Support NeoGAF

[Meadows]

For the new page (again!):

-------------------------------

Please take the voting intention survey for UK PoliGAF (even if you're a lurker!), you don't need to put a name, user, email or anything for it, just fill it in (only 3 multi-choice questions, it'll only take 1 minute MAX) and I'll post results as I have done so far!

------------------------------

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/KVDTPX3

------------------------------

And finally: VOTE (irl)

 

[phisheep]

This picture is why Yes lost today.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. The votes aren't in and nothing's been counted yet.

I hate it when people presume to second-guess the electorate - it is downright insulting.

We'll know one way or the other on Friday evening.

 

[DECK'ARD]

This picture is why Yes lost today. Nigel Farrage should be in this picture instead of Izzard. The latter may appeal to the trendy metropolitan voter, but since they are already voting Yes he just turns the mainstream voters off.

Cable should have been replaced by Clegg or Huhne. Cable is a windbag who has been thoroughly discredited.

Izzard should be kept away from anything.

There was just no gravitas to the Yes campaign, and when you've got the Prime Minister leading the charge against it you needed that. The splits in Labour were very damaging as well. It had to be painted as something very important, a needed change to an outdated system, and a rare opportunity to do it. A seize the day sort of thing.

Instead you got a confusing message, endorsed by the wrong people, and voters left thinking they might as well stick with what they have.

 

[JonnyBrad]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. The votes aren't in and nothing's been counted yet.

I hate it when people presume to second-guess the electorate - it is downright insulting.

We'll know one way or the other on Friday evening.

Saturday. They're not announcing the av result until then.

 

[Chinner]

i don't want to second guess th electorate but i do think we're stuffed.

 

[Songbird]

I know people who were instantly turned off voting Yes by all the personalities that had their portraits on the referendum letter. Seems like a silly way to form an opinion myself, but horses for courses.

 

[killer_clank]

Saturday. They're not announcing the av result until then.

Link? Breakfast said late Friday.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. The votes aren't in and nothing's been counted yet.

I hate it when people presume to second-guess the electorate - it is downright insulting.

We'll know one way or the other on Friday evening.

True, but it would be an upset far bigger than when polling agencies called the 1992 election wrong.

It's going to hinge on whether younger voters turn out, and being the local elections as well it would take a lot of them to cancel out the older generations who are the ones most likely to vote.

Chances are very low.

 

[iapetus]

I'm sure you worked really hard on that, but it captures exactly why Yes are going to lose today. The No campaign had a very effective single line campaign, "one person, one vote". If it takes you 11 pages to explain why AV is better people aren't going to vote for it. You can blame the electorate as much as you like, but Yes have run an awful campaign from start to finish, they failed to attract many, many Labour voters. They didn't campaign with Farrage to try and get the centre right/right voters, they let the No campaign tar them with the BNP/"extremists get more votes" rubbish.

The Yes campaign has been an abject failure from start to finish, and now Yes are going to blame the electorate like all political parties with their heads firmly in the ground (Labour 2010, Con 1997, Lab 1992, Lab 1979) which is the wrong thing to do. They need to look for the reason why they failed because I think there is an appetite for electoral reform. Maybe no voting reform, but some kind of electoral reform, and they need to see what they can do about it in the future.

Fuck this attitude. You're saying that the No campaign is going to win because they trivialised the issue to the level of inaccurate soundbytes, and you think the fix is for the Yes campaign to sink to the same level? Fuck that.

 

[DECK'ARD]

http://i.imgur.com/uDj2q.jpg[IMG]
i don't want to second guess th electorate but i do think we're stuffed.[/QUOTE]

UGH.

Bad analogies till the very end.

 

[Songbird]

Fuck this attitude. You're saying that the No campaign is going to win because they trivialised the issue to the level of inaccurate soundbytes, and you think the fix is for the Yes campaign to sink to the same level? Fuck that.

You think things like pasting Eddie Izzard and Stephen Fry onto Yes publicity isn't trivialising the whole event anyway? When it comes to Twitter celebrities versus the PM, unfortunately Cameron's influence will win out. From the people I've discussed AV with, they're pretty sick of "know-it-all" liberal celebs. Alas.

Ed: Scary horror stories are what people seem to be wanting and listening to.

 

[The Friendly Monster]

I hate how the discussion of who is going to win always gets reduced to the quality of the campaigns rather than the substance of what is voted for. This is why politics is broken. Thought I might be able to muster an appetite for political discussion but it's just bullshit.

I'm just going to go vote in future.

