(no subject)

[webofevil]

If you do not exactly feel yourself to be a natural Tory voter, please bear in mind that today's referendum features a choice between two campaigns that, yes, have both been run equally badly, but one of which (hint: "NO") has been funded entirely by wealthy Tory donors and is backed by the BNP*, and might therefore be worth opposing. I'm just saying.

That said, people are naturally disposed to baulk initially at the notion of change and, when actively encouraged to fear and therefore hate it, tend to respond with alacrity. Should that be the result, though, I will be pressing for legislation to be brought in that inflicts the direst penalties on those who voted "no" (or indeed failed to vote at all) but then continue to bitch about their MP or the behaviour of politicians in general.

* Conservative chair Baroness Warsi has tried to claim that the BNP want AV. Conservative chair Baroness Warsi says a lot of things.

Comments

[lowlowprices.livejournal.com]

The Tories are going to win this, and then for years afterwards, everyone who voted no because they hated the Lib Dems more will wonder why we keep getting Conservative majorities. It so is simple.

[quercus.livejournal.com]

I'm not a an of AV, although I'll be voting for it, as an improvement over FPTP. It's just the wrong question - of the many other systems we could have gone for, AV isn't the best to change to.

I don't think it will necessarily change the result of elections either. What it will do though is to change the behaviour of parties, to keep themselves more AV-friendly. We might indeed see more Cameron parties in power, but we will see fewer Thatchers - even if we then get Camerons as the alternative, not Kinnocks.

[lowlowprices.livejournal.com]

I agree that it won't necessarily change the make-up of future Parliaments, other things being equal.

My point is that AV should still be seen as the Lib Dem side of the coalition's constitutional carve-up. The Tories have already got their side of the bargain in legislation - redrawing of boundaries, a reduction in the number of seats and a five-year Parliament. There may be perfectly good reasons to support these changes, and the Conservatives could be mistaken in expecting to benefit from them electorally, but at the moment the traffic is all one-way. That's why I voted yes. I fully expect AV to be defeated, however.

[matgb]

FWIW, fixed terms distinctly not a Tory thing, they're fairly opposed to it, it's a longterm objective of reformers--I wanted 4 years, but can live with 5, but that was a Lib Dem request (and LD policy is STV with 500 MPs, so reduction in numbers is valid LD policy but not on its own).

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Yeah, thats the clincher for me. If the Tories hate it, it must be a very good thing indeed.

[moleintheground.livejournal.com]

Is Warsi... what the fuck is her fucking problem? That's what I want to understand.