That is the question.

Decide for yourself:

Say NO to AV!

Say YES to AV!

Neither of these are mine by the way, but they fit the directive so I thought I'd post them to get other's opinions on AV and First Past the Post. There seems to be a flaw in both of the systems to me, but I think I'm voting no.

I'm voting Yes because I believe AV is better than FPTP.

 

I prefer the idea of full PR but I don't like the idea of list systems which also reduce proper local representation. At least with AV it is a form of PR and it still maintains local representation.

I'm going for yes. Simply because I like that AV does away with the need to tactically vote all the time. This way, you can actually vote for the candidate you really want, but then cover your vote with a 2nd place for the main none-Tory candidate (or whatever).

FPTP encourages too much of people voting not for who they want, but for who they feel has the best chance of defeating the candidate that they definitely don't want.

They both suck, but FPTP sucks way more.

More importantly though, voting no will make any future change to a better system very unlikely to happen, whilst voting yes will make it possible to have a more fully representative system in future.

I probably wont vote because while I'm in favour of voting reform and think the present system sucks a lot of dick, AV is just as fucking shit in that it still massively favours major parties. It is in no way proportional.

Also, I have a hard enough time trying to find one candidate who is not too objectionable to vote for. Trying to find two is asking a bit much.

I can't believe what utter fucking cunts the Lib Dems have become. Allying with the tories, going back on student loans and now accepting this pathetic half-arsed non-compromise rather than pushing for actual genuine voting reform.

So yeah, I can't vote for it, because it's shit. But I can't vote against it, because the current system is equally shit (and that's the bit which really pisses me off, they are equally shit). There is no 'they are both shit, give us actual reform please' option so yet again none of the options represent my opinions/beliefs.

Fuck you Lib Dems. Fuck you.

It really won't.

You obviously already know this, but you don't have to pick more than one person (if you can even decide to pick one). You'd still be able to use your AV voting slip like FPTP.

Aye, I'm just saying the added 'opportunity' to vote for another of these lying cunts is of no value to me.

Stay at home and moan on the internet then :@

 

(hugleft)

Maybe I will.

:((

(hugleft)

Why not?

A successful No result will just mean lab/con get almost all of the votes next time.
A successful Yes result means more chance of smaller/independent candidates getting seats.

Less seats for the major parties can only be a good thing (in general), and must make further reform more likely to succeed?

Yes to AV as it's slightly less shit, and *could* see smaller parties win more seats (but probably wont)

It really doesn't. If you class Lib Dems as being smaller then maybe, but there is no chance anyone beneath the big 3 will get seats except in very few constituencies.

The only way smaller parties will have a good chance of winning seats is with a proper PR system.

No it doesn't. The balance may shift a little between the major parties is all that will happen.

You three have all just said slightly different things. :S

PLEASE GET YOUR STORIES STRAIGHT!

(and then explain to me why it will/wont help)

I can't be bothered to explain it all fully but the smaller parties would still need an overall 50% of the vote, either by 1st choice of choices after that, the big 3 will (nearly) always get far more 1st choice votes and if they don't they will easily make up the difference to 50% from 2nd/3rd/4th choice. With AV there is more chance of people voting for a smaller party as 1st choice because they know their backup can be a big party.

 

I've probably explained this very poorly, but thankfully someone else will step in and explain it better.

What ant said basically, but it depends on people using their vote fullly.

 

It removes the idea that voting for (x) is a wasted vote, and in theory you could see some crazy changes.in.voting behaviour. But people are boring and will pobably still vote the same as before.

Thanks, you've both made me depressed now. :(

Is there any point in going to vote at all? :'S

Now you understand (hugleft)

Depends where you live.

 

I live in a safe Labour seat. At the last election it was a new Labour candidate and she increased Labour's majority by a thousand, to 7,000-odd.

 

This is why I didn't vote. What is the fucking point.