AV poll - AV or Not AV that is the question

[observer]

Think you'll find that the Tories are no one's second preference - hence their stance on AV. Labour voters will vote Lib Dem and visa versa - just to keep the Tories out. The only way you'll get real PR, is through a Party list system, which could be used if we ever get an elected House of Lords.

[Bazj]

Well can you imagine the mess we would be in if the only parties that got elected were Labour and the Lib Dums?

 

Labour would spend all the money and then the Libs would come along and hand out all sorts of stuff for free that we couldn't afford!.... We would be worse off than Greece!

[Eagle]

Think you'll find that the Tories are no one's second preference

 

 

There you go again, it begs the question "why do you keep spouting such ridiculous, made up nonsense?"

 

How many people have you asked because I would imagine that protest voters will pick a minor party as first choice and vote for their "own" party as second choice.

[observer]

So, when did you carry out your survey, to reveal it's "nonesense"? The tribal vote is still as strong as ever, despite there being little difference between them nowadays - hence the LibDums attempt to introduce AV.

[Eagle]

If the "tribal vote" is as strong as ever, why did Labour lose the last election?

[wolfie]

Didn't Call me Dave get elected as party leader using the AV system?

[observer]

Eagle, cos the "other" tribe (the Tories) had more votes!

[Bazj]

Didn't Call me Dave get elected as party leader using the AV system?

 

No.

 

Candidates were eliminated at each stage and another vote taken on the remaining candidates. AV would have meant just one vote and each voter putting multiple choices in order of preference.

 

The way the Tory leader ballot was done meant that in the end, there were two candidates in the "final" and then those voting chose one or the other. Totally different because at each stage voters only voted for one candidate!

[Bazj]

with regards to AV, I found this reply on another forum I frequent and it sums things up nicely....

 

the last time this Country voted yes in a referendum was to join the EEC for free trade in Europe and look what has happend since!. We are now being ruled by a vast army of unelected faces. The Liberal Democrats dont want AV; they want PR and this AV is just their first step towards that goal.

 

As for labour they will cling to anything at the moment that will take our minds off of the mess they left us in and as for Brown in charge of the World Bank god help us.

 

PS (I would not have invited Brown or Blair to my wedding either)

[Peter T]

Nice one.

[wolfie]

Didn't Call me Dave get elected as party leader using the AV system?

 

No.

 

Candidates were eliminated at each stage and another vote taken on the remaining candidates. AV would have meant just one vote and each voter putting multiple choices in order of preference.

 

The way the Tory leader ballot was done meant that in the end, there were two candidates in the "final" and then those voting chose one or the other. Totally different because at each stage voters only voted for one candidate!

 

The results in 2005 were

 

David Davis - 62

David Cameron - 56

Liam Fox - 42

Ken Clarke - 38

 

Under your first past the post preference David Davies should now be Conservative leader.

[silverlady54]

Duh!!!! that wasn't the final result! Below are Paul Kennedy's answering comments on the home page news item about AV, where he explains it very coherently!!

 

 

Paul Kennedy

said this on 01 May 2011 10:17:38 PM BST

Not really AV as is being suggested for our general elections. As I recall there were 4 candidates, Davis, Cameron, Fox & Clarke. In the first ballot of MPs, Davis got most votes, Clarke least and he was eliminated. In the second ballot of MPs a couple of days later, Cameron got most votes, Fox least and he was eliminated. In the final ballot by all party members a few week later, Cameron outpolled Davis 2 to 1 and was elected Leader. I think about 80% of members voted.

[Bazj]

Wofie.....

 

the election of the Tory leader wasn't run as a first past the post system, nor was it run as an AV election; it was a series of ballots designed to produce two people to fight it out at the end. At each stage the previous ballots votes had nothing to do with the next one.

 

That is the way it has always been done

 

Go look at how Liebour did it; everyones favourite (the other Millipede) was beaten by a block Union vote...... I know which system I prefer!

[Robbo]

Didn't Call me Dave get elected as party leader using the AV system?

 

No.

 

Candidates were eliminated at each stage and another vote taken on the remaining candidates. AV would have meant just one vote and each voter putting multiple choices in order of preference.

 

The way the Tory leader ballot was done meant that in the end, there were two candidates in the "final" and then those voting chose one or the other. Totally different because at each stage voters only voted for one candidate!

 

The results in 2005 were

 

David Davis - 62

David Cameron - 56

Liam Fox - 42

Ken Clarke - 38

 

Under your first past the post preference David Davies should now be Conservative leader.

 

When it suits

 

The two faces of Cameron

[observer]

Does that mean there are less than 200 members in the Tory Party?

[JimmyMac]

Think you'll find that the Tories are no one's second preference - hence their stance on AV.

 

Possibly UKIP voters might go with Tories as a second preference.

[observer]

Some no doubt - but I guess folk who vote for outsiders, do so cos they're fed up with the favourites - and all the favourites support membership of the EU.

[wolfie]

Duh!!!! that wasn't the final result!

 

Duh !!!!! I know but it would have been if they had used first past the post, which is the point in question.

[Dizzy]

4 to 1 against AV in this little poll at the moment. Food for thought.

 

and 10 days later (with only one more full day until voting day) it's now neck and neck. Not many new 'NO' supporters registering to vote on the forum poll then but then maybe they don't need to as people aren't stupid

[P J]

4 to 1 against AV in this little poll at the moment. Food for thought.

 

and 10 days later (with only one more full day until voting day) it's now neck and neck. Not many new 'NO' supporters registering to vote on the forum poll then but then maybe they don't need to as people aren't stupid

 

Ah but several of the "yes" votes probably came from the same poster

[Dizzy]

You can't vote more than once PJ ... probably all these new users who register but never actually post any comments or join in with the chat ... maybe they are just poll vote spotters... or is that pole vault jumpers

[P J]

You can't vote more than once PJ

 

You can if you have more than one identity and accounts

[Peter T]

I think you can only vote once.

[P J]

So if I had an account at home with the name "Dog" and I opened one from work with perhaps another name say "KevinP" and then opened another account on my mobile with yet another name like "Virus" all these would have different IP addys and I could vote 3 times.

[Bazj]

So if I had an account at home with the name "Dog" and I opened one from work with perhaps another name say "KevinP" and then opened another account on my mobile with yet another name like "Virus" all these would have different IP addys and I could vote 3 times.

 

a bit like AV then.... your vote counts more than once if you don't vote for the first majority candidate!!