our say, can't get fairer than that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Like I said before I see the benefits of AV, I just don't think it suits me personally. But should the country decide its a good idea, then great because we've all had our say, can't get fairer than that. Wonder if they'll give us AV on the AV referendum, imagine. "Yeah, well i agree with the Yes group, but also the No group. So i'll mark both boxes." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Wonder if they'll give us AV on the AV referendum, imagine. "Yeah, well i agree with the Yes group, but also the No group. So i'll mark both boxes." I know you're joking, but still ... the second votes would never be needed; as there are only two options one of them at first count will have more than 50%. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Definitely AV. Wouldn't be able to play my games consoles without it. That's the worst component of a joke I've ever heard. I disagree. I think it's a fairly composite joke. I think these jokes signal how much we're actually bothered by this... :p In all seriousness though, I may vote AV. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I would vote Yes, but, sadly, the Turkish postal system is shite, and my proxy vote form hasn't arrived in time. If you're not quite sure how AV works, the simplest explaination is this: you say "I like this person the most, this person the second most, this person the third most, etc..." AV is, quite frankly, not a brilliant system. Sadly, we're being offered a choice of two, and it's infinitely better than FPTP. Arguably the main reason I support it is that if the No vote wins, for the next 30+ years, every time someone suggests changing the system, the government of the time will pull out this referendum and say "look, the people said they love FPTP", and we don't get something decent like STV. AV is, sadly, the best option available. It was a remarkably impressive little trick on the Conservatives, actually, to offer a single, bad alternative, and then be able to use that as ammunition to keep FPTP in the future. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I'm voting No, anyone who knows me will have guessed that, it has amused me that the leaflets posted by the No campaign don't explain the points of AV just the terrible things that could come about from it. As well as the government leaflet that explains it so very poorly. But I did my own research into it and decided against it. If they were to offer a Proportional Rep referendum instead then I'd vote for that. Before anyone says something about evolution not revolution etc, a bad system shouldn't be required to get us to a better one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 It was a remarkably impressive little trick on the Conservatives, actually, to offer a single, bad alternative, and then be able to use that as ammunition to keep FPTP in the future. I'd say it's more of an idiotic sellout on the Lib Dem's part. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I'll definitely be voting yes, I want more but a "no" vote will be kissing goodbye to any chance of any electoral reform for another generation at least. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 Voting yes too Went to a talk by David Miliband at uni yesterday and I think he was shocked at about 90% of people in the room would be voting yes. I don't believe the polls that the No vote is way ahead. My constituency (Tory) MP has been pretty safe in our area for the past 14-15 years so hopefully AV might put his place under threat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I'm voting Yes, because first rule of politics is that whenever an opportunity to kick the Tories in the balls arises, you take it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted May 4, 2011 I'm voting No, anyone who knows me will have guessed that, it has amused me that the leaflets posted by the No campaign don't explain the points of AV just the terrible things that could come about from it. As well as the government leaflet that explains it so very poorly. But I did my own research into it and decided against it. If they were to offer a Proportional Rep referendum instead then I'd vote for that. Before anyone says something about evolution not revolution etc, a bad system shouldn't be required to get us to a better one. Personally, I think that's a terrible reason. You said it, evolution not revolution, you're not going to get closer to Prop Rep(which I think I'd like too) by sticking with the current system, for exactly the reason Fish said. Grunch, that picture is brilliant, stealing it for feeb tonight. I get what you're saying, but for me when I vote I don't have a list of candidates I'd prefer. I assess all the campaigns and choose the candidate that best matches my way of thinking/political stance. I get under AV I could just vote for one person, which would be fine. But I feel other people might just number all the boxes when they don't really prefer the others. It could (and this just my brain thinking here, no facts or evidence) lead towards people being even lazier in their research/decision making of their ideal candidate. Like I said before I see the benefits of AV, I just don't think it suits me personally. But should the country decide its a good idea, then great because we've all had our say, can't get fairer than that. It's ok if you don't have a list of candidates you prefer. Just, as you do now, vote for one. Personally, something which sells me is the fact that 'safe seat' areas could lead to harder working politicians to win more favour of the people. Sure, you may not take their first preference, but being their second preference if you're from a strong party could win you that area. To HAVE to have >50%(and I like my numbers, >50% seems sensible to me) when you could have won before with 40% vs a second place 35% should hopefully inspire both first and second place parties to work harder to please the people, which surely means doing more of what the people want? It's still not a great system, but it IS more of a fairer representation of what people want, surely? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
