Would AV change how you vote?

[otherman]

Caulkhead said:

It won't make a jot of difference even if adopted. The vast majority will just put an X next to the candidate they want and ignore all the others as they are entitled to do.

I don't think all voters are that clever. Many vote for the candidate they think will win, because any other vote is 'wasted'

[Caulkhead]

otherman said:

Caulkhead said:

It won't make a jot of difference even if adopted. The vast majority will just put an X next to the candidate they want and ignore all the others as they are entitled to do.

I don't think all voters are that clever. Many vote for the candidate they think will win, because any other vote is 'wasted'

That's true but it supports my belief that most will still just make one mark, rather than numbering the candidates in preferential order, which requires far more thought.

[thinfourth2]

Caulkhead said:

Perhaps the people you perceive as voting by tie colour are actually just voting for the party that has the best fit to their views from the available choice, rather like you do?

So seeing that the vast majority of this site supports the torys we can say the vast majority of this site believes 100% in man made global warming like the tory party do

[grumbledoak]

Folks should remember that Labour wanted AV. As it would further cement their advantage.

For me, if it isn't going to be full PR why go to all the expense?

[Halb]

JagLover said:

It might yes

If a party with a truly radical and Libertarian agenda came along they would get my first preferance and the Tories the second.

Like...the libertarian party?
http://lpuk.org/

[otolith]

thinfourth2 said:

So seeing that the vast majority of this site supports the torys we can say the vast majority of this site believes 100% in man made global warming like the tory party do

All of the major parties are warmists - the only difference between left and right is that the left fervently want it to be true.

[RemainAllHoof]

"This referendum alone is costing £91 million. And switching to AV would cost even more:
£130 million on electronic vote counting machines
£26 million on explaining the new system to voters
Instead, that money could provide:
2503 doctors,
6297 teachers,
8107 nurses
35885 hip replacements or
69832 school places"
Source: No Campaign leaflet.

I call BS. Given government employees' inability to manage budgets, I suggest the electronic vote counting machines will cost £300 million.

I am voting "no" unless someone thinks this £300 million is worth it. You have a day to convince me to vote "yes" (postal vote sitting on desk).

And if anyone thinks it will cost £130 million and not be over budget and behind time, then I won't listen to your argument because you've probably been drinking or smoking something illegal.

[thinfourth2]

RemainAllHoof said:

"

I am voting "no" unless someone thinks this £300 million is worth it. You have a day to convince me to vote "yes" (postal vote sitting on desk).

.

Well done for completely missing the opening question of this thread

If it costs £300million to stop nothing changing but tie colour in parliament its worth every penny

[Mojooo]

Its not like you are paying the £300m !!

Anyway isn;t it worth it at the price of a decent democratic system?

I think AV will win because a lot of people will probably consider it a fairer system - even moreso the ones that havent really spent time thinking about it but have read the leaflet that comes in the post (not that I am saying its biased)

[RemainAllHoof]

thinfourth2 said:

Well done for completely missing the opening question of this thread

If it costs £300million to stop nothing changing but tie colour in parliament its worth every penny

Well done for completely missing the point that I didn't care about the opening question and didn't want to start another thread.

How would it be worth every penny? You can change the tie colour under the current system. Or is Labour still in power?

[RemainAllHoof]

Mojooo said:

Its not like you are paying the £300m !!

Anyway isn;t it worth it at the price of a decent democratic system?

The government is paying for the change isn't it, which comes from the taxpayer?

You're 100% sure it's a better system?

[Mojooo]

RemainAllHoof said:

The government is paying for the change isn't it, which comes from the taxpayer?

You're 100% sure it's a better system?

I was being sarcastic on the first point

On the second poimt, whether its a better system or not its a system a significant number of people would proably vote for - therefore we may as well have a chance to vote on it.

My guess is that AV will win or come a very close second. I don't think FPTP will win by a significant majority.

[RemainAllHoof]

Mojooo said:

I was being sarcastic on the first point

On the second poimt, whether its a better system or not its a system a significant number of people would proably vote for - therefore we may as well have a chance to vote on it.

My guess is that AV will win or come a very close second. I don't think FPTP will win by a significant majority.

Oh, ok. I just wanted to check I wasn't getting confused.

If FPTP doesn't win by a significant majority, can I put a "2" by the "Yes"? Oh, wait...

[thinfourth2]

RemainAllHoof said:

thinfourth2 said:

Well done for completely missing the opening question of this thread

If it costs £300million to stop nothing changing but tie colour in parliament its worth every penny

Well done for completely missing the point that I didn't care about the opening question and didn't want to start another thread.

How would it be worth every penny? You can change the tie colour under the current system. Or is Labour still in power?

Well done you don't care about the opening question we if you actually read the opening question you might notice the fact it said there was another thread already running

And labour are still in power just they appear to be wearing a blue tie instead of a red tie

[Caulkhead]

thinfourth2 said:

Caulkhead said:

Perhaps the people you perceive as voting by tie colour are actually just voting for the party that has the best fit to their views from the available choice, rather like you do?

So seeing that the vast majority of this site supports the torys we can say the vast majority of this site believes 100% in man made global warming like the tory party do

Of course not, you're contradicting your own posts now. You said you'd vote for the party that most reflected your beliefs, you didn't say they had to reflect your beliefs exactly.

So I put it to you again, the people you accuse of voting for tie colour might well be doing exactly what you and I do, choosing the party that is closest to their beliefs from a finite choice whilst accepting that no party will ever reflect exactly what they want, so they have to settle for the closest option available.

[EliseNick]

Here is an interesting article. Having read it I now don't think this matter is very important - because of MATHS.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/apr/2...

Sorry it's from the Guardian - but that doesn't matter. It's right because of MATHS, rather than being wrong because of where it was published.

(MATHS is a bit like SCIENCE, but it's never wrong and you can't make things out of it.)

[Jasandjules]

Will it affect how I vote? Well, to a degree yes. Whether or not it makes enough of a difference to the outcome of elections is another matter.

[RemainAllHoof]

thinfourth2 said:

Well done you don't care about the opening question we if you actually read the opening question you might notice the fact it said there was another thread already running

And labour are still in power just they appear to be wearing a blue tie instead of a red tie

<shrugs>

Are they really? Or more to the point, all politicians are the same so it doesn't really matter?

[otolith]

I have difficulty finding one name on the ballot I'm willing to vote for - can we have a system where we put a cross against the ones we definitely don't want?

[MG CHRIS]

Voted no will not make a difference. However gets in what ever way the voteing sytem is will not make a difference for us they just want more tax for them self oh sorry the defict.