[Archived] Election

[ABBEY]

I was talking to a few off-duty policemen on the march and they are very angry about the cuts which they say is bound to lead to an increase in the crime rate that has been in decline over the past 13 years.

The story of Saturday of the peaceful and democratic fight against the cuts has not been lost despite the attempts of the hooligan elements.

wonder how many police voted condem and whinged on the beeb today....what goes around comes around,remember the miners !!!!

[LeChuck]

wonder how many police voted condem

Nobody voted for that.

[Paul]

Can anyone enlighten me as to what I'm voting on come May 5th. I was discussing the electoral reform with Mrs P last night and we came to the conclusion we do not understand the proposed new voting system. You can be as sure as eggs are eggs we won't be voting for any reform which might see our votes transferred to a Conservative candidate!

The BBC says this but I don't really get it:

Voters rank the candidates. If no candidate has 50% of first preferences then second preferences are counted and so on until someone has a majority

[LeChuck]

You can be as sure as eggs are eggs we won't be voting for any reform which might see our votes transferred to a Conservative candidate!

You rank in order of preference, so as long as you don't put Conservative on there then that won't happen. In fact you can nominate as many preferences as you want, so you can just go with one preference if you choose. You just wouldn't get any say in any further rounds. So if you really wanted to keep Conservatives out, just put every other candidate in order of your preference.

I believe many of the smaller parties are favouring the system.

Found a Q&A thing that should answer everything for you - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11243595

[sparkspakespoke]

Cameron used to be a member of the Bullingdon club, a Oxford elitest group who used to go to top resturants, eat, refuse to pay then often trash the place.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Cameron used to be a member of the Bullingdon club, a Oxford elitest group who used to go to top resturants, eat, refuse to pay then often trash the place.

Pretty old news.

[sparkspakespoke]

Pretty old news.

Yep, very slow day at work was just reading some old articles.

[Paul]

You rank in order of preference, so as long as you don't put Conservative on there then that won't happen. In fact you can nominate as many preferences as you want, so you can just go with one preference if you choose. You just wouldn't get any say in any further rounds. So if you really wanted to keep Conservatives out, just put every other candidate in order of your preference.

I believe many of the smaller parties are favouring the system.

Found a Q&A thing that should answer everything for you - http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-11243595

So I might chose to rank the candidates in preference like this, just as an example:

1. Labour

2. Liberal

3. Greens

4. Venky's Out for a better team

5. Bring back JW Alliance

6. Monster Raving Loony Party

7. Conservative

If the Labour chap gets say 45% of the vote he doesn't have enough for a majority. Say the Liberal gets 39%, my second preference goes to the Liberal and if the Liberal first preferences + second preferences = 50% or more then Liberal gets in provided the Labour man's first + second preferences is less, if the Labour man got a total of, say, 60% first + second then he/she would get in?

I think. Got to understand this before May 5th

[LeChuck]

That's not quite how I understand it. I don't proclaim to understand the complexities myself! However, I think this is what it means...

I'll stick with your example, so Labour got 45%. Let's say Monster Raving Loony Party came last. They would be eliminated from the voting, and any votes for them would then be changed the secondary vote.

If adding these secondary votes gave Labour (or anyone else) 50% then they would win. Otherwise the party in last would be eliminated (let's say Greens). Votes for them moved to secondary, unless primary and secondary choices were Monster Raving Loony Party and Greens, in which case the tertiary vote would be used. And so on.

I think that's it anyway!

You can see how it will encourage voting for smaller parties, it's far less likely that you will have the 'lost vote' feeling. Still not as much as Proportional Representation though...

[jim mk2]

How AV works from a letter in that august journal the Darlington and Stockton Times.

http://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes.co.uk/comment/letters/8877548.

Needless to say the Daily Mail is not in favour of AV, which is a good enough reason to vote for the change.

[den]

Imagine an election with 100 voters and four candidates: As with the present system “first preferences” votes are counted as before. If no candidate has received more than 50 per cent support, the last placed candidate is eliminated then his/her second preference votes are transferred to the others.

So, if that brings a winner, the only people who's second preference votes counted for anything, were those who backed the loser?

How can that be right?

[thenodrog]

Can anyone enlighten me as to what I'm voting on come May 5th. I was discussing the electoral reform with Mrs P last night and we came to the conclusion we do not understand the proposed new voting system. You can be as sure as eggs are eggs we won't be voting for any reform which might see our votes transferred to a Conservative candidate!

I hate local govt being subject to party politics. One should always vote for the best person who will work hardest for his locality instead of taking an immature yah boo sucks stance and voting for a particular party, or not for one as you intend. If you have ever been invited to a count as I have (by the local SDP candidate... do you rem them?) you would think the same. It's like the worst excesses of a primary school playground!

Furthermore when I attended council meetings I felt the only group who spoke with any common sense were the 4 strong group of Independent Ratepayers. Tories and labour were both full of the kind of thick and unpleasant people that I detest, whose main aim was to shout down and jeer the opposition no matter what was the issue. Such heavily agenda'd party voting is not good for any community.

[sparkspakespoke]

I hate local govt being subject to party politics. One should always vote for the best person who will work hardest for his locality instead of taking an immature yah boo sucks stance and voting for a particular party, or not for one as you intend. If you have ever been invited to a count as I have (by the local SDP candidate... do you rem them?) you would think the same. It's like the worst excesses of a primary school playground!

Furthermore when I attended council meetings I felt the only group who spoke with any common sense were the 4 strong group of Independent Ratepayers. Tories and labour were both full of the kind of thick and unpleasant people that I detest, whose main aim was to shout down and jeer the opposition no matter what was the issue. Such heavily agenda'd party voting is not good for any community.

Spot on.

[Paul]

<br /><br />

I hate local govt being subject to party politics. One should always vote for the best person who will work hardest for his locality instead of taking an immature yah boo sucks stance and voting for a particular party, or not for one as you intend. If you have ever been invited to a count as I have (by the local SDP candidate... do you rem them?) you would think the same. It's like the worst excesses of a primary school playground!<br />

Furthermore when I attended council meetings I felt the only group who spoke with any common sense were the 4 strong group of Independent Ratepayers. Tories and labour were both full of the kind of thick and unpleasant people that I detest, whose main aim was to shout down and jeer the opposition no matter what was the issue. Such heavily agenda'd party voting is not good for any community.<br />

Good for you Gordon, never miss an opportunity to misinterpret and then have a rant at someone else's words. All helps to demonstrate the individual you are.

My post concerned the forthcoming referendum and the possible change to our voting system. Other people's replies confirm this. Currently my vote goes to the person I wish to support, under AV I fear it may not do because I don't understand how AV works. It seems from your post you are unaware of the referendum and you believe we are only voting in local elections. I am interested to understand AV so I can decide how to vote on this issue. Are you?

As you have proudly announced on many occasions you don't vote your opinion on this and political matters becomes valueless. You have a hard won democratic right you chose not to exercise, don't then spend your time relentlessly criticising those who spend their lives attempting to represent those who do vote.

I realise humour is difficult to get across in writing but I would have thought my remarks about the Conservatives and placing them 7th in an imaginary list was not meant to be taken entirely seriously.

Take some time to read my previous postings and you will see I have always argued one should vote for the man not the party. I have voted Conservative, rarely admitedly, in local elections but never nationally but the when Den Dover has been your local candidate one his hard-pressed to consider the Conservative as the best man for the job.

If you wish to be insulting towards me please take the trouble to understand what I wrote before going off on another of your rants.

Thank you.

[Rover Down Under]

Factcheck: Your warped view of the world culminating in an unjustified attack on this country.

There's only been one unjustified attack on the country in the last week and it had nowt to do with me.

[thenodrog]

Good for you Gordon, never miss an opportunity to misinterpret and then have a rant at someone else's words. All helps to demonstrate the individual you are.

My post concerned the forthcoming referendum and the possible change to our voting system. Other people's replies confirm this. Currently my vote goes to the person I wish to support, under AV I fear it may not do because I don't understand how AV works. It seems from your post you are unaware of the referendum and you believe we are only voting in local elections. I am interested to understand AV so I can decide how to vote on this issue. Are you?

As you have proudly announced on many occasions you don't vote your opinion on this and political matters becomes valueless. You have a hard won democratic right you chose not to exercise, don't then spend your time relentlessly criticising those who spend their lives attempting to represent those who do vote.

I realise humour is difficult to get across in writing but I would have thought my remarks about the Conservatives and placing them 7th in an imaginary list was not meant to be taken entirely seriously.

Take some time to read my previous postings and you will see I have always argued one should vote for the man not the party. I have voted Conservative, rarely admitedly, in local elections but never nationally but the when Den Dover has been your local candidate one his hard-pressed to consider the Conservative as the best man for the job.

