Having had more Vote Yes for AV material thrust at me the delicious irony of the 5th May referendum has finally broken through to me: The vote is a first past the post one! If more people vote for it than against it will succeed, and will do so by the very system that it desires to eradicate,
So it 15% of the population vote for it, and less than that vote against, it will be passed by a minority.
Given that a few luvvies are queueing up to urge a Yes vote from their fans (who will no doubt vote Yes without understanding why), and that there is a small campaign in favour, but no apparent cry to oppose, we face the strong possibility of having a political nonsense thrust upon us. As WSC might have put it; “never in the field of politics have so few done such damage to so many” (well, other than New Labour of course).
We need change, but not this one. Perhaps I should take to the streets.
The Voice of the Bloke at the Back 
Have you spotted the irony that the AV referendum gives voters a simple choice between Yes and No? No-one disputes for an instant that FPTP is an excellent system for choosing between two options. But when there are more than two it breaks down, and with upwards of five candidates in the average UK constituency, it is a recipe for unrepresentative governments. Over two-thirds of our current MPs were elected by less than a majority of voters – more people voted for someone else than for them.
You may be happy with that state of affairs; I am not.
As I make very clear in other posts on this topic I am not happy with the current FPFT system and I do want electoral reform. AV though is, in my opinion, a ridiculous alternative.
Thanks for commenting though. It is nice to see people taking the trouble to debate the issue.
I, too, want reform, but not this one. It is so sad that the first real chance that we get to change things is such a poor one and, like you, I am sad that I will have to vote against it. Why they couldn’t have come up with something better I don’t know.
And, as you say, the irony is that it may well be successful by the very system that it seeks to destroy. Truly ironic I agree.
Surely the question for you must be this: will we be any closer to a PR system if the referendum on May 5th returns aYes or a No?
Have a look at this briefing paper from the Political Studies Association, in particular the final section, which discusses the “battle for interpretation” that follows a “no” result in a referendum.
There’s evidence from Canada and elsewhere that the battle tends to be decisively won by the supporters of the status quo, which would mean that UK is likely to be stuck with FPTP for a considerable time after a No vote.
On the other hand, a Yes result indicates that the electorate has an appetite for change, and in France, New Zealand and Japan “Yes” results have led to further reforms.
The message would seem to be clear: even if you don’t think AV is where you want UK to end up, you should vote Yes, in order to get FPTP behind us.
My feeling is that if the country accepts this that we will have no prospect of change for the foreseeable future, and certainly not in my lifetime (I will hit 59 this year), but a no vote will leave us the opportunity for a change to something worthwhile.
Perhaps I am out of step with those that you refer to, but I genuinely believe that, if we vote this change in, then we will be stuck with it.
It makes no sense to me to vote for something that I believe is so wrong, and I have seen too many times in my life situations where people have said “go with us on this, and we can tweak it later”. Snakeoil salesmen all.
I am for a firm no vote and to tell them to go away and come back with a sensible solution.
After the general election result last year gave us a coalition government there were a lot of people saying that they hadn’t voted LibDem just to get a Tory government. Isn’t that just what they are asking us to vote for when they want AV to succeed?
Like you, I am in the No2AV camp.