The Alternative Vote (AV)

[thefab444]

IMO the referendum goes to show that it's far more effective to brainwash through excessive media coverage, lies and misinformation than it is through truth and honesty.

The problem is a lot of people do not question what they are told, but will just simply believe it!

The result of the referendum is proof that the British public care about electoral reform. It is not proof that we are happy with the current system of voting. It shows that the majority of the public want genuine change in the form of PR voting.

I doubt very much the politicians will interpret it like that.

 

[Ferret]

All the result shows is that AV is an utter pile of piffle, and nobody wanted it. If we'd been asked about PR, it would've been far more interesting. In the interests of democracy, it certainly would've got a yes from me. It'll take time, probably at least 10 years, but maybe one day!

 

[passmore]

I doubt very much the politicians will interpret it like that.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean the referendum result means we're apathetic to any electoral reform whatsoever.

 

[HST Power]

Well they say that if Labour win the next general election (and I pray they don't) Ed Miliband will hold another referendum on AV. The Labour Party have been split on the issue, and they were saying on Westminster Hour (Radio programme) that the Party is starting to suffer from lack of proper leadership.

 

[Ferret]

Well they say that if Labour win the next general election (and I pray they don't) Ed Miliband will hold another referendum on AV. The Labour Party have been split on the issue, and they were saying on Westminster Hour (Radio programme) that the Party is starting to suffer from lack of proper leadership.

That will allow the right wing press an absolute field day, and with good cause. Sorry - you've been told 'no' once, accept it and deal with it. The public don't want AV, simple as!

 

[HST Power]

That will allow the right wing press an absolute field day, and with good cause. Sorry - you've been told 'no' once, accept it and deal with it. The public don't want AV, simple as!

Just as Nick Clegg said, the public have spoken. A landslide victory for No, and rightfully so!

 

[SS4]

Just as Nick Clegg said, the public have spoken. A landslide victory for No, and rightfully so!

What is right about only those in marginal seats having their vote count? The Lib Dems need to leave the coalition now for their own sake - the Tories have used them so they can use the Tories

 

[Ferret]

What is right about only those in marginal seats having their vote count? The Lib Dems need to leave the coalition now for their own sake - the Tories have used them so they can use the Tories

I quite agree - but AV wouldn't solve the curse of the safe seat. Proper PR would though, which is why I support that. I voted no to AV because we'd be stuck with it forever if we'd voted yes. I'm not sure Ed Miliband will be able to win an election outright for Labour, but if he did, he'd be better off offering a referendum on PR, maybe a year after taking power. In the meantime, the Lib Dems are screwed. They can't bring down the coalition because they'll face electoral oblivion in the inevitable GE that would follow. So, they are stuck between a rock and a hard place...

 

[HST Power]

What is right about only those in marginal seats having their vote count? The Lib Dems need to leave the coalition now for their own sake - the Tories have used them so they can use the Tories

I don't quite understand what you mean by your first question.

At the end of the day, Clegg wanted a referendum. As part of the coalition agreement, he got one. Despite the fact that the whole affair turned into one of lies, untrue propaganda and complete political carnage, the public have spoken, the Lib Dems have had their way, and the result is final.

The coalition will go on, even though the Lib Dems have been crushed for breaking pretty much every single word they wrote on manifesto paper.

Nonetheless (I must stop using that word) this Government shall continue to work in a cooperative and beneficial manner.

Take a look at the polls. For what was being forecast, the Tories have done exceedingly well in England. If there's one Party leader who will be smiling the most, it'll be Cameron.

 

[passmore]

I don't quite understand what you mean by your first question.

At the end of the day, Clegg wanted a referendum. As part of the coalition agreement, he got one. Despite the fact that the whole affair turned into one of lies, untrue propaganda and complete political carnage, the public have spoken, the Lib Dems have had their way, and the result is final.

The coalition will go on, even though the Lib Dems have been crushed for breaking pretty much every single word they wrote on manifesto paper.

Nonetheless (I must stop using that word) this Government shall continue to work in a cooperative and beneficial manner.

Take a look at the polls. For what was being forecast, the Tories have done exceedingly well in England. If there's one Party leader who will be smiling the most, it'll be Cameron.

