The Friendly Monster
Member
How is a referendum on AV not electoral reform?firehawk12 said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF: General election thread of LibCon Coalitionage
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
- Status
firehawk12
Subete no aware
The Friendly Monster said:
Because real electoral reform would have been STV? It's why the Tories made AV their line in the sand (and some elements of the Labour party as well).
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
The Friendly Monster said:
Because it's not fair electoral reform?
The Friendly Monster said:
Basic AV is not 'massively more fair' in any degree of the imagination.
It is FPTP in all but name. AV only kicks in when someone doesn't get 50% of first choices. So safe seats still stay safe and most of the population's votes are completely wasted. In marginals the post just changes to 50% of adding on the 2nd, 3rd etc. If someone votes for the 3rd party, or a smaller one, chances are one of the big parties will still be their 2nd choice which just adds onto the bigger party's 1st votes. The gains the 3rd party makes are very hindered by this, they gain but not to the degree their vote share should dictate.
Fringe parties get a proportion of the 1st votes from their supporters, but then get lost by not being most people's 2nd, 3rd etc. Marginal parties get more marginalised by AV, whereas the big parties easily rack up extra from those. This is how AV actually makes things less representative.
Tactical voting will still happen. People just back-up their preferred party with the tactical vote as second, or vice versa.
And as with FPTP, when a party gets the 50% all the other votes cast in that constituency count for nothing in the make-up of Parliament. Those people's votes are still wasted.
The reason basic AV is the only ground both the Tories and Labour were prepared to give on electoral reform is because it is still heavily in their favour of the old 2-party politics.
It's not a step to PR, it's actually a step back, and is a waste of a very rare chance of electoral reform. For many people true electoral reform should of been a dealbreaker, because the opportunities for it are so rare.
JonathanEx
Member
Varion said:
UKGAF will live on!
...to the annoyance of the missus. Yes, checking GAF again...
The Friendly Monster
Member
AV is still electoral reform and should not be discounted. There was no way the Libs would get STV in this deal ever, the fact that they are still going ahead with a coalition is not a betrayal, just realistic.
AV does eliminate tactical voting on a local scale, since there is no benefit to putting down anything other than your true preference, unlike FPTP. To suggest that having a preferential order is "tactical voting" is utterly disingenuous, all voting is "tactical", it's not all "tactical voting".
I think small parties could easily do better out of AV, for instance the Greens are a party who a lot of my friends support, but don't vote for since they don't have a chance, presumably they would be able to do better than the one seat they (incredibly) managed to take.
"Wasted votes" are not eliminated in AV, but neither are they in STV. And at least a majority is needed per constituency.
Let's keep protesting for STV, but please don't just shrug at the idea of the alternative vote, a system which is so so much better than what we have at the moment.
AV does eliminate tactical voting on a local scale, since there is no benefit to putting down anything other than your true preference, unlike FPTP. To suggest that having a preferential order is "tactical voting" is utterly disingenuous, all voting is "tactical", it's not all "tactical voting".
I think small parties could easily do better out of AV, for instance the Greens are a party who a lot of my friends support, but don't vote for since they don't have a chance, presumably they would be able to do better than the one seat they (incredibly) managed to take.
"Wasted votes" are not eliminated in AV, but neither are they in STV. And at least a majority is needed per constituency.
Let's keep protesting for STV, but please don't just shrug at the idea of the alternative vote, a system which is so so much better than what we have at the moment.
JonathanEx
Member
My friend is organising a local Take Back Parliament demonstration this weekend, and I'm proud to be involved. It might not do that much, but if at least one person new considers the issue seriously, I'll be happy.
MarshMellow96
Member
Varion said:
How much are we talking here?
MarshMellow96
Member
Sage00 said:
I thought it was £5.612 billion? :lol
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
Wes said:
Which is all fluff, why be happy about something changing if it's not for the better?
I think what people have to realise is that PR WAS NOT AN OPTION
I don't see any possible way that Lib dems could have got PR. They choice they faced was join the conservatives or let there be a tory minority government. From what we've heard a progressive alliance was never going to work.
People are saying they didn't vote lib dem to get Cameron, but Cameron was going to become PM anyway, at least this way we get some of our manifesto implemented and can dilute the conservatives.
There is no magical option where we block cameron but still get government positions and agreement on PR.
I don't see any possible way that Lib dems could have got PR. They choice they faced was join the conservatives or let there be a tory minority government. From what we've heard a progressive alliance was never going to work.
People are saying they didn't vote lib dem to get Cameron, but Cameron was going to become PM anyway, at least this way we get some of our manifesto implemented and can dilute the conservatives.
There is no magical option where we block cameron but still get government positions and agreement on PR.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
I NEED SCISSORS said:
I thought you were Scottish from your earlier use of the word "chebs" but this just confirms it.
Wes said:
Something something silver living.
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
dsister44 said:
Whilst I'm not opposed to what's going on, in face I adore the fact that Cable and Huhne are in office. I think it's fair to say the majority of people in Britain would much rather see a Labour and Lib-Dem coalition rather than seeing Cameron as PM. It only seems fair that the party who the majority of Brits would least like to see in government doesn't control it, does it not?
