Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: AV and Polling Day
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
veritas |
we are all doomed most certainly. All scientists say that it's a matter of time before the planet implodes and morphs into something else.
UK politics has been a disgrace since the election of Blair. If John Smith had lived it would have been a whole different ball game.
Vote AV.. at least it will shake up the system.
.Just think..if Screaming Lord Sutch was still alive he may have been elected under AV and that is a positive.  |
|
In The Know |
JK2006 wrote:
But I don't want those imbeciles who judge on tabloid headlines and slogan, simplistic solutions to elect government.
I want a benign autocracy. And I'll never get it because, if it existed, it would fast corrupt.
Human nature.
We're all doomed.
We are much closer than you realise JK.
I've often said that I'm really in favour of dictatorship (as long as I am the dictator, of course !) |
|
JK2006 |
So; Yes to AV means a fairer representation of the opinion of the majority.
But I don't want those imbeciles who judge on tabloid headlines and slogan, simplistic solutions to elect government.
I want a benign autocracy. And I'll never get it because, if it existed, it would fast corrupt.
Human nature.
We're all doomed. |
|
david |
You've put the case for a 'Yes' vote better and more simply than I could have, ITK. Good post. |
|
In The Know |
JK2006 wrote:
The people are, in general, morons - voting without knowledge or intelligence.
That has always been the case .... can you believe that Sun "readers" get to vote ????!!
On the subject of AV - it is far and away the best and fairest option (currently on offer).
When we only had 2 real parties the first past the post meant that in all cases the winner had the majority (ie more than 50% of the votes cast).
Now we are a 3 party system, with other smaller parties (Greens) too, the votes are spread around more ... it is becoming increasingly rare for the "winner" to get more than 50% of the votes cast - meaning that the majority of voters do not want the "winner" !
AV allows people (if they wish) to select more than one candidate, so smaller parties, frequently overlooked because people said they "didn't have a chance" and a "vote for them was a wasted vote", now get their opinions heard (if the winner hasn't already achieved 50%).
Die-hard party members can still vote for their choice first but give encouragement to smaller parties by putting them as a second option.
All MPs will have to work harder as they cannot just rely on their "core" support (loony unions?) to ensure that they get the most votes even if that is well short of the 50%+ majority.
As for those (the "No" campaign) that say this leads to more coalitions - this is simply untrue. In Oz, where they have had AV for 80 years (can you confirm, veritas?) they have had fewer coalitions than we have had !
Of course the best (and fairest) option is PR - but that choice is not on offer (yet). |
|
|
|