If you wish to be insulting towards me please take the trouble to understand what I wrote before going off on another of your rants.

Thank you.

Thank you for that Paul. You've taken an extraordinary amount of time to point that out. My fault for speed reading.

As for voting being a waste of time and energy I've heard loads of woolly Liberals agreeing with that since the election! Odd really, given that the AV issue is down to them.

btw Den Dover eh? He's a dodgepot allright.

[LeChuck]

Currently my vote goes to the person I wish to support, under AV I fear it may not do

That definitely can't happen if you don't put them on your ballot slip Paul. You can put as many or as few preferences as you want. Don't put a preference number next to the candidates you definitely wouldn't want your vote to go to.

However, if you thought "well I want Mr. X to win, but if he doesn't I wouldn't mind Mr. Y. In fact, I want anyone but Mr. Z." then you can vote in this manner using the preference system. If you want only Mr. X and no-one else you can vote this way too.

I can't see why anyone would vote against this. It provides choice and flexibility to voters.

[jim mk2]

There's only been one unjustified attack on the country in the last week and it had nowt to do with me.

Many of your posts contain an attack on England and as long as you continue to do so you will get it back - and more.

Looking back at some of your "contributions" I have to this country is better off without people like you. I also doubt whether you will be happy in Australia either.

There are however countries in the world with extreme right-wing reactionary governments such as Iran and Saudi Arabia where I'm sure you would feel far more at home. An alternative would be the US where the rise of the Tea party has given an outlet to the rightwing lunatics in that country. You should join them.

[Paul]

That definitely can't happen if you don't put them on your ballot slip Paul. You can put as many or as few preferences as you want. Don't put a preference number next to the candidates you definitely wouldn't want your vote to go to.

However, if you thought "well I want Mr. X to win, but if he doesn't I wouldn't mind Mr. Y. In fact, I want anyone but Mr. Z." then you can vote in this manner using the preference system. If you want only Mr. X and no-one else you can vote this way too.

I can't see why anyone would vote against this. It provides choice and flexibility to voters.

Yes I think you're right LeChuck, it's just taken me a while to get my head round it. As Den pointed out one could take the view the outright winner would be bypassed in favour of someone who came second or third. I think this is probably correct but I'm assuming it will work on the basis the candidate with the broadest base of support will be the ultimate winner. So we might end up with this situation:

Candidate A wins 50+% of the vote has worked the hardest and gained the required support. fair enough

OR

Candidate A only gets 40% of the first preference and candidate B gets say 39%. Candidate B has worked extremely hard and picked up say another 15% by virtue of the second preference giving him 54% in total. Seems to me a good deal if 54% of the electorate can see they will be represented by the candidate who was their first or second choice. It must be an improvement on being represented by a candidate you would not usually support. I like this and if my assumptions are correct will be voting positively in the referendum.

[Al]

Can't help thinking that that system will result in more hung parliaments with the Liberals choosing who to side with and therefore holding the balance of power. Surely it can't be right for the third choice party to have that power.

Of course you could have a Lab/Con Alliance but I can't honestly see that happening.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Guido talking about the AV experiment on Five Live:

AV too much for BBC

[jim mk2]

Explains your political views if you read Guido.......Paul Staines is a nasty piece of work.

Meanwhile, the multi-millionaire David Cameron says "we're all in this together" in having to tighten our belts.

Well Dave, I've got not news for you. The management aren't listening. Even the Mail is outraged.

http://www.dailymail...ta-Osorio.htmlr.

[thenodrog]

Your post reveals that you are obviously an avid reader of both publications Jim.

[philipl]

The video clip on this item is something else!

[thenodrog]

The video clip on this item is something else!

No suprise to anyone who lives here. Cause and effect and exactly as I said here.....

http://www.brfcs.co.uk/mb/index.php/topic/24383-edl-demonstration-in-blackburn/page__view__findpost__p__1041553

However as usual that video is somewhat skewed ... I understand that there was another bunch of aggressively racist scumbags intent on causing trouble at the other end of Northgate yet there seems to be no video of them.

btw 1. These demonstrations should only be permitted on a Monday or a Tuesday. Why should the businesses in Blackburn effectively lose a lot of money when the best day of the week sees Blackburn virtually shut off? If I had a business there I'd feel like withholding some of my business rate by way of recompence.

btw 2. just as an aside Philip, what has your post to do with the last election?