Another unelected labour PM

No worries policywonk, I haven't actually expressed my political views - in some ways I'm just pointing out the same as you, which is that a lot of nonsense gets talked when sometimes it seems people don't realise the full implications of what they say or state that they want. Expressing my views on individual points and comments and policies does not necessarily require me to disclose my political allegiances - there is good and bad on all sides and if possible I'd give 60% of my vote to one party and 40% to another!

AV+ is AV but with a top-up vote from a regional list.

It doesn't actually exist yet, we would be the first to use it. It's broadly proportional but you weirdly end up with 2 types of MPs: constituency and top-up.

The thing is that even though we elect a local MP and not a PM,most people elect an MP in the knowledge that he/she will support a party which is being led by a particular person.The leader of the party sets the tone and has a big say in policy and will also be on the world stage as our country's leader so it does have a big part in people's voting intentions to to not acknowledge this is to be naive.

No party can deliver PR ,there is no majority in Parliament to carry a vote for PR ,in addition PR is complex and will take several years to bring in not least because under the Liberal's preferred version there will have to be a redrawing of the boundaries,bear in mind this generally takes several years to do and is currently already based on out of date census data because they have not been able to keep up with the last census.

Hague has now said that they would vote against any change in the voting system which does not involve a referendum and as Lib-Lab does not not have a majority in the House of Commons they will not get the change through ,Labour knows this and is therefore offering an empty hand.

Yes, AV is a shite system from what I've heard.

They did vote for a hung parliament, Aussie - did you see the polls before the election? More than 60% thought a hung parl would be best outcome, IIRC.

He hasn't offered it, he has offered a referendum.

Frakked up - lots of systems lock out smaller parties. Even full on PR systems often have rules which mean that parties with say less than 5% of the national vote can be ignored - it's how you keep out loonies and the BNP.

Aussienq, I did read the whole thread and I remember thinking that I wasn't sure which side you were coming down on Sorry if I misinterpreted.

I agree with EdgarAllenPole. I don't think people voted for a hung parliament or that they voted for a specific coalition. The hung vote merely reflects the fact that we are in difficult times and there is a real split of views on what the best way is to deal with the current situaion unlike anything we have ever known before.

I vote for a referendum. There's never been a referendum in my lifetime - I want to try one of those!

I'm still really about AV. It's even more distorting than FPTP even though it eliminates tactical voting and it totally locks out smaller parties unless they get an outright majority like Caroline Lucas did.

Not just AV but AV+??
(goes off to google AV+..)

Another one here who thinks WetAugust should apologise to MMeLindt. Off to play up my own end now.

Greensleeves - d'ja reckon?

Fembear, I'm not saying that it's impossible that the LibCon deal could come off. It's perfectly possible that some sort of limited arrangement could me arrived at, I suppose. I was arguing Edgar's (I think?) point that Lab and Lib supposedly have much less in common than Lib and Con - I just don't think that's true.

What's Clegg been doing? He was doing exactly what he said he would do, before the election. Presumably trying damned hard to get an agreement. Behaving entirely honourably IMO.

Did you read the whole thread Policywonk - 'cause you certainly took my post out of context.

AV - alternative vote - it is the system they have in Australia. Eliminate the one with least votes and redistribute their votes according to their second (alteriative vote) preference

AV is a system where you rank the candidates and when your top preference is eliminated you move onto your second preference.

It's sort of STV but keeping the same constituencies, if that makes sense?

haven't seen a single journo, politician or commentator attempt to argue that there is more natural LibCon synergy than there is LibLab synergy, but I've seen most of them arguing the opposite (including every single senior LibDem who's been authorised to talk to the press).

David Steel refused to indicate either way (as i said down the thread)

i really don't think there is that much in common policy wise (any more than labour have in common with the conservatives..). The Lds have opposed labour on many issues central to their core belief (detention without charge, ID cards, etc etc..)

my point stands. people didn't vote for a coalition that didn't exist before the election...they may be satisfied with either form after the fact...and the worst outcome for the LDs is that they don't reach an agrement with either and look like the party-poopers - that would lose them even more respect in the eyes of the voting public.

Go and play on your own leftie thread.

If MMe is distressed at my post she must be over-sensitive. Toughen up!

Alternative Vote

I can't believe Cameron has offered AV+

My estimation of him just went down.

Big deal Quaatro - impressed - not!

Actually Greensleves - I have said I'm not a Tory voter.

If the LibDems and Cons are not a posible match then what on earth have they been talking about for four days?

Sorry- what is AV??

wetaugust is just sore - like most right-wingers - because even after 13 years of allegedly dreadful Labour rule, the tory party STILL haven't managed to secure a majority

how galling it must be

I'm not dictating anything. I said I thought you owed MmeL an apology. And now I think you owe me an apology too