solentstars Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 As I've said before, I have no issue with people voting no for genuine reasons based on the perceived merits, or otherwise, of the two systems. But some of the above posts are quite sad IMO.agree and it look very petty:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 As I've said before, I have no issue with people voting no for genuine reasons based on the perceived merits, or otherwise, of the two systems. But some of the above posts are quite sad IMO. I hope you're not surprised by that?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 I hope you're not surprised by that?! Let's just say that SaintsWeb never disappoints... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 I think we should have a poll on this with more than one choice! winky face thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 I voted yes to AV and Green for my local council so I had might as well rolled up my vote slip and poked it up my arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 Chalk 3 up to the YES tally - myself, Mrs B, and #1 son. They also said we could vote for no more than 3 candidates in the council election - but out of 5 on the list 3 were Tory & 1 UKIP, so I only placed one X, and not for any of these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandy_Top_89 Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 Voted yes to AV, 1 Lib Dem/ 1 Conservative to local council, 4 Lib Dem/ 1 Conservative/ 1 Green to parish council. Found it interesting that on the parish council form only Lib Dem and Green members were marked out, anyone else find that a tad strange? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bug187 Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 voted yes and green.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bug187 Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 I voted yes to AV and Green for my local council so I had might as well rolled up my vote slip and poked it up my arse. I sort of felt the same. One day though...in a galaxy far away.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 5 May, 2011 Share Posted 5 May, 2011 http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/05/campaign-figure-blunkett David Blunkett has admitted they made up the figures to scare people! Number 1: It won't cost anything until 2015. Number 2: It won't cost anymore to run elections under AV, as compared to FPTP as already confirmed by the treasury. The idea we will need to buy electronic counting machines for £130m is laughable. Also, remember we spend £345m on health in this country EVERY day... so even if it did cost the amount the amount the no campaign now admit to be a lie, it is barely a drop in the ocean of our finances and a good price for a fairer democracy. However, as it happens, it doesn't actually cost any extra so there we are. Nonetheless, It's going from one less then ideal system to another. It's not true proportional representation... it's certainly not a step towards it, therefore I couldn't vote for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Jim Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/05/campaign-figure-blunkett David Blunkett has admitted they made up the figures to scare people! Number 1: It won't cost anything until 2015. Number 2: It won't cost anymore to run elections under AV, as compared to FPTP as already confirmed by the treasury. The idea we will need to buy electronic counting machines for £130m is laughable. Also, remember we spend £345m on health in this country EVERY day... so even if it did cost the amount the amount the no campaign now admit to be a lie, it is barely a drop in the ocean of our finances and a good price for a fairer democracy. However, as it happens, it doesn't actually cost any extra so there we are. It will cost more to run. Counting single votes is simple in the FPTP sytem is quick and simple, counting preferential votes will take a lot longer because once you have done the initial count you have to recount the send preferences, third preferences etc until there is a 50% majority. Because of this the counting process alone will cost more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 It will cost more to run. Counting single votes is simple in the FPTP sytem is quick and simple, counting preferential votes will take a lot longer because once you have done the initial count you have to recount the send preferences, third preferences etc until there is a 50% majority. Because of this the counting process alone will cost more. I don't believe counters are paid by the hour. They are paid by session. Taking longer won't mean more cost. And the extra time is barely any at all and who cares if it takes an hour extra, 30 minutes extra... this is for a better democracy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st alex Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Wasn't sure where to put this and it may have been mentioned already, but I've not the 16 pages of this thread. But I was just looking at the results of the local elections and saw that there was an independant candidate running for Redbridge called Ricky Lambert; my question - is this the same Ricky Lambert who plays for Saints? http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/politics/local_election_2011/constituency/127/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Yesterday's votes could have massive implications for the future of this country. SNP look likely to get a majority in Scotland. If they do, they will hold a referendum on independence. By the time of the