GAH!

[andrewducker]

The BBC now has a "Best arguments for voting Yes or No" on AV page up.

And while I'm annoyed that the No campaign are still arguing that AV means
that some votes are counted more than others (clearly untrue - every round
counts all votes for people whose preferences are still in the running), I
am _furious_ at the awful arguments put forward by the Yes campaign.

The bit which seems to actually grab people (an end to the split vote
problem, where you can have 70% of people voting for an X-wing party, and a
Y-wing party gets the seat) is relegated to an aside in point 4, which 90%
of people will never see.

I am incredibly frustrated by their continued incompetence at getting their
message across.

Am I wrong? Do people really think that AV will make MPs work harder? Does
anyone really care about that? Is there any reason whatsoever for that to
be the top point?

Comments

[simont]

you can have 70% of people voting for an X-wing party, and a Y-wing party gets the seat

As long as the TIE fighter party doesn't get in ... :-)

[andrewhickey.info]

(BTW I can't actually access your - or anyone's - LJ, so I don't know if anyone's commented on this there).

The reason for that is that all the messages were focus-group tested to death last year, and those were the ones the 'average person' claimed to care about at the time. But yes, the campaign has been horribly, horribly flawed.

[jack]

I don't know. To me, the "make MPs work harder" is just made up, and the "don't need to avoid splitting the vote" is the killer feature. And I assumed other people would feel the same, even if they didn't previously know the issues. And a few anecdotal reportings of talking to someone previously unconcerned about the issue bear it up. But maybe I'm wrong, and the more blatant lie is more persuasive *shrug*

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

I don't think people care about MPs working harder. I don't think people really have much of an idea of how hard MPs work. What people think abotu that, in my experience anyway, is that MPs are paid far too much, and many of them appear to be criminally incompetant.

But being criminal doesn't seem to be a barrier to getting re-elected.

There are many better arguments the yes campaign could be using.

I mean, I'm amazed they haven't been talking about the horribly low t urn-outs we have in the UK for elections, and saying look, the system is so badly broken, only about half of us can be arsed voting. Lets change that.

[meaningrequired.livejournal.com]

Well, I personally don't care about MPs working harder, because I doubt that changing the voting system is going to increase effort. It might change targeting and advertising, but I don't think anyone is going to work harder.

[broin.livejournal.com]

An X-Wing party? A Y-Wing party? AWESOME. Pew pew, Red Leader.

And yes, the left column is unclear while the right column gets me by the emotional balls.

[woodpijn.livejournal.com]

Argh! Yes, that page is appalling and depressing.

It makes it sound like the BBC objectively endorse the truth of both columns, so "On one hand, AV is unfair; but on the other hand, it does make MPs work harder. So if you care about fairness, vote no, but if you care about MPs working hard, even at the expense of fairness, vote yes." Not only misleading, but makes the yes supporters look really small-minded.

[alitheapipkin.livejournal.com]

That's a pile of pants, I agree point 4 is best pro AV argument and the working harder bit is both iffy and possibly not desirable anyway because what they actually mean is making them spend more time in the constituency and speaking personally, I wasn't very impressed when I wrote to my MP about a bill going through parliament and was informed he wouldn't be taking part in the vote because it was on one of his constituency days.

Bah. If that is the best the Yes camp can manage, I'm not surprised people think the No lot are going to win :(

[momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com]

See?

This is why faffing about trying to get people warmed up is bad. Just 'You're wrong. This is right. End of.'

[marrog.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm so sick of the AV campaign's shitty campaigning.

[strange-complex.livejournal.com]

Thankfully, it looks like the official Yes campaign may at last be getting one thing right. Their second referendum broadcast has just appeared, and it's a re-filmed version of Dan Snow's coffee or pub video. Pity they didn't focus on the point it makes from the start (as you say). But let's hope too late isn't too little in this case.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

I'm 100% pro AV, but have mostly ignored the YES campaign since it's cringingly fucking awful and seems to be run by idiots with little or no idea of how to talk to the electorate.

I have been arguing AV to anyone that declares uncertainty. Whether that is helping, I do not know.

to answer your final question: no. it shouldn't even be on the list.