View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
area51newmexico Goddess
Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Posts: 10598 Location: East Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2011 12:01 pm Post subject: Lets go to the Polls! |
|
|
Today, 5th May, the UK goes to the polls to decide if we want to keep our current system 'first past the post' or change to 'alternative vote' system.
Many people are confused about what AV actually is but it's actually quite simple (with the help of BBC!) Watch this little display:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12892836
I reckon it's bollock anyway:)
But what would you prefer: AV or traditional system? _________________ Helen, the Administratrix of www.area51newmexico.com
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stalker Forum Champion
Joined: 08 Jan 2009 Posts: 1622 Location: UK
|
Posted: Thu May 05, 2011 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've voted "no" - seems like a half measure to me, so would rather stick with the existing system.. at least with the current way, the person that the most people wanted the most wins!
I'd kinda worry that AV basically lets far more game playing - the people who want to vote for fringe minorities kind of get multiple votes, but those who want to stick with for example their current candidate who is popular then only get one vote in real terms. - I could see things going mad with tacticle voting, then letting loonies run the country lol |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aalpha Nicest Guy In The Universe/Site Admin
Joined: 17 Oct 2005 Posts: 8399 Location: Where ever you need me I'll be there. Whatever you need done I'll do it. Made in the USA.
|
Posted: Fri May 06, 2011 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with stalker even tho I'm not in the UK. With the AV method, candidates acquire votes that were cast for other candidates.
If I don't want Party A then my vote for Party C should be lost if C doesn't win, not go to someone I can't stand.
Bill Clinton won one of his elections with only 43% of the popular vote. Thanks to a third party candidate who kept either of the two main parties from winning with 51% or better margin.
I'm still stuck on how to apply the grammar and syntax "first past the post." What is the "post"? I think I'll get what it means to get "past" it once I know what "it" is.
Definitely vote ---NO!!-- on AV. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
area51newmexico Goddess
Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Posts: 10598 Location: East Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Fri May 06, 2011 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
stalker wrote: | I'd kinda worry that AV basically lets far more game playing - |
I reckon it would require strategic voting! If you wanted Mr B to win, you'd kinda have to put another name as your first choice (someone who you knew would not have a cat in hells chance of winning), Mr B as your second choice?!
aalpha wrote: | I'm still stuck on how to apply the grammar and syntax "first past the post." What is the "post"? I think I'll get what it means to get "past" it once I know what "it" is. |
I wondered that too. 'first past the post' is a phrase with has been banded about on TV alot.
UKers - correct me if I'm wrong but currently candidates do not need to have a certain % of the vote to win, just the most? E.g. a person could gain only 30% the vote but still win. The remaining 70% of votes could be spread out over the other 5 or more candidates (we can often vote between many many candidates. On my last European election, there was 21 candidates!) _________________ Helen, the Administratrix of www.area51newmexico.com
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
stalker Forum Champion
Joined: 08 Jan 2009 Posts: 1622 Location: UK
|
Posted: Mon May 09, 2011 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
aalpha wrote: | I'm still stuck on how to apply the grammar and syntax "first past the post." What is the "post"? I think I'll get what it means to get "past" it once I know what "it" is. |
"First Past The Post" is actually from Horse Racing! there is a post at the finishing line, first horse to get to the finish wins! - it actually doesn't make sense really for our election system as there is no line to get to, in UK politics it just means the person who gets the most votes in that constituency wins and becomes a MP (you can win by 1 vote, you don't have to have a set size majority).. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lamiaceae Site Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 7651 Location: To the right of my computer
|
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I too voted no. I didn't like the sounds of my vote going to someone who I didn't like.
Far too many 'behind closed doors' deals and greasy handshakes could of been made without the input of the public which would of made a mockery of democracy in my opinion.
