to wonder why on earth so many people are going to vote no?

[nightowlmostly]

I just don't get the apathy with regard to this referendum tomorrow.

In what circumstances would you ever reject the opportunity to have a second choice option?

"Ok, if I can't have that one, I'd like this one instead."

What is it that people don't like about that? I am honestly baffled. Obviously, PR would be a better option, but we've got to take what we can get when it comes to reforming the voting system, this will just be a small step. If the no vote wins, we will never get another opportunity to vote for change.

If you are voting no, I would genuinely like to know your reasons why!

I haven't read/seen/listened to anything on whether to vote yes or no nightowl, I know how both work and decided which I prefer.

And if you think fair and parliament are anything but an oxymoron, then you're kidding yourself.

nightowlmostly

you're a Nick Clegg fan, i''m guessing?

"I'm voting No. One person, one vote. I don't see the point of a complicated, costly system that ends up with someone that no one really wanted"

But with AV it is one person one vote. How much will it actually cost? In the current system you still end up with someone winning on a minority vote ie someone in power that the majority didn't actually want.

People will be voting because of scaremongering, because of fear of the unknown, because AV's been made out to be some mystical system no one can understand... I'm actually fairly confident I could explain it to a class of 9 year olds to be honest - it ain't rocket science.

Of course people only understand what they can be bothered to understand and people really by and large don't give a shit about politics. So while you have the likes of hubby and me who hit up Tesco a day early to make sure we could get down to vote tomorrow - you've also got those who will only roll out on a General Election day to stick their X in the Labour box, or those who'll just assume they're all the same and curse the lot of them.

But I come from a very politically aware family - I'm the only one not currently in a political party (have been in the past but the local bickering fest via newsletter really doesn't appeal), and my parents are actually dep Mayor and Mayoress of a city. I also believe passionately (and have done ever since I was about 16 and first learnt about it) in voting reform - I tactically voted Tory in the hopes of forcing a coalition and trying to get it onto the agenda. I'm also the sad bastard who would rub her hands with glee at an election and the thoughts of being able to do the school mock election thing... then get the idea scuppered by the boss :(

Don't think for a moment it'll get through though - disgusting though the No campaign's been.

Because why as a leading democracy in the world would we adopt a voting system used only by Australia, new Zealand and papa new guinea?????? Not To mention it's been a disaster in oz and they r now investigating it's removal.

It's a system promoted by smaller and niche parties because it benefits them if it wasn't for the lib dems increased influence through the coalition I doubt we'd even be conducting a referendum.

First past the post may not be ideal but it's still a less flawed system than AV I've already voted no with my postal vote.

If AV's too complicated you're not paying attention. Whether you vote yes or no is up to you and what kind of parliament and government you want. Just vote.

I am really looking forward to seeing the Lib Dems hanging around outside the polling station trying to get my number . It'll be nice to have a little chat

theinet no, not any more! I actually think it's unfortunate that he has anything to do with this, as people's feelings about him personally will doubtlessly affect the result.

It's a system used in Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinea. I haven't heard or seen anything about Australia investigating its removal or that it's been a disaster - does anyone have any firm evidence of that - I know the No campaign have said it but with no backing.

AV: you rank the candidates 1,2,3.. in order of preference.

No more tactical voting, and it ensures all MPs are elected with a majority (over 50%). At the moment 2/3 MPs are elected without getting a majority.

Gosh OP, it couldn't possibly be that people are just perfectly happy with FPTP and don't want to change it, could it? No we must have been brainwashed by the "lies" of the No campaign.

You sound a bit like Harriet Harman with that line of thinking.

That's not a compliment btw.

First past the post is a system that works well when you have 2 parties. It doesn't work well when you have 3+. I think that a lot of people simply haven't bothered to read up on AV, and don't understand how it works.

Oh even better. Pure Hattie: you don't support it because you don't understand it.

Do you two have any comprehension of how condescending you sound?

A Nice illustrated explanation

AV means you rank preferences - everyone gets that bit. It's what happens next that seems to confuse people.

Are you seriously suggesting that everyone has understood it? Once can see only from this thread that clearly is not the case.......

*One. ffs.

I have no idea whether everyone has understood it. I doubt everyone in this country understands FPTP, or even the voting system on Strictly Come Dancing. But to assume that people who oppose something have been hoodwinked or are ignorant is condescending.

One can also see that some people get their knockers right in a twist when other people won't do as their told Hellno.

Arf at getting knockers in a twist

I meant knickers of course.

Whether you support AV or not is you business, but it's pretty clear that people don't actually understand it when they're suggesting that eg it would give undue power to minority parties.

I think everyone understands that the Lib Dems are in favour of it, and thats a big factor.

Yes its used in Australia etc.

All the main UK political parties use a type of alternative vote to ensure their leader has a true majority and is supported by most of the voters.

FPTP is an ancient, out dated method. Most modern democracies do not use it - Neither Wales, NI or Scotland chose to use FPTP when they set up parliaments(link)

What a condescending reply from nightowlmostly - that anyone still voting 'no' has been taken in by lies.

I'm voting 'No' because I don't want the deciding votes to be cast by people who voted for the losing party. Quite possibly the BNP. Why should these muppets get a second chance at a vote?

BabyDubsEverywhere - why on earth would you not use your vote? I can't understand that kind of attitude. And if your peers/friends aren't voting either - why?

I assume that you never complain about what any of our politicians/governments are doing? I hope you don't, if you're not prepared to take part in the process of electing them.

It's a bit different choosing a leader of a party from a group of like minded people who broadly agree about policies to choosing between the widely differing political agendas of different parties. Not comparing apples and apples at all.

Labour use a collegiate system which led to the person who came second in the first two rounds ultimately winning thanks to the massive weighting given to union block votes over "one member one vote".

The Tories use a sort of AV but it is not really, as there are separate rounds of campaigning in between the rounds of voting. All that happens is the person with the least votes is eliminated and there is a fresh ballot. It's not at all a case of ranking the candidates and then apportioning second preferences if no one has 50%.

No idea what the Libdems do and don't care.