french_disko Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 The "No" campaign basically said "You are too stupid to understand this - just say no".I've never seen a political campaign before that treated the voters as being thick. Saying that, they may have been correct with this assertion, given the projected results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 They're keeping a system that works, doesn't cost too much money and enshrines the ethos of one person, one vote.Works for the safe seats, yes.Also: Blunkett admits AV cost claims were "made up" | Left Foot Forward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Also, AV wouldn't prevent MPs from getting safe seats, there are over 200 in Parliament right now who would have been elected after one round of voting under AV.Yup, and that's because most people in that constituency want them there (over half). This is not the case for the other 400...So, what are the costs then? Surely if the Yes campaign were treating voters as intelligent human beings they'd cost out their proposals and present the figures to the electorate. They haven't done that at all. Also, it's interesting to note that some of AV's biggest cheerleaders are directors and shareholders of companies that make vote-counting machines. AV would do anything but clean up politics if this is the way their supporters go about things.Most of the costs were to cover this referendum so they're fairly moot now. I imagine the rest would be on educating voters which from what I've heard will be around 9m.They've already said they're not going to use machines, but hey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 By the way, Orkney and the Isles of Scilly have both voted emphatically for "No". Strange, since Orkney is the most Liberal seat in the country... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Stu Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 I had no difficulty voting no. It seems like an excellent strategic play to ensure second term conservative governemnt and a high turn out of nationalists for the independence referendum, giving it to the swing vote, me!also, brilliant way to annoy hectoring liberals. Plus I just don't like it so neh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 The other 400 aren't safe seats though, they're the ones that regularly change hands under FPTP. In fact AV would probably mean MORE safe seats as compromise candidates perpetually get voted in. It's no wonder people voted against it in droves.Of course they're not safe! Most of the people in those constituencies don't want the MPs they have!Look at Aberdeen Central's results from last night:SNP - 10,058LAB - 9,441CON - 3,100LD - 2,349NF - 201That's 15,091 people (60%) that voted against the SNP. And yet we're stuck with the SNP.How on Earth is that fair? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Stu Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Of course they're not safe! Most of the people in those constituencies don't want the MPs they have!Look at Aberdeen Central's results from last night:SNP - 10,058LAB - 9,441CON - 3,100LD - 2,349NF - 201That's 15,091 people (60%) that voted against the SNP. And yet we're stuck with the SNP.How on Earth is that fair?You're assuming that most of the second preference votes would go to Labour, not the SNP. Based on what exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 More than 60% voted against Labour, so how on Earth would it be fair if their candidate was elected?We simply don't know how many of those who voted for Labour would have selected SNP as a second choice. Or vice versa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 What would it matter, though? Anyone who votes is compromising their views and ideals by voting for the party that most closely reflects their standpoint. To introduce a system that seeks further concessions and compromise risks making our political system impotent and redundant. A ballot paper that includes votes for Labour, the SNP and the Conservatives is meaningless and worthless.Not really. All these parties share some views, it's a case of doing the research and working out which to make your second choice. Personally, I think the main reason that people are opposing this is because they've voted Labour/SNP/Conservative all their life and couldn't bear to actually research a second choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Von Mondragon Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Looks like AV is fucked, but our Safety Blanket has gained a new edge and the political map has become a lot more interesting/quite frankly fucking strange, as long as Salmond doesn't sign off on UTG, as I deeply suspect he will/would.Innerestin timez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 That's 15,091 people (60%) that voted against the SNP. And yet we're stuck with the SNP.How on Earth is that fair?You do realise that Lewis Macdonald, the Labour candidate who lost the Aberdeen Central constituency will be re-joining the Holyrood Parliament through virtue of securing enough votes on the list?Or to put it another way, if you prefer the Labour candidate he is still an MSP for your region. You're 'stuck' with nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 You do realise that Lewis Macdonald, the Labour candidate who lost the Aberdeen Central constituency will be re-joining the Holyrood Parliament through virtue of securing enough votes on the list?Or to put it another way, if you prefer the Labour candidate he is still an MSP for your region. You're 'stuck' with nothing.I preferred the Lib Dem candidate, but y'know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 I preferred the Lib Dem candidate, but y'know.Well I don't think any voting system could have helped you last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke1976 Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Of course they're not safe! Most of the people in those constituencies don't want the MPs they have!Look at Aberdeen Central's results from last night:SNP - 10,058LAB - 9,441CON - 3,100LD - 2,349NF - 201That's 15,091 people (60%) that voted against the SNP. And yet we're stuck with the SNP.How on Earth is that fair? Yeah but the people who didnt vote for SNP can turn to their particular LIST MSP for the NE. From the votes above who exactly do you think should have taken the CONSTITUENCY seat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Yeah but the people who didnt vote for SNP can turn to their particular LIST MSP for the NE. From the votes above who exactly do you think should have taken the CONSTITUENCY seat.Not sure what you mean there, but I'd rather contact a constituency MSP about issues, not a list MSP as they can be based pretty much anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Not sure what you mean there, but I'd rather contact a constituency MSP about issues, not a list MSP as they can be based pretty much anywhere.Yeah - but who should take the constituency seat then? The Labour MP who got even less votes?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 Not sure what you mean there, but I'd rather contact a constituency MSP about issues, not a list MSP as they can be based pretty much anywhere.No they can't FOX. List MSPs are regionally based. A region may be larger than a constituency, but constituencies come in all shapes and sizes anyway so I don't see what difference it makes.You have the choice of a constituency MSP and/or one or more of many regional MSPs.The Lib Dem MSP for the North East Scotland region is:Scottish Lib Dems: Alison McInnes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 No they can't FOX. List MSPs are regionally based. A region may be larger than a constituency, but constituencies come in all shapes and sizes anyway so I don't see what difference it makes."North-East Scotland" is far bigger than "Aberdeen Central", I think you'll agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 "North-East Scotland" is far bigger than "Aberdeen Central", I think you'll agree.I do. What is the issue though, that the regions are too big or that your one didn't win? Your preferred party didn't get enough votes so your constituency is represented by an elected member of another party. That's how democracy works. It's not designed to please everyone all the time.I've tried to be helpful by giving you the contact information of the local MSP for your preferred party but I think you're being obtuse now. You do realise that the AV referendum had nothing to do with how we elect MSPs to Holyrood? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FOX Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 I do. What is the issue though, that the regions are too big or that your one didn't win? Your preferred party didn't get enough votes so your constituency is represented by an elected member of another party. That's how democracy works. It's not designed to please everyone all the time.I've tried to be helpful by giving you the contact information of the local MSP for your preferred party but I think you're being obtuse now. You do realise that the AV referendum had nothing to do with how we elect MSPs to Holyrood?Yeah, it's okay, you're right enough. The issue for me really is that the regions cover too large an area but it really doesn't matter.Sorry for being a pain in the backside.(And yeah, AV's for Westminster) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Well - actually, AV is for nothing in the UK at the moment as it got hoofed out by the voters. Westminster still has first past the post. Under that system, you would have no Lib Dem MP in your constituency and that would be it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 The same is true of AV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 Interestingly the Lib Dems look to be moving back to a position supporting the Steel commission. Good news.Lib Dems plot to oust Scottish Secretary - Scotsman.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.