IanB
|
Edited Apr 18, 2011, 13:58
Re: A/V?
Apr 18, 2011, 13:13
|
Yes from me. There will be other chances to give Clegg what he deserves at the polls. This is an increment but very little by way of change to our electoral system has been introduced at anything other than snail's pace. As someone else points out this is a small step. Remember this is a change that is at minimum 33 years in the making. Don't throw away a good opportunity to open up the democratic process in order to punish someone who is already walking a tightrope in galeforce conditions. His time will come. The Tories are bricking it, unlike 1928 they've done the maths and know exactly what it means to them should this go through. Isn't that incentive enough?
As for the argument that FPTP keeps out extremists well a) 1m votes should buy you some seats whatever colours you are wearing and b) once people have seen what hopeless mps a lot of the far right candidates are going to make you can be sure that they wont make that mistake again. Whereas hopefully the likes of the Greens will prove their worth.
If the argument is that a broken, failing and patently unfair system is easier to target and thus dismantle in its entirity in some massive wave of revolutionary upheaval then I am at the proverbial wrong meeting.
|
IanB
|
Edited Apr 18, 2011, 13:22
Re: A/V?
Apr 18, 2011, 13:22
|
|
ratcni01 wrote: The libdems are going to take some years to recover from this fiasco, fucking idiots (& stupid Brown).
Indeed not to mention the people who thought it was better to abandon Labour as a punishment for Iraq (or whatever else) than keep the Tories out.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: A/V?
Apr 18, 2011, 13:44
|
|
rojo wrote: Also we need to get away from the idea that coalition govt necessarily means bad govt. Just because the present one leaves a bad taste in your mouth does not mean that they are all rotten.
I Agree. Coalition govt is probably the norm in most places. And although it needs researching I wouldn't be surprised if coalition governments declare war less than FPTP ones.
|
nigelswift
|
In praise of Clegg:
Apr 18, 2011, 13:50
|
|
Very long term he'll be remembered as the man that achieved the step without which PR would never have been achieved.
|
rojo
|
Edited Apr 18, 2011, 14:38
Re: A/V?
Apr 18, 2011, 14:26
|
|
Merrick wrote: I've not found any reason for a No vote that stands up.
Voting No to punish the LibDems is an odd idea - we could just as readily advocate voting Yes to punish the Tories.
The related idea of a no vote splitting the coalition is dubious - it's a point of contention either way, and a yes vote will make backbench Tories feel like they've conceded to far the LibDems.
I could not have put it better! Unless you actually believe in FPTP its needlessly self destrcutive to vote no and some kind of tactical vote to punish the lib dems to me seems negative. The current system is antiquated and this is one step to improve it (not the end goal)
Merrick wrote:
It does not necessarily mean more coalition governments. Australia has AV and get coalitions about as often as we do.
Also we need to get away from the idea that coalition govt necessarily means bad govt. Just because the present one leaves a bad taste in your mouth does not mean that they are all rotten.
|
ratcni01
|
Re: In praise of Clegg:
Apr 18, 2011, 16:20
|
|
My only concern about full PR is the possibility of loss of local representation - not a worry at this point.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: In praise of Clegg:
Apr 18, 2011, 16:22
|
|
ratcni01 wrote: My only concern about full PR is the possibility of loss of local representation - not a worry at this point.
I guess there isn't a right way of expressing the public will through the ballot box, it's like trying to represent the globe on a map, whichever way you tweak it something gets distorted.
So you have to say, what's your number one priority. For me it's the avoidance of 40% of the votes cast being enough to bring about huge changes against the will of most people. It's my age, see. My parents judged everything in the light of the war, I judge everything in the light of Thatcherism.
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: In praise of Clegg:
Apr 19, 2011, 12:49
|
If you're so dedicated to the boing boing party you don't have to put a second choice.
It's democratic because the party that wins has to get over 50% of the votes. I think that's much more democratic than the system that got the tories into power this time - the majority of the votes weren't for the tories, how is that right?
As a supporter of the boing boing party you can still vote for them without thinking it's a wasted vote. By voting for them people will see they have support and next time round they might get even more. That's not the way it is at the moment, where people won't vote green (for example) because they would sooner spend their vote tactically to stop some bastards getting in. Now if that's democracy, voting for people to stop other people getting in?!!!
What is your response?
|
sanshee
|
Re: In praise of Clegg:
Apr 19, 2011, 13:15
|
Thing is, who does AV 'represent'?
If the boing boing party has got its deposit and I vote for the boing boing party, even if I'm the only sod in the country who does, shouldn't my vote 'stay' there?
Why should it be 'transferred' anywhere?
How can that be considered 'democratic'?
Certainly wouldn't represent me at all!
That's about the crux of it, right?
x
|
ratcni01
|
Re: In praise of Clegg:
Apr 19, 2011, 14:24
|
The response is BOING BOING of course 8^D
Yours, helpful of Nottinghamshire
xx
PS. I like be able to vote Labour, then Green or somesuch cobination but not vote at all for tory scum or nazis
|
