What do people think of the alternative vote system?

The countries that have AV at the moment are trying to bin it - ask any Aussie what he thinks. It is an ideal way to let inept members of the public become MPs. Most of the electorate struggle to understand the policies of the main parties (I suppose that includes the hapless LibDems).

First past the post has served this country well for hundreds of years and by and large produces a fair representation of peoples intentions, and I for one will be voting NO.

Hsquared – You can rank one party as you do at the moment in FPTP or if you want you can rank two or three or four with AV. Just don’t rank any parties that you wouldn’t want your vote to go to.

I’m not happy with any of the mainstream political parties. All I hear is how people are unhappy with their political system and when they get the chance to make some sort of change to it, it seems that most people are going to bottle it.

First past the post is an antiquated system from the long gone antiquated world of the Tories and the Whigs. Wake up, it’s now the 21st century. We have a slew of parties to choose from. The old red / blue boundaries are being broken down and with each passing year they look and feel more and more like the Democrats and Republicans. It’ll only take an intelligent charismatic genius leader for one of the upcoming parties and a change in the way people consume media and the tired old Labour / Conservative NWO party system is toast.

If we don’t take the first step, we’ll never have proportional representation.

‘Britain has experienced hung Parliaments in the 1920’s, 1970’s and in 2010 and had periods in the 1950, 1960’s and 1990’s when a single party has been unable to effectively govern alone. Canada which also uses First Past The Post has permanent hung parliaments. Australia which uses AV has returned it’s first hung parliament in 28 elections. ‘

Australia have had two hung parliaments in 80 years. In the UK, under first past the post, we have also had two.

The Alternative Vote: Questions Answered

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/downloads/AV%20...

Richard D – only because our leaders don’t trust us with full PR so as good little kiddies they’re only letting us have a few sweets instead of a full pack.

Crow – I don’t believe it. You spend a lot of your time on here extolling the virtues of the main political parties and when you have the chance to swing influence away from mainstream big business politics to that of the voter, you bottle it. All talk and no action, eh? Lol.

The point of the AV system is that where nobody gets a clear majority, then the candidate which is most acceptable gets elected, rather than someone who is supported by the largest minority and hated by everyone else.

It will make more sense of tactical voting, so you can vote for your first choice despite there being no chance of him or her winning, and then vote for the better option that is likely to win. If you want nobody but your first choice, there is no reason why you should put any other number than '1'.

Every campaign will make it clear who is the leading contender, who is the most likely challenger, and who are the no-hopers. Just a poster count can confirm this.

Does it benefit the Liberal Democrats? They may well lose many more first votes, but gain on second votes where they put in a decent campaign and have a decent candidate. I think though in present circumstances they'll get a thrashing whatever the voting system.

Minor parties and Independents? Probably not a lot of difference. An unpopular major party candidate might choose to vote Independent first, and for their own party further down the list just to make a point. There are lots of interesting subtleties where I could give the message I want to make far better than just putting an X for the Green, which influences nobody except in Brighton.

Some people say it complicates things, but it makes no difference at the polling station, and at the count, it is simple enough to recount the piles of votes from losing candidates and place them in another pile. The idea that it is more complex to administer is a red herring.

Suppose the ballots are as follows:

8 ballots choose A, then B, then C

7 ballots choose B, then C, then A

6 ballots choose C, then A, then B

Candidate C is eliminated, giving 6 votes to A who wins with 14 votes. But suppose A governs well, and next year has the support of two voters who previously supported B:

10 ballots choose A, then B, then C

5 ballots choose B, then C, then A

6 ballots choose C, then A, then B

Now candidate B is eliminated first, giving 5 votes to C, who wins with 11 votes. Candidate A improved his support, at the expense of the other two candidates, yet it cost him the election?!

It has been tried in the USA in some states and this sort of thing is why it has been mostly repealed. In Australia, full ballot details are not released in case specific preference orders can identify voters, but it has probably happened a lot.

AV is quite simple really and I for one will be voting 'YES'. It is worth considering that Cameron was elected leader of the party using the AV method, so it strikes me as a bit hypocritical of him to be sitting in the 'NO' camp.

