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!

Agree with SWC's last sentence - I feel strongly enough to have organised postal proxies on this for dh and myself as we live abroad, and I wanted to ensure we voted No.

I understand FPTP and I understand AV and I'll be voting 'no' simply because I don't think what we're being offered represents much of a difference, let alone an improvment. When the Labour government were making noises about AV early last year, LibDems (like Chris Huhne) were very lukewarm about it. Their best argument was that it was 'better than nothing' but everyone seemed to agree that it didn't do anything to increase proportionality of representation... just give an illusion of choice.

It's because the two systems are equally flawed that the campaigners have ended up playing the man and not the ball. The 'yes' camp just don't believe in it enough to make proper arguments stick.

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

I would suggest that if anyone wants to win people around to their view they don't patronise.
I am voting NO-and I am not gullible and stupid -and I don't need nightowly to interpret things for me!

the worst thing about av is that it is indeed possible for your vote to count for someone you would never dream of voting for, by various deals between parties and in my opinion is AV stinks as an alternative to our current system.

I think it's broke...

also , i just wonder. if the vote goes NO and decisively so, will anyone in the Lib Dems ask themselves a question. The country is in a fiscal mess, we have so much to sort out and this is what they see as the most important thing? AV? Improving their electoral position?

Maybe the country has other priorities and if it is voted down heavily it has seen this whole business for what it is.

Or maybe theyve seen the Lib Dems in action in government and have concluded its not a good idea to have them trying to be the arbiters of power for every election from now.

I'm not clear about the idea of choice when applied to political parties - so if you believe that further education should be affordable for all you vote for one party, but if they don't get in, you'll be happy for it not to be affordable to anyone but the very well off as a second choice? How does that work?

Seems to me it is an election system for those who can cope with 'I'm a politician, get me out of here' - you vote for the people you want to keep in, they get rid of the bottom two, then you get a second chance vote...either you believe in something or you don't.

Unless you believe that the LibDems will stick to any of their election promises...then you need to vote for SFA...and I have a bridge you might be interested in.

Can we re-run past elections using AV when we have incomplete data (the other preferences of the voters)? It seems to be theorising ahead of the facts to me.

I agree with AnnieBesant.
I think that FPTP is broken.
I agree that AV isn't a big change - and wouldn't have changed all the General Election results, nor is it PR.
I wish that the referendum were about PR. But it's not. I have to vote on the choice that I have been offered.

Balia - I could believe firmly in the Bread and Circuses Party, but if that is not an option, having had the fewest votes, I can transfer my vote to a party that is my preferred option of those left. It wouldn't mean that I believe any less in the B&CP. Or when I go to the tea shop, if Darjeeling is on the menu, but there isn't any left, can't I ask for Earl Grey instead?

Theinet - the situation you describe where your chosen party can do a deal with another party that you would never in a million years vote for, can happen just as easily under FTFP. The last election being a case in point.....

I was a dithering No before reading this. Think I may well have changed my mind now.

it can happen, but it is less likely to. FPTP tends to give secure, stable governments who aren't always looking over their shoulder rather than doing dodgy deals every 2 minutes and changing policies randomly .

Theinet what is the evidence for this being more likely under AV?

I am voting no. Most people I work with have learning disabilities are as entitled to vote as much as anyone else. In fact, as many are people who use services, they are generally under-represented as so many don't vote and they are in the front row of people affected by elections and legislation. Explaining av to some of the folk I work with is really difficult. Also, I predict loads of folk will end up spoiling their vote despite knowing which one politician/party they want to vote for, and why, if av is implemented. I have a degree in politics and do understand av, just not how to explain it simply to clients and have looked on the internet for easy read info and all I can find is shite about x factor and the oscars.

Also, I live in Scotland and PR works well here (and all over the world). Why not PR? AV just replaces one pish not great system with another. PR brings real change, that's why.

Fair enough - but people have got up to just as many (if different) dirty tricks with FTFP.

Does anyone know whether the 60% of Australians are against AV thing is true or not? Because I've heard it said many times but seen no evidence for it, apart from it being in the ridiculous "no to AV" material

Incidentally, did anyone see the letter in the Independent today from an Australian who said AV was actually very popular there?

It's not going to squander millions though. It'll cost about the same as FPTP would.

I'm surprised at how many thickies there are out there

Surely if you don't vote yes tomorrow, you're stuck with FPTP for a generation

I'm voting a resounding NO because a candidate who has not been the first choice of any voter in their constituency could be elected and we already have a surfeit of second and third-rate politicians.

Secondly, this whole expensive exercise is merely a sop to the LieDems and Clegg deserves a bloody nose for reneging on his pledge to abolish tuition fees.

Some may not be aware that Londoners will be voting solely on AV as the capital's local elections were held last year. The turnout will make interesting reading - the chattering arses v the can't be arsed.

Rubbish Izzy Wizzy - if nobody put a party down as first choice in their constituency, it would be the first to have the votes for it tranferred to the other parties which had got first preference votes.