Laters x

 

[Meadows]

For all it's worth in our poll there's only 3 or 4 labour voters out of 19 going with NO and no non Tory-UKIP voters voting NO. Also, I only know two people voting NO, my parents, who are tories, are voting YES.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

http://i.imgur.com/uDj2q.jpg[ /IMG]
i don't want to second guess th electorate but i do think we're stuffed.[/QUOTE]

No was also endorsed by The Sun, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Express, The Evening Standard and City AM. Yes had an endorsement from The Mirror, The Independent, and a sort of maybe go vote (but we don't like AV) from the Guardian.

 

[JonnyBrad]

Fuck this attitude. You're saying that the No campaign is going to win because they trivialised the issue to the level of inaccurate soundbytes, and you think the fix is for the Yes campaign to sink to the same level? Fuck that.

IMO rolling out celebs left right and centre was an utterly ridiculous thing to do from the Yes campaign. They should have focused on getting their msg across rather than having Steven Fry tweeting yes to av.

 

[killer_clank]

and a sort of maybe go vote (but we don't like AV) from the Guardian.

The Guardian annoys me like that.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Fuck this attitude. You're saying that the No campaign is going to win because they trivialised the issue to the level of inaccurate soundbytes, and you think the fix is for the Yes campaign to sink to the same level? Fuck that.

So having people like Eddie Izzard and Helena Bonham Carter isn't trivialising the vote. Both sides did it, one did correctly. Again you are falling into the trap of blaming the electorate for not voting for your cause when the correct course of action is to look at why they didn't vote for your cause and rectify that for next time.

 

[Songbird]

IMO rolling out celebs left right and centre was an utterly ridiculous thing to do from the Yes campaign. They should have focused on getting their msg across rather than having Steven Fry tweeting yes to av.

Absolutely this. Soundbites on both sides.

The Guardian annoys me like that.

Why's that? I might agree with them.

 

[radioheadrule83]

I'm sure you worked really hard on that, but it captures exactly why Yes are going to lose today. The No campaign had a very effective single line campaign, "one person, one vote". If it takes you 11 pages to explain why AV is better people aren't going to vote for it.

I won't blame the electorate if the No campaign wins, I'll blame the duplitious and misleading No campaign, and I'll blame the media for being too busy fawning over the prospect of a coaltion fallout to bother covering each voting system on their merits.

I think that's the thing that's annoyed me most -- this whole narrative build up of a Cameron / Clegg face off, like they're just wetting themselves in excitement and anticipation of a bust-up and the coalition splitting up.... the kind of shit that keeps Nick Robinson in a job. They're trying to create another Blair VS Brown narrative, and its bollocks. Real political coverage - the kind this referendum deserved - is just lost by the wayside, political news is all about personalities now, and X-Factor style popularity. Its just bullshit.

The truth is, you can explain AV in one or two sentences. It's a preferential voting system, whereby you number your choices instead of placing an 'X' by them. Winners under AV would enjoy significantly higher public support than recent governments have enjoyed under the current system.

Instead of being able to reduce and communicate that message, the Yes campaign has been having to fight this suggestion that AV is not "one person, one vote".

IT IS ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE UNDER AV.

It's just a better kind of vote, a preferential vote. The Yes campaign has been having to combat the lies and misrepresentations of a political elite hellbent on keeping themselves comfortable with the current system... it has had to counter their bullshit costings plucked out of thin air, fear mongering about legitimacy, about how it would function, exploitation of Nick Clegg's unpopularity... the No campaign just got right down into the mud, shit itself and smeared the feces everywhere.

At least two or three pages of that document I linked (http://www.invitemii.com/allaboutav.doc) is rebuking No campaign lies. Another large chunk of it is explaining how the current system has failed us... if every political argument has to be boiled down to a single snappy slogan so it can meet the electorates attention span, then to some extent, maybe they ARE to blame. Because if that's the case, my are we fucked.

Personally, I don't think people are stupid... and I'm not disheartened by the polls. Like Phisheep, I'm waiting to see how the actual results come out...

ITS NOT OVER

If you're a Yes supporter, and you know people who are voting No based only on no campaign lies, then please do your bit today and have a word with them. Get out there and vote yourself. We can fucking do this!

*crushes can on forehead*

 

[iapetus]

So having people like Eddie Izzard and Helena Bonham Carter isn't trivialising the vote. Both sides did it, one did correctly. Again you are falling into the trap of blaming the electorate for not voting for your cause when the correct course of action is to look at why they didn't vote for your cause and rectify that for next time.

