Smacks a bit of what’s occurring in my country right now.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
You’re focusing on the act of actually voting and not the importance of what each voting system actually brings to the table. Ranked voting is much more representative of a populations wishes and that is exactly what an election is intended to determine.
I voted for Binface as my second choice as well… 1/2 his policies actually make sense!
I suppose ultimately there is no system that makes everyone happy.
One is a vote of support. The other is a vote of intent. However you order them.
Ranked choice voting sees more people get what they want. You’re just wrong, and wholly corrupted by two party politics.
firstly, nothing wrong with different opinions. Therefore it’s not black and and white. You last sentence shows that you can’t have a sensible debate. Well done.
Its not opinion. It really IS that black and white.
‘One vote one choice’ is so painfully stupid to defend. Ranked choice voting is accepted by anyone neutral as the fairest and most accurate method.
It’s ok that you defend your position, but just think about what you’re defending. It’s so silly.
It is an opinion - the real issue I have is the way you approach a discussion.
I honestly don’t care. If you’ve picked soft challenging opinions to this point you clearly need a stronger one.
What is your problem with ranked choice voting?
The point is - it is an opinion. Give a shit what you think. If you hadn’t been such an aggressive an petulant child, we could have discussed it, and maybe I’d even have changed my perspective if your argument had been persuasive.
If you were Boris Johnson when would you call for an election?
No... 100% no... with such a huge majority the risk / reward just does not stack up.
They have still not scrapped the fixed term parliament act either which im sure they will do before they call an election and that would take some parliamentary time... certainly don't think that would go through before the summer resess... so the earliest you would be looking at would be something like a winter election which would seem unlikely given how rare they have been.
I really do wish she had the same energy to go after Boris and the Tory cronyism.
You're the child here. Why do tories always clutch their pearls and disengage so easily?
It’s called an escape hatch.
Republicans & conservatives use them wantonly over here.
Typical examples are a variant of ‘do your own research’ or some version of manufactured outrage pearl clutch / ‘so, you think you’re better than me’ / ‘why don’t you just tell me what to think.’
It’s thought of as a clever obfuscation by the deliverer, but it’s wholly predictable & true to type.
Good word for it, very true.
get a grip. I’m very happy to engage in conversation and discussion in here. When someone, just comes straight in and says you are flat out wrong, and have been corrupted! Then yes it’s going to get anyone’s back up.
you can’t have a discussion with someone when they start off with that. This not me disengaging at all - that’s calling someone out for being a prick.
Righto.
Grow a backbone.
whats the point of this?
What's the point of a backbone? Wow you really have been corrupted.
Jesus Christ.
On a serious, you can't just casually support anti democratic moves (because tory) and then get upset and hide when someone takes offense at that. If you can't back that shit up then stop believing in it.
Local Election & Hartlepool By-Election Results: What Went So Wrong for Labour?
As I’ve said in this thread or the other one, their are positives and negatives to any voting system.
It might be nice to discuss them rationally.
the fact we have different voting systems for different elections is somewhat bizarre - and just from a personal perspective and from others I’ve spoken to choosing 2 candidates seems illogical. Hence me voting for Binface.
it’s certainly not something ‘I believe’ in, I have no affinity to a voting system, like I would assume very few do.
Go on then give us some rational discussion. All you've done so far is said "I don't like this and I prefer this other thing", that there might be arguments to support your opinion but you won't share them because people were mean to you.
So here is your chance to answer and I promise to be nice and rational with you:
Why is fptp better than sv? Pros and cons please as you said.
Slightly condescending
but I’ll play!firstly, I’m coming from a layman’s perspective - because I don’t have to spend time and effort researching voting systems. I know you will use that as a criticism against me - but i very much believe you can and should have a discussion without the need to be 100% read into the scenario.
These are musings rather than pro’s and con’s - as I’ve tried to be clear, I’m not wedded to any system.
one of my key issues is having different voting systems, it’s confusing to the electorate and obviously if FPTP or SV or any other system was preferred then why do we have a mixture?
how valid are second choice votes? Are they more likely to go to candidates that just have name recognition, or for a ‘joke’ vote? Aside from the candidate you vote for, and usually the direct rival - does the voter actually know anything about their second choice?
granted, I’m sure many voters don’t know anything about the first choice candidate they are voting for - but I’m sure you see my point.