Also, Peter Mandelson was all for it, and anything he wants is usually bad for Britain so on the strength of that I voted no alone. _________________ I should update my sig. What to put here for $CurrentYear ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aalpha Nicest Guy In The Universe/Site Admin
Joined: 17 Oct 2005 Posts: 8399 Location: Where ever you need me I'll be there. Whatever you need done I'll do it. Made in the USA.
|
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
stalker wrote: | aalpha wrote: | I'm still stuck on how to apply the grammar and syntax "first past the post." What is the "post"? I think I'll get what it means to get "past" it once I know what "it" is. |
"First Past The Post" is actually from Horse Racing! there is a post at the finishing line, first horse to get to the finish wins! - it actually doesn't make sense really for our election system as there is no line to get to, in UK politics it just means the person who gets the most votes in that constituency wins and becomes a MP (you can win by 1 vote, you don't have to have a set size majority).. |
I was afraid of that. Another misapplied concept. Check this out.
Here's what drives me nuts about the USA's elections. For some years now early voting has become popular where voters can vote 1 to 2 weeks (maybe more?) before election day. The news media refer to the polling sites as "one stop voting" places, stations, whutevvva. . .
My bitch is when has there ever been multiple voting sites for any election early or on election day? The answer is NEVER!!!!
so who's the moron that came up with one stop?
I'm shaking now, I have to go eat some chocolate. . . . _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
area51newmexico Goddess
Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Posts: 10598 Location: East Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lamiaceae wrote: | I too voted no. I didn't like the sounds of my vote going to someone who I didn't like. |
If you don't like them, don't put them as you're 2nd/3rd/4th choice votes then:)
aalpha wrote: | Here's what drives me nuts about the USA's elections. For some years now early voting has become popular where voters can vote 1 to 2 weeks (maybe more?) before election day. The news media refer to the polling sites as "one stop voting" places, stations, whutevvva. . .
My bitch is when has there ever been multiple voting sites for any election early or on election day? The answer is NEVER!!!!
so who's the moron that came up with one stop? |
We have 'postal votes'. If you are unable to get to the voting place, you can elect to have your vote sent in via post. _________________ Helen, the Administratrix of www.area51newmexico.com
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lamiaceae Site Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2006 Posts: 7651 Location: To the right of my computer
|
Posted: Sun May 15, 2011 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
area51newmexico wrote: |
If you don't like them, don't put them as you're 2nd/3rd/4th choice votes then:)
|
So what's the difference between putting a 1 in a box as opposed to a X ?
Also, if my favourite candidate doesn't get through, isn't my candidate dropped from the runnings and my vote re-assigned to someone else?
I still stand by my thought that if Peter Mandelson wanted it, it's bad for Britain. _________________ I should update my sig. What to put here for $CurrentYear ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
area51newmexico Goddess
Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Posts: 10598 Location: East Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lamiaceae wrote: | area51newmexico wrote: |
If you don't like them, don't put them as you're 2nd/3rd/4th choice votes then:)
|
So what's the difference between putting a 1 in a box as opposed to a X ? |
I think under AV you would put a number 1/2/3 etc in the box rather than the X which you do now.
Lamiaceae wrote: | Also, if my favourite candidate doesn't get through, isn't my candidate dropped from the runnings and my vote re-assigned to someone else? |
Your vote is only re-assigned to another candidate if you actually select your second choice. _________________ Helen, the Administratrix of www.area51newmexico.com
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rach Site Administrator
Joined: 16 Jul 2005 Posts: 1056 Location: Middle of nowhere in England
|
Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-13305738 - this is the best argument for AV that there is. The election results for Bury Council were tied, so they just drew lots for who got to be councillor. At least under AV, they would take into account people's second choices and even third etc choices until one of the two tied candidates actually won the election! How could AV be less democratic than what we have now?!?! _________________ ~~~I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minuite of it!~~~
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
area51newmexico Goddess
Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Posts: 10598 Location: East Yorkshire, England
|
Posted: Wed May 18, 2011 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
@ Rach
Crazy talk! Drawing straws!
Your example just goes to show that individual votes do make a difference. I've heard a lot of people say 'I can't be bothered to vote, my vote wont count'. Turns out, it can do! _________________ Helen, the Administratrix of www.area51newmexico.com
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|