No2AV campaign is full of lies!! Watch

Muffinz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#1
This is disgusting!



1. Ridiculous fallacy that the UK will spend £250 implementing the reform
2. No reason is given for the spending!!

I think it's horrible that they can try to mislead people like this.

(Original post by http://www.yestofairervotes.org/pages/av-myths)
Myth 10) AV will cost us £250 million

The No camp’s sums, like their arguments, simply don’t add up. There will be no electronic counting machines aren’t an issue in this referendum. This has been confirmed by the Electoral Commission.

Australia has hand counted its elections for 8 decades. The £130 million of make-believe machines don’t exist in Australia and won’t exist in the UK.

AV will keep what is best about our current system – the link between an MP serving their local constituency – but strengthens it by making MPs work harder to get elected and giving voters more of a say. Short on arguments the No campaign are trying to claim we can’t afford change. After the expenses crisis we can’t afford not to.
Article here.

Thoughts?
1
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 8 years ago
#2
"The proponents of this campaign, the head of which is David Cameron, will do anything they can to maintain the status quo of this country."

Is the head of the campaign David Cameron?
0
reply
Muffinz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#3
(Original post by tripleeagle)
"The proponents of this campaign, the head of which is David Cameron, will do anything they can to maintain the status quo of this country."

Is the head of the campaign David Cameron?
He is the most prominant figure campaigning for the no vote.
1
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#4
Report 8 years ago
#4
(Original post by Muffinz)
He is the most prominant figure campaigning for the no vote.
...because you say so?
0
reply
Muffinz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#5
(Original post by tripleeagle)
...because you say so?
Because he's the prime minister and it's been all over national news?

sigh.
1
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#6
Report 8 years ago
#6
(Original post by Muffinz)
Because he's the prime minister and it's been all over national news?

sigh.
So what if he is PM? That doesn't mean that he is "head of the No2AV campaign".

It's not because Nick Clegg is Deputy PM and that he donated to the RSPCA, for example, that he is leading the RSPCA's operations now.

Yes Cameron is important, yes he is affiliated with the campaign, but to say that he's the head is lying or misleading to say the least...
2
reply
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#7
Report 8 years ago
#7
(Original post by tripleeagle)
So what if he is PM? That doesn't mean that he is "head of the No2AV campaign".

It's not because Nick Clegg is Deputy PM and that he donated to the RSPCA, for example, that he is leading the RSPCA's operations now.

Yes Cameron is important, yes he is affiliated with the campaign, but to say that he's the head is lying or misleading to say the least...
?

He is the most famous figure to back the no vote....

At the launch of the No2Av campaign in London its director Matthew Elliott said he wanted to see more "transparency" in politics and not a political system "conducted behind closed doors".
source
1
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#8
Report 8 years ago
#8
(Original post by jakemittle)
He is the most famous figure to back the no vote....
Maybe I am confused but I never knew that you become head of something just by supporting it and being famous :confused:
0
reply
837491
Badges: 14
#9
Report 8 years ago
#9
(Original post by tripleeagle)
Maybe I am confused but I never knew that you become head of something just by supporting it and being famous :confused:


Oh yeah, you didn't know that Tiger Woods runs Nike?




The OP sounds like a moron.
reply
A Cat
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 8 years ago
#10
(Original post by tripleeagle)
Maybe I am confused but I never knew that you become head of something just by supporting it and being famous :confused:
then who is the leader of this campaign? Why do you choose such a petty little thing to argue about?
0
reply
callum9999
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report 8 years ago
#11
(Original post by Dan1992)
In practical de facto terms he is head of the campaign at the moment (and for the foreseeable future) because he is the leading light people look to on the issue (because yes, he is quite famous, what with being PM and all- and being a politician, it's kind of in his field of expertise,) it's a simple truth, stop being so intentionally difficult, jeez.
I think the point was that if he is designated as the head, it is implied he's personally involved in the lies (I don't know if they actually are lies or not - just going on what someone said). If he isn't actually the head, and is just involved, then it's presumably not his fault.
0
reply
837491
Badges: 14
#12
Report 8 years ago
#12
(Original post by Dan1992)
In practical de facto terms he is head of the campaign at the moment (and for the foreseeable future) because he is the leading light people look to on the issue (because yes, he is quite famous, what with being PM and all- and being a politician, it's kind of in his field of expertise,) it's a simple truth, stop being so intentionally difficult, jeez.
'leading light'? No, it doesn't make him 'head' of anything :lol:

Is Tiger Woods head of Nike? NO!

