NO2AV NOtoAV No to AV serves only to protect the TORIES vested interest

[angloengland]

Well, only a minority turned out to vote between these two undemocratic systems (turn out of 41%), the majority gave these two systems the contempt they deserve. The main parties and their supporters are supporters of undemocratic values, with only their interest at heart. No wonder people turned to violence in order to further their aims because it isn't possible to do it at the ballot box in this country.

[checkthefacts]

So true,Cross Party non-partisan my ass! The Tories and their friends who control most of the press,Murdock &Co, are pulling out all the stops to mislead the public,Why! Because they would likely lose out on the hugely inflated numbers of voters versus seats in Parliament they have at present.,its all vested interest,you will get very few die hard Tory supporters supporting AV,they love it just as it is.

[flatfrog00]

@Sliepnir2006 No one can steal your vote. If you want to put just one party on your ballot paper, you're free to do that. The rest of us like the idea of being able to make a second choice.

[Guesswhokk]

Only America & UK adopt FPTP in it purest form.

Who would u choose Al Gore or Bush in 2001 USA election under FPTP?! If AV exist Bush certainly wouldn't get 8 years in office. I don't want a UK version of Bush!

[Guesswhokk]

If I understood correctly, only few countries uses AV, but majority of the countries in the world "no longer uses" FPTP or at it pure form, their reasoning that FPTP was an old system no longer fit for todays system.

Also under the FPTP era there were many situation where the term "U turn" occurs against their own manifesto.

So the question is AV worst than this FPTP?

[somnolentsurfer]

AV may not be the proportional system some had hoped for, but the truth is that it fixes a lot of the things that are wrong with FPTP without adding any new ones.If we want the chance of public debate on PR any time in the next 40 years we need to vote yes now. A no vote will be painted as a no vote to any kind of reform.

[Braunche]

People fail to see the wider picture in politics.

It's all, if it doesn't fit with my ideology, it's shite and it's worse for the whole country overall.

I hope AV comes about, and hopefully that will lead to a better system such as STV.

[Sliepnir2006]

NO AV does not help only the Tories, what it does do though is protect the three party system.

Think of it this way, you vote for the Green Candidate, ok he loses and comes last, (sorry here just and example). What happens then is that the votes for him then become available to those remaining (first to fifth choices)

So who are most likely to be in the top three choices (CONLIBLAB) of course!

And unless a person gets less than 50% of the votes it doesnt kick in anyways... What a bloody scam!

[maurice]

@Sliepnir2006 if Greens get enough votes they won't come last. Like already in Brighton. In AV, folks will no longer be frightened away from voting for smaller parties by the thought they can't win, so they will win more support, will often not come last, hence have a chance of winning, and break down the 3 party system. Only small party this won't work for is BNP, because they are the bottom preference of everyone except their supporters, so no gain from preferences. But Greens will gain.

[frakflash]

Anyone who spent five minutes studying the Australian system would know that the conservatives do just fine under an AV system, the two party system is even more entrenched, and there are no fewer safe seats or seat warmers waiting for their parliamentary pension than in the UK parliament.

[admillnx6]

Beautiful,hate this country,love it as well.We need a sea change in our politics,sooner rather than later.

[shahideurope]

NotoAV is a Tory front, if you vote against AV, you're voting Tory - that's fine if you are a Tory but if you're Labour then you are being stupid. Why? Because the boundary redistribution willl reduce Labour seats and FPTP will make it even worse.

[Sliepnir2006]

@shahideurope No to AV Is not a Tory Front, I for one have none party allegiance! My belief is every firm that if this succeeds, it will only serve to strengthen the three party hold. AV is NOT PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION, it is a purely a way of stealing the vote from the candidate you choose and giving it to another who is at the top of the pile, come on which three parties are always at the top of the pile... AV will serve the politicians very very well.. It is a con!

[shahideurope]

@Sliepnir2006 if FPTP is not a tory friendly voting system why are the tories spending millions of pounds supporting it? Why does the Murdoch media support it? Only tories and radical old Labour people support FPTP, it is the most shit, undemocratic sorry excuse for a voting system in the world, I hope it gets buried on 5 May 2011.

[Sliepnir2006]

@shahideurope FTFP is supported by the Con's Liberation Movement, because it suits them the best, according to the hype it offers stability of Government, whilst what it really means is well we can do what we want as long as we correct our mistatkes in the last year, and that goes for Labour too, oh and Libe Dems Have just joined in recently with Student fees, what a lying two faced shyster, Nick Clegg really

[Sliepnir2006]

@shahideurope I might also agree that FTFP is the most undemocratic pile of trash since The Roman Empire, but the AV system will be no better when it comes to the crunch, trouble is many people want change and that is completely understandable and sadly people will grab at any straw if they think it will that change.

The sad fact is that in burying FTFP, you may just bring about an even worse system, which in itself, will only further serve to protect the interests of the three main parties.

[shahideurope]

@Sliepnir2006 fine, go ahead and vote no, don't expect another vote to reform the electoral system before you're about 90. It's typical for people in this country to make the best the enemy of the good.

[timaustin2000]

Vote AV; "Safe Seats" are a F*cking DISGRACE. No wonder we had the expenses scandal, half of the Bastards didn't need to worry about winning votes anymore!

[Guyb1231]

In this Mock up, say party a was conservative and party b was labour, under first past the post the Conservatives would win, without even having to consider the interests of the 68% of voters who didn't vote for them, but under AV, Labour might have the interests of some of the voters from party C,D and E, so they would win,

HOWEVER, this political bias DOES work both ways, for instance Scotland elected 59 MP's last May, One out of the 59 was a conservative, but they got 1 in 5 votes.

[Guyb1231]

This voting system is great because It means that Candidates have to look outside there "safe" voters to try and get Votes or Second Choice Votes from less Popular parties, Hypothetical Situation.

Party A - 32%

Party B - 28%

Party C - 20%

Party D - 15%

Party E - 5%

Under First Past the Post Party A would get in easily even though 68% of the voters wanted some one else to win, However under AV if most Voters of E,D and C wanted Party B to get in as there second choice then B would win,