BS: Any thoughts on AV? (Alternative Vote)

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 07:55 PM

Well I hope all you who are still working for a living don't mind your taxes being used to pay the extra costs of two or three weeks spent counting and recounting, just to get exactly the same kind of government you have right now.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 06:54 PM

Many years (decades, half-centuries) ago I read a book which reckoned that there is correlation between the complexity of the voting system and the number of spoilt ballot papers, ie. Switzerland with one of the world's most complicated voting systems had a negligible number of spoilt ballot papers, while the UK with a supposedly simple voting system had high numbers of spoilt ballot papers.

Maybe, of course, it's just that we have to have ballot papers simple enough for our politicians to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 06:20 PM

McGrath mentions the politicians supporting the "No" vote claim it will be too difficult for us. My favourite misleading claim is this one: "AV would undermine the principle of one person, one vote, by giving greater weight to choices of those who put fringe parties first and whose second-choice votes could decide results" - a statement that is either mathematically illiterate (ok, pedants, innumerate) or careless in its phrasing. Or both, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 06:08 PM

Thanks Bill.....I look for the chances but so few bite anymore, its hardly worth it...............................

Just to wrap up the bad joke, here's a typical A-V Club from my era ....... 10 geeky kids surround a projector and an even geekier teacher/advisor.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 05:53 PM

It's better than what we have, for the reasons that Lox sets out.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: sian, west wales
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 05:47 PM

I'm going to vote for it. It isn't perfect but, as I don't support any party 100% (cuz no party has ever supported me 100%) I like to indicate my 'spectrum' of support in this way.

I also entertain a variation of Micca's rationale: the minute the No campaign claimed we must vote against cuz we're too stoopid to understand it, my heels dug in.

I found the early Media reports also annoying. The "first past the post is the British Way" my foot. We've had a different system in Wales since we've had the Assembly. Not a terrific system either but gives a far more interesting mix. Indeed, the Tories might remember it's the only way they get a look-in in the Assembly. On a positive front too, it played a role in the Assembly being one of the first elected Assemblies with close to a 50/50 female/male balance.

And I have no problem with coalition governments. Yes - it slows the process down. Thank God for that.

I was having this conversation with someone last Friday and couldn't quite work out why, "Wales has had the STD system for years" didn't sound quite right. Single Transferable ... oh. Vote. STV. Right. Similar to the War in Iraq, and the first time I heard a report about exploding IUDs. The things they don't tell us, eh? "No! Don't pull that string ... "

sian

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 05:42 PM

I'm afraid that if I thought that the candiddate I voted for would implement everything (or even most of the things) on their party's manifesto, I'd never vote. FPTP has consistently given us governments that have insisted that they have a mandate to do such and such when the majority have voted against it. At least with AV (though it's a long way from being perfect) there's a chance that every vote might count, rather than the current system where the majority of the population is effectively disenfranchised.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 04:58 PM

"Only problem is, by expressing a view you are seen to be agreeing with either Cameron, Clegg or Milliband. Bit of a bugger all round."

Creepy isn't it ...

"It's worth noting that, if Strictly Come Dancing had been decided on the First Past the Post system, Ann Widdecombe would have won."

HA - nice!


Its worth pointing out that a two party system is much more susceptible to corporate bribery.

This is a real chance to claim back our democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 04:45 PM

Interesting the way that politicians opposed to changing the voting system this way insult voters by saying they will find an alternative voting system too difficult to understand.

It's worth noting that, if Strictly Come Dancing had been decided on the First Past the Post system, Ann Widdecombe would have won.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Micca
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 02:21 PM

I will own up that, for me, since David Cameron was agin it my gut reaction is to support it!!! Having thought about it, I will probably support it as the FPTP Principle still holds IF the candidate can muster 50% of the Vote, but if s/he can't then NOW I will be able to effectively say ANYONE But THEM!!!! by leaving their candidate BLANK!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 02:01 PM

David Cameron was elected Tory Party leader under a preferential voting system.

So why the tories are making such a big noise about how disastrous such a thing would be.

Is there an implication that that wasn't a disastrous outcome?

.....................

Still, in spite of this system having given us David Cameron, as well as the leaders of the various other political parties, it's a much better system than the only other one on offer, First Past the Post, which can give us MPs elected with a tiny proportion of the vote, and only one in three elected with the support of a majority of those voting.

I'm fed up being presented with the choice between "wasting my vote" by voting for the person I'd like to get in, who I've been told has little chance of getting in, or voting for somebody I don't particularly want, in order to prevent someone whose politics I detest sneaking in.