Though that deviates from the point. Just because PR was an impossibility (especially with the corrupt nature of Torys) it doesn't mean that people should be content with any other form referendum.
As I said I'm more than happy with the result, Cable and Huhne are the two men in my mind that could sway public favour towards the Lib-Dems based on their performance in office and now it seems they might just have the chance. Though I don't think anybody's in any position to be saying others should be happy with the results, PR was a major reason to vote LD this time around after all.
dsister44 said:
The devil is in the wording, with only basic AV being guaranteed to be put to the public.
All that was needed was a referendum allowing more options than just bad/as bad. Not unrealistic at all, especially if each party was allowed to campaign for their preferred option.
If the public are finally being given a say in changing our electoral system after all this time, they should have all options put to them and the cases for and against. We probably won't get another shot at this, so the more pressure that's applied the better.
Spirit of Jazz said:
What's your basis for most people wanting a Lib Lab Coalition? To me the election results show a desire to get rid of Labour, not get the Lib dems into government and stop the Tories. Although there's a lot of hate for Cameron on gaf, his party got the most votes and the most seats. Whether we like it or not, he is popular.
But again I deviate. I'm not saying people cant still want PR, but to de dissappointed that Nick didnt achieve the impossible and brand him a traitor because of it is madness. People showed support for PR by voting Lib dem but I don't know how many people actually thought it would happen. I just can't understand being unhappy with the best possible option given the circumstances
dsister44 said:
It's one of the party's core beliefs, of course people are going to be passionate about it when the party is in the rare position of having a say in Government.
At the very least pressure could help ensure it's AV+ that is offered in the referendum, rather than basic AV, which at least would make things more proportional than FPTP.
DECK'ARD said:
ypu say not unrealistic at all, but i don't see the Tories agreeing to that. Yes, I personally would have liked that your idea a lot better, its a lot fairer. but as they said a guaranteed referendum on AV was their 'final offer', i think this was the best we were going to get. The only way i see we could have got more from them would be iff the Lib Lab talks went well, but they didn't.
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
dsister44 said:
I believe the majority of labours voters derive from their leftist past, ignorant with how the party has adopter the "New Right". With the conservatives on the right and Labour/Lib-Dems on the left it only makes sense that people would rather one of the two other parties in power rather than the Torys.
Surely if he were popular he would of got into power? Also as you say a large percentage of the seats the Torys claimed are probably due to people wanting Labour out rather than them wanting Dave in. Even then as it stands the majority of the votes stand with the two 'leftist' parties, with the right being a minority. Lets not even factor in the amount of votes the Lib-Dems could of gained if people thought it would of been a wasted vote, and if the Conservatives didn't go forwards with their hung parliament fear-warmongering.
Personally I think if the majority of the public understood what PR was they would vote for it, when you tie that to voting for a political party things get far more complicated. Still I've never once said I agree with people calling Nick a traitor, as it is this is a pretty solid deal for the Lib-Dems. That also doesn't make out parliament any less unfair or corrupt.
The first day...
Hadn't seen the deals of the coalition until just now, pretty awesome. Looks like the Lib Dems made the Tories give up a lot of stuff they really wanted. In fact... those negotiators rock. The Lib Dem concessions are listed as things like 'not joining the Euro in this parliament', I don't think they even really wanted that. Hell they even got them to evaluate wasted money in Trident.
Just over a month ago very few in the country knew who Nick Clegg even was, now he's pretty much set out the policy for the next government.
Hadn't seen the deals of the coalition until just now, pretty awesome. Looks like the Lib Dems made the Tories give up a lot of stuff they really wanted. In fact... those negotiators rock. The Lib Dem concessions are listed as things like 'not joining the Euro in this parliament', I don't think they even really wanted that. Hell they even got them to evaluate wasted money in Trident.
Just over a month ago very few in the country knew who Nick Clegg even was, now he's pretty much set out the policy for the next government.
dr_octagon
Banned
Should get Ed on board, get another Milliband free when you buy David.Meadows said:
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Sir Fragula said:
They have 16 seats (out of 129) in the Scottish Parliament. I do not see them winning more than 10 seats next year. The SNP and Labour will be all over their "betrayal" when campaigning for the election begins.
The election will be epic anyways. If Labour can get as many voters next year as they did last week (42% of total votes, one fifth of our total population) I can see them possibly getting a majority. But then again I'm assuming that a lot of those votes were tactical with the knowledge being that if Labour don't win Scotland in a UK Election then they're up shit creek without a paddle. Either way, I look forward to the ScotPoliGAF thread.
If somebody gets 50% of the vote in a constituency, they should easily be entitled to the seat anyway.DECK'ARD said:
What this does is offer a new way for people to vote, so some don't have to vote Labour "to keep the Tories out" (or other tactical votes), they can put Lib Dem > Labour > Tory, even if the seat was a battleground between Labour and the Cons. There's still room for attempts in tactical voting in putting the Tories last behind UKIP, some independants, etc, but you can still simultaneously put who you truly genuinely prefer at the top of that very list.
