Richard Hawley
http://www.richardhawleyforum.co.uk/

AV
http://www.richardhawleyforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=26804
Page 6 of 9

Author:  Poppy Dog [ Tue May 03, 2011 1:09 pm ]
Post subject: 

Egg wrote:
I haven't commented yet, but I think now the time has come.......

5 Feckin' pages about AV..........ENOUGH!! :P


Lets vote on it...

Author:  dj89 [ Tue May 03, 2011 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

everyone remember to put down your second preferences... :*:

Author:  Shambolic Charm [ Tue May 03, 2011 4:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

Neil Kinnock is making some good points. The tories in general only ever get in on a minority vote, there is always a massive vote against them but First past the post benefits them massively.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 78046.html

I think were all fucked if the no vote goes through, cos they'll fix things even more in their favour as they did under Thatcher. Much harder to fiddle AV

Imagine another 12 years of Tory rule? What becomes of Britain then? They are working very hard and spending loads to fill us all with fear of AV, ask yourself why?

It took a landslide to get them out in the Thatcher/Major years - for many of those parliaments the majority voted against the Tories, but boundary changes ensured they returned time after time

Author:  bloodshift [ Wed May 04, 2011 1:25 am ]
Post subject: 

As a Commonwealth citzen over the Atlantic, I can tell you that right now I'd eat a plate of fresh turds to turn back time and get rid of FPTP. That antiquated fucking system means we, yesterday, gave a majority to a guy who makes David Cameron look like Gandhi (he proved this with all the shit he pulled during two previous minorities). Look up Canada's election results for further details, but the upshot is that OUR Conservatives got just under 40% of the popular vote yet 55% of the seats. And it's all due to vote-splitting between the centrist and centre-left parties; our current proto-fascist dickhole, and I'm too pissed off right now to even type his name, only got TWO PERCENT more of the vote share than he did last time, when he got 145 seats out of 308 rather than the current 167.

So all I can say, my fellow Hawley-loving UK friends not to mention Mr. H. himself, is ditch FPTP and don't look back. May we be the next to do it when (if?) we get the chance.

Author:  Longpigsdad [ Wed May 04, 2011 8:37 am ]
Post subject: 

I still cannot see that AV - where it kicks-in - is no more than a fudge, concensus or a compromise except when the process is completed the candidate with most votes from the first round still wins? Compromise invariably means no one is really satisifed and under AV only those voters who chose the second, third etc candidate as a first choice would get what they wanted.

What I also can't get my head around is that if you believe in a political party surely "backing" another is out of the question? Betting on two horses in the Grand National I understand; having a first, second or third choice on a menu I can appreciate, but Politics, Religion and probably (most relevant on this Forum!) Football Teams you can only believe/support one at a time? :?

Author:  Poppy Dog [ Wed May 04, 2011 8:41 am ]
Post subject: 

Just so long as you vote LPD - most polls suffer from apathy - along with AV I'd bring in mandatory voting - I'm a socialist / facist kind of guy.

Author:  Shambolic Charm [ Wed May 04, 2011 8:45 am ]
Post subject: 

Concensus is what true democracy is about. Not the modern Tory model (post Thatcher) which is do what the majority want and screw the rest, or in the case of FPTP do what a substantial minority want and screw the majority.

....or even what the current government are doing which is do what the rich want and screw over everyone else

Author:  Craig [ Wed May 04, 2011 10:00 am ]
Post subject: 

Longpigsdad wrote:
What I also can't get my head around is that if you believe in a political party surely "backing" another is out of the question?


What if you don't believe in a particular party? And don't blindly vote for one time after time? But you look at policies, or perhaps local issues? There can be similarities between parties, you might want party A, but would also prefer party B if it was at the expense of C or D?

For me the idea i like is it gives added weight to voting against a party, as opposed to just voting for what you want.

Author:  Longpigsdad [ Wed May 04, 2011 10:12 am ]
Post subject: 

I can't agree that concensus is a good way to run anything when progress is needed. It very often leads to "sitting on the fence" or "standing still" whatever metaphor you wish to use.

My experience within large organisations and latterly as an Executive in a busness that too often tried to reach decisions by "committee" I found the whole process disheartening and frustrating. Sometimes you need to be decisive and positive and make unpopular decisions rather than be too moderate. Even a decison you are not in agreement with is better than a fudged one. The alternative is to perhaps fall deeper into the mess you are already in.

In my humble opion Coalitions/concensus decisons are probably good only in times of war (common cause etc) but not for making "United Kingdom PLC" work again. I'm not sure what the Lib Dems are all about anymore but the Tories and Labour have very different ideas on how to run the country and tackle the National Debt. One clear plan must be better to work to than a fudged one?

And PD I always use my vote and even if AV is the way we go I will almost certainly only have one cross on my voting slip!

Author:  RP [ Wed May 04, 2011 10:13 am ]
Post subject: 

I haven't had anything in the post about voting, no ballot card or anything. Think they might have forgotten. :cry:

Author:  Shambolic Charm [ Wed May 04, 2011 10:59 am ]
Post subject: 

Longpigsdad wrote:
One clear plan must be better to work to than a fudged one?


....not if it's a tory one that dismantles the welfare state and loses people their homes and jobs, purely for the sake of free market ideology.

The whole point of consensual democracy is it prevents a situation where if 40% of the country is doing very nicely, they can't let the other 60% go to hell. This is a country not a business after all and peoples lives and well being are more important than having an elite few making loads of money.

Check it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_democracy
isn't that the proper way to run a democracy? Most countries that hold those ideals have a better standard of life across the board, no-one suffers unecessarily.



http://blog.38degrees.org.uk/2011/05/04 ... s-to-vote/

Author:  Dawoodcock [ Wed May 04, 2011 11:09 am ]
Post subject: 

RP wrote:
I haven't had anything in the post about voting, no ballot card or anything. Think they might have forgotten. :cry:


Check that out today, don't leave it till Thursday.

Author:  DisneyTime [ Wed May 04, 2011 11:28 am ]
Post subject: 

Longpigsdad wrote:
In my humble opion Coalitions/concensus decisons are probably good only in times of war (common cause etc) but not for making "United Kingdom PLC" work again. I'm not sure what the Lib Dems are all about anymore but the Tories and Labour have very different ideas on how to run the country and tackle the National Debt. One clear plan must be better to work to than a fudged one?


I can't agree with this... We have a minority government in Scotland at the moment and they've done incredibly well. More people's opinions are represented because the government party doesn't automatically get its policies through - each issue is voted on individually, and each MSP gets a real say in it.

If we had David Cameron leading a minority government, things would be going very differently. If nothing else it's a bit of a buffer against the shitty leaders and a more convincing backing for the decent ones...

And whether you think AV is the perfect system (I honestly don't see anything wrong with it logistically although I do prefer STV), it's the only chance for any kind of proportional representation we're going to get for god only knows how long, it would be a shame to throw it away now...

Author:  Longpigsdad [ Wed May 04, 2011 11:57 am ]
Post subject: 

I guess the interesting thing about politics is that is splits opinion!
:D
The sad thing for me is that very few mandates come to fruition and politicians seem to be imore n it for themselves (if not initially, eventually) rather than the country. Vote-pulling and placating their backers* appear to take first priority. :(

(*Businesses/TU's)

Author:  beaux nidle [ Wed May 04, 2011 3:49 pm ]
Post subject: 

who do you think the tu represent ?

i think it's me.

Page 6 of 9 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/