As for breaking promises made in manifestos, all parties do that regardless of whether they are in coalitions or not.

In fact AV would make it more possible for MPs who go along with that to be punished at the next election - when the Cleggite Lib-Dems stand for election next time, I am sure there will be anti-coalition Lib-Dems joining the line-up against them, and taking enough votes from them to send them to the bottom of the poll, so their vote gets redistributed in an hopefully more honest direction.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Smedley
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 01:43 PM

AV means more coalitions, permanent involvement in government by the Lib Dems, and the replacement of voting for principles by secretive post-election deals between politicians. It's a big old no from me.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 01:26 PM

There are several problems with that, though, Ian. One is that it is pretty unlikely that as a voter you agree with the whole of any manifesto in the first place; also thanks to the weasiliness of politicians the manifesto might not mean what it appears to (eg Labours promise not to introduce University fees in that term actually meant that they would pass the legisation that term but the fees wouldn't start until the next term). Finally every manifesto must change as a result of events ("events, dear boy, events"). So I don't think of a manifesto as much more than an outline of general principles. Then again, I remember a talk by Robin Cook we he said our normal approach has been to have strong governments that do what they like because no-one can prevent it, then the other party comes in and overturns it because they can and then when the first comes in again they overturn that "and I'm sick of that kind of strong government". A strong change is really one which is lasts across governments because everyone fundamentally accepts the broad approach.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Musket
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 01:02 PM

I'm against it on balance.

First past the post should give us a government that has the mandate to carry out its manifesto. AV has a much higher statistical chance of no overall majority, and the problem with that?

A coalition government ignoring the promises of those parties who make up the government by saying all bets are off. Sounds familiar. It happened, it can happen but under AV it has more chance of happening.

Not a good day for democracy, so why anybody other than fringe interests such as Lib Dem and Monster Raving Looney should support it is beyond me.

Only problem is, by expressing a view you are seen to be agreeing with either Cameron, Clegg or Milliband. Bit of a bugger all round.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 12:14 PM

When I first saw the thread title, I thought it was about my beloved Aston Villa (football team in the UK). I came onto the thread quickly thinking I would be able to talk about them with other like minded supporters. :-) Doh!

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:59 AM

Why can't the title SAY "alternative voting"? The concept is important, but the abbreviation is not widely understood.


Oh well, then 'Spaw couldn't make funny remarks about it... ☺

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:40 AM

Thanks Lox - your explanation makes it dead simple and in the jargon I understand :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:38 AM

"So I can vote green, and if they only get 5%, I can still say I'd rather Labour to the tories - but only if noone has won more than 50% of the seats. "

Sorry, I should have said:

So I can vote green, and if they only get 5%, I can still say I'd rather Labour to the tories - but only if noone has won more than 50% of the VOTES.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:37 AM

Arthuritis.

AV explained


Basicall, its saying - if the party you really want don't get enough votes, you get a chance to say who you would prefer out of the remaining candidates.


So I can vote green, and if they only get 5%, I can still say I'd rather Labour to the tories - but only if noone has won more than 50% of the seats.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:25 AM

I will vote for AV reluctantly, because it is such a small improvement, but it is an improvement and all that is on offer, so I suppose it will have to do. Either way, I reckon we will be stuck with the result for decades.

I suspect it will be just an anti-Nick-Clegg vote, rather than anything whatsoever to do with voting methods.

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 11:24 AM

I am still trying to work out the strategy on this and this could be a great thread.

Suppose for arguments sake that I would always vote Labour, but if they didn't get in, would prefer Lib Dems to get in and at the last resort Conservative.

How should I vote and how does the syetem work. Is it still a seat per constituency or what?

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 10:13 AM

David Cameron was elected Tory Party leader under a preferential voting system.

So why the tories are making such a big noise about how disastrous such a thing would be is something that I fail to understand.

Our MEP's are chosen by a preferential voting system.


If I could vote that way, I would put my preferred minority party first, and my preferred mainstream party second.

That way there would be a point to voting for my preferred minority party as my vote would not be wasted in the event of them coming last.

Most people would do the same.

You would see massive increases in support for the Greens, and other smaller parties.

This could include the BNP, but it is unlikely, and besides, the notion that we have to keep democracy a closed shop with only two contenders so as to preserve democracy is a nonsensical argument.


I am pro AV

Subject: RE: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 10:10 AM

AV? You vote using school movie projectors?   


Spaw

Subject: BS: Any thoughts on AV?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Apr 11 - 09:49 AM

With the referendum on whether or not to modify the British way of voting, maybe a thread to exchange views about this would make sense.

So here it is.