Alternative vote,sell it to me,or otherwise...

[Drainy]

No AV is shite it lets the 2nd or 3rd position win.

The Lib Dems are desperate for AV so they can play king maker every election.

No party will ever have over 50% votes unless it's a two horse race.

AV is a way of fudging a contest until certain groups get what they want.

It the Lib dems want to stand a chance then they should make themselves more electable.

I said AV Top up is better. AV in practice only has a 5% 'second place win' record in Australia. Candidates have to be selected by more than 50% of their constituents.. so majority rules, ok? Try thinking outside the box.

Lib Dems do want a more proportional system because proportionality is a good representation of representation in a voting system. You have fallen into the trap of thinking that its the Lib Dems that came up with AV for Britain... http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp98/rp98-112.pdf Have a read of this, it gives a good suggestion of what a good voting system in the UK would look like.

And why do you think the Tories are so against it?
On the question of electability of the Lib Dems, I know plenty of people who wanted to vote for them but were scared that the tories would get it.. not suggesting that they could win, but fear of the other side does suppress Lib Dem vote traditionally.

 

[Excal]

You lot failed to convinced me, I voted NO!

That's a shame. But I'd imagine everyone appreciates the open-mindedness and willingness to be convinced you showed at the beginning of this thread.

 

[B Cantona]

No AV is shite it lets the 2nd or 3rd position win

The campaign is over Impy, you don't need to spout the guff anymore. Unless you actually believe the shite the No campaign came out with?!

You wouldn't be alone. The surge in support to stick with the current system (which all parties said was out of date at the time of the last election result) coincides with the lies and fantasies made up about AV by the No campaign

People opted to stick with the gutter politics which sees a cosy club of parliamentary elites protect their positions as rulers of the land, under a rather contrived version of democracy. Let's be honest, AV is merely papering over the cracks, but it was at least a step in the right direction

The people get the politicians they deserve

 

[peterstorey]

No one deserves a shamelessly unprincipled opportunist like Clegg.

 

[Team Brian GB]

Indeed, it's interesting to see our own mini poll doesn't quite reflect that but this forum is by and large just to the right of Karl Marx!

This website certainly doesn't seem to be in touch with the national vote.

 

[B Cantona]

You can give it a rest too Peter. I'm shocked at how utterly naive the electorate is. I know we don't have much coalition politics in this country due to the grossly disproportional system we have which bears little relation to the popular vote of the country, but some of the stuff I've heard knocking Clegg for going into coalition is utterly ridiculous. Given Lib Dems have so long supported electoral reform where it's so much more likely we'll have coalition politics, it's incredible that so many who voted for them now feel betrayed. This "didn't respect the manifesto" bollocks is exactly that too. It's not his perrogative to have his agenda realised in parliament, he's the minority partner, because the public didn't vote to have his full pledges realised. If they wanted him to honour his manifesto, they should have fecking voted him in as Prime Minister, shouldn't they

 

[Team Brian GB]

You can give it a rest too Peter. I'm shocked at how utterly naive the electorate is. I know we don't have much coalition politics in this country due to the grossly disproportional system we have which bears little relation to the popular vote of the country, but some of the stuff I've heard knocking Clegg for going into coalition is utterly ridiculous. Given Lib Dems have so long supported electoral reform where it's so much more likely we'll have coalition politics, it's incredible that so many who voted for them now feel betrayed. This "didn't respect the manifesto" bollocks is exactly that too. It's not his perrogative to have his agenda realised in parliament, he's the minority partner, because the public didn't vote to have his full pledges realised. If they wanted him to honour his manifesto, they should have fecking voted him in as Prime Minister, shouldn't they

I agree with that, politics by consensus requires give and take based on the balance of power within a coalition. Especially so as the coalition agreement was drawn up dictating what policies would be taken forward and whar would go, and that your party had the 'triple lock mechanism' which approved both the agreement and the coalition.

