Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    As someone who hates having a vote, I say FPTP. Democracy is so much easier without all that pesky 'representing people' stuff.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mann18)
    If no single person has the majority of the vote, second votes are counted and added and if still no-one has a majority, we go to third votes and so on and so forth.

    I wouldn't vote for anyone else in my constituency than Labour, but someone else might vote Tory and Lib Dem.

    Results:
    Tory 20%
    Lib Dem 30%
    Labour 40%
    Others 10%

    Now, in this scenario, I effectively have only voted once, whilst people who put second choices, get another vote.

    No sale.
    Well no, because their first votes are removed. They get one vote, just not for the party that is their first choice. Really, you've got a better deal than they have.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    can someone explain exactly what av is
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Azog 150)
    Except from the fact its insanely unrepresentative and parties often get a monopoly on power despite getting under 50% of the votes?
    AV does not solve that the problem because it is not proportional. Indeed in some circumstances, it makes unrepresentative governments more powerful.

    Its not fair that someone with more first votes could come in second place under AV. Why should someone get their vote counted twice or three times and someone else once?

    One person = one vote
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fallen)
    Oh my...
    Seriously. Before you make any comments, before you even form an opinion, but most importantly, before you vote PLEASE actually know what AV is.

    Whether you are for it or against it, at least know how it works before going to the polling station on the 5th of May, or posting in topics (unless you are posting asking for clarification).
    A fair few people in here know what they are talking about (not that its complicated), but I would say there are more people who are utterly clueless.

    Sorry, but ignorance of something which is so important really bugs me.
    hey, I'm pretty ignorant about this (but at least I realise that i guess) could you explain to me exactly what av is. I did think I understood until some of the things on this thread confused me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I started pro AV, but now I think I definitely prefer FPTP.

    AV could help pave the way for extremist parties to come into power.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Will Lucky)
    The great misunderstanding of the people in this thread just demonstrates how much of a failure this voting system would be.
    I agree. British people are too stupid to have anything more complicated than 'TICK THE ONE YOU LIKE THE COLOUR OF PLZ'.

    I mean good God, they expect us to be able to count! What folly is this?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    AV could help pave the way for extremist parties to come into power.
    No, no it couldn't.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    No, no it couldn't.
    They might not get into power in office but they could gain power in the commons
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NGC773)
    AV does not solve that the problem because it is not proportional. Indeed in some circumstances, it makes unrepresentative governments more powerful.

    Its not fair that someone with more first votes could come in second place under AV. Why should someone get their vote counted twice or three times and someone else once?

    One person = one vote
    GODDAMNIT THAT'S NOT HOW AV WORKS AND IF ANYONE ELSE SAYS SO I WILL MURDER THEM WITH AN AXE AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

    It works the same way as STV, that is, the SINGLE transferrable vote system. If someone's second or third choices are used then their earlier choices are removed. They only get one vote.

    ONE VOTE.

    It depresses me that a website that is supposed to contain the cleverest segment of the student population is falling for all the *******s of the no campaign.

    I bet you're also against AV because all the money used on those expensive counting machines could go towards saving puppies/babies/soldiers, right?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    No, no it couldn't.
    :rolleyes: Yes. Yes it could.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NGC773)
    They might not get into power in office but they could gain power in the commons
    No, no they couldn't.

    Unless they managed to get more than 50% of the vote.

    Which is very hard if you're an extremist party.

    While a BNP voter might put Tory or UKIP as his second choice, a Tory or UKIP voter is not gonna put BNP as his second choice.

    To quote Caroline Lucas, fascists don't tend to compromise.

    In fact, the BNP are MORE likely to get a seat under FPTP because the moderate vote (ie, everyone else) is split between parties, and they can get in with 25-30% of the vote, as many current MPs did. AV means that they have to get at least 50% of the vote.

    And anyway, even if AV DID increase the likelihood of them getting into power, so what? You can't deny the British people democracy just because they might vote for someone you don't like.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    GODDAMNIT THAT'S NOT HOW AV WORKS AND IF ANYONE ELSE SAYS SO I WILL MURDER THEM WITH AN AXE AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

    It works the same way as STV, that is, the SINGLE transferrable vote system. If someone's second or third choices are used then their earlier choices are removed. They only get one vote.

    ONE VOTE.

    It depresses me that a website that is supposed to contain the cleverest segment of the student population is falling for all the *******s of the no campaign.

    I bet you're also against AV because all the money used on those expensive counting machines could go towards saving puppies/babies/soldiers, right?
    Posters like you make this section of TSR terrible. Go do your research, look at the figures and get a pragmatic view on it all then come back here.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gap4)
    Posters like you make this section of TSR terrible. Go do your research, look at the figures and get a pragmatic view on it all then come back here.
    I spent a whole term learning ****ing voting systems, and then got full marks on the exam. It's a particular interest of mine. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. If you can counter my point, please do so. Don't resort to ad-hominems.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    No, no they couldn't.

    Unless they managed to get more than 50% of the vote.

    Which is very hard if you're an extremist party.

    While a BNP voter might put Tory or UKIP as his second choice, a Tory or UKIP voter is not gonna put BNP as his second choice.

    To quote Caroline Lucas, fascists don't tend to compromise.
    Wrong.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NGC773)
    When Australia introduced it they had to make voting compulsory because voting numbers dropped. Now they and Fiji are looking to drop it.

    FPTP is a tried and tested system. Its simple it works we have had it for years, there no problem with it.
    Except that parties get seat allocations that are wildly out of sync with the number of votes they get. There's something deeply flawed with a system in which one party can get 258 seats with 29% of the popular vote and another gets only 57 with 23%.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    I spent a whole term learning ****ing voting systems, and then got full marks on the exam. It's a particular interest of mine. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. If you can counter my point, please do so. Don't resort to ad-hominems.
    Shame its not going to win in a referendum
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    It strikes me as patronizing that some people argue the electorate would be unable to put 5 numbers on a ballot sheet.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    No, no they couldn't.

    Unless they managed to get more than 50% of the vote.

    Which is very hard if you're an extremist party.

    While a BNP voter might put Tory or UKIP as his second choice, a Tory or UKIP voter is not gonna put BNP as his second choice.

    To quote Caroline Lucas, fascists don't tend to compromise.
    You really don't now what you're talking about.
    Generally, the largest support for the BNP comes from areas with political alienation and decaying local parties, incidentally this has very often been Labour constituencies. All of the areas that have had high(er) levels of BNP support have been former Labour strongholds; Burnley in the 2001 election, Barking and Dagenham in 2006 (when the BNP won 12 councillors in the area).

    A typical BNP voter is one who feels left down by the prevalent political party, which for the past 13 years has been Labour, meaning a large swathe of BNP supports derives from former Labour supporters.

    And you can still have power in commons without having 325 of the seats..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RDL445)
    Shame its not going to win in a referendum
    You say that. However most people voting against it are stupid reactionaries. Stupid reactionaries don't make a motivated voting population. Informed people do.

    And the latest poll says that AV is ahead anyway?

    P.S. I like how you couldn't counter my point, so responded with the equivalent of sticking your tongue out with your fingers in your ears.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.