Put simply AV works like this. A voter selects candidates in the order they would like to see them elected. If there is only one candidate that you support, then you are perfectly free to only tick one box. So if you're a fan of the old FPTP system there is no need to vote 'NO' when you will still be able to only tick 1 box, why not vote 'YES' and allow those who wish to select in order of preference their freedom too. Now that would be the truly democratic thing to do.

Hopefully AV will put an end to the farce of alternating Labour and Conservative governments.

The so called 'big 3' are scared because they know that people who would traditionally vote Labour to keep out the Tories and vice versa, will now be casting their 1st choice vote for the party that they feel most closely mirrors their beliefs. Both Labour and the Tories will lose huge amounts of first choice votes if AV is passed, as people will no longer feel the need to vote tactically, when they can put either Labour or conservative down as their second choice. The result of a 'YES' vote would be to see huge inroads made by parties like UKIP and the BNP, which in turn would force the LibLabCon party to return to their individual core beliefs and values.

I went to between the conferences (as a do no longer understand) with Baroness Vasey and Alan Johnson. the ingredient i spotted replaced into maximum people who have been for AV needed Proportional, and those regarded bored stiff no count if or no longer that they had a consultant for their constituency or some numpty chosen for them via the occasion. The final chap to talk replaced into an area, who observed, no human beings in any u . s . are happy with their balloting gadget the place the occasion they do no longer help does not get in. That clinched it for me. stick to the cutting-edge gadget. A consultant (the place I stay Labour, even nonetheless I vote Conservative) that represents my area, if I easily have a criticism, i desire somebody from my area who is going to stick up for my Constituency. AV will nevertheless supply this, in spite of the undeniable fact that it incredibly is substitute for substitute sake and could supply the human beings who desire PR, a wager to have PR for the Commons. properly PR stinks, if human beings desire PR whats incorrect with the Lords for that, distant people who incredibly have there faces interior the Troughs, it incredibly is PR.

Pros and cons .

FPTP = Strong government but no representation for smaller parties .

True PR = Coalition government but the representation in parliament that people actually voted for . Meaning the small parties actually get a voice .

AV = Coalition government but no representation for smaller parties .

AV is the worst of both systems . It is an utter con that will feep the big three in perpetual power but give them an excuse to say "well you've got a fair system" . AV is not fair , it will not give any representation to the small parties and will mean a permanently hung parliament and permanent coalition government . Con Dem for five years then Lib Lab for five years the back again ,

___________________________________________________________________________________

I would vote for true PR but only if it was TRUE PR . This means no constituencies , the vote of the nation is counted as a whole and 1% of the votes equals 1% of the seats in parliament . That is what PR is ! No other system is PR .

AV is a con that will keep the big three ( all pro EU , all corporate capitalist , opposed to true democracy ) in perpetual power and still prevent any representation for the smaller parties .

Ed Milliband only became leader of the Labour Party through the trade union votes under the AV system, need I say more ?

I am voting against AV because it is the only way I can affect a protest against Nick Clegg.

I have asked before but no one responds > what does it matter which system is used when the party's do not honour their manifestos ?????

If I say I will bring back the death penalty ? it makes no difference whether AV or FPTP if when I get power I dump my manifesto pledge.!!

AV does not make the party's accountable - it will produce coalition government on a regular basis wherein they will each blame the other. Under FPTP system you can hold the government to account because they have no one to to blame.

I simply want to see Nick Clegg and the LIb Dems get a good thrashing. We have no way of getting back at Clegg so I am voting NO to AV in the hope Clegg loses and will have to leave the coalition.

EDIT > For me it is a referendum on Clegg I am very happy to do so.

Before long our fiddling, greedy careerist MPs will be on there own form of X Factor at £1.50 a phone call.

The Alternative Vote (AV) is very much like First-Past-the-Post (FPTP). Like FPTP, it is used to elect representatives for single-member constituencies, except that rather than simply marking one solitary ‘X’ on the ballot paper, the voter has the chance to rank the candidates on offer.