'The proposed wording for the question in the referendum on changing the UK voting system needs to change, the Electoral Commission says.
Some people - "particularly those with lower levels of education or literacy, found the question hard work and did not understand it" - its report says.
The watchdog says the structure, length and the language used made the question "harder to read than it needed to be".
The final wording of the question is a matter for the UK Parliament.'
Wow the wording must be really complex, maybe it includes the exact way that AV systems work? Well no:
'The proposed wording for