 

[rednev]

Aww, is Bwad throwing his toys out of the pram because the stupid electorate decided to reject his idea of democracy?

You carry on defending your leader, Brad. I hear the party are offering a free tube of KY jelly with each membership renewal, because after all, you might as well make it as comfortable as possible for when Clegg and co next decide to give you a good shafting.

By the way, remember this?


What a hoot.

 

[Team Brian GB]

I remember that, though out of interest I wonder how many of those people would have given up electoral reform in order to keep their tuition fee pledge?

 

[B Cantona]

Aww, is Bwad throwing his toys out of the pram because the stupid electorate decided to reject his idea of democracy?

No, and AV isn't my idea of democracy, far from it. It was however a progressive step, however small, from the grubby unrepresentative system we have currently

God save the Queen

 

[rednev]

No, and AV isn't my idea of democracy, far from it. It was however a progressive step, however small, from the grubby unrepresentative system we have currently

God save the Queen

It was hardly progressive, it has set the issue of electoral reform back years. Well done. At least it got your party into government though, eh? A position of power which has allowed them to carry through their headline election promises of no rise in VAT and no increase of tuition fees. Oh wait, they didn't do that. They decided to sell out. What for again?

 

[Silva]

It was hardly progressive, it has set the issue of electoral reform back years. Well done. At least it got your party into government though, eh? A position of power which has allowed them to carry through their headline election promises of no rise in VAT and no increase of tuition fees. Oh wait, they didn't do that. They decided to sell out. What for again?

For the other 60% of their manifesto. That's pretty good going for the third party.

 

[RK]

I voted "yes" and didn't really base it on any party preferences. I just voted for the system I thought was best/fairest for the electorate.

Whether you think my vote was right or not, I wonder what percentage of people could honestly say the above?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

For the other 60% of their manifesto. That's pretty good going for the third party.

You're joking right? They've got nothing. The pupil premium is just circling money already in the budget, and the raising of the income tax threshold is actually regressive.

The only possible genuine concession they've got is on Europe.

Well done to the Liberals, sold out on everything for nothing. Lib Dem supporters need to stop sitting on the fence and pick a side.

 

[Silva]

YWell done to the Liberals, sold out on everything for nothing. Lib Dem supporters need to stop sitting on the fence and pick a side.

Oh don't worry about me, I'm firmly in the "former lib dem voter" category. I think I'll waste my vote on the Greens next time.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

A fence sitter forever then.

 

[Silva]

Probably

Unless Labour decides to become a bit more liberal.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

Or pick a side, join a party and start trying to influence policy.

 

[Silva]

The only party I'd consider joining is the Green party, as they're the only ones who stand remotely close to what I do.

I mean, the Labour party fired one of their own scientists because his facts disagreed with their policy, I couldn't support a party that does that.

Edit: and I don't want to join the Green party because, ironically enough, I disagree with their green policy.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

You see parties as immovable objects when really they are just a collection of people. No one agrees with everything their party does, but you have more chance of influencing policy from within a party as opposed to just ticking a box every five years.

 

[Silva]

You see parties as immovable objects when really they are just a collection of people. No one agrees with everything their party does, but you have more chance of influencing policy from within a party as opposed to just ticking a box every five years.

The problem is I can't join any of the parties because:

Conservatives - well, cnuts really
Labour - There's no chance of me changing anything because the things I believe in they consider unelectable
Liberal Democrats - What's the point? They won't be a political force for decades to come and I'd rather waste my time with a party whose policies I agree with.
Greens - I love everything about them, it's just a shame they want to spend £44bn a year on their environmental policies, which ultimately will have zero effect on the planet thanks to America and China. And ironically enough, this is the one thing I won't ever be able to change.

 

[Ubik]

Just remembered about the boundary changes that'll be coming in at the next election too. Great. Cheers lib dems for helping the tories get that one through.

 

[Silva]

Just remembered about the boundary changes that'll be coming in at the next election too. Great. Cheers lib dems for helping the tories get that one through.

