AV straw poll

[Bailey]

Sorry - double post

 

[Bailey]

My Surprise is how the Lib-dems have shot themselves in the foot over the timing of the Voting

They, as we know are the strongest champions of AV & PR, and achieved the agreement to a public vote on the issue by agreeing to the present coalition govenment (along with other concessions)

Why agree to hold the vote the same year /indeed time that the govenment has shown how 'manifesto trade-offs' can be abused - ie Lib-dem support for tuition fees - in exact contradiction to their own manifesto has portrayed the Lib-dems as 'horse traders' or 'Granny Sellers'

Had they waited another year - who knows what light that might have been shining their way

 

[Alien]

Its ironic that the younger people are more likely to vote for AV, but are less likely to vote, and visa versa.

I am also for compulsory voting.

Agreed, compulsory voting should be introduced.

Out of interest, what do you class as 'younger' people? Age is relative after all.

 

[Systreg]

Agreed, compulsory voting should be introduced.

I don't vote, have never voted in my life, and if they introduced compulsory voting, I still wouldn't vote.

 

[rob]

(That's a yes from me, then)

P.

I think that picture which has been bandied about a fair bit is nonsense. It implies a clear question and skewed outcome but it is not.


Do you want beer or coffee?
Winner is 7 : 3 beer.

Do you want crap lager, decent real ale, shots or a dayglo rave with watered down spirits or coffee shop?

2 want crap lager pub, 2 want real ale camra approved pub, 1 wants some shots 2 want a rave and 3 want some coffee.


Say I am the dayglo raver and persuaded a couple of my mates to vote, I doubt the real ale beards would be happy nor the stella brigade.

Likewise, no element of ranking....

 

[rob]

I don't vote, have never voted in my life, and if they introduced compulsory voting, I still wouldn't vote.

I would agree with compulsory voting, but with an option of non of the above.

 

[wb]

I don't agree with comments that voting should be made compulsory.

What would be the point? I imagine that those who have no interest in voting would either void their ballot paper or just vote based on a name they like the look of without knowing any further information.

Edit: Agree with the the two above posts by Rob. Having a 'non of the above' option hadn't crossed my mind but would resolve this.

 

[rob]

It works well - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_electoral_system#Compulsory_voting

Australia is very forward thinking in some areas eg. preference voting and STV etc

 

[binny]

Why vote?

Once they have power they please themselves and do things that weren't in their manifesto anyway (oil & gas tax changes) or worse still something that they specifically said they wouldn't (child tax credits).

Things won't change until turnout is under 10%.

Party politics is the root of all evil and AV won't change it. AV will probably cause coalition government and an even worse environment for kickbacks, bribes and dubious deals.

Give independent MPs double weighting with their votes in Westminster, independents better represent the voters and aren't at the command of a party whip. Ease the path to becoming an independent candidate so there is genuine competition to the parties.

Bring in legislation to stop a government introducing anything which wasn't in their manifesto during their first two years of government (with exceptions for special circumstances).

Major change is needed and I think my vote does more unused than going out right now and voting for the cretin I dislike least.

 

[Systreg]

I would agree with compulsory voting, but with an option of non of the above.

Option of none of the above what? Do you mean an option on a voting form to tick to say 'I don't vote'?

With regards to any attempt to make voting compulsory, how could they do that? In order for me to cast a vote on anything, I would need to have some idea of what I'm voting on, but I know nothing about politics or political parties, it's something I have pretty much ignored my whole life, I couldn't even tell you who the current UK prime minister is, so how could I make a vote on something I know nothing about?

I should state that I don't know what AV is either, I've seen AV stuff literally plastered everywhere on the internet, but I've not bothered to read what it is because it's politics related.

 

[Ashton]

Agreed, compulsory voting should be introduced.

Out of interest, what do you class as 'younger' people? Age is relative after all.

In this context probably upto about 40/50

 

[newguy]

There's a "Vote No to AV" google ad on this page. Pretty much mirrors where the money has been going. The Yes campaign really hasn't got off the ground. Maybe full PR would've performed better, but it looks like we won't be able to vote on that for quite some time.

 

[theaffiliate]

I'm curious... do you see a "yes" vote or a "no" vote as being socialist?

Haven't seen anyone else comment on this, so I would say a "yes" vote is the more left wing option.

 

[Bailey]

Well the first reports are in on the local election - and the Lib-dems got the slap they should've seen coming - expect a similar response to their baby AV

 

[wb]

69% voted no.

Bad day for Nick Clegg, was never going to happen.

 

[philipp]

What a tragic missed opportunity. Back to the same old strategic voting then.

P.

 

[monaghan]

I am definitely for AV as its a counter to tactical voting.

Surely AV would just make tactical voting more complex...

Under AV - I don't want party X, Party Y will never get in around here, Party Z may stand a chance, so I vote Y 1st as I've always voted for them, then Z 2nd, to try to keep the X's out. Z get in as the Y's votes get passed onto the Z's

Normal - No point in voting Y as they won't get in so vote Z as a protest to prevent X from getting in.

Result is the same, just more complex at the ballot box.

If X have a natural majority under the normal system I can vote X or stay at home and X will get in by default. Under AV, I'd probably have to go out and vote just in case the local nutter party bus in a load of supporters knowing the traditional X's won't bother.

I think AV was just too little a change for most people to be bothered with, we should have had a full PR choice, then perhaps more would have considered it properly as it would have been a much bigger change.

 

[philipp]

Surely AV would just make tactical voting more complex...

Possibly, but at least it would allow you to vote for the party you really like rather than feeling it's a wasted vote.

Not that it matters now.

P.

 

[websaway]

What a tragic missed opportunity. Back to the same old strategic voting then.

P.

Oh well, that's democracy for you.

 

[JackG]

I can't begin to imagine how much of a waste of money this whole yes/no thing has been from a position of a person who did not vote.

Cameron would be neither leader of the Conservatives nor Prime Minister without AV. It is somewhat hypocritical of him to be against it for other elections.