next general election Scotland could be a separate country. That would take away a large chunk of Labour mp's from the UK parliament. Previous elections show that the Conservatives hold a clear majority in England, and their vote seems to have held up well yesterday. We could be in line for a generation of Conservative government. Obviously I'm excluding Wales from this, where Labour are still strong, but I believe Wales has a much smaller amount of mp's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I would start a new thread on that, Scummer. Worthy of separate discussion, mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I don't believe counters are paid by the hour. They are paid by session. Taking longer won't mean more cost. And the extra time is barely any at all and who cares if it takes an hour extra, 30 minutes extra... this is for a better democracy! I think that you've got a funny idea as to how long it takes to do a count and how much extra the AV system would have added. Most counts take at least a couple of hours and in most seats where there wasn't a clear majority of over 50% of the vote, that would require all of the votes of the lowest eliminated candidate to be redistributed and then perhaps again and again. You're therefore talking the process taking two or maybe three times the duration. Now, if you're paid by the session under the existing system, expecting to take a couple of hours or so and then told that for the same sum of money you might be expected to work for two or three times longer, I'm sure that as such an upright member of the community, you'd agree willingly, wouldn't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I believe that the greens will have a lot to gain from AV. I dont think i could cope with a load of tree huggers running the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I believe that the greens will have a lot to gain from AV. I dont think i could cope with a load of tree huggers running the country. They'd never get in a position to run the country though would they? Lib Dems managed to win every seat in Eastleigh. Tories lost 2 seats to Labour in Southampton but still have overall control. All results on Echo website: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/politics/local_election_2011/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I believe that the greens will have a lot to gain from AV. I dont think i could cope with a load of tree huggers running the country. I'm not sure the Greens will gain a huge amount - and I say that as party member. It's a shame that people like yourself can't see beyond tags like 'treehugger' however and look at some of the policies they have. I'm not expecting you to agree with them necessarily, but if you're going to criticise a party, better to do it on substantive grounds rather than generalisations that only seem to highlight your ignorance of the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I believe that the greens will have a lot to gain from AV. I dont think i could cope with a load of tree huggers running the country. The Greens will never run the country, in my opinion it would be wise if they have more of an influence though, to stop the UK sleep-walking into the inevitable energy/environmental disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 now the lib dems are getting an absolute bashing and the tories (the nasty tories who ware destroying our lives) are doing alright considering... does this make the blue half of government stronger..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 now the lib dems are getting an absolute bashing and the tories (the nasty tories who ware destroying our lives) are doing alright considering... does this make the blue half of government stronger..? No it makes the Tories as they always were, a party with an alternate chance of government and the lib dems clueless turncoats who'll do and say anything to get a foot into the corridors of powers...as they always were in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I believe that the greens will have a lot to gain from AV. I dont think i could cope with a load of tree huggers running the country. not just the greens, the loony left and the extreme right as well. If you look at governments formed on a basis proportional representation you have all the colours of the rainbow and the shady areas beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 not just the greens, the loony left and the extreme right as well. If you look at governments formed on a basis proportional representation you have all the colours of the rainbow and the shady areas beyond. What a lot of rot. Are you saying that if you do not support either the CONs or Labour your vote should not have any worth ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 What a lot of rot. Are you saying that if you do not support either the CONs or Labour your vote should not have any worth ? Do I say that?? I said it not only the Greens would benefit. You are reading between the lines where there's nothing to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Do I say that?? I said it not only the Greens would benefit. You are reading between the lines where there's nothing to read. I think the interpretation was that you were agreeing with OldNick saying that he 'could not cope' with Greens running the country, and therefore you were also adding 'loony left and extreme right' to that, whereas you were (I think) just pointing out that under PR all colours would have more influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I think the interpretation was that you were agreeing with OldNick saying that he 'could not cope' with Greens running the country, and therefore you were also adding 'loony left and extreme right' to that, whereas you were (I think) just pointing out that under PR all colours would have more influence. Probably, living in a country where there is PR for certain assemblies which have a fair modicum of power I can assure you all that not only do you get your friendly neighborhood greens in executives roles you also get your off with the capitalists heads and no coloureds round here mate brigades.PR has it's benefits it also has it's drawbacks as can be seen it the governments of places like Belgium and Austria. If you want Greens in Westminster then be prepared for the BNP as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Figures show more people turned out to vote in the AV referendum than many commentators expected. Of the eight regions so far announced, Scotland had the highest - 50.7% - and London the lowest - 35.4%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Early results from the BBC is that No is running away with it. Nick Robinson is calling it a stunning victory for the No vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Early results from the BBC is that No is running away with it. Nick Robinson is calling it a stunning victory for the No vote. Plenty I know, my wife included, voted NO so to damage Clegg. I voted Yes in the end, not out of any great desire for AV but I saw it as a step towards STV, which is fair IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Just pinched this from the live feed on BBC - is it me or are the percentages a bit fishy? There have been two declarations so far in the AV referendum - both in favour of the No campaign. On the Isles of Scilly, 39.76% (288 people) voted Yes and 65.3% (542 people) voted No. On the Orkney Islands, there was a Yes vote of 39.76% (3,187) and a No vote of 60.42% (4,829). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Plenty I know, my wife included, voted NO so to damage Clegg. I voted Yes in the end, not out of any great desire for AV but I saw it as a step towards STV, which is fair IMHO. This has nothing to do with Clegg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 (edited) predicting over 70% of the vote will be a no.. also predicting that not a single part of the country will vote yes. I think that comprehensively clears that up...the tories gaining in the locals, a complete clear up in no certain terms that the nation simply does not want AV Edited 6 May, 2011 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 This has nothing to do with Clegg. No, of course it doesn't. Nobody who switched to the LDs last year feels betrayed and want him brought to his kness. Nope, no one at all including nobody I'm married to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atticus Finch of Maycomb Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Probably, living in a country where there is PR for certain assemblies which have a fair modicum of power I can assure you all that not only do you get your friendly neighborhood greens in executives roles you also get your off with the capitalists heads and no coloureds round here mate brigades.PR has it's benefits it also has it's drawbacks as can be seen it the governments of places like Belgium and Austria. If you want Greens in Westminster then be prepared for the BNP as well. Except that the Greens have 60 council seats at the BNP only have 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 predicting over 70% of the vote will be a no.. also predicting that not a single part of the country will vote yes. I think that comprehensively clears that up...the tories gaining in the locals, a complete clear up in no certain terms that the nation simply does not want AV Camden was 51% Yes, 49% No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 It's unfortunate but AV didn't stand a chance because it was associated with Clegg. There could have been a referendum for free beer and No would have won if it was Glegg's idea. Oh well, back to my vote meaning jack sh!t for at least the next decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 No, of course it doesn't. Nobody who switched to the LDs last year feels betrayed and want him brought to his kness. Nope, no one at all including nobody I'm married to. That's not the point I'm making. I'm sure hundreds of thousands voted against AV because of Clegg, but my point is what a crap reason that is! He has nothing to do with whether AV is better than FPTP at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Excellent result. Fantastic! Now those traitorous waste-of-space lib-dems can shove the idea for electoral reform back in the closet for at least a generation. It was a spanking. Clegg lost bad. What a loser. Ha! Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Oh well, how unfair life is, eh? Here we are, shackled with this dreadfully unfair electoral system and the public are just not intelligent enough to have followed the simple facts put across by the Yes campaign. How could they have been so gullible to fall for all those lies and the deceitful way that the No campaign was run? I feel so sorry for that nice Nick Clegg. I hope that his party aren't too hard on him, as it wasn't his fault for wanting to improve the chances of them being elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Jim Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 I don't believe counters are paid by the hour. They are paid by session. Taking longer won't mean more cost. And the extra time is barely any at all and who cares if it takes an hour extra, 30 minutes extra... this is for a better democracy! It's not an extra 30 minutes to count all the preferences. In the Australian (states and federal) election, there were numerous examples of it taking nearly a week to count all of the votes (because it was so tight getting a 50% majority they had to count all the preferences). Now that's not just a personnel cost but also a location cost (they will have to pay for the hall or office where the counts are held), and then if there is a need for a recount you are recounting an already long process. All the arguments are now academic anyway - there won't be another referendum on the voting system for a bloody long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Personally I think we should do away with this whole 'democracy' crap and let Wills 'n' Kate run the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 It's not an extra 30 minutes to count all the preferences. In the Australian (states and federal) election, there were numerous examples of it taking nearly a week to count all of the votes (because it was so tight getting a 50% majority they had to count all the preferences). Now that's not just a personnel cost but also a location cost (they will have to pay for the hall or office where the counts are held), and then if there is a need for a recount you are recounting an already long process. All the arguments are now academic anyway - there won't be another referendum on the voting system for a bloody long time. Yes, but in Australia the geographical challenges are much greater. In the end, I do not care if I have to wait a few more hours for results if they are fairer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Excellent result. Fantastic! Now those traitorous waste-of-space lib-dems can shove the idea for electoral reform back in the closet for at least a generation. It was a spanking. Clegg lost bad. What a loser. Ha! Ha! Not true, if there is another hung parliament next election or perceived injustice it will come straight back. I simply can not see a situation where(if trends continue and that is in the balance right now with the Lib Dems on 15% last night) only 65% of people vote for the two main parties, to have a system which favours two party politics. I just don't see how anyone can be truly happy with a system where you can increase your share of the vote, but decrease your representation! The electoral reform battle WILL go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1976_Child Posted 6 May, 2011 Share Posted 6 May, 2011 Yes, but in Australia the geographical challenges are much greater. In the end, I do not care if I have to wait a few more hours for results if they are fairer. Nothing fairer about some people having effectively more than one vote and an undue influence on the result. FPTP is one man one vote. (And unfortunately these days one woman one vote.) With AV some hippy dip-sh!t sandal wearing Green environmentalist ponce gets to distort the result because he wants to save the otters or ban us from burning coal. Unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 7 May, 2011 Share Posted 7 May, 2011 Nothing fairer about some people having effectively more than one vote and an undue influence on the result. FPTP is one man one vote. (And unfortunately these days one woman one vote.) With AV some hippy dip-sh!t sandal wearing Green environmentalist ponce gets to distort the result because he wants to save the otters or ban us from burning coal. Unfair. I wondered what had happened to Alan B'Stard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 7 May, 2011 Share Posted 7 May, 2011 It's unfortunate but AV didn't stand a chance because it was associated with Clegg. There could have been a referendum for free beer and No would have won if it was Glegg's idea. Oh well, back to my vote meaning jack sh!t for at least the next decade. So! You only want your vote to mean something, if you win? Seems to me, that with attitudes like that, we should scrap voting all together, and issue guns to everyone, for a 'I shoot faster than you' system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 7 May, 2011 Share Posted 7 May, 2011 That's not the point I'm making. I'm sure hundreds of thousands voted against AV because of Clegg, but my point is what a crap reason that is! He has nothing to do with whether AV is better than FPTP at all. So you think these 'hundreds of thousands' have no political thought process, bit disrespectful don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 7 May, 2011 Share Posted 7 May, 2011 Not true, if there is another hung parliament next election or perceived injustice it will come straight back. I simply can not see a situation where(if trends continue and that is in the balance right now with the Lib Dems on 15% last night) only 65% of people vote for the two main parties, to have a system which favours two party politics. I just don't see how anyone can be truly happy with a system where you can increase your share of the vote, but decrease your representation! The electoral reform battle WILL go on. There won't be, the conservatives will sort out Labours mess, and win by a landslide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 7 May, 2011 Share Posted 7 May, 2011 I owe an apology to Verbal. The British electorate aren't thick afterall. I can only apologise for insinuating otherwise P.s. Good to see the Tory vote increase in the local elections too. Who'd have thought, especially after all the unnecessary cuts... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now