|
|
Post by id on Apr 2, 2011 7:05:45 GMT
How many of you actually know when it is ?
Have had ballet cards ?
Know anything about the AV system verses the current system ?
For such an important political event, it seems to be being ignored by all this Wills n Kate guff
|
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 2, 2011 20:51:04 GMT
It's not important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Time4aPINT on Apr 2, 2011 21:09:57 GMT
Thursday 5th May is the day for the referendum.
Don't know a great deal about it but will be reading up on it before then.
|
|
|
|
Post by frasier45 on Apr 2, 2011 21:20:44 GMT
theres already been a thread on the vote a while back
im voting no..... if it helps
i remember grange hill telling me " just say NO!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Time4aPINT on Apr 2, 2011 21:33:23 GMT
theres already been a thread on the vote a while back im voting no..... if it helps i remember grange hill telling me " just say NO!" I'll vote yes then ;D Wouldn't want to read the opinionated political un-objective bollocks that gets spouted on here, I'll go elsewhere for information, ta.  |
|
|
|
Post by frasier45 on Apr 2, 2011 21:34:28 GMT
I don't blame you  |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 2, 2011 23:14:53 GMT
It doesn't matter how they end up in Parliament because it will still result in the same type of dishonorable, corrupt MPs being there.
Parliament is an irrelevence anyway. Decisions are made by unelected bodies and 70% of laws are made outside of this country.
Remind me how much discussion Parliament had before committing this country and its troops to another invasion of a foreign country.
Must be just me again .....
|
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Apr 2, 2011 23:52:15 GMT
I know fuck all about it and i think i know even less about the "Wills n Kate guff"
|
|
|
|
Post by jonesinamillion on Apr 2, 2011 23:54:24 GMT
We're voting on voting, whatever next!
Should we not have a vote on whether or not to hold a referendum then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 3, 2011 1:37:58 GMT
It's a waste of money and no one gives a shit. Vote No and put Clegg back in his place.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2011 10:48:57 GMT
Vote yes for a fairer electoral system.
One point a lot of people have missed is that you don't have to vote 1,2,3,4,5 etc if you don't want to. Just put 1 against your preferred candidate, then if they get eliminated, there are no secondary votes going to other candidates.
Should satisfy the FPTP supporters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2011 11:11:28 GMT
If we voted by borough council definded areas then this might be a fairer system of dealing with things ...and cheaper to administer.
We could slash the number of MP'S as a result with councillors taking up the mantle as complaints officers on behalf of the Mp's ...
Just a thought like....Over 600 corrupt bastuurds in Parliament.!
|
|
|
|
Post by Norfolkstokie in manchester on Apr 3, 2011 13:32:21 GMT
A yes vote is the right thing to do, but it may help Clegg and his Lib Dem lapdogs.
Having said that I doubt a no vote would bring this shower of a government down as Clegg et al are in too deep now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 3, 2011 16:53:49 GMT
Vote yes for a fairer electoral system. One point a lot of people have missed is that you don't have to vote 1,2,3,4,5 etc if you don't want to. Just put 1 against your preferred candidate, then if they get eliminated, there are no secondary votes going to other candidates. Should satisfy the FPTP supporters. No, it hands more than one vote to people, so some people who only want one party, and don't want to reference have less of an impact than some political tactician. It's a bullshit voting system and it's not fairer at all, it just let's people rank their choices. You should have one choice, not as many as you want. |
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 3, 2011 16:57:48 GMT
Also, it's costing 2.35 million pounds just to educate the public, which don't give a shit, on what it all means. That's enough to keep 10 elderly care homes open for year. Yet things like this are being cut. It's a pile of wank which the pathetic lying Lib Dems are masturbating over so they can get some more power so they can stab the electorate in the back further. Anyone who votes Yes is delusional if they think that all of sudden Britain will be democratic after spunking money, which could be used to stop people being made redundant or to help job growth, up the wall. |
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Cooper on Apr 3, 2011 17:15:02 GMT
Which option keeps all the muslamics out of the country?