And again, you're advocating sinking to the level of the opposition. You're of the view that the Yes campaign should be campaigning on the grounds that FPTP causes AIDS, or allows Polish migrants to dictate our political system, or whatever.

I don't like rolling out the celebrities either, but I dislike it less than reducing what is a relatively complex issue to talking points based on lies.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I won't blame the electorate if the No campaign wins, I'll blame the duplitious and misleading No campaign, and I'll blame the media for being too busy fawning over the prospect of a coaltion fallout to bother covering each voting system on their merits.

I think that's the thing that's annoyed me most -- this whole narrative build up of a Cameron / Clegg face off, like they're just wetting themselves in excitement and anticipation of a bust-up and the coalition splitting up.... the kind of shit that keeps Nick Robinson in a job. They're trying to create another Blair VS Brown narrative, and its bollocks. Real political coverage - the kind this referendum deserved - is just lost by the wayside, political news is all about personalities now, and X-Factor style popularity. Its just bullshit.

The truth is, you can explain AV in one or two sentences. It's a preferential voting system, whereby you number your choices instead of placing an 'X' by them. Winners under AV would enjoy significantly higher public support than recent governments have enjoyed under the current system.

Instead of being able to reduce and communicate that message, the Yes campaign has been having to fight this suggestion that AV is not "one person, one vote".

IT IS ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE UNDER AV.

It's just a better kind of vote, a preferential vote. The Yes campaign has been having to combat the lies and misrepresentations of a political elite hellbent on keeping themselves comfortable with the current system... had to counter their bullshit costings plucked out of thin air, fear mongering about legitimacy, about how it would function, exploitation of Nick Clegg's unpopularity... the No campaign just got right down into the mud, shit itself and smeared the feces everywhere.

At least two or three pages of that document I linked (http://www.invitemii.com/allaboutav.doc) is rebuking No campaign lies. Another large chunk of it is explaining how the current system has failed us... if every political argument has to be boiled down to a single snappy slogan so it can meet the electorates attention span, then to some extent, maybe they ARE to blame. Because if that's the case, my are we fucked.

Personally, I don't think people are stupid... and I'm not disheartened by the polls. Like Phisheep, I'm waiting to see how the actual results come out...

ITS NOT OVER

If you're a Yes supporter, and you know people who are voting No based only on no campaign lies, then please do your bit today and have a word with them. Get out there and vote yourself. We can fucking do this!

*crushes can on forehead*

Blaming No, and the media is almost as bad as blaming the voters. If Yes loses today, and it looks like it will, then they have only themselves to blame. I personally think that electoral reform is relatively popular and could scrape 51% of the electorate, but the Yes campaign has been awful from start to finish.

The only other explanation is that electoral reform is deeply unpopular and people like our current system. That is something I am unwilling to accept since the Yes campaign was so very poor.

 

[Ashes]

nv

 

[Walshicus]

Blaming No, and the media is almost as bad as blaming the voters. If Yes loses today, and it looks like it will, then they have only themselves to blame. I personally think that electoral reform is relatively popular and could scrape 51% of the electorate, but the Yes campaign has been awful from start to finish.

The only other explanation is that electoral reform is deeply unpopular and people like our current system. That is something I am unwilling to accept since the Yes campaign was so very poor.

Perhaps. But it's very hard to counter "this baby will die if you vote AV" style campaigning with level headedness.

In the end we deserve what we vote for, so if "No" wins I hope everyone who votes that way shuts the fuck up when Labour get a landslide on 35% of the popular vote.

 

[Meadows]

Perhaps. But it's very hard to counter "this baby will die if you vote AV" style campaigning with level headedness.

At first I lol'ed, but then I realised they actually said that

 

[zomgbbqftw]

And again, you're advocating sinking to the level of the opposition. You're of the view that the Yes campaign should be campaigning on the grounds that FPTP causes AIDS, or allows Polish migrants to dictate our political system, or whatever.

I don't like rolling out the celebrities either, but I dislike it less than reducing what is a relatively complex issue to talking points based on lies.

Firstly, I think there was a massive failure by Yes to communicate the virtues of AV as a system to all people. They concentrated on like-minded liberal progressives who were already converted instead of putting their effort in with the don't knows and wavering Tory/UKIP voters. The latter would have voted Yes if you gave them a good reason, especially the 900k UKIP voters whose votes were absolutely wasted, they got 900k votes and no seats, with only 4-5 clear obstructions and maybe 9 or 10 obstructions if all UKIP voters broke to the Tories.

