Saturday, April 09, 2011

NO is a no-no

I just can't resist it ...

... this short video is very silly :-)

But it's also very, very funny :-))


A Brown said...

I see Ian Murray has been pushed over to the no side. Oh dear.

Anonymous said...

AV does not really represent a clear result as the final count for the winner if it has to go past the first round.

The votes added ,from the party who is knocked out in each round, to the winner count represents people second or third... choice.

There is also an element of bias on the second or third .. vote depending on the first choice made for these votes. This depends on the policies the party who is knocked out.

The winner only ever has the full confidence of the voters who voted for them in the first round. Technically that could be around a third of their vote and they could be winning based on the second and third choices on the balance of votes which comes from the parties they have knocked out.

Why is someone who has won based on some people's second and third ... choices a democratic way of selecting some to represent the people ?

It does not make any sense what so ever.It's just a fudge. Its a case of if we dont like the first result and lets twist the results.

Andrew said...

A Brown - just what can I say about Ian :-(

Anonymous - thanks for the comment, but I'm afraid we'll just need to agree to disagree.

AV is as easy as 1,2,3:

- and, for me, a definite improvement on FPTP which has had its day.