I agree completely. The public have spoken. They have said 'no to AV, but not to electoral reform', a distinction that those that keep peddling the 'Yes to AV' don't seem to be able to distinguish.

 

[SS4]

I don't quite understand what you mean by your first question.

Safe seats render those who have a different point of view's vote pointless. If you lived in a safe Labour seat you may as well stay at home on polling day than vote Conservative. Only those in marginal seats will have a chance to really affect the composition of government and since they are relatively rare it's hardly democratic.

At the end of the day, Clegg wanted a referendum. As part of the coalition agreement, he got one. Despite the fact that the whole affair turned into one of lies, untrue propaganda and complete political carnage, the public have spoken, the Lib Dems have had their way, and the result is final.

All it's shown is that vast swathes of the public don't think about what they're told (that includes Yes voters too). More media coverage for NO meant they won.

The coalition will go on, even though the Lib Dems have been crushed for breaking pretty much every single word they wrote on manifesto paper.

An extremely one-sided agreement. The Lib Dems got next to nothing, Cameron has been adept at shifting every unpopular move onto them and letting them soak up the blame.
Have to agree that Labour holding a referendum on AV if they win the next election is stupid - hold one on full PR or take a leaf out of Clegg's book and simply lie

Nonetheless (I must stop using that word) this Government shall continue to work in a cooperative and beneficial manner.

Except those unfortunate enough to be sick, old, unemployed, poor, use public transport, in a Labour council. But that's OK, the Big Society will cure AIDS as well as fix everything wrong in Britain![/sarcasm]

Take a look at the polls. For what was being forecast, the Tories have done exceedingly well in England. If there's one Party leader who will be smiling the most, it'll be Cameron.

Agreed. The referendum has shown he can lie through his teeth (what's new?) and get away with it. I wonder if we would get UN support if we wanted to overthrow our unelected leader and impose democracy?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree completely. The public have spoken. They have said 'no to AV, but not to electoral reform', a distinction that those that keep peddling the 'Yes to AV' don't seem to be able to distinguish.

You really think the government is going to see it that way? They'll interpret it as "the public want FPTP and nothing else" especially since it suits them
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Even if we'd have been stuck with AV it would still be preferable than FPTP and would show that the public want electoral reform of any kind

 

[devon_metro]

Safe seats render those who have a different point of view's vote pointless. If you lived in a safe Labour seat you may as well stay at home on polling day than vote Conservative. Only those in marginal seats will have a chance to really affect the composition of government and since they are relatively rare it's hardly democratic.

There is nothing to stop every single seat in the country becoming a marginal however.

 

[Ferret]

I don't see how AV would be in any way preferable to FPTP. It appears neither do the vast majority of those who bothered to vote, which should tell you something...

 

[passmore]

Even if we'd have been stuck with AV it would still be preferable than FPTP and would show that the public want electoral reform of any kind

No it doesn't, the results clearly tell you that AV had nothing to do with electoral reform of any kind. The public aren't stupid. They don't need the media or anyone to influence their vote so your argument that the media swayed the decision is wrong.

 

[thefab444]

There is nothing to stop every single seat in the country becoming a marginal however.

Maybe in ten to twenty years time when party dealignment becomes much more widespread, and the current generation of "I've always voted..." people die out. Right now though, it would be impossible for many seats to become marginal.

 

[HST Power]

Safe seats render those who have a different point of view's vote pointless. If you lived in a safe Labour seat you may as well stay at home on polling day than vote Conservative. Only those in marginal seats will have a chance to really affect the composition of government and since they are relatively rare it's hardly democratic.

In some ways, I agree with you. I was advising a Tory Councillor a few years back, who wanted to be elected in Islington. Islington is Labour inside and out. The chances of a Conservative being elected are virtually zero.
Nonetheless, if Islington is strongly Labour, then it's only fair they have a Labour Councillor. If you were to take into account the votes of a minority, you would be flying in the face of the majority. Thus, there would be uproar. It wouldn't be fair if that same Tory Councillor had gone on and won.
In my town, the Conservatives got 51% of the vote at the last general election. Labour got sixteen percent, the Lib Dems got thirty two. The way I see it, you can win by an inch, you can win by a mile. In a true democracy, one vote counts for one vote, and a win is a win. Simple, easy, fair.

All it's shown is that vast swathes of the public don't think about what they're told (that includes Yes voters too). More media coverage for NO meant they won.