I'd like to think they won't let that piece of legislation go through without at least getting Lords reform through as at the same time. But then again, they' proven me wrong before.

 

[Scrumpet]

Oh well there goes the likelihood of my vote ever actually mattering in my lifetime.

 

[CircusMonkey]

I find it extremely disappointing to have heard from numerous 'No' voters that the main reason for their decision was "Nick Glegg".
Its a shame that our children might not see a change in the voting system.
Fptp is deeply flawed and has lead to this stale two party politics.
AV is far from perfect, but it was always a step towards alternative voting systems being introduced.
I really like 'standardised bidding' but realise it is a very complicated system, which could alienate and deter even more people from voting.

 

[peterstorey]

Labour - There's no chance of me changing anything because the things I believe in they consider unelectable.

Well as Mike says the point is to work inside the party to try and effect the changes you want (a bit rich of me since I gave up on them 15 years ago).

 

[B Cantona]

You're joking right? They've got nothing. The pupil premium is just circling money already in the budget, and the raising of the income tax threshold is actually regressive.

The only possible genuine concession they've got is on Europe.

Well done to the Liberals, sold out on everything for nothing. Lib Dem supporters need to stop sitting on the fence and pick a side.

It's been reported time and again that Tory backbenchers are upset how much ground they conceeded to the Lib Dems in the coilition agreement. At the time the two party press were even reporting that Clegg had driven a hard bargain and played a blinder

He must regret not fighting harder for a better comprimise on tuition fees though. Amongst his parties core base, that's the killer

I'm sure now we'll see the party try and re-establish its identity. Perhaps it would be nice if the public woke up and panned the party forcing these unpopular policies through, rather than the one that gave us some modicum of strong government after the last election result

 

[Frosty]

Tuition fees? It is an awful system at the moment, and will have to go up again soon.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

I'm sure now we'll see the party try and re-establish its identity.

It never had any identity. It has always ridden the reactionary political winds of cynical and opportunistic opposition. There is a place for that in politics but it's not the most noble of positions.

Perhaps it would be nice if the public woke up and panned the party forcing these unpopular policies through, rather than the one that gave us some modicum of strong government after the last election result

Perhaps it would be nice if the Lib Dems realised they have no business propping up a Tory government and are being rightly punished for it.

The policies by and large aren't unpopular with Conservative voters.

 

[noodlehair]

I voted no in the end. I liked the idea in principal but with the way it'd be exploited and the way politicians behave, it would have been a pointless change

There's no point giving people power to vote for the little guy if the little guy still ends up being the little guy, and then just sells out to the big guy and stabs his voters in the back.

Plus, the biggest problem at current is that too many people vote despite being ignorant of what they're actually voting for. AV would only have complicated that.

Just weren't enough realistic benefits for me. Good to see the Lib Dems getting the treatment they deserve though...the system can work.

 

[B Cantona]

It never had any identity. It's always ridden the reactionary political winds of cynical and opportunistic opposition. There is a place for that in politics but it's not the most noble of positions.

Perhaps it would be nice if the Lib Dems realised they have no business propping up a Tory government and are being rightly punished for it.

The policies by and large aren't unpopular with Conservative voters.

Spare me the nobility talk, it's not a word that's particularly applicable to any politician at Westminster of any party these days

What exactly did you want to see happen after the last election then? This great system we've voted to keep, the one at the time all parties said was out of date and needed overhauling (until self interest kicked back in), what should the Lib Dems have done?

By and large, voters didn't opt for the Conservatives. The majority of the people did not want their policies

 

[evra]

It never had any identity. It has always ridden the reactionary political winds of cynical and opportunistic opposition. There is a place for that in politics but it's not the most noble of positions.



Perhaps it would be nice if the Lib Dems realised they have no business propping up a Tory government and are being rightly punished for it.

The policies by and large aren't unpopular with Conservative voters.