Is Eva Mendes 'head' of PETA? NO!




The head of No2AV group - which is what the OP is talking about - is Matthew Elliott
reply
Norfolkadam
Badges: 15
#13
Report 8 years ago
#13
I like Glenn.

But yeah, that's not a great campaign video and I think a lot of people will just say "Oh well you won't spend £250m on children or health (because of the cuts) so you might as well spend it on AV"
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#14
Report 8 years ago
#14
(Original post by Samrout)
Why do you choose such a petty little thing to argue about?
The reason I point this out is because the writer of this article seems to be seeking to place blame for this on Cameron. By putting the PM's name there, he makes Cameron somehow responsible for the video's content.

To be honest, I agree with the OP but I don't agree with the writer's intentions.


(Original post by Dan1992)
Oh, ok sorry, fair enough this is very true [...] he is unlikely to personally head a campaign, and even less likely to be responsible for the content of some propaganda video... So yeah my bad, valid point.
I think you understand why I was being so pedantic
0
reply
Craig_D
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#15
Report 8 years ago
#15
(Original post by tripleeagle)
Maybe I am confused but I never knew that you become head of something just by supporting it and being famous :confused:
Well he's the most senior figure backing the campaign and therefore has the ultimate authority. Nobody's authority supersedes his, so even though he isn't running the campaign on a day-to-day basis he is still effectively at the head of it. The Queen has nothing to do with the government, but she's still the most senior figure and therefore is its head.
0
reply
Louis.
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#16
Report 8 years ago
#16
The permanent coalition argument is a bunch of bull as well from what I can tell.
0
reply
tripleeagle
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#17
Report 8 years ago
#17
(Original post by Craig_D)
Well he's the most senior figure backing the campaign and therefore has the ultimate authority. Nobody's authority supersedes his, so even though he isn't running the campaign on a day-to-day basis he is still effectively at the head of it. The Queen has nothing to do with the government, but she's still the most senior figure and therefore is its head.
I agree; however, I think the way in which the writer called Cameron "head" was implying that Cameron was somehow responsible for the creation of the video.
0
reply
837491
Badges: 14
#18
Report 8 years ago
#18
In other news, the OP's post is crap. AND she references an article that she wrote herself (on this weird website that looks like it is for 11 year olds) to back up her incorrect claims.


(Original post by Muffinz)
This is disgusting!



1. Ridiculous fallacy that the UK will spend £250 implementing the reform
2. No reason is given for the spending!!

I think it's horrible that they can try to misleads people like this.


Article here.

Thoughts?
Funny that you complain that you think No2AV are trying to 'mislead' people, when you are doing exactly the same thing.

"2. No reason is given for the spending!!"
You are literally just lying, I know this because a 1 second google found this 12-page PDF guide on how they reached their result.

Click here if you want to see it.
http://votemay5th.notoav.org/documen...cost-of-AV.pdf

So, whether you agree or not with aspects of their methodology, you are still wrong.

I just wanted to point out how hypocritical you are..
reply
Craig_D
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 8 years ago
#19
(Original post by tripleeagle)
I agree; however, I think the way in which the writer called Cameron "head" was implying that Cameron was somehow responsible for the creation of the video.
I think you're probably right on that point, it is indeed all in the wording.
0
reply
Muffinz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#20
(Original post by loafer)
You are literally just lying, I know this because a 1 second google found this 12-page PDF guide on how they reached their result.

Click here if you want to see it.
http://votemay5th.notoav.org/documen...cost-of-AV.pdf

So, whether you agree or not with aspects of their methodology, you are still wrong.

I just wanted to point out how hypocritical you are..
In the video they give no reason and no link to the PDF. Kthx.

Also:

(Original post by http://www.yestofairervotes.org/pages/av-myths)
Myth 10) AV will cost us £250 million

The No camp’s sums, like their arguments, simply don’t add up. There will be no electronic counting machines aren’t an issue in this referendum. This has been confirmed by the Electoral Commission.

Australia has hand counted its elections for 8 decades. The £130 million of make-believe machines don’t exist in Australia and won’t exist in the UK.

AV will keep what is best about our current system – the link between an MP serving their local constituency – but strengthens it by making MPs work harder to get elected and giving voters more of a say. Short on arguments the No campaign are trying to claim we can’t afford change. After the expenses crisis we can’t afford not to.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (273)
38.18%
No - but I will (51)
7.13%
No - I don't want to (51)
7.13%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (340)
47.55%

Watched Threads

View All