Last night, I dropped in on one of the local stations where AV campaigners (Yes and No) were getting ready for the night ahead. In the No office, posters were flying, the staff were active, and the mood was good.
I went to take a look at the Yes office, and the door was locked. Not a soul in sight. If you don't get out there and fight, you won't win. Peter Mandelson praised Cameron for mobilizing his troops and raging a good campaign.

As for little Ed Miliband, he wouldn't even share a platform with Clegg. If he was that desperate for reform, he would've gone to the Lib Dems and said 'right guys, you want AV, we want AV, let's get out and win this election.'

Yet another example of Miliband's truly awful leadership skills. It's no wonder half of the Labour Party have turned their backs on him.

An extremely one-sided agreement. The Lib Dems got next to nothing, Cameron has been adept at shifting every unpopular move onto them and letting them soak up the blame.
Have to agree that Labour holding a referendum on AV if they win the next election is stupid - hold one on full PR or take a leaf out of Clegg's book and simply lie

Well they still got their AV referendum. They still got into power. Clegg still won the big ticket and got his parties name on the scorecard.
Cameron has been doing what Conservative governments do best. Getting out there, fighting and working hard for change.

Except those unfortunate enough to be sick, old, unemployed, poor, use public transport, in a Labour council. But that's OK, the Big Society will cure AIDS as well as fix everything wrong in Britain![/sarcasm]

I really am getting fed up with this. I have written post after post outlining Tory policy for pretty much every group of people you mention above. I'm not going to waste yet more of my time doing it again.

 

[Zoe]

In the South West of England, unless you live in Exeter or Plymouth it's usually a two horse race between the Tories and the LibDems. Some Labour supporters end up voting LibDem just to keep the Tories out. With AV they could have Labour as their first choice and LibDem as second so a Labour vote would not effectively be a wasted vote.

 

[Greenback]

It's all rather irrelevant now isn't it?

 

[Zoe]

It's all rather irrelevant now isn't it?

No it isn't, if people just give up now there will never be electoral reform.

 

[thefab444]

Simple, easy, fair.

It certainly isn't fair. Simple and easy maybe, but counting from 1 to 5 isn't exactly complicated.

Last night, I dropped in on one of the local stations where AV campaigners (Yes and No) were getting ready for the night ahead. In the No office, posters were flying, the staff were active, and the mood was good.
I went to take a look at the Yes office, and the door was locked. Not a soul in sight. If you don't get out there and fight, you won't win.

You can't blame them, the polls were looking extremely poor for the Yes campaign by then - I assume you mean Thursday night rather than last night.

Cameron has been doing what Conservative governments do best. Getting out there, fighting and working hard for change.

That's a contradiction of terms, but I agree with what you're saying though, it's difficult to campaign well for something you don't really believe is the best!

Would you and other grassroots Tories have voted in favour of AMS?

 

[Ferret]

In the South West of England, unless you live in Exeter or Plymouth it's usually a two horse race between the Tories and the LibDems. Some Labour supporters end up voting LibDem just to keep the Tories out. With AV they could have Labour as their first choice and LibDem as second so a Labour vote would not effectively be a wasted vote.

And then the Tory still gets in! Talk about an exercise in futility?! You've just illustrated perfectly why AV is so unsuitable, and why we were right to reject it.

 

[Zoe]

And then the Tory still gets in! Talk about an exercise in futility?! You've just illustrated perfectly why AV is so unsuitable, and why we were right to reject it.

No, if the Tories are say 500 votes ahead of the LibDems when Labour are eliminated and more than 500 of the Labour votes had LibDem as a higher preference than Tory then the LibDems would win.

 

[Ferret]

No, if the Tories are say 500 votes ahead of the LibDems when Labour are eliminated and more than 500 of the Labour votes had LibDem as a higher preference than Tory then the LibDems would win.

But if the Labour supporters have been voting tactically to keep the Tory out then the Lib Dem man still wins!

 

[Oswyntail]

Safe seats render those who have a different point of view's vote pointless.

Except that, if enough people vote against the incumbent, the seat becomes marginal. It does happen, but it also means that those seeking to bring change need to be more active and convincing.

All it's shown is that vast swathes of the public don't think about what they're told (that includes Yes voters too). More media coverage for NO meant they won.

