tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post1298862553666139971..comments2024-03-28T09:36:06.579+00:00Comments on SCOT goes POP!: Why supporters of PR should probably hold their noses and campaign for a Yes to AVJames Kellyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-16344380545395680612010-09-07T20:56:48.494+01:002010-09-07T20:56:48.494+01:00If people could be motivated to do it...real Liber...If people could be motivated to do it...real Liberals for example.. then it culd be a runner.<br /><br />I certanly want neither of the two on offer.<br /><br />Why Clegg didn't hold out for what he wanted I really can't imagine....<br /><br />...or can I? I bet it's nice to be called Deputy Prime Minister wherever you go.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-66354993483379294892010-09-07T20:37:46.770+01:002010-09-07T20:37:46.770+01:00I haven't posted anything on a political blog ...I haven't posted anything on a political blog before, and I confess the "PR" spoiled paper was a quick not entirely serious kind of reaction. BUT<br /><br />I'm not convinced something like this couldn't be a runner. OK "PR" is vague. Is it STV we basically want? Then lets campaign for supporters of proper PR to write "STV" on the ballot paper. It could get a huge response.<br /><br />Across Britain there are surely more supporters of PR who prefer STV to AV. If there was a co-ordinated campaign isn't there a good chance that "STV" wouldn't challenge if not actually beat "AV"? In Scotland wouldn't SNP voters prefer to write "STV"? What about disgruntled Liberals, Greens and others who simply follow the logic of proper PR?<br /><br />Can you imagine Paxman inviting Clegg to condemn the "STV" option, reminding him of his previous comments on AV?<br /><br />I actually believe that have the potential here to torpedo the miserable choice on offer. If we want STV and don't want to be fobbed off with some pathetic compromise then let's say so - they may set the question but surely it's up to us to provide an effective answer.Eric Fnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-26554076738094038952010-09-05T11:54:01.064+01:002010-09-05T11:54:01.064+01:00LOL @ Eric. I take your point.
Yes James, I see w...LOL @ Eric. I take your point.<br /><br />Yes James, I see what you are saying too.<br /><br /><br />It is unlikely that enough people would actually “spoil” their papers to make the point.<br /><br />It could even be seen as another victory for the Tories if the numbers were particularly small.<br /><br />But I find it hard to believe that no matter how much the Yes campaigners stress the “first small step” position, the prime minister is likely to take that on board.<br /><br />It seems like a lose lose situation, and I am deeply disappointed in Clegg. He promised so much more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-42909197938297001502010-09-04T17:45:51.957+01:002010-09-04T17:45:51.957+01:00Tris, the only thing that worries me about that id...Tris, the only thing that worries me about that idea is that I struggle to think of a 'spoil your ballot' campaign that has ever really worked in this country - it's almost impossibly difficult to persuade people to 'think outside the box' in sufficient numbers. And to make a serious impact, the numbers would have to be huge.<br /><br />I think it would be better for PR supporters to focus on winning the crucial battle for interpreting what a particular outcome would mean - <i>before</i> the referendum takes place. To give an example, the big mistake the Yes campaigners made in the 1979 devolution referendum was to use the 40% rule to browbeat people into turning out to vote - ie. "if you stay at home, you are voting No". When more people voted Yes than No, but the 40% threshold wasn't met, it was difficult for them to then say "Scotland voted yes", even though that was evidently the case. It's vitally important that the narrative isn't allowed to take root that a vote for AV is some kind of settled judgement, or that the new system would at least have to be 'given a chance' for a good few elections. Yes campaigners must emphasise again and again that they see this only as a very small first step.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-62110548520052761092010-09-03T09:56:56.892+01:002010-09-03T09:56:56.892+01:00That's a bit wordy Tris. Suggest a campaign t...That's a bit wordy Tris. Suggest a campaign to get people to write "PR" over the ballot paper. It might even make it as the most popular option!Eric Fnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-77629966105769085862010-09-03T09:19:01.373+01:002010-09-03T09:19:01.373+01:00Food for thought James
Even the prize of bringing...Food for thought James<br /><br />Even the prize of bringing down this misbegotten coalition is not worth a ‘No’ vote. After all, what on Earth would they be replaced by? A broken Labour Party still engaged in internecine feuding or a stronger Conservative government gratified and strengthened by a vote for them, as opposed to against Labour, and thus set free from any constraints to wreak havoc on our society? Not, I suppose, that the Liberals have thus far offered any constraints.<br /><br />I am deeply concerned that a vote AGAINST AV will tell the Tories what they want to hear; that Britain wants the “strong government” that FPTP can bring, free from the shackles of negotiating legislation in parliament, free to follow direction from Washington in foreign policy; without having the problem of opposition, free to whip to get its way. <br /><br />On the other hand a vote FOR AV will tell them that we are happy to be palmed off with a system which is so marginally better as to be not worth the while to introduce. The lifelong seats will still be there. The lazy MPs who know that all they have to do to have a job for life is turn up at a few garden parties or bingo sessions, and keep the local constituency ladies happy. (I’m not sure that came out quite the way I meant it to!)<br /><br />It’s a dilemma. Either option is a pat on the back for Mr Cameron. He has been spared PR. <br /><br />I’m furious with Nick Clegg for giving in to this. He could and should have held out for PR. A minority government trying to get through the changes that the Tories want to get through would have been facing defeat at every turn. Clegg is the last in a line of Liberal leaders that squandered the chance they have had to form a proper opposition since Tony Blair turned labour into the Red Tories.<br /><br />However, I digress. It is indeed a dilemma. <br /><br />I will never abstain. That’s copping out from making a decision on how the country is run. We can’t do that.<br /><br />How would a spoiled paper sit from a moral point of view? Spoilt papers are protest papers. <br /><br />“Neither of the above. I vote for PR”, repeated over the country in vast numbers might send the right message.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com