Don't forget to vote for AV on Thursday
Don't forget
- Thread starter ebee
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Don't forget to think carefully about whether AV will improve or dilute democratic selection of those who serve us in parliament.
Then vote onThursday.
Then vote onThursday.
Sponsored Links
My picture - now removed - showed someone coming fourth in a fair race. I was using that as an analogy, not a direct comparison.
In a fair election the person getting the most votes for themself should win.
In an AV situation a person could win with a minority share of the votes plus those of other contestants who, for some obscure reason, have been eliminated.
The current method is not fair either, hence the coalition we are stuck with now.
First past the post should mean just that.
AV? No thanks.
That's what happens now but it may only be a small minority of the total votes cast. Therefore we end up being governed by a party which may only have, say, 30% of the votes cast (maybe 20% of the eligible voters). This is NOT democracy.
That will be 'cured' by AV as these minorities will be eliminated and their voters other preferences will be counted until one party achieves >50%.
Have I changed your mind?
Mind you, we'll end up with the same people in charge but at least they will have an actual majority.
Have I changed your mind?
Mind you, we'll end up with the same people in charge but at least they will have an actual majority.
I
imamartian
can anyone explain exactly what is wrong with proportional representation?
J
joinerjohn
I've said before on this subject, the only way we can have proper representation in this country is to make voting in elections compulsory. This way elections will always be a true result as there will be no excuse for not voting. My partner doesn't vote, but I asked her "If it was compulsory to vote, would you vote , rather than have to pay a fine for not doing so?". Her answer was "Well , if it became compulsory , I'd have to vote."
I think in Australia, voting is compulsory, for all reaching voting age.
Why not have that here? We'd have near on 100% votes every time there was an election. FPTP would be a true reflection of the electorate.
I think in Australia, voting is compulsory, for all reaching voting age.
Why not have that here? We'd have near on 100% votes every time there was an election. FPTP would be a true reflection of the electorate.
I
imamartian
that's flawed because people will do things like state their religion is Jedi etc...
the principle in question here is freedom... and that's what we fight for isn't it? so i want the freedom not to choose between a bunch of idiots, none of which i like. Once you start forcing me to vote, you can limit my choices, and force me to vote... therefore dictating to me.
Which is exactly what's happening here... a referendum with only 2 choices is a nonsense....AV or ist past the post.... we need PR in there too!
M
Mickymoody
It's not a census, its a vote. No need to state your religion. If you want AV, then it's still one vote one person. You DONT have to supply a second vote. So you can still vote the traditional way. How did the ConDem leadership get in? By an AV vote.
Nobody is forcing you to vote, in fact you don't need to vote, if you don't like the options. But by choosing that option, you give the great uneducated, chance to vote against what you would choose, so vote!
The No campaign is so corrupt, and the Yes campaign don't do nothing. are the no campaign hanging themselves?
J
joinerjohn
My point Martian , is that people complain that they don't like whoever is in power , then say that they have been elected with less than 50% of eligible voters bothering to vote. They moan that it's not democracy. . If we had 100% of people voting every time, then we have a true democracy. One where no one can complain that their MP was elected by only a small percentage of the electorate, because whoever polled the most votes would clearly be the winner. No need for AV, PR STV or any other system of voting. 
Surely, it follows , that these people who can't be bothered to vote, have no right to complain when they don't like who's in power after an election?
Surely, it follows , that these people who can't be bothered to vote, have no right to complain when they don't like who's in power after an election?
As an aside I would like voting to be compulsory.
That does not mean they must vote for an actual person/party though.
Another space on the ballot paper to register an abstention.
That space might actually get the most votes as such and show the politicians just how much we loathe them all rather than being put down to "can't be bothered to vote".
Of course such "votes" would not be counted in the result whether AV, PR or first past but would make an interesting point.
It's yes to AV to me because PR is not yet an option and first past is the worst of all worlds.
That does not mean they must vote for an actual person/party though.
Another space on the ballot paper to register an abstention.
That space might actually get the most votes as such and show the politicians just how much we loathe them all rather than being put down to "can't be bothered to vote".
Of course such "votes" would not be counted in the result whether AV, PR or first past but would make an interesting point.
It's yes to AV to me because PR is not yet an option and first past is the worst of all worlds.
This would be an absolute necessity if voting were made compulsory in the UK.
It's outrageous enough that it isn't included on ballot papers already.
"None Of The Above!"
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- Deleted member 294929
- General Discussion