It's not a fantastic system, but it's better than FPTP which doesn't even proportionally repesent a constituency's support, nevermind the whole nation's.
blazinglord
Member
Hopefully the Lib-Con government is going to readdress the disproportionate influence Scotland has on UK politics. It's a ridiculous idea that England should be mindful of what Scotland wants when only make up 8.4% of the UK and have their own parliament anyway. English votes for English laws, equalising constituency numbers/cut in MPs (including Scottish MPs) and readdressing the Barnett formula please Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg.Sir Fragula said:
It looks like there are some ancient die-hard Tories who are unhappy with the concessions that Cameron has made but those are just the sort of people that they need to weed out of the party if they want to become more socially digestible. Hopefully this will push the Conservatives further left in the years to come.
Mecha_Infantry
Banned
Man Wendy Hurrel on BBC London Weather is tasty as hell..BBC has some good white women
blazinglord
Member
I wouldn't characterise my sentiment as fuck the union, but I do think that the period of Scottish celtisation in UK politics is over. Anyway, a lot of Tories aren't as pro-Union as Cameron would like to make out. I personally wouldn't be terribly upset if Scotland left the union - Wales should remain with us though and we'll obviously keep the oil. But I think readdressing the West Lothian question will go a long way in returning Scotland to its rightful position within the union i.e. a minor partner. This would placate the English while Scotland should be left to their own domestic concerns via the Scottish parliament.Sir Fragula said:
It's funny really because Cameron's re-branding of the party is characterised as 'modernisation' when really, the Tory party has historically been quite centrist and flexible to change. It was Thatcher who came in and wrecked the hegemony of the one-nation Tories with her neo-liberalism and with Major, shifted social policy to the New Right. Thatcher might have been a good PM in the 1980s, but there is no doubt that she left a divisive legacy behind, both within the party and without. Cameron is evidently himself of the one-nation ilk, and the new generation of Tories are similar. I think, and hope, that the coalition with the Liberal Democrats will only hasten the departure from Thatcherism, which for all intents and purposes is woefully out of date.defel1111 said:
killer_clank
Member
Fully elected House of Lords using PR according to BBC.
Is there going to be PMQs today?
1) A fully elected House of Lords, with the number of seats proportion to numbers of votes.
2) Will give people a taste for a properly representative democracy in the Lords, hopefully increasing the desire for it to be used for electing the Commons, and to diminish the impact of the inevitable media opposition to future movements towards PR for the Common. Would be nice if this helps against the capmaign for a "No" vote on the AV referendum.
killer_clank said:
1) A fully elected House of Lords, with the number of seats proportion to numbers of votes.
2) Will give people a taste for a properly representative democracy in the Lords, hopefully increasing the desire for it to be used for electing the Commons, and to diminish the impact of the inevitable media opposition to future movements towards PR for the Common. Would be nice if this helps against the capmaign for a "No" vote on the AV referendum.
Nexus Zero
Member
killer_clank said:
Holy fucking shit. I called it! I've been saying since the argument started that they should do this - best of both worlds.
Sir Fragula said:
A fucking Tory was getting into number 10 anyway, owing to the fact that a coalition with Labour was unworkable (and unsustainable) and if the Lib Dems didn't actively support the Conservatives, they'd be forming a minority government now, and when the inevitable happened and another election was called, there's every chance they'd have ended up with a majority - largely through cannibalising the Lib Dem vote.
A strong Lib Dem coalition with the Conservatives allows them to temper the more ridiculous Tory policies - you can see a whole host of the ones they've already dropped in the news today. It also allows them to get Lib Dem policies in place, and likewise you can see a number of those in the news today. No increase in the inheritance tax level? A fully elected House of Lords with a true PR system? How the hell is that a bad thing?
It's also the only situation short of a Labour-Conservative coalition that gives a stable government at a time when having a stable government is probably the single most important thing we need. There are a whole load of tough and unpopular changes that need to be pushed through right now as a result of the state the country (and the world) is in, and though the Tories wouldn't be my first (or second) choice of parties to do it, I'd rather have them doing it than nobody.
Jexhius said:
A minority government would be a disaster for the country right now IMO, given how difficult the cuts we need to make are going to be. Both the Conservatives and the Lib Dems are taking hits politically by agreeing to things that a lot of their supporters may not like in order to get a stable government in place. Obviously they're gambling on being able to sort things out quickly enough that the electorate can see what they've accomplished when it comes to go to the polls in five years...
PumpkinPie
Banned
I'm fairly happy with the result, Cameron got PM and is now best buddies with Obama. Even good old William Hague is back! Come on the blues.
blazinglord
Member
No because the MPs aren't going to be sworn in until next Tuesday but I am looking forward to see Harriet Harman as leader of the opposition debate with PM Cameron. It will surely be a sight to behold.Parl said:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked