Av referendum fails - and the ignorant masses bring "Great" britain deeper into it's shit. - Polidicks

I saw a vote on facebook about whether or not you would vote for AV, and it was about 60-40 for no. I looked at some of the comments of people who said no, and they were all convinced that the BNP would come into power if we voted for AV, someone even said the same system got Hitler elected. Someone earlier in this thread said that calling everyone who disagreed with you a retard wasn't the right thing to do, but in this case it's actually true to some extent. I cannot believe this.

I don't think a lot of people understand our political situation today, relative to how it was before in relation to the voting systems. A common argument I hear, especially amongst older people (the age divide between the 'no' and 'yes' voters here must be noted) is "FPTP has worked for years. Why change it now?" Well, the answer to that is simple: British politics has changed and our voting system must change to reflect this. For hundreds of years Britain has been a 2-party state. At the turn of the 20th century it was always Liberal/Conservative, without a doubt. With the rise of the Labour Party and the fall of the Liberal Party, Britain remained a 2-party state, only this time as Labour/Conservative. It's only in the past 30 years, if that, that the Liberal Democrats have slowly started to gain a foothold and, today, we exist in a three-party state with multiple popular minor parties (UKIP, Green etc). "But it works fine in America!" - yeh... a two-party state. FPTP [i]does not work[/i] in a state with 3 main parties and so many popular minor parties, especially when there is not unanimous support for a single party. This was shown last May and look where it has gotten us.

[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;29670536]Went downstairs, saw the Daily Mail on the table and laughed [img_thumb]http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/222174_2056412974530_1370784183_32338973_2375740_n.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/230039_2056412374515_1370784183_32338967_8306899_n.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] To be honest I laugh whatever's on the mail's front page

I just found this while going through and deleting/keeping hundreds of gigs of old shit, I made it while I was working on my AV thread in GD but I ended up not including it [img]http://imgkk.com/i/nnpm.png[/img]

[QUOTE=smurfy;29678456]I just found this while going through and deleting/keeping hundreds of gigs of old shit, I made it while I was working on my AV thread in GD but I ended up not including it [img_thumb]http://imgkk.com/i/nnpm.png[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] Basically all the half decent parties supported it. And all the shit ones hated it. Why the fuck were the BNP opposed to it? They have no chance on FPTP, even UKIP realized that and supported AV if that image is right.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;29680103]Why the fuck were the BNP opposed to it? They have no chance on FPTP, even UKIP realized that and supported AV if that image is right.[/QUOTE] COS DEY LIKE TRADITION. OLD = GOOD. NEW = BAD

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;29680151]COS DEY LIKE TRADITION. OLD = GOOD. NEW = BAD[/QUOTE] No one realises that the British voting system has seldom been left alone. There was an essay in an issue of The Independent which stated that before 1950 some seats used a form of AV.

I think OP is a bit biased.

[QUOTE=lukepker;29681325]I think OP is a bit biased.[/QUOTE] It's The Guardian what do you expect.

[QUOTE=Darth_GW7;29656149]Under "First past the post", you are given a ballot paper with, say, 5 candidates on it. You mark the box next to the one you want to vote for. The results are counted, and the person with the most votes wins. Under "Alternative Vote", you are given the same ballot paper, however, you put the candidates in order of preference - a 1 next to the person you MOST want, through to a 5 for the person you LEAST want. You're not obligated to vote past the first preference, but you're a fool not to. The votes are counted as before, however, if no candidate has a clear majority, ie. 50%, the person with the least votes is eliminated. All the people who voted for that person have their first preferences ignored and their second preferences counted as one vote. This continues until one party has a majority - the person with the least votes being eliminated, and all the people who voted for them having their next preference counted instead.[/QUOTE] That sounds awful, and ripe for fraud.

I personally didnt like the AV system and voted no. Not because of the bollocks they put into the campaigns, but that the parties in my top preferences I know will be knocked off and my vote will either no longer be counted or go onto a party I didnt actually want. And I like the idea of people having dedication to a party rather than listing them in popularity.

[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;29673628]"But it works fine in America!" - yeh... a two-party state.[/QUOTE] Being a two party state is one of the worst things about America's electoral system and the fact that our country will likely still use FPTP when it's on the verge of collapse is a horrible thing to imagine. Most of America's voters are unaffiliated voters, people who consider themselves to be "moderate" but really just don't give a shit about actual issues and base their feelings about the state of the country on how much their personal life sucks and how angry the people in the media sound rather than what the government is actually doing. These are the people that vote against the incumbent because they got fired and expect the new guy to get him a new job by the end of the week. Those "undecided" voters you see in polls taken a week before an election are almost always these people. Being a two party state just makes it makes that much easier for these people to mindlessly vote as if their deciding whether or not to press a "reset" button and get angry when it doesn't work. And if that's not enough, we also have the electoral college to make presidential elections really stupid.

[QUOTE=P1X3L N1NJA;29681704]I personally didnt like the AV system and voted no. Not because of the bollocks they put into the campaigns, but that the parties in my top preferences I know will be knocked off and my vote will either no longer be counted or go onto a party I didnt actually want. And I like the idea of people having dedication to a party rather than listing them in popularity.[/QUOTE] You realize that with AV you can still vote for just one party if you want, right?