As always with a democracy, it is difficult to decide whose views really prevailed, given that the decisions one way or another are largely taken on based on the views of a handful of vocal voices, not, for example, mass meetings where the topics can be genuinely discussed. Certainly the 'No' campaign was full of lies and misdirection. Certainly also the 'Yes' campaign did not make its case, and too much of that was also full of misdirection. The whole concept of "making MP's work harder" was open to confusion and much mischief was made from it. It is one of the few situations in which that glib managment phrase "work smarter not harder" is what AV would have brought about.

I think there is much more subtlety in the 'No' camp than a simple 12m majority suggests. There was a huge 'Not Proven' vote, a mighty "we-don't-trust-the-LibDems-and-it's-really-all-about-them" vote, a substantial "we-have-more-important-things-to-worry-about-just-now-thank-you" vote and, from the 'Yes'-ish camp "We-want-full-PR-and-this-isn't-it-so-we'll-vote-No".