Rolling out the celebrities harmed the Yes campaign by trivialising the vote more than No rolling out their slogans. Yes knew what was coming when the spurious £250m claims came out and they did nothing. Then Osborne released the info about the ERS possibly benefiting from a Yes vote and they still did nothing. Huhne tried, but ended up calling them Nazi's which comes across as nasty and almost pathetic, Clegg was kept quiet for reasons I have yet to understand and Izzard was wheeled out.

There are other reasons as well, like not capturing all the Labour voters, trade unionists etc... but the core is that Yes failed to get their message across effectively while No did. It looks like Yes will pay the price today.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Blaming No, and the media is almost as bad as blaming the voters.

Oh come on!
The Yes campaign hasn't been the best, but the "No" arguments have been so misleading and so virulent; they have been propagated by a passive, personality-cultured news media... even if the Yes campaign HAD been making an amazing case, those arguments would always have been lost in the vapid, empty, meaningless gossiping and panty wettings of mole-man Nick Robinson. The no campaign is founded on misrepresentations and lies, and the media have not done enough to expose them.

Those are legitimate complaints, and I will damn well blame them if I choose. Some of the papers and commercial news channels may as well be an extension of the establishment the way they've reported on this.

Judge that viewpoint as you will. Frankly, I think you're wrong to.

I still have hope that something momentous will happen today.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Perhaps. But it's very hard to counter "this baby will die if you vote AV" style campaigning with level headedness.

In the end we deserve what we vote for, so if "No" wins I hope everyone who votes that way shuts the fuck up when Labour get a landslide on 35% of the popular vote.

You do know that AV is less proportional than FPTP, and in the 1997 and 2001 elections Labour would have had bigger majorities?

 

[Songbird]

Perhaps. But it's very hard to counter "this baby will die if you vote AV" style campaigning with level headedness.

In the end we deserve what we vote for, so if "No" wins I hope everyone who votes that way shuts the fuck up when Labour get a landslide on 35% of the popular vote.

Were there not "AV won't kill babies" billboards or newspaper ads? Yes was outgunned pure and simple.

To people blaming No for all the lies and bullshit they've pushed out, do you really think politics has room for fair play? Why wasn't Yes bullshitting right back at them? Where were the balls?

/cynic

 

[Meadows]

Ugh, so annoyed that this referendum boiled down to party politics.

 

[Meadows]

Why wasn't Yes bullshitting right back at them? Where were the balls?

I think he took a back seat in the referendum

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...ow-ed-balls-suggests-he-wont-campaign-for-av/

Spoiler

ba-dum-tsh

 

[Carl]

Link? Breakfast said late Friday.

AV result is friday evening according to this BBC article, so yes you're right


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13212671

 

[Songbird]

I think he took a back seat in the referendum

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...ow-ed-balls-suggests-he-wont-campaign-for-av/

Spoiler

ba-dum-tsh

Well, damn. I walked right into that one.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Oh come on!
The Yes campaign hasn't been the best, but the "No" arguments have been so misleading and so virulent; they have been propagated by a passive, personality-cultured news media... even if the Yes campaign HAD been making an amazing case, those arguments would always have been lost in the vapid, empty, meaningless gossiping and panty wettings of mole-man Nick Robinson. The no campaign is founded on misrepresentations and lies, and the media have not done enough to expose them.

Those are legitimate complaints, and I will damn well blame them if I choose. Some of the papers and commercial news channels may as well be an extension of the establishment the way they've reported on this.

Judge that viewpoint as you will. Frankly, I think you're wrong to.

I still have hope that something momentous will happen today.

It's not up to the media to expose them. It was up to the Yes campaign. One thing is certain the BBC and C4 had to be neutral throughout and rebutting the No lies would have been seen as picking a side and the only other media supporting Yes was The Mirror and The Independent, not even The Guardian has given Yes a full endorsement. Relying on friends in the media to do your job for you is not a good idea at the best of times, but when you have little to no support from them it is an even worse one.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I think he took a back seat in the referendum

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...ow-ed-balls-suggests-he-wont-campaign-for-av/

Spoiler

ba-dum-tsh

He didn't campaign because he supports No!

 

[Chinner]

It's not up to the media to expose them

amazing quote. nope not up to the media to uncover lies, they're just there to propaganda it and churn out PR bullshit. welps.

 

[Meadows]

He didn't campaign because he supports No!

it was a joke mate, you kind find other similar political ones here:

http://tinyurl.com/67p28rd

 

[JonnyBrad]

Link? Breakfast said late Friday.

My bad got my dates mixed up and thought it was Friday today!

