On 07/05/2011 19:34, Old Codger wrote:
On 07/05/2011 18:30, Roger Mills wrote:


Do you have a copy of the booklet produced by the independent Electoral
Commission (not to be confused - as even my MP appeared to do - with the
partial Electoral Reform Society) and circulated to all households?

Not to this household it wasn't. Since this is the first time I have
heard it mentioned I suspect that I am far from being the only household
not to have received a copy.


Mine was brought by the postman - un-addressed. Maybe if you've opted
not to receive un-addressed mail. . . but things like that are supposed
to get delivered despite any such opt-out.

If so, turn to Page 5 and read the bit where it says:
"You can choose how many candidates to rank.You don't have to rank every
candidate. As long as you rank at least one, your vote will be counted"

OLD CODGER, PLEASE NOTE!!

Noted. That is what I would expect for the small print. The Liberals
would have ensured that the impression would be that all candidates had
to be ranked. Those words in the small print would be their get out
clause (see other post tonight).


The paragraph I quoted is in the same sized font (looks like 14pt)as the
rest of the leaflet - hardly small print!

[1] though, sadly, not savvy enough to see the merits of AV in
sufficient numbers! g



If anybody has been brainwashed it seems to me it has to be the pro AV
folk. How anyone can consider AV to be a fair voting system, or even
fairer than FPTP, is beyond me. I think I have read all the pro
arguments in this thread and they just don't hang together.


How do you explain the fact that, up to a few weeks before the
referendum, the opinion polls were showing a 10 point lead for the YES
camp? What changed in the meantime?
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.