Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 29, 2015, 02:30:47 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  International Elections (Moderator: Hash)
| | |-+  UK AV Referendum Poll
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Print
Poll
Question: Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the 'alternative vote' system instead of the current 'first past the post' system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?
Yes   -30 (69.8%)
No   -13 (30.2%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 43

Author Topic: UK AV Referendum Poll  (Read 25908 times)
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9016
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #300 on: April 30, 2011, 07:14:55 pm »
Ignore

I know that, which is why countries with more than two significant parties have no business using FPTP.

Or any majoritarian system, for that matter. We're being asked whether we want a system that doesn't fit Britain or a new system which also doesn't fit the country.
Logged

Joe Republic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31901
Kiribati


View Profile
« Reply #301 on: April 30, 2011, 07:24:33 pm »
Ignore

I disagree with your latter assessment; pretty much anything is better than FPTP.  It seems like most of the specific arguments against AV have largely fallen flat.  Not that it matters any more though, once the matter of reforming the constitution became a debate on the Deputy Prime Minister instead.
Logged



Real Americans (and Big Sky Bob) demand to know.


[Y]ou are not going to change my mind or even cause me to think.
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 59065
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #302 on: April 30, 2011, 07:30:28 pm »
Ignore

I disagree with your latter assessment; pretty much anything is better than FPTP.

From the point of view you have, PR with two seat districts would be worse (actually that's dreadful from almost all points of view), as would FPTP with multi-seat districts (which we have in local elections in some places, notably London). Functionally, I don't think a switch from FPTP to optional-preference AV would make much of a difference.

Quote
Not that it matters any more though, once the matter of reforming the constitution became a debate on the Deputy Prime Minister instead.

Often the way with referendums.
Logged

'If pop music is going to be used to destroy our established institutions, then it must be destroyed first.'

Marcus Lipton MP
Delicious Steak Pentagram
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30456
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #303 on: April 30, 2011, 08:24:07 pm »
Ignore

The electoral college is really a warped, presidential version of FPTP. It's just that the US only has two parties so it works properly. When there's a significant 3rd candidate, it breaks down (Ralph Nader).

Nader never was and never could be a significant third candidate.
Logged

Quote from: Ignatius of Antioch
He that possesses the word of Jesus, is truly able to bear his very silence. Epistle to the Ephesians 3:21a
The one thing everyone can agree on is that the media is biased against them.
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9016
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #304 on: April 30, 2011, 08:25:12 pm »
Ignore

The electoral college is really a warped, presidential version of FPTP. It's just that the US only has two parties so it works properly. When there's a significant 3rd candidate, it breaks down (Ralph Nader).

Nader never was and never could be a significant third candidate.

Significant in that he, arguably, swung Florida to Bush...
Logged

minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #305 on: May 01, 2011, 03:30:30 am »
Ignore

I disagree with your latter assessment; pretty much anything is better than FPTP.

From the point of view you have, PR with two seat districts would be worse (actually that's dreadful from almost all points of view), as would FPTP with multi-seat districts (which we have in local elections in some places, notably London).
Well, yeah. But no one is thinking of introducing these things anywhere. It is only a matter of not enough people understanding that they need to go where they exist (the Chilene parliament and UK and some US local elections, respectively. Don't think they exist anywhere else in the world.)
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 39111
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: 0.43

View Profile
« Reply #306 on: May 01, 2011, 03:40:06 am »
Ignore

I disagree with your latter assessment; pretty much anything is better than FPTP.

From the point of view you have, PR with two seat districts would be worse (actually that's dreadful from almost all points of view), as would FPTP with multi-seat districts (which we have in local elections in some places, notably London).
Well, yeah. But no one is thinking of introducing these things anywhere. It is only a matter of not enough people understanding that they need to go where they exist (the Chilene parliament and UK and some US local elections, respectively. Don't think they exist anywhere else in the world.)

I find it amusing but also sad that Chile still uses Pinochet's ridiculous electoral law. It may be the worst system in the world that isn't actively antidemocratic.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Αλληλεγγύη
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34863
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #307 on: May 01, 2011, 03:45:11 am »
Ignore

How does it work ? I'm curious.
Logged

RIP Greece. RIP European Federalism.



"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favor."

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones, ep. 5x09
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #308 on: May 01, 2011, 03:57:39 am »
Ignore

You have one vote. Top two votegetters elected in every constituency.
I'm not sure, maybe it's D'Hondt and you can have a running mate and get both seats if you poll twice as much as the nearest opposition. Anyways the result is that parliament is always almost exactly half Conservative and half the Left Coalition (which really is a coalition, not a single party), with the occasional stray indy.

EDIT: Looks it up and yeah, that's right. Two candidate "lists", and D'Hondt. Oh, and they're open "lists", at least.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2011, 03:59:30 am by now it's time to overreact »Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Αλληλεγγύη
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34863
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #309 on: May 01, 2011, 05:44:16 am »
Ignore

You have one vote. Top two votegetters elected in every constituency.
I'm not sure, maybe it's D'Hondt and you can have a running mate and get both seats if you poll twice as much as the nearest opposition. Anyways the result is that parliament is always almost exactly half Conservative and half the Left Coalition (which really is a coalition, not a single party), with the occasional stray indy.