 

[zomgbbqftw]

amazing quote. nope not up to the media to uncover lies, they're just there to propaganda it and churn out PR bullshit. welps.

For the purposes of this campaign, relying on the media which were mostly friendly to No (as we have seen today with the endorsements) or unable to take sides (BBC, C4) doesn't seem like a good idea. Yes didn't have an effective rebuttal machine, Clegg/Huhne should have been out knocking on doors getting the message out about No lies, but they weren't. The best Huhne came up with was the Goebbels comment which went down poorly with the electorate.

 

[Meadows]

Yes didn't have an effective rebuttal machine, Clegg/Huhne should have been out knocking on doors getting the message out about No lies, but they weren't. The best Huhne came up with was the Goebbels comment which went down poorly with the electorate.

Nobody knows who Huhne is and everybody hates Clegg, that's why.

 

[Songbird]

amazing quote. nope not up to the media to uncover lies, they're just there to propaganda it and churn out PR bullshit. welps.

Which is never going to change. Yes should have known that and offensively promoted.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Nobody knows who Huhne is and everybody hates Clegg, that's why.

Not everybody hates Clegg. Only lefty Labour waverers hate Clegg. Forget them, Clegg should have been out in the shires promoting AV to centre right voters with Farrage. Huhne should have been targetting those Labour people with Farron. Take a look at Clegg's personal ratings, he is deeply unpopular with Labour voters and around 2/3rds of LD voters at the 2010 GE, he has a net positive with current LDs and Cons.

 

[Meadows]

Not everybody hates Clegg. Only lefty Labour waverers hate Clegg. Forget them, Clegg should have been out in the shires promoting AV to centre right voters with Farrage. Huhne should have been targetting those Labour people with Farron. Take a look at Clegg's personal ratings, he is deeply unpopular with Labour voters and around 2/3rds of LD voters at the 2010 GE, he has a net positive with current LDs and Cons.

So they didn't appeal enough to Labour voters but Clegg should have campaigned even though labour voters don't like him. Not following you here mate.

 

[killer_clank]

Not everybody hates Clegg. Only lefty Labour waverers hate Clegg. Forget them, Clegg should have been out in the shires promoting AV to centre right voters with Farrage. Huhne should have been targetting those Labour people with Farron. Take a look at Clegg's personal ratings, he is deeply unpopular with Labour voters and around 2/3rds of LD voters at the 2010 GE, he has a net positive with current LDs and Cons.

I generally find the ones who hate Clegg to be Labour voters who voted LD last election thinking the LD's HAD to go with Labour and found out wrong.

Everyone else feels just slightly sorry for the guy.

 

[Songbird]

So they didn't appeal enough to Labour voters but Clegg should have campaigned even though labour voters don't like him. Not following you here mate.

Grassroots LD and Labour voters were very likely to say Yes to AV no matter what. Clegg appealing to Tory voters when he has a positive personal rating with them would have made a difference.

Plus I hate Clegg and I always voted LD. Not anymore.

He should have campaigned in the shires where Labour have little to no support anyway. Knocking on doors and getting the vote out for Yes.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

So they didn't appeal enough to Labour voters but Clegg should have campaigned even though labour voters don't like him. Not following you here mate.

He should have campaigned in the shires where Labour have little to no support anyway. Knocking on doors and getting the vote out for Yes.

 

[SmokyDave]

I can't find the box to tick for 'Authoritarian Dictatorship'.

 

[killer_clank]

I can't find the box to tick for 'Authoritarian Dictatorship'.

THE LIB-CON CON COALITION AMIRITE?????11111!!!!11111

 

[Songbird]

THE LIB-CON CON COALITION AMIRITE?????11111!!!!11111

No, just a huge disappointment.

 

[Walshicus]

You do know that AV is less proportional than FPTP, and in the 1997 and 2001 elections Labour would have had bigger majorities?

It's not less proportional. It's more representative of voter intentions. The only way Labour would have received more seats in 1997 and 2001 would be if Lib Dem voters saw Labour as a suitable alternative.

So no, FPTP is not more proportional.

 

[killer_clank]

Why don’t we restrict votes to people who actually pay something into the system? No, I am not suggesting a return to property-based eligibility; although that system worked quite well when Parliament administered not just Britain but most of the world. Today, income would be a much better test, setting the bar as low as possible; perhaps including everyone who pays at least £100 of income tax each year.

From the Telegraph. What the shitting fuck. I wish we still had the lol smiley.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/financ...ax-based-alternative-to-the-alternative-vote/