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
bam0 said:
Note I said a majority of the applicable votes, under AV once your preferences are exhausted your vote is no longer applicable.
Click to expand...

Apologies, missed that. But surely that is really just semantics if the end result is a candidate still getting elected on a plurality? It will just happen to be a different plurality and may be a different candidate.
 
BDEE said:
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.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Pedant then. You have a penchant for pedancy it would seem, not a very nice trait.

I have not personally insulted anyone, although your hypocrisy on the matter is noted.

If you feel I have, RTM the post and let a moderator decide.

BDEE said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is what I am saying, how do you know to ask in the first place or have the background to make such a correlation?

BDEE said:
You still didnt answer my question.
Click to expand...

No one cares about your obsessions, stop trolling the thread.
 
I voted yes this morning.

Heard that there's been heaps of no votes though, so anyone else who was going to vote no might as well not bother, others have got it covered ;)
 
RDM said:
Apologies, missed that. But surely that is really just semantics if the end result is a candidate still getting elected on a plurality? It will just happen to be a different plurality and may be a different candidate.
Click to expand...
You can't make people vote (well, ok, you can and I actually support compulsory voting but right now you can't make them), under AV in the final round of voting regardless of how many candidates are still in the winner will have a majority of the applicable votes. That is more mandate than you can say of a FPTP winner with 30%, or if you lived in Papua New Guinea when they still used FPTP a winner with 7.7%
 
AcidHell2 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'd love that, but I don't get that choice, it is FPTP for the rest of my lifetime, or AV for the rest of my lifetime.

I personally believe that a move to AV now will make a move to PR in the future more likely, but it is just my belief.

I also believe that AV gives a more accurate view of the feelings of the electorate.

There is no right or wrong vote, just voting for what you believe, and I just want people to make their choices based on facts, not the lies peddled by either Yes/No campaign.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Are you claiming the author of the source i quoted, Roger Mortimore from ipsos mori is a liar? Yes or No answer

My question is relevant to this thread topic, yours is not, and you have not answered it
Click to expand...

Your question wasnt directed at me IIRC. If it was then I must have missed it, but I thought you were conversing with RDM.

My question is highly relevent, in that you have repeatedly claimed "Troll" against me, becuase of the fact you wont take on board other peoples views and just dismiss them instead of having a proper debate, therefore I am trying to establish if you are the same person that was in fact banned for trolling. Its simple enough. If you are not then no problem, nothing to hide. If you are it further decreases your credability. It doesnt matter what the answer is now, but as you decided not to answer it four times I will make my own assumptions.
 
Voted No, and cast my votes for the Scottish Parliament. Only one person outside my Polling station. A SSP supporter, she's getting soaked. Might take her a cup of tea, she's quite attractive.
 
Ahleckz said:
Voted No, and cast my votes for the Scottish Parliament. Only one person outside my Polling station. A SSP supporter, she's getting soaked. Might take her a cup of tea, she's quite attractive.
Click to expand...

Who did you vote for Ahleckz if you don't mind me asking?

I'm just about to stand outside and get wet myself :( :D

SAOR ABLA!!! :p

I voted yes on AV.
 
bam0 said:
You can't make people vote (well, ok, you can and I actually support compulsory voting but right now you can't make them), under AV in the final round of voting regardless of how many candidates are still in the winner will have a majority of the applicable votes.
Click to expand...

Even compulsary voting wouldn't make a difference, you would have to force people to rank all candidates (I think Australia does this? Could be wrong) which I would also be against.

bam0 said:
That is more mandate than you can say of a FPTP winner with 30%, or if you lived in Papua New Guinea when they still used FPTP a winner with 7.7%
Click to expand...

Under AV you can still get a winner with just 30% of the vote, it just can't be 30% of the final round. AV does not stop pluralities winning so it isn't really an advantage of AV.
 
bam0 said:
You can't make people vote (well, ok, you can and I actually support compulsory voting but right now you can't make them), under AV in the final round of voting regardless of how many candidates are still in the winner will have a majority of the applicable votes. That is more mandate than you can say of a FPTP winner with 30%, or if you lived in Papua New Guinea when they still used FPTP a winner with 7.7%
Click to expand...

I believe there is a caveat addendum because its not compulsory to list all preferences. If enough people dont list next preference votes and treat it like fptp, or extreme party voters only list their extreme parties and dont list a main party, you could end up with a final round that doesn't conclude a majority

final round

lab 32%
con 38%

(the remainder dont list lab or con as a preference at all)
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Go on, if you are so clever, show me the stats. Show me a test case scenario with the stats that prove some voters have more than one vote
Click to expand...

Say I vote for ukip in first round, but in the second round I vote for ld.
In that first round my choice is em images, on the stats my preference is noted as ukip.
My vote is then moved to ld. And again marked against the stats.

So although in each round I have only had 1 vote, I have been marked down on the statistics which are used by all parties as two votes.
Therefore I have more say than someone who has only made one vote.
 
Biohazard said:
:rolleyes:

Pedant then. You have a penchant for pedancy it would seem, not a very nice trait.

I have not personally insulted anyone, although your hypocrisy on the matter is noted.

If you feel I have, RTM the post and let a moderator decide.



This is what I am saying, how do you know to ask in the first place or have the background to make such a correlation?



No one cares about your obsessions, stop trolling the thread.
Click to expand...

To be honest your last couple of replies to me constitute nothing but baiting and abuse and are highly irrelevant. I dont have anything else to say to you since I already answered your question, not that it had anyting to do with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom