On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:53:43 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article ,
Mark wrote:

What we have now is where a few voters in a few marginal
constituencies decide the government. The rest of the population get
virtually no say. AV is not perfect but it's a lot better than what
we have now.

This is a foolish specious argument.

So anything you don't agree with is foolish and specious then?

The seats are "safe" because a lot
of people bothered to turn out to vote in them.

No. Seats are safe because some people turned out to vote for them
and fewer people for the other candidates. Many people do not bother
to vote at all, especially in a "safe" seat.

That's those who you are
referring to as "the rest of the population", above. And guess what - in
those seats someone probably gets more than 50% of the vote. I thought
that was what you wanted.

Some seats do get more than 50% of the vote and they are not all safe
seats. Many safe seats get a lot less than 50% of the vote.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.