Poll: Should We Change The Voting System?

[Jason]

...and why?

[mikthe20]

Voted Yes. Because FPTP has overseen the decline of Britain over the last 50 years - AV can't be any worse so it's worth a shot. Can always change it back if we don't like it (people seem to forget that point).

Edited April 19, 2011 by mikthe20

[efdemin]

Voted Yes. Because FPTP has overseen the decline of Britain over the last 50 years - AV can't be any worse so it's worth a shot. Can always change it back if we don't like it (people seem to forget that point).

This ^ and the fact that Cameron is campaigning against it.

[rw42]

Voted Yes. Because FPTP has overseen the decline of Britain over the last 50 years - AV can't be any worse so it's worth a shot. Can always change it back if we don't like it (people seem to forget that point).

I'm always suspicious of numpties voting for 'change' without actually finding out what that change will actually be.

Who is it that you expect to be able to change it back? You or me if we decide we don't like it? The politicians if they find they don't like it? Both? Neither?

Given how few polls the actual british public have been allowed to take part in regarding the lisbon treaty, euro membership, being able to hang criminal MPs, i'm not convinced that this isn't yet another change in the MPs own interest, and the first of many.

[oracle]

I'm always suspicious of numpties voting for 'change' without actually finding out what that change will actually be.

Who is it that you expect to be able to change it back? You or me if we decide we don't like it? The politicians if they find they don't like it? Both? Neither?

Given how few polls the actual british public have been allowed to take part in regarding the lisbon treaty, euro membership, being able to hang criminal MPs, i'm not convinced that this isn't yet another change in the MPs own interest, and the first of many.

I agree.

in order for them to really step up to the plate of democracy,they need to FIRST allow people the vote on membership of the behemoth(and that actually IS STILL law-from the 17th century)......the meaning of that is EACH and EVERY act of parliament ceding further control to foreign bodies needs to be approved....and amendments/veto's can be applied as conditions.

Politicians have been misleading you if they have been telling you otherwise.....so by STATUTE they have been comitting treason.

Even the queen can't officially sign sovereignty away without our approval.

it was put there for a reason.

my personal view is that we need a consolidation of NATO(yes even possibly having a common means of exchange in tandem to domestic currencies),but with each remaining as a sovereign entity, bound by a fairly loose set of laws(such as free movement and trade...but with certain strings attatched,like in criminal cases...no single country has ultimate jurisdiction for things like extradition...and the penalties must be of a nature that is applicable ALL member states,with incarceration etc to be done in guilty party's country of origin)

I don't subscribe to the EU view that our "masters" do,who see it as a counterweight to US supremacy.I would much rather see a complimentary arrangement.

as for AV,I think on paper it looks like a fairly good idea,but so did comunism.

Edited April 20, 2011 by oracle

[sbn]

No

Because Labour is backing "YES"

Every political decision I make these days is reached by the same process......

1. What is the position of the Labour party on the matter?

2. Back the opposite course of action

In the event of Labour not having an opinion on the matter, or their opinion being the same as all the other parties.. then I think independently and vote on what I believe would be the best thing.

To sum up, I consider a "Contra-Labour" mechanism to be a better calculator of the correct course of action than my own decision making process!

[Habeas Domus]

No

Because Labour is backing "YES"

I followed a similar logic, all the politicians I've heard backing the No vote have been idiots, so I'm voting Yes

Don't expect it to happen though, I always seem to vote for the losers!

random thought: wouldnt it be great if exactly 50% of the population voted each way, what would they do then.

[sbn]

I followed a similar logic, all the politicians I've heard backing the No vote have been idiots, so I'm voting Yes

Don't expect it to happen though, I always seem to vote for the losers!

random thought: wouldnt it be great if exactly 50% of the population voted each way, what would they do then.

Well that's you and I cancelling each other out already! You could be on to something here!

BTW if they offer "no" as a second place alternative to "yes" (which they should if they are serious about AV) than I suggest you vote for it as your second choice. I will, of course, be voting "yes" as my alternative - thus continuing the nullifying effect.

[Charlie The Tramp Returns]

Should We Change The Voting System?

No way, never ever, what has worked for over a hundred years quite well should be left as it is.

If we give the pinkies their way then the wishes of the majority now sorely tested, ignored and forgotten will end up being hell in the UK. If the minorities don`t get their way it is nice at the North Pole now for them to move to.