Poll: F.P.T.P or A.V.. This Thursday

FPTP or AV

  • FPTP

    Votes: 319 37.1%
  • AV

    Votes: 359 41.8%
  • Pfft, Will Still End Up Run By Crooks

    Votes: 181 21.1%

  • Total voters
    859
It's not fact at all.

How will the stats look at the end, some votes are counted multiple times. That is fact and those stats will have influence on future policies and parties as a whole.

Now you may not see that as a problem, but you can not deny some people will get multiple votes. The thing is av is not need, national vote and as such it would be some sort of PR system. Then you don't need all this rubbish.

But that isn't on the cards. I don't think very many people voting Yes see AV as the end goal, rather it's the starter pistol to get us there.

All votes are counted multiple times unless you get to a round where all your preferences have been eliminated and no one has 50% yet.
 
A vote of the above would out of play pretty quickly in AV, and one of the No Camps arguments is that AV will give extremist minorities more power. The above will have the extremist numpty essentially have no say, just like they currently would with FPTP.

Extremist minorities still get shafted with AV, and the more convetionally "agreeable" voters will have a better way to express their feelings and preferences.

The smiley did sort of suggest it wasn't really a serious reply. However, I will say it again as it seemed to have been missed (or ignored?) the first time. It isn't really about minority parties gaining more seats but more power and that power comes with no representation. Effectively minor parties become very powerful lobby groups. If we are going to give the minor parties the power they are due, it should be via representation and for that we need some form of PR rather than AV.
 
But that isn't on the cards. I don't think very many people voting Yes see AV as the end goal, rather it's the starter pistol to get us there.

All votes are counted multiple times unless you get to a round where all your preferences have been eliminated and no one has 50% yet.

No it's not on the cards( and is one small point why I will be voting no, I will not be voting for change for the sake of change. I want real benefits, something I don't feel av gives) nor is voting av for further change, that is just as rediculuse. Either yes or no vote will end all future reform for a minimum of a generation. You need to vote on the merits of what is on the cards, that's fptp or av. Nothing more, nothing less. To say it's the first step to PR is just silly.
 
Agree it's not one vote, if it was one coyote, the stats would reflect that. But they won't, what they really mean is one vote per round, which is Tyne point and not one vote.

Only way to get what most people want is national voting, where you can really just pick who you want and they will get the seats.

You can't say its not one vote.

That would be second guessing how everyone uses AV.

You can't.
 
BDEE.

Thanks for asking.

Oh king of the pendants, eh?

Well if you have arrived within the last month, and if you aren't a dup yourself, how do you have such extensive historic knowledge of other posters to have the ability to claim other people are using various monikers?

Pish twaddle, that's what.
 
Last edited:
That is only part of the debate though.

My initial concern and my biggest reason for voting no, is what I consider people getting multiple votes. There is no need to got back over the "AV is ONE vote" argument becauase it has been done, but I do not see it as one vote - IN MY OPINION It is people getting another go because thier candidate didnt win, which I see as fundamentaly wrong in democracy.
Your MP is supposed to be your local representative in Parliament, how is it wrong that this person is someone with the most support from the electorate? I see it as fundamentally wrong that in a democracy a representative can be elected with only a plurality (and not a majority) of applicable votes.
 
Your MP is supposed to be your local representative in Parliament, how is it wrong that this person is someone with the most support from the electorate? I see it as fundamentally wrong that in a democracy a representative can be elected with only a plurality (and not a majority) of applicable votes.

Then why are you voting yes to AV when the same can (and will) happen? It might happen less but in the seats where AV will most likely make the difference the end result the likelyhood is that the MP will still be returned on a plurality (or relative majority) rather than an absolute majority.
 
You can't say its not one vote.

That would be second guessing how everyone uses AV.

You can't.

As long as one person votes for multiple parties, then the stats will show this and as such it is not truly one vote. As stats change parties and their policies. Always have always will. Av will give much more influence, as they can say for example although I want ukip policies my second preference is Tories. In each round that is one vote, not in the stats and not in real life, where that data will be used to look at the similarity and difference in policies. Just like the stats currently are used. But it gives some people much more voting power to influence.
 
Oh king of the pendants, eh?

Well if you have arrived within the month, and aren't a dup, how do you have such extensive historic knowledge of other posters to have the ability to claim other people are using various monikers?

Pish twaddle, that's what.

King of what now? Decorative neckwear? How odd. I feel it amusing you feel the need to resort to personal insults when it has nothing to do with you nor was directed at you. Lame. I think we HAVE found a troll after all.

I didnt say he IS, I asked IF he is. I am not a dup, however I know users who have been here longer than me. I am mereley asking a question.

Besides, I see no reason for you to worry yourself with my question directed to someone else which does not involve you.
 
Your MP is supposed to be your local representative in Parliament, how is it wrong that this person is someone with the most support from the electorate? I see it as fundamentally wrong that in a democracy a representative can be elected with only a plurality (and not a majority) of applicable votes.

Av doesn't change this, it's just more likely to have a bigger share.
 
Yes at the end or even in each round, again how will the stats look, it won't equal 100,000 will it.

Yes it will. If 100 votes are cast, at the end of each round, 100 votes are on the score board. Where a voter has given a next preference, the vote is moved to that party. Where no preference is listed, the vote stays with that dead party.
 
Then why are you voting yes to AV when the same can (and will) happen? It might happen less but in the seats where AV will most likely make the difference the end result the likelyhood is that the MP will still be returned on a plurality (or relative majority) rather than an absolute majority.

Note I said a majority of the applicable votes, under AV once your preferences are exhausted your vote is no longer applicable.
 
Yes it will. If 100 votes are cast, at the end of each round, 100 votes are on the score board. Where a voter has given a next preference, the vote is moved to that party. Where no preference is listed, the vote stays with that dead party.

You're still not listening or reading what I said. Each round you have one vote, over the course of the voting you can have more than one vote, in some cases multiple votes. Again at the end of voting will you just have 100 votes for statistics or are you going to have more. Yep that's right of course you are going to have more.
 
Back
Top Bottom