EDIT: Looks it up and yeah, that's right. Two candidate "lists", and D'Hondt. Oh, and they're open "lists", at least.

LOL, that's retarded indeed.
Logged

RIP Greece. RIP European Federalism.



"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favor."

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones, ep. 5x09
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9016
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #310 on: May 01, 2011, 07:13:41 am »
Ignore

The Sunday Times/YouGov says that voters think a Yes would hurt Dave slightly more than a No would hurt Clegg and a No vote would be slightly more likely to destablise the coalition. Wouldn't have expected that.

http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/st20110501.pdf
Logged

Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 59065
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #311 on: May 01, 2011, 08:35:19 am »
Ignore

It is only a matter of not enough people understanding that they need to go where they exist (the Chilene parliament and UK and some US local elections, respectively. Don't think they exist anywhere else in the world.)

Well, yeah. Was just pointing out that even from a 'proportionality is good' perspective, there are worse systems around than what we have now.

Of course one of the many reeking features of this unnecessary referendum is the fact that AV would only be introduced for General Elections, meaning that the far worse electoral system used in local elections in more than a few parts of the country (did you know that there are actually a few five member FPTP wards in Wales? Actually you probably did; most reading this won't though) will remain in place no matter the outcome of the poll.
Logged

'If pop music is going to be used to destroy our established institutions, then it must be destroyed first.'

Marcus Lipton MP
Swedish Austerity Creep
JOHN91043353
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3988
Sweden


View Profile
« Reply #312 on: May 01, 2011, 08:45:04 am »
Ignore

To me it seems increadibly strange to use different voting systems for different levels of goverment. Of course the only variations that exist in Sweden is that County Council elections have a 3% threshold instead of a 4%, and that city council elections have no threshold at all and no evening out seats. 
Logged

Quote from: Badger
Quote from: Swedish Cheese
London of course. Smiley

Shocked

4 realz SWEDISH Cheese? Huh

He's not from Sweden, he's from Scania.
 

Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 59065
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #313 on: May 01, 2011, 08:55:44 am »
Ignore

To me it seems increadibly strange to use different voting systems for different levels of goverment. Of course the only variations that exist in Sweden is that County Council elections have a 3% threshold instead of a 4%, and that city council elections have no threshold at all and no evening out seats. 

There's nothing British politicians love more than piecemeal reform, nothing the Civil Service hates more than comprehensive reform.
Logged

'If pop music is going to be used to destroy our established institutions, then it must be destroyed first.'

Marcus Lipton MP
Αλληλεγγύη
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34863
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #314 on: May 01, 2011, 10:10:14 am »
Ignore

To me it seems increadibly strange to use different voting systems for different levels of goverment.

France beats every country for that matter :
- Two-round FPTP for Presidential.
- Two-round FPTP (with different qualification criteria) for Parliamentaries and Cantonals.
- Proportional representation by constituencies without a threshold for Europeans.
- Proportional representation with a 10% threshold and a 25% majority bonus for Regionals.
- Proportional representation with a 10% threshold and a 50% majority bonus for Municipals, except in Paris, Lyon and Marseille.

Not to speak about Senatorials...
Logged

RIP Greece. RIP European Federalism.



"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favor."

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones, ep. 5x09
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #315 on: May 01, 2011, 10:23:53 am »
Ignore

Five seats? Crikey. I thought Welsh wards were small, mostly? (Okay, so not in Cardiff.) Where be these five member wards?
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 59065
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #316 on: May 01, 2011, 10:31:42 am »
Ignore

Five seats? Crikey. I thought Welsh wards were small, mostly? (Okay, so not in Cardiff.) Where be these five member wards?

There are two in Swansea; Morriston and Sketty. Had those utter idiots on the Local Government Boundary Committee for Wales not been stopped before their deranged plans became official many more wards of that sort would have been drawn elsewhere in Wales.
Logged

'If pop music is going to be used to destroy our established institutions, then it must be destroyed first.'

Marcus Lipton MP
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #317 on: May 01, 2011, 10:45:15 am »
Ignore

Lol.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Acting like I'm Morrissey w/o the wit
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3235
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #318 on: May 01, 2011, 11:42:39 am »
Ignore

The Sunday Times/YouGov says that voters think a Yes would hurt Dave slightly more than a No would hurt Clegg and a No vote would be slightly more likely to destablise the coalition. Wouldn't have expected that.

http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/st20110501.pdf

Probably because, as an earlier question shown, the argument made by pro-AV-ers in a desperate appeal to Labour voters that it'll help keep the Tories out and Liberal/Labour in has gained traction.

As CS has pointed out, it's complete revisionism and a perfect example of the Pro-AV following the anti-AV crowd into the gutter, employing complete lies.