Indeed, on the whole I'm very satisfied with this administration.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

What exactly did you want to see happen after the last election then? This great system we've voted to keep, the one at the time all parties said was out of date and needed overhauling (until self interest kicked back in), what should the Lib Dems have done?

Why ask 'what should the Lib Dems have done?' and not ask 'what should Labour have done?' or 'what should the Tories have done?'... No one forced the Lib Dems to be king-makers.

They should either have let the Tories act as a minority government or formed a minority government with Labour and whoever else wanted in. Imagine if Labour had formed a coalition with the Tories, I'd have been outraged, and you should be too.

 

[711]

Spare me the nobility talk, it's not a word that's particularly applicable to any politician at Westminster of any party these days

What exactly did you want to see happen after the last election then? This great system we've voted to keep, the one at the time all parties said was out of date and needed overhauling (until self interest kicked back in), what should the Lib Dems have done?

By and large, voters didn't opt for the Conservatives. The majority of the people did not want their policies

They could have formed a minority government with Labour, or let the Conservaties form a minority government on their own. No opposable legislation would get through of course, but maybe a lot of Liberals would prefer that to what we have now. Would be another election before long too, no doubt, but that's likely to happen anyway.

 

[B Cantona]

Why ask 'what should the Lib Dems have done?' and not ask 'what should Labour have done?' or 'what should the Tories have done?'... No one forced the Lib Dems to be king-makers.

They should either have let the Tories act as a minority government or formed a minority government with Labour and whoever else wanted in. Imagine if Labour had formed a coalition with the Tories, I'd have been outraged, and you should be too.

Well yes, Labour and Conservatives could have formed a grand coalition, but we all know that's never going to happen in this country. The Lib Dems were 'kingmakers' because they offered enough votes, with the Tories, to make a majority government. How you think a Tory minority Government would have coped with some of the decisions they've (had?) to make I'm not sure. We'd be back to the polls in the no time. And the population might vote the same way. And suddenly, we're Canada and our politics is a farce

They could have formed a minority government with Labour, or let the Conservaties form a minority government on their own. No opposable legislation would get through of course, but maybe a lot of Liberals would prefer that to what we have now. Would be another election before long too, no doubt, but that's likely to happen anyway.

Labour and Lib Dems didn't have enough seats between them to form a coalition

Conservative minority was an option, but surely it's understandable why the parties didn't want weak Government at such an economic time

 

[Frosty]

It's the tuition fees that will finish them. When they are increased again and universities turn private the LD's will get blamed.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

How you think a Tory minority Government would have coped with some of the decisions they've (had?) to make I'm not sure. We'd be back to the polls in the no time. And the population might vote the same way. And suddenly, we're Canada and our politics is a farce

How you say that with a straight face, I don't know. If you don't have enough votes to make those decisions, then you can't make those decisions. It's called democracy, and you were making out you supported it earlier in this thread.

You're the one telling people that the representation at Westminster doesn't reflect the democratic will of the people, and then somehow go on to defend the liberals forming a coalition and agreeing to implement policies against the wishes of the people who voted for them. And then you even go on to deride a situation that asks the public for their their opinion at the polls!

Your musings on democracy seem very hollow.

 

[Team Brian GB]

Greens - I love everything about them, it's just a shame they want to spend £44bn a year on their environmental policies, which ultimately will have zero effect on the planet thanks to America and China. And ironically enough, this is the one thing I won't ever be able to change.

The United States for generations has had a greater proportion of renewable energy than any other significant economy in the world whilst China is spending far more and going to greater lengths than anybody else to develop such forms of technology - their five biggest hydroelectric plants produce more energy individually that the entirety of the British renewable sector.

 

[Team Brian GB]

I'd like to think they won't let that piece of legislation go through without at least getting Lords reform through as at the same time. But then again, they' proven me wrong before.

It is through, the referendum was part of the same legislation.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

What is the logic behind the propsed reduction in seats in the commons? Why this particular number?