Slightly condescending
firstly, I’m coming from a layman’s perspective - because I don’t have to spend time and effort researching voting systems. I know you will use that as a criticism against me - but i very much believe you can and should have a discussion without the need to be 100% read into the scenario.
These are musings rather than pro’s and con’s - as I’ve tried to be clear, I’m not wedded to any system.
one of my key issues is having different voting systems, it’s confusing to the electorate and obviously if FPTP or SV or any other system was preferred then why do we have a mixture?
how valid are second choice votes? Are they more likely to go to candidates that just have name recognition, or for a ‘joke’ vote? Aside from the candidate you vote for, and usually the direct rival - does the voter actually know anything about their second choice?
granted, I’m sure many voters don’t know anything about the first choice candidate they are voting for - but I’m sure you see my point.
I agree that a mixture isn't ideal but I'm not sure why you'd solve that by using the least democratic method everywhere (fptp).
Your second question I'm not sure how to answer.
One advantage of the system is that it allows for instance green voters to indicate a preference for green without "wasting" their vote on a candidate that they think unlikely to win.
If people haven't researched who they are voting for then that's on them. They don't have to utilise the second choice, they can just choose one. And as you say you could make the same argument for the first choice too so I don't see the logic in that.
Another advantage in my view is that it discourages negative campaigning or at least makes it less effective by making voting less of a binary choice which leads to people often voting against a party rather than for it.
And the stuff about not being arsed to do research is very disrespectful, both to the time of the people you debate with on here, and more importantly to democracy. Please stop voting if you don't care enough to educate yourself about how your vote works.
i was with you until your last paragraph.
I have more than enough knowledge about voting systems, candidates and ‘where my vote goes’.
what I take absolute offence at is the notion as I said earlier that you have to be “100% read into the scenario” to have a debate.
you don’t need to, and shouldn’t have to.
Otherwise you can simply only debate areas where you have a level of expertise.
I may have been somewhat facetious in earlier posts about my knowledge. your statement is explicitly anti democratic.
do you honestly think the average voter researches each candidate/ party?
whilst I expect we disagree on many fundamentals, I’m sure we could have a lively and interesting discussion in real life. What % of the electorate could or would want to do so?
everyone has a right to vote, no matter how little they know or care, or that they make a voting decision based on knowledge gleamed from Facebook - it is a fundamental right.
there are very few absolute rights or wrongs - which is what I took issue with yesterday. But to say someone (anyone) shouldn’t vote is a massive no no.
Soooo many bots in the replies with various flavours of ‘he’s been running the country who cares?”
Its a witch hunt
I'm not taking away your right to vote or even advocating that, I'm just asking kindly that you stop until you have taken the effort to understand it better. You clearly don't because your questions in the previous post were ridiculously basic and you plainly ignore any point I make that doesn't play into your stupid narrative.
Deaths of people on benefits prompt inquiry call https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56819727
maybe we wouldn’t have a sensible discussion in person!
Wer'e not having a sensible discussion now and you never were actually trying so maybe not.
You remind me of my Aunt who floats controversial opinions at the dinner table and then gets upset and wants to change the subject as soon as people (usually my mum) challenge her. She's a Tory too, voted for brexit, talked about it enthusiastically and now her company that she's trying to sell is not doing so well so we don't talk about Brexit any more.
and yet - nothing was controversial. Unless you really think musing over a voting system is controversial?
I don’t think anyone asked about your aunt and the dinner table.
Edit: perhaps you don’t talk about brexit anymore because no one in your family has got an online certificate confirming they have spent enough time on Google researching the subject.
Musing requires reflection and thought, neither of which are things that you seem to be willing to do here. You just want other people to develop your views for you and get upset when they don't play nice.
develop my views! I thought I was a closed minded Tory?
Yes, you post half arsed opinions and expect other people to do the research on them for you in a discussion, coming up with ridiculous questions, ignoring any point I make, instead asking more stupid questions and getting upset instead of actually posting any evidence or developed argument of your own at any point.
What points did I specifically ignore from you?
Stop it.