Alternative Vote

[Joel`]

With the country going to the polls again on Thursday, the main talking point will be about the alternative vote referendum.

How does AV work?
The AV system asks voters to rank candidates in order of preference. People can nominate as many preferences as they like. Only first preference votes are counted initially. Anyone getting more than 50% of these is elected automatically. If that doesn't happen, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their second choices allocated to the remaining candidates in a second round of counting. If one candidate then has more than 50% of the votes in this round they are elected. If not, the remaining candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their second preferences (or third preferences if they were the second choice of someone who voted for the first candidate to be eliminated) reallocated. This continues until one candidate has 50% or more of the vote in that round of counting, or there are no more votes to be distributed.

I'm personally against it. FPTP has served us well for years, the only major democracy that uses AV is Australia. There are better electoral systems than AV if we're really serious about electoral reform, why choose this system? I don't want to have 2nd and 3rd preferences. How can a party be expected to be unique and still appeal for secondary and tertiary votes?

What's everyone else think on it?

 

[Lee]

[video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo[/video]

 

[Calum]

no daft idea

will be voting to keep FPTP

 

[Joss]

Anything's better than FPTP at the moment tbh - terrible system.

Voting AV.

 

[Joel`]

Spoiler

[video=youtube;s7tWHJfhiyo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo[/video]

 

[GodCubed]

no daft idea

will be voting to keep FPTP

Explain. Because frankly, the majority of people think you're wrong.

Saw a funny thing the other day. Only people voting to keep the current system are the Tories, the BNP and the British Communist Party.

 

[Joss]

Ironically, the Conservatives are saying 'no to AV' despite using it for their leadership elections (inc. for Mayor) so Boris Johnson and David Cameron both got where they are now through AV.

 

[GodCubed]

Also, I'd be inclined to agree with AV simply because of the Tories' ****** stupid ad campaign, which assumes we're all idiots and would take it at face value.

 

[Joel`]

Explain. Because frankly, the majority of people think you're wrong.

Saw a funny thing the other day. Only people voting to keep the current system are the Tories, the BNP and the British Communist Party.

UK Polling Report Explain how that's showing the majority, please.

 

[Steve*]

AV is also known as PR(proportional representation).

It works quite well here for the last 20 years as you have more chance to get the people you want elected.

 

[Calum]

Is AV not when the 4th place candidate can win or have a say in winning?

if so i rest my case

 

[GodCubed]

UK Polling Report Explain how that's showing the majority, please.

It seems AV has, somehow, in the face of useless ad campaigns and increasing desperation from the Tories, increased its stake since I last saw.

Also, surely there should only be two choices in the poll, since we're talking about a referendum for AV and a straight choice between FPTP, not a multiple choice opinion?

 

[King Sid]

I'll be voting to keep the current system. No point in wasting hundreds of millions of pounds on something that doesn't need changing.

 

[Jak]

Personally I would vote against it but doesn't really matter since I can't vote :'(

 

[Joel`]

It seems AV has, somehow, in the face of useless ad campaigns and increasing desperation from the Tories, increased its stake since I last saw.

Also, surely there should only be two choices in the poll, since we're talking about a referendum for AV and a straight choice between FPTP, not a multiple choice opinion?

Maybe, but I guessed some wouldn't want FPTP or AV in which case the 3rd option can apply to them, rather than being blanketed into the 'no' section.

And No to AV has held a resounding lead for some time IIRC.

 

[GodCubed]

Is AV not when the 4th place candidate can win or have a say in winning?

if so i rest my case

No. As I said, the Tories would like you to think that. The person with the most votes wins, simple as that.

There are many advantages to AV:

All MPs would have the support of a majority of their voters. I read something about in last year's election two thirds of MPs didn't have majority support, which is ridiculous. It also hurts extremist parties (such as the BNP), who are unlikely to gain many second-preference votes, as well as eliminating the need for tactical voting. Electors can vote for their first-choice candidate without fear of wasting their vote. Finally, it encourages candidates to chase second- and third-preferences, which lessens the need for negative campaigning.

Unless you support the BNP, there's very little reason to not want AV really.

Maybe, but I guessed some wouldn't want FPTP or AV in which case the 3rd option can apply to them, rather than being blanketed into the 'no' section.

And No to AV has held a resounding lead for some time IIRC.

Well they don't have a choice past AV or FPTP, so surely there's no point? They can just not vote.

And from what I find it hasn't been for long nor has it been resounding.

I'd like to hear your reasons why you don't want AV. Someone as intelligent as you must have a **** good reason for choosing No.

 

[Joel`]

No. As I said, the Tories would like you to think that.

There are many advantages to AV:

All MPs would have the support of a majority of their voters. I read something about in last year's election two thirds of MPs didn't have majority support, which is ridiculous. It also hurts extremist parties (such as the BNP), who are unlikely to gain many second-preference votes, as well as eliminating the need for tactical voting. Electors can vote for their first-choice candidate without fear of wasting their vote. Finally, it encourages candidates to chase second- and third-preferences, which lessens the need for negative campaigning.

Alternatively, those who vote for extremist parties will get their votes counted multiple times. What happens if people don't have a 2nd or 3rd choice? I read that 55% of people wouldn't even exercise the ability to vote for multiple candidates. The fact that Australia is the only major democracy with the system speaks volumes.

And surely if their first choice candidate is eliminated immediately, then their vote has been wasted, still. Just because their 2nd choice votes are added on doesn't make their vote worth more. It means that they're helping a candidate who they didn't even support progress.

 

[Calum]

Says it all about AV when i read in a poster Austrailia want to get rid of it !

 

[GodCubed]

Alternatively, those who vote for extremist parties will get their votes counted multiple times. What happens if people don't have a 2nd or 3rd choice? I read that 55% of people wouldn't even exercise the ability to vote for multiple candidates. The fact that Australia is the only major democracy with the system speaks volumes.

Right, but that is more than offset by the lack of second or third choice votes. If people don't have a second or third choice they can just not pick, and so be it, that's the system. That's their choice.

The fact that Australia is the only major democracy to use it speaks volumes only of all the old democracies laziness. Nobody can be BOTHERED to change their system, because it works alright. Not well, but alright. In fact, seeing as Australia is a new country with a new democratic system that they were able to choose at a time and would allow them to assess how different systems work rather than evolving from a rudimentary system over hundreds of years, it would seem to suggest that this is a good thing rather than a bad one. Please don't point out America, they're a huge anomaly with everything political.

And surely if their first choice candidate is eliminated immediately, then their vote has been wasted, still. Just because their 2nd choice votes are added on doesn't make their vote worth more. It means that they're helping a candidate who they didn't even support progress.[/QUOTE]

Says it all about AV when i read in a poster Austrailia want to get rid of it !

Oh Calum, use your ****** head. Was it by any chance a "No to AV" poster? Because of course they're going to basically lie in order to get you to support them. Australians think their system is great, from what I hear anecdotally.

 

[LP94]

Personally, I don't see why we can't have a system when the highest amount of votes wins? Even if the gap between the parties in first and second place is miniscule. The one with most votes should win. imo....