|
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 3, 2011 17:23:25 GMT
Also, it's costing 2.35 million pounds just to educate the public, which don't give a shit, on what it all means. speak for yourself  A 'yes' vote in the AV referendum on May 5th would be a disaster for our democratic system. It would mean candidates who finish third winning elections, and an end to the principle of One Person, One Vote - because under AV, supporters of extreme parties would get their vote counted more times than supporters of mainstream parties. |
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 3, 2011 18:02:03 GMT
Also, it's costing 2.35 million pounds just to educate the public, which don't give a shit, on what it all means. speak for yourself A 'yes' vote in the AV referendum on May 5th would be a disaster for our democratic system. It would mean candidates who finish third winning elections, and an end to the principle of One Person, One Vote - because under AV, supporters of extreme parties would get their vote counted more times than supporters of mainstream parties. I agree with you, I think it's a crock of shite. It is a fact that 2.35 million quid has been spent on pamphlets etc plus the printing of ballot papers for this pile of crap. |
|
|
|
Post by id on Apr 3, 2011 18:08:24 GMT
Any system bar dictatorship would be more democratic than the current system in place, where a party who were voted for by just 25% of the total electorate are in power, and killing the country for their own political agenda whilst bullshitting the stupid that the financial mess is all labours fault, completely ignoring the fact there was a world wide recession created by the American sub-prime disaster
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubes on Apr 3, 2011 18:17:24 GMT
I agree with you, I think it's a crock of shite. It is a fact that 2.35 million quid has been spent on pamphlets etc plus the printing of ballot papers for this pile of crap. since one of the ruling parties included a commitment to voting reform in their manifesto (for what those promises are actually worth) I don't think it's a waste of time or money. You can't have a referendum without producing information for the public on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Apr 3, 2011 19:06:01 GMT
- because under AV, supporters of extreme parties would get their vote counted more times than supporters of mainstream parties. How? One person, one vote means the party more people have voted against in every general election simce 1945 has ended up forming a government. FPTP is an extremely negative system. |
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 3, 2011 19:37:32 GMT
- because under AV, supporters of extreme parties would get their vote counted more times than supporters of mainstream parties. How? One person, one vote means the party more people have voted against in every general election simce 1945 has ended up forming a government. FPTP is an extremely negative system. And you think AV will change this? It will still be Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems with all the seats, there will just be smaller majorities. The system is equally as negative. |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Apr 3, 2011 20:02:29 GMT
And you think AV will change this? It will still be Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems with all the seats, there will just be smaller majorities. The system is equally as negative. They'll get more seats cos more people vote for them. The smaller majortites will reflect the way people have voted more accurately. Doesn't seem negative at all. Also how will supporters of extreme parties get more votes than others? |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Apr 3, 2011 20:27:25 GMT
For those who don't know, the AV system works like this:
Instead of putting a cross next to one person on a ballot paper as at present, voters rank candidates in order of preference. If none gets a majority of first preference votes, the candidate who comes last is eliminated. The second preference votes on the loser’s ballot papers are then given to other candidates. This continues until one candidate has more than 50% of votes and is declared the winner.
|
|
|
|
Post by ricksastokie on Apr 3, 2011 23:10:11 GMT
How many of you actually know when it is ? Have had ballet cards ?Know anything about the AV system verses the current system ? For such an important political event, it seems to be being ignored by all this Wills n Kate guff Does this mean I have got to vote wearing a pair of tights and a codpiece? |
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Apr 4, 2011 0:09:08 GMT
And you think AV will change this? It will still be Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems with all the seats, there will just be smaller majorities. The system is equally as negative. They'll get more seats cos more people vote for them. The smaller majortites will reflect the way people have voted more accurately. Doesn't seem negative at all. Also how will supporters of extreme parties get more votes than others? Because their ballots are eliminated first time. So their 2nd preference votes are more likely to be the deciders in the overall winner. For example, say UKIP voter put UKIP 1 then Conservative 2, and UKIP then get eliminated in the first round, he'll have been able to have his 2nd vote count. Say a Labour supporter put Labour 1 then Lib Dem 2, chances are Labour wouldn't be eliminated soon enough and so their 2nd choice wouldn't count. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 4, 2011 4:25:54 GMT
How many of you actually know when it is ? Have had ballet cards ?Know anything about the AV system verses the current system ? For such an important political event, it seems to be being ignored by all this Wills n Kate guff Does this mean I have got to vote wearing a pair of tights and a codpiece? It certainly does ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2011 11:23:32 GMT
FPTP worked ok when we had an electoral system with just two parties, Tory and Whig. That's what it was designed for essentially and is now out of date and doesn't work in a multi-party system.
Not surprisingly, none of the new Eastern European democracies chose a FPTP system for their new democratic processes.
If AV helps out extremist parties, why are the BNP against it?
Plus, if it's such a poor system, why do the Tories use it to elect the leader of their Party?
I agree it's not PR where the seat allocation in parliament would be a true representation of how the people vote, but at the moment we have a system where a small collection of marginal constituencies effectively decide who forms a government. Crazy!
|
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 4, 2011 13:45:53 GMT
Can't believe so many people still take Parliament seriously and invest so much faith in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by frasier45 on Apr 4, 2011 15:11:40 GMT
Can't believe so many people still take Parliament seriously and invest so much faith in it. I can't believe that you still think the world is being taken over by pinky and the brain ;D |
|
