Added: 11 months ago
From: ajuk1
Views: 1,426
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (32)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • It's not as simple as 1,2,3

  • @MrAEMiller it is, hell if Australian teenagers can understand it (my old school actually used it to elect multiple members of the student body) and if they can understand it so should've the British Public.

  • Of course if you were tell these kind of lies at a General Election about a candidate you'd be liable for prosecution by the Electoral Commission but because no human is being elected both campaigns are exempted. It's a legal loophole.

  • It is indeed nonsense. But the YES campaign should have known this stuff - it took me a week to calculate that if the person in 1st place doesn't get 50% then the person in 2nd or 3rd place can win and if the person in 2nd place gets between 25 and 33%. Other candidates (4th to nth places) can just push the person in 1st place over the finishing line but not the party in 2nd place. For an in depth explanation of mathematical model of AV visit the pear shaped av deal or no deal page.

  • @MrAEMiller most of the time the candidate which is leading after the primary count will win, here in Australia results like Corangamite and Denison are rare.

  • Here is pretty solid evidence that the referendum was rigged , simply look at the likes/dislikes for No and YES vids , of course it's not a valid poll but the fact that they are generally the exact reverse of the end results is unbelievably suspicious .

    I smell a dictatorship.

  • This is so ridiculously wrong I actually enjoyed it!

  • This is a joke .. right? I mean, are they trying to prove we can't do maths? Look at that graph. Look at the winner going over the line. Does that even look remotely like they have 50% of the votes represented by that graph? It's closer to 20-30%. If you actually work out where the 50% line is, the votes for the last placed candidate can't even push the first placed person over the line, let alone anyone else.

  • If a candidate wins then it is because they have the support of a majority of the voters. A BNP voter could not swing a win for anyone who wasn't already popular with people. You need to be in the majority to win. If the BNP voters can affect the outcome this is because they have a large number. Remember these are voters we are talking about, the point of voting gis to have a say in who represents you, it is distinctly undemocratic to ignore a large number of constituents.

  • What a fucking ridiculous advert....

  • I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

  • @OppositeOfCoffee Amen to that.

  • Obviously BNP are second class citizens in the UK...what the hell? They are citizens as well. What a shit advert!

  • BNP councillor elected with less than 28% of the vote. This is not hypothetical. This is not something that 'could happen' under AV, it actually happened under the current system. Think about that. A candidate whose views are strongly opposed by the majority of the voters is elected by just over a quarter of them.

  • Fuck you whoever made this advert. Whether you agree with the BNP or not they're still a political party, and how dare you incite the idea that their voters are somehow 'less' worthy to vote than other people. People like you are exactly the reason the voting system needs to change.

  • @finalfantac It was the NO2AV campaign. They are suggesting the BNP voters could toip the balance in favour of a candidate no-one else wants... which is just untrue. To win under AV you need a majority of the voters - all the voters who have any preference for the remaining candidates that is, including those whose first preference was for any other party. It's just a series of short listing, and voting on who's left, but using preferences to allocate the votes in each round. Vote YES on 5th May

  • @finalfantac It was the NO2AV campaign. They are suggesting the BNP voters could toip the balance in favour of a candidate no-one else wants... which is just untrue. To win under AV you need a majority of the voters - all the voters who have any preference for the remaining candidates that is, including those whose first preference was for any other party. It's just a series of short listing, and voting on who's left, but using preferences to allocate the votes in each round. Vote YES on 5th May

  • @finalfantac It was the NO2AV campaign. They are suggesting the BNP voters could toip the balance in favour of a candidate no-one else wants... which is just untrue. To win under AV you need a majority of the voters - all the voters who have any preference for the remaining candidates that is, including those whose first preference was for any other party. It's just a series of short listing, and voting on who's left, but using preferences to allocate the votes in each round.

  • Comment removed

  • so what evidence do they have to say the BNP would swing it if we didn't have it in the election

  • Ah! A scary video with scary sounding music!

    It's trying to mislead people to thinking that AV makes it inevitable that fringe parties will win seats but that's not at all the case. The BNP are a party I strongly disagree with but if we're going to pretend this country is a democracy, then we should be acknowledging peoples votes and their right to be represented by the BNP.

  • So let me see if I got this correctly, if you vote YES for AV, you are letting the fascists win, and obviously you are not British cause "It's not how we do it in Britain".

  • If I "like" this video, will it be interpreted as me liking the video, or me liking the analysis of the videos's ridiculously incorrect math? I'm torn! I don't want people to think the video itself is popular! ;-)

  • terrible advert. But sadly, AV is worse than FTPT. It's less proportionate and simply gives the party in power a false image of legitimacy. And as far as I can see most people who are saying yes to it are only doing so because the a lot of the people saying no are tories.

  • @philipmcjim sorry and the party/parties in power dont have a false sense of legitimacy now?

    it would clearly reduce it as they would have to actually interact with the constituency as a whole and not just the core supporters

    No it's not perfect but it allows disapproval to be shown as well as approval & it is clearly more proportional as to win you need at least 50% of the public to have acknowledged you with a vote. that is more proportional than needing 1 more than the other guy

  • @philipmcjim AV is no less proportionate than FPTP - it depends on the individual constituencies. We already have parties in power with a false sense of legitamacy. I'm saying Yes because it will mean I don't have to vote tactically, I can express support for my favourite and second favourite candidate, and I know my local MP has had support from at least half the voters. FPTP only works in a two party set-up and we have 3 large parties and quite a few smaller ones. Vote Yes because it's better

  • bollocks. how better to start scaremongering than to point the finger at the bnp hahaha so amateur.

  • @follow40 You say that... but this is an official video from the NO2AV campaign... and you'd be surprised how many people believe it!

  • IF YOU DONT BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY FOR THOSE YOU HATE, YOU DONT BELIEVE IN IT AT ALL. 

  • Can I just say... if the majority want BNP, that's who should be in power. I hate the ideals of the BNP, but in a democracy and a modern world, the party the people want in power should win!

    Don't believe this scaremongering. Obviously the majority don't want the BNP and you don't need to worry about 'extremists' voting for obscure parties. They are the minority, and the parties are obscure for a reason. AV allows the majority to get the party in power they want.

  • So the opinions of racists shouldn't be counted in a democratic system?

  • exactly. this is just incorrect. if you have 100 voters, and 30 vote for p1, 30 for p2, 20 for p3, 10 for p4 and 5 for p5 (other 5 don't vote :P) then basically every person would have to have the same second preference to tip the scale. And the runoff would mean that even if those last 5 people did have the same preference, no party would have 50% again, so the other parties votes would be redistributed, so it's pretty impossible in the real world for this to happen. scaremongering eh?

  • Christ. What's the source of this?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more