That is about as patronising as those who said the public wouldn't understand AV. Perhaps the public actually realised that AV itself is fairly pointless....

Agreed. The referendum has shown he can lie through his teeth (what's new?) and get away with it. I wonder if we would get UN support if we wanted to overthrow our unelected leader and impose democracy?

There were plenty of untruths on both sides of the argument, and Cameron's were no worse than Millibroon's. As for "unelected leader", I take it you really mean "leader I didn't want". Cameron is the leader under the rules of the election at the time it was held, because more wanted him (or his party) than any of the alternatives. Just get over it!

You really think the government is going to see it that way? They'll interpret it as "the public want FPTP and nothing else" especially since it suits them

Sadly I agree with you - though it is not only the Government that thinks this way. It suits Labour as much, which is presumably why their leader was so half-hearted in supporting "Yes". But now they are in a position to say that sticking with FPTP is a Tory block on their progressive ideals - anyone see Mandelson on the telly saying just that yesterday? The real split on this issue, though, is between the tribalists who form a large proportion of the Conservatives and LibDems and almost all the Labour MPs, and those who see co-operation and compromise as the way forward.

Even if we'd have been stuck with AV it would still be preferable than FPTP and would show that the public want electoral reform of any kind

Back to disagreeing, I'm afraid. The tribalists were in a Win/Win: if the vote was "No", they could claim that no one wants reform; if "Yes" (which, remember, would have little or no effect on elections) then they could insist on a "decent period" to see how it worked, and some of the reformist energy would have been dissipated. Now there is still the pressing need for reform (not just of the voting system but across the whole of government) and enough dissatisfied people to keep it on the agenda.

 

[passmore]

Sadly I agree with Greenback, it is a bit irrelevant to talk about it now. The British public have voted and have declined AV.

When all is said and done, whether or not that means they reject any electoral reform of any kind is up to the politicians and how they interpret the result. Campaigning for AV long after the horse has clearly bolted, which some on here are still doing, is as pointless as it can get.

 

[Ferret]

Yup - the AV horse has well and truly bolted, and I'd say we've just made it a nailed on certainty that we'll never use that system here in our lifetimes. I don't agree that the media were responsible for the result, but the media can be responsible for starting the ball rolling to get full PR. It'll take time, but I think it could be done....

 

[HST Power]

It certainly isn't fair. Simple and easy maybe, but counting from 1 to 5 isn't exactly complicated.

And what makes AV a fair system? Counting to five is far from complicated, but when you say to the ballot box teams 'right guys, tonight you are going to count votes not once, not twice, not three times.......actually, you'll just keep counting until one candidate has over fifty percent. Do this by eliminating the last place candidate and moving on the voters second preferences. If there's still no winner..........'

That's quite complex. And it's not fair either. It's an election of gobbledygook, won by votes of second choice.

You can't blame them, the polls were looking extremely poor for the Yes campaign by then - I assume you mean Thursday night rather than last night.

Indeed. Typing error.

Would you and other grassroots Tories have voted in favour of AMS?

That's a different kettle of fish. It's got more in common with FPTP, but to be honest, I like the system as it is.

I went out for dinner with a couple of Tory MP's yesterday evening, and they started talking about the other system for electing Ministers.

Wait for it....

Alternate Vote Plus. And yes, such things exists.

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=56

I think we'd better not go down that road!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

If AV isn't fair, then why do the major political parties use it to elect their leaders?

 

[HST Power]

If AV isn't fair, then why do the major political parties use it to elect their leaders?

The Conservatives do not use AV for their leadership elections. Conservative MPs vote using the ‘Exhaustive Ballot’ system – a series of separate run-off rounds, a crucial distinction which allows them to know who has been eliminated at each stage, and which candidates remain. MPs can only vote for one candidate, and vote using an ‘X’. The final round is a First Past the Post vote of all party members, who again vote for one candidate using an ‘X’. (Nor do the Labour Party use AV as it is being proposed in this referendum: they use an electoral college system, where union members, party members, and MPs each cast separate ranked ballots.)

 

[Zoe]

The Tories don't use AV. There is a separate ballot of MPs in each round. If it was AV MPs would state their preferences in a single ballot. When only two candidates remain and then goes to the party membership.