What about Labour? Is that really the UKIP logo? It looks like a budget supermarket.
-
-
The ones above are all officially backing one side or the other. There are some smaller parties, like the Cornish Nationalists who support the Yes campaign.
Labour, sadly, are split. Ed Milliband, their leader, and people like Alan Johnson are in favour, and Magaret Beckett, David Blunkett and John Prescott are all opposing it.
It would have been good if Milliband had led more strongly on this, but I guess his authority doesn't extend that far.Comment
-
-
I will deffo be voting yes. In the last election I really did feel that my vote was a not so important as I live in a very safe labour seat.Comment
-
No one is anywhere near extremist enough to deserve my massively important vote.
Failing that I vote for politics to GTFO, along with religion and finance. No one really understands any of it, some think they do, but the only people who really do understand how the system works are the people who are beyond caring about money. I like to think I'm beyond simply taking sides like some classroom argument.Comment
-
Don't really get all this ****. If the No voters win, do we keep the system we have now?
I agree it needs to change, but this alternative system sounds no better. Whichever leader wins the most votes come election time SHOULD be in power, regardless of a majority of seats or any such BS, that is how we should be voting, this ****ty coalition government we have should not exist!Last edited by Daragon; 27-04-2011, 17:59.Comment
-
In the spirit of the contest, i will be voting No as my number one vote, and yes as my second vote.
That about sums av up
Comment
-
Originally posted by monomaniacpat View Post
That's an excellent video.
That video and the follow-up explain exactly why AV is a better system than FPTP.
Sadly, I expect most people are going to vote No on the basis of "it's different, and someone told me it was crap".
The No lobby's smear campaign has probably been successful...Last edited by Tig; 27-04-2011, 19:46.Comment
-
Asking guys at work about the referendum today was shocking. Total lack of knowledge about there even being a referendum and a typical resistance to change.
I fear the Yes campaign is in for a battering at the polls.Comment
-
Which is precisely why you should be supporting this electoral reform. It's a step on the road to Proportional Representation, when you can vote for almost any party, no matter how extreme their views, and still be guaranteed that your vote will count.Originally posted by dataDave View Post
Daragon, yes if the No voters win we stick with FPTP for another generation. It's taken 80 years to have an opportunity to vote on AV (first proposed by the Labour government in 1931). A Yes vote will be a massive boost for PR, which is what you and I both want.Originally posted by Daragon View Post
The Alternative Vote is a small change, and I would go far further, but we cannot pass up this reform in the hope of something better. It ain't happening when half of Labour and all of the Conservative party oppose it.
The Australians passed up a move to indirectly electing a President because they wanted a direct election. See here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ectoral-reformThat lesson was taught in 1999, when Australia held a referendum on whether to remove the Queen as head of state. The alternative on offer was another "miserable little compromise" – with MPs, not the people, electing a new head of state – and some republicans preferred to let it fail and wait for something better. They're still waiting – and Elizabeth II is still Queen of Australia.
It doesn't sum up AV in any way shape or form. FPTP only works when there are only two options or candidates available. The problem with it is it reduces the whole contest down to backing one of the two most likely winners. This scares people into voting for X for fear of Y and many people simply stay at home as a result.Originally posted by Shez View PostIn the spirit of the contest, i will be voting No as my number one vote, and yes as my second vote.
That about sums av up
By virtue of the fact there are only two options, one must win a majority – AV guarantees this for elections with more than two candidates.Last edited by egparadigm; 27-04-2011, 20:17.Comment
-
There's a response at the end of the last page, but I thought I'd post some quick photomontages I did for a FaceBook group:
(A response to: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1K8ILlp40)
Last edited by egparadigm; 29-04-2011, 09:25.Comment
-
Yeah, I know how it works young gun, my reply was in jest - I thought that was obvious, but at least it gave you another chance to spam your activist viewsOriginally posted by monomaniacpat View Post
By the way, a mate of mine asked if he could vote using his tv remote by pressing the av button
Comment
-
Comment
-
I'm still undecided on how to vote.Comment
-
Well here in Ireland we've been doing the AV thing for as long as I can remember. It STILL results in complete useless gob****es getting voted in.
But, that said, I think it's a much better system and it does mean that the people who do get voted in are more likely to be people you don't mind or might even like. It keeps out the loons and that is both its strength and its weakness. A strength because, while the Irish political system is overrun by incompetents, it is rare we get someone that we actively despise or any loose cannons. A weakness because often those who have the guts and strength to make things better, the real revolutionaries, are seen as loose cannons by people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. So those people are less likely to get in too.
But, generally, I think it's a better system if I had to choose between the two. Although, that said, we have it and yet I still think the whole system here needs to be torn down and rebuilt. It's not perfect by a long shot. Not even close. But it might be better and a step in the right direction.Comment
Comment