What was most interesting was the question asking what the referendum should've been on, and what the vote would be;

35% A referendum on PR
28% Neither
27% don't know
 9% A referendum on AV

...and if there were a referendum on PR

37% would vote in favour of retaining FPTP
34% would vote in favour of changing to PR
22% don't know
 7% wouldn't vote

So, a 3-point lead for FPTP>PR and a 10-point lead for FPTP>AV.
Logged

You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9016
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #319 on: May 01, 2011, 02:46:27 pm »
Ignore

It's still got me annoyed how Huhne can even try and profess that he wants his party to be part of a progressive majority. As part of this coalition, he's part of the problem. I hope he'll man-up and resign, first thing on Friday morning, if he honestly thinks of himself as a progressive.

Although, he didn't have the guts to show up to the tuition vote, so I don't know if he'll have the guts to pull Clegg down.

AV's probably the only way Huhne's seat doesn't turn blue at the next election anyway.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2011, 07:34:30 pm by Refudiate »Logged

Peter
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6093


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

View Profile
« Reply #320 on: May 02, 2011, 07:01:10 am »
Ignore

Does anybody know to what level of detail the results will be reported?

In Scotland/Wales I suppose it makes sense to report by devolved consituency?

In England/Northern Ireland, by local authority?
Logged

Retarded babies should be fed to crocodiles.
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #321 on: May 02, 2011, 11:10:50 am »
Ignore

Offtopic, but I just realized that with lots of people mixing their vote between parties or just voting for part of the slate of their preferred party and letting their remaining votes go to waste, it can be argued as if voters behave much as if under open list pr already. So it seems reasonable to count results on that principle to see what it would do to seat distribution.

I'll start with Swansea (obviously, the single seat wards don't need counting.) Brum might be interesting to do, too.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #322 on: May 02, 2011, 11:56:49 am »
Ignore

Note: I used D'Hondt.

Well, the overall composition change isn't huge:

Labour 26 (-4)
LD 23 (no change)
Con 7 (+3)
Independents 6 (-1)
independent@Swansea 6 (no change)
PC 3 (+2)
People's Representative 1 (no change)

Of this, 18 are elected in single-member seats anyhow:
Con 4, Labour 3, LD 3, Independents 3, i@Swansea 3, PC 1, People's Rep 1

For the remaining 54 councillors from 18 wards with 2 to 5 seats, it's

Labour 23 (-4), LD 20 (0), Independents 3 (-1), i@Swansea 3 (0), Con 3 (+3), PC 2 (+2)

by ward:
West Cross (2)
Labour 1 (-1), Con 1 (+1)
Dunvant (2)
LD 2 (no change)
Penyrheo (2)l
Labour 1, i@Swansea 1 (no change)
Pontarddulais (2)
Labour 1, i@Swansea 1 (no change)
Sketty (5)
LD 3 (-2), Con 1 (+1), Labour 1 (+1)
Uplands (4)
LD 3 (-1), Labour 1 (+1)
Townhill (3)
Labour 2 (-1), LD 1 (+1)
Castle (4)
Labour 2 (-2), LD 1 (+1), PC 1 (+1)
Cwmbwrla (3)
LD 3 (no change)
Cockett (4)
LD 2 (-2), Labour 1 (+1), PC 1 (+1)
Penderry (3)
Labour 2 (-1), LD 1 (+1)
Landore (2)
LD 1 (-1), Labour 1 (+1)
Mynyddbach (3)
Labour 2, i@Swansea 1 (no change)
Morriston (5)
Labour 3 (-2), LD 2 (+2)
Clydach (2)
Labour 1 (-1), LD 1 (+1)
Llansamlet (4)
Labour 2 (-1), Independents 1 (0), Con 1 (+1)
Bonymaen (2)
Labour 1 (0), Independents 1 (0)
Saint Thomas (2)
Independents 1 (-1), Labour 1 (+1)
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14180


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile
« Reply #323 on: May 02, 2011, 04:31:33 pm »
Ignore

I once had a summer camp counselor from Swansea.

He taught us to always spit after saying Cardiff.
Logged
Bro-mentum
tomm_86
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1183
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #324 on: May 03, 2011, 11:59:03 am »
Ignore

The Sunday Times/YouGov says that voters think a Yes would hurt Dave slightly more than a No would hurt Clegg and a No vote would be slightly more likely to destablise the coalition. Wouldn't have expected that.

http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/st20110501.pdf

Probably because, as an earlier question shown, the argument made by pro-AV-ers in a desperate appeal to Labour voters that it'll help keep the Tories out and Liberal/Labour in has gained traction.

As CS has pointed out, it's complete revisionism and a perfect example of the Pro-AV following the anti-AV crowd into the gutter, employing complete lies.

What was most interesting was the question asking what the referendum should've been on, and what the vote would be;

35% A referendum on PR
28% Neither
27% don't know
 9% A referendum on AV

...and if there were a referendum on PR

37% would vote in favour of retaining FPTP
34% would vote in favour of changing to PR
22% don't know
 7% wouldn't vote

So, a 3-point lead for FPTP>PR and a 10-point lead for FPTP>AV.

Talk about an enthusiasm gap..
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines