AV - the alternative vote.

[Shaun]

Probably been a thread on it before but with the referendum just around the corner, I don't remember one.

[Boothy]

This will be the first time I can legally vote but I'm still undecided which way to go. Think I'm swaying more towards Yes though.

[BigBrotherfan4ever]

Got my postal vote today, & have voted for AV.

[Shaun]

I personally think it sounds good in theory but am worried it'll lead to a great deal of political inertia. Plus I think the AV solution is a lot like my Top10s games lmao - just unnecessarily complicated and it kind of devalues the voting process - it's hard to describe. I also don't really want the Lib Dems to have more power.

[MTVN]

Cant vote but even if I could I dont think I would, it's a choice between two crap systems, FPTP is unrepresentative but so is AV, although maybe not as much, and it seems a bit complicated and beurocratic. PR would be a far better option.

[Smithy]

I can legally vote :amazed:

Not that arsed though tbh, it seems like a really complicated way of voting

[Jamie.....]

Can't vote, but they still send me a voting card and info on voting :confused:

But I'm not overly sure if AV will work, and seeing as only three countries use it, and apparently want to change it.

[Livia]

There was another thread about this, and I will say what I said in the last one for those that missed it. Only three countries in the world have AV: Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Australia. Fiji and Australia want to get rid of it.

Nick Cleg, who insisted on a referendum on voting reform described AV as "a miserable little compromise".

It will give unfair advantage to minority parties. Rather than the candidiate with the most votes winning, under AV the person who came third might win. We will be forced into coalition governments forevermore.

Calculating the results would be long and complicated. Anyone who's ever been to a political count will know that it already takes allllllllllllll day. AV take much longer to count than the current sustem and will require specialist equipment. AV will cost us millions.

I think some people who are supporting AV don't truly understand the implications of it. It is not proportional representation.

My advice on voting on AV would be... Vote "no" as your first choice, and "yes" as your second choice.

[joeysteele]

I will be voting NO,for a few reasons,some of them petty.

I voted Lib Dem at the election, my first vote and I feel I have been kicked in the teeth for giving them my trust so anything against Clegg I will do now.

This system as Livia says is only used in 3 Countries,the biggest being Australia who would like to ditch it and have another system.

On a newsnight programme the YES campaigners inc. Paddy Ashdown said that if used in elections in the UK over the last few decades,AV wouldn't have greatly altered the results we got.
That being the case then that is the main selling point of then voting NO to it, if that's the case then the time wasted and massive costs wasted on it of holding the referendum and then setting it up is not acceptable,we should cut our losses and not go down the road of the massive costs of setting the AV syatem up.

The other point of it is also, under AV the Conservatives would never again be likely to get an overall majority in elections, so any Conservative voters should think hard on that one.
The only party likely to be regularly involved in Govt under AV are the Lib Dems with their lies and chopping and changing of policies to suit themselves.

I hope its beaten and I hope it also means the Lib Dem party questions whether it has the right leader when he fails, as I hope he will fail,to deliver this very small move to electoral change.

I would vote for a full PR system,but that could easily have been on the ballot paper this time round too. The full question could have been asked and the chance has been missed so I hope the voters who do vote will vote no to it and this is resoundly voted against.

[Livia]

I agree with joeysteele. I too would vote for full proportional representation if it had been included in the referendum.

[Mystic Mock]

If I was able to vote I would vote yes,because it would have stopped the hung parliment we had in the last election,plus conservatives will have a better chance at winning imo.

But even if they dont win I always believe the majority should always get what they want.

[Livia]

If I was able to vote I would vote yes,because it would have stopped the hung parliment we had in the last election,plus conservatives will have a better chance at winning imo.

But even if they dont win I always believe the majority should always get what they want.

Hung parliaments would be the norm under AV.

Conservatives would not have a better chance of winning. If you check out the Conservatives website you will see that they are firmly in the "No to AV" camp.

I'm confused that you say that the majority should always get what they want, but say you would vote "yes" to AV. That's a complete contradiction and indicative of the way people are misunderstanding AV.

Nice to see you JF.

[joeysteele]

If I was able to vote I would vote yes,because it would have stopped the hung parliment we had in the last election,plus conservatives will have a better chance at winning imo.

But even if they dont win I always believe the majority should always get what they want.

Sorry my friend jf but the expert analysis of what may have happened under AV at the last election is as follows.

Conservatives got 307 seats on FPTP, but under AV they would have likely got only 282 (25 less).

Labour got 258 seats on FPTP, but under AV they would have likely got 262 (4 more)

Lib Dems got 57 seats on FPTP, but under AV they would have likely got 78 (21 more).

Other parties would have still likely got 28 seats on both electoral systems.

AV if it is voted in would very likely make it unlikely for the Conservative party to ever again get an overall majority in elections,it's why the Conservative party and David Cameron are now getting so worked up about it.

In my view thankfully this silly system that would only benefit the Lib Dems looks like being voted against.
Also as Livia says, under AV hung parliaments would be the norm under AV.

[joeysteele]

I agree with joeysteele. I too would vote for full proportional representation if it had been included in the referendum.

Thank you Livia, I really think it should have been,get the whole question asked in one go at one cost.

[Mr XcX]

I do not want an AV System.

GB will regret it if we do. Y'all have been warned.

[joeysteele]

I do not want an AV System.

GB will regret it if we do. Y'all have been warned.

I agree fully with you.
We most certainly will also be left with a situation where election promises mean nothing, backroom deals being done after the votes are cast and in reality only one party always part of the Govt and that being the Lib Dems.

I really hope voters throw this over expensive referendum out and deliver a massive body blow to Clegg and his party by voting NO to AV,I also think they will.

If It's so good a system why do only 3 Countries have it, but the biggest of those that do want to ditch it too.

[Harry!]

I am not allowed to vote as I am 16 but vote NO. The voting system is fine as it is. You lose you lose. No explanation needed.

[Shaun]

Ah crap, I clicked the wrong option. Meant to say no.

[bananarama]

I want rid of the corrupt first past the post system but the AV system is no better. In fact its bloody ridiculous. Proportional representation is the only realistic alternative in my book. A choice the bloody main parties have denied the public from selecting. Shame on the anti democratic crooks......

[Livia]

I want rid of the corrupt first past the post system but the AV system is no better. In fact its bloody ridiculous. Proportional representation is the only realistic alternative in my book. A choice the bloody main parties have denied the public from selecting. Shame on the anti democratic crooks......

Although I think proportional representation would be a better way, I hardly see what we have now - one man, one vote - as corrupt.

[joeysteele]

First past the post has it's faults but it is miles better than AV.

[karezza]

AV means perpetual hung parliaments.

[joeysteele]

AV means perpetual hung parliaments.

It would indeed and only one party having the say as to who has the chance to govern,the Lib Dems with a ridiculous amount of influence.
Unless a major party gets well ahead all we will have are hung Parliaments.

The Conservatives need to be 6% ahead of Labour to even get the smallest overall majority even on FPTP but under AV they will need to be in a position they haven't been now for over 20 years to be nearer 10 points ahead of Labour with still no guarantee of an overall majority under the AV system.

The reason for that being, few of the minor parties 2nd votes using AV would go to the Conservatives, whereas the vast majority of Conservative 2nd choice votes would be for the Lib Dems, Labour voters 2nd choice votes would also for the vast majority go to the Lib Dems and the Lib Dems 2nd choice votes would likely go to Labour.

AV will highly likely effectively kill off the Conservative party as a ruling party with overall majorities for good.

[Sticks]

I want rid of the corrupt first past the post system but the AV system is no better. In fact its bloody ridiculous. Proportional representation is the only realistic alternative in my book. A choice the bloody main parties have denied the public from selecting. Shame on the anti democratic crooks......

But a no vote will kill PR stone dead for generations to come as it will give a massive vote for FPTP

However this is academic as the polls show a massive vote for the NO campaign since all people are seeing this as a chance to give Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats a thorough good kicking.

The way things are with Nick Clegg, if there were a referendum on whether we should slaughter everyone's first born child, and Nick Clegg was against that, there would be a massive vote in favour of slaughtering everyone's first born child, including votes from loving parents, just to give Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems thorough good kicking :rolleyes:

[ILoveTRW]

Already voted no

[joeysteele]

But a no vote will kill PR stone dead for generations to come as it will give a massive vote for FPTP

However this is academic as the polls show a massive vote for the NO campaign since all people are seeing this as a chance to give Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats a thorough good kicking.

The way things are with Nick Clegg, if there were a referendum on whether we should slaughter everyone's first born child, and Nick Clegg was against that, there would be a massive vote in favour of slaughtering everyone's first born child, including votes from loving parents, just to give Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems thorough good kicking :rolleyes:

The first part fo your post is right, it will kill the PR debate for a long time to come,
It is why with the enormous influence the Lib Dems had after the 2010 election that they will be seen to have have failed real change by at least trying to secure a treble option an any referendum,as to 1)keeping FPTP, or 2) Opting for AV, or 3) bringing in a full PR system.

The referendum could have been held later in the year with those questions fully detailed and the systems clearly shown.
The Lib Dems got the very least they could have with this referendum, despite the fact without their votes and support in Parliament the Conservatives could not get anything passed likely.

Nick Clegg jumped in for some minor Ministerial positions and an increase in salary for some in his party,he abandoned the PR dream of the Lib Dems and opted for this pathetic weak system but it still to be decided on a costly referendum too.
If he and the Lib Dems have put full PR on to the back boiler for another few decades at least,they deserve that to happen.

Although clearly not the case is the last part of your post,I think you are right in the sense that anything political from Nick Clegg,be it a policy idea or speech, will be taken by most voters with a pinch of salt,now thinking he is a man not to be believed or trusted and therefore he likely is the kiss of death to anything major in politics now.

I for one voted Lib Dem,I am very unlikely to do so again and I will never vote for them while Clegg is leader or has any high status still in the party.
To me they abused the power the voters gave them and should be cast into the political wilderness for that abuse of great trust put in them by those who voted for them.

[arista]

Most will Vote No

To punish Nick Clegg.


Thats what we are down to here.

[bananarama]

Most will vote no for a variety of reasons. The Nick Klegg factor I think is much over rated....Traditionally people just don't like "change". Unless it is blindingly obvious it is for the good.....New voting systems arn't blindingly obvious in their benefits or not..

Nick Glegg or no Nick Clegg the No vote will be strong......

Some maybe like me will be angry at all parties denying the public at least a chance to choose a PR system along with the other two on offer.......As a result of that anger and being denied a fair choice of options I will not be voting at all in the referendum............

[joeysteele]

Most will Vote No

To punish Nick Clegg.


Thats what we are down to here.

I think you are right arista, one of the main reasons (and I know it will seem petty on my part) I am voting no is because of my anger at Clegg and the Lib Dems.

I do also think that genuinely strong Conservative voters will also vote no too, for the preservation of future success of their party. AV will be no friend to the Conservative party in elections so I hope their voters do go and vote this down tomorrow.
I also think the NO campaign broadcasts have been far stronger than the YES ones.

We will know either way sometime on Friday.I hope it is a NO result and a resounding one too.

[Sticks]

Then there is no point having anything other than the two main parties, or in fact any elections in most places as with some places like where I live, put up a pig in a coat as a candidate and it will be elected.

[bananarama]

Then there is no point having anything other than the two main parties, or in fact any elections in most places as with some places like where I live, put up a pig in a coat as a candidate and it will be elected.

Very true....

[joeysteele]

Then there is no point having anything other than the two main parties, or in fact any elections in most places as with some places like where I live, put up a pig in a coat as a candidate and it will be elected.

Well, yes, I take your point on that, you are right. I can see the argument for a change to the voting system but I don't think AV is the right way to go.

[Sticks]

As AV was not gone for, any chance of PR died a death today :(

[arista]

I Voted No

at 7AM sharp this morning

[joeysteele]

I Have been out and cast my vote No. I really hope it is voted down but listening to people it seems many more are voting No than Yes.

[Judas]

Vote yes.

[arista]

Vote yes.




No we are all Voting No
to Punish Clegg.

[Judas]

No we are all Voting No
to Pubish Clegg.

To make a vote of 'No' to simply punish one 'JUDAS' is utterly stupid. I hate Clegg as much as the next man, but I think AV is one step towards a fairer, and better system. It's a once if a lifetime opportunity.

- If you remember my name was username is based on Nick Clegg, I joined in the student protests and Nick Clegg was my display picture.

[DrunkerThanMoses]

I voted No :)

[arista]

I voted No :)


You are Most Wise.

[Sticks]

So if there was a referendum on the proposition that everyone must kill their first born child and Nick Clegg was against that proposition, you would vote in favour of killing your first born child just because you think it would punish Nick Clegg?

[billy123]

No thanks due to the points already mentioned.
Although getting one over clegg doesnt figure in my descision that would be short sighted i cant help but feel the liberal democrats are only so keen on the idea because they have the most to gain they arent trying to push it through because it is benificial to the country its just because they will benefit the most and to hell with whether its in our interests or not.

That is irresponsible of them.
Not to mention the quarter of a billion pounds it would cost that we can ill afford at the moment.

No thanks.

[arista]

So if there was a referendum on the proposition that everyone must kill their first born child and Nick Clegg was against that proposition, you would vote in favour of killing your first born child just because you think it would punish Nick Clegg?


If only Life was that Simple.


That would not happen here


Maybe in China , though.



Check any News TV or DAB or Radio
so many are Angry at this Clegg AV.
And worse so many are not even voting
from Labour and Unions.

[Judas]

Arista, you make no sense. Go buy a new LCD TV or photoshop yourself on to the body of a teen being spunked by King Desmond if you are making your judgement based on Dick-Head-Clegg.

Life as arista.

That would not happen here


Maybe in China , though.

LOL at this though!

[BB_Eye]

Voted 'Yes' today.

How sad it looks as if most will vote 'No' and settle for the same tweedle-dee/tweedle-dumb bullshit for decades to come.

If the results speak for this then the British public deserve every useless government they get.

[Scarlett.]

Voted 'Yes' today.

How sad it looks as if most will vote 'No' and settle for the same tweedle-dee/tweedle-dumb bullshit for decades to come.

If the results speak for this then the British public deserve every useless government they get.

I want a different system, but an unstable one like AV is not what we need

[arista]

Arista, you make no sense. Go buy a new LCD TV or photoshop yourself on to the body of a teen being spunked by King Desmond if you are making your judgement based on Dick-Head-Clegg.

Life as arista.


LOL at this though!


I do not need another 1080P LCD
as I have some.

Judas AV got a No

Deal with it.