He's as much a wanker as the rest of them.

Quite. What a tired old cliche.

it was a silly thing to say but you should vote for AV !

why ?..the Tories don't want it..nuff said !

also anything that awful John Reid says..you should immediately do the opposite of.

I'd vote YES if the Lib Dems hadn't supported killing innocent Libyans with out tax monies. Now I shall abstain.

I'll vote NO, unless between now and voting day, someone is able to convince me otherwise. I can't see the logic that, if who I originally vote for comes last, the system counts my second choice with equal weighting. First Past The Post is the fairest simplist system and has served our country well. If you don't like our rules, go and live somewhere else. The system we have in this country allows you to do that!

veritas wrote:
it was a silly thing to say but you should vote for AV !

why ?..the Tories don't want it..nuff said !

also anything that awful John Reid says..you should immediately do the opposite of.

You are aware, aren't you, that this isn't the same system of AV as the one used in Australia?

Prunella Minge wrote:
veritas wrote:
it was a silly thing to say but you should vote for AV !

why ?..the Tories don't want it..nuff said !

also anything that awful John Reid says..you should immediately do the opposite of.

You are aware, aren't you, that this isn't the same system of AV as the one used in Australia?

yes but there are similarities but the fly in the ointment and the real problem is that voting in the UK is NOT compulsorary as it is in Oz so that means when you get minority governments they are simply not representative of the great mass of people. Not that the great mass is empowered with intelligence.

but as I've made a habit of purposely oppsoing the Tories all my life-why change now ?

the problem is that Nu Labour is equally appaling

overall-you will find government and elections much more fun with AV..trust me.

dixie wrote:
I'll vote NO, unless between now and voting day, someone is able to convince me otherwise. I can't see the logic that, if who I originally vote for comes last, the system counts my second choice with equal weighting. First Past The Post is the fairest simplist system and has served our country well. If you don't like our rules, go and live somewhere else. The system we have in this country allows you to do that!

I'd question whether it is the fairest.

At present those with the most votes currently win but obviously they can be not wanted by the majority.

They can keep on winning and still never represent the majority-just their supporters.

Under AV it is true-MPs and candidates will have to woe the majority of the voters.

Going to live somewhere else isn't an option for most people and they have the right to try and change the system.

Although I expect no change.

The winner is the candidate with the most votes. What’s unfair about that? Better than giving it to the person who only wins because he/she gets everybody’s compromise vote, and the person who actually got the most valued (i.e. first choice)votes NOT being the winner.

Everyone has the option to leave the UK, even if it’s only to Europe. But if you really wanted to, there are many countries you could go to if you wanted it bad enough to make the effort. That is NOT possible for people who live in some countries.

veritas wrote:
the fly in the ointment and the real problem is that voting in the UK is NOT compulsorary as it is in Oz so that means when you get minority governments they are simply not representative of the great mass of people.

When I made that very point a while ago you disagreed, you contrary fellow!

dixie wrote:
The winner is the candidate with the most votes. What’s unfair about that? Better than giving it to the person who only wins because he/she gets everybody’s compromise vote, and the person who actually got the most valued (i.e. first choice)votes NOT being the winner.

Everyone has the option to leave the UK, even if it’s only to Europe. But if you really wanted to, there are many countries you could go to if you wanted it bad enough to make the effort. That is NOT possible for people who live in some countries.

That's not the most practical solution though is it ?..people upping stakes and moving because they want a change in the system.

Afterall that's why we have referendums which are part of the 'democratic' process.

Although the winning candidate may not be your first choice he/she may be your preferred candidate and so on down the line. Overall the electorate gets a winner that is preferred by a majority.

I very much doubt AV will get up though-Britain is always reluctant to change.

AV would be far more represenative of the majoirty-except for the big elephant in the room-non compulsorary voting which means you could still end up with the most preferred candidate of the minority.

"When I made that very point a while ago you disagreed, you contrary fellow!"

Me change my mind??..most unusual as I'm always right.

There could be some very dramatic elections though under AV..as in the recent NSW local one with the right wing zenopohobic candidate Pauline Hanson looking like taking the final seat in the Upper House and holding the balance of power but losing out at the last minute on preferences to a left wing Green candidate...

I have totally given up on Democracy; it doesn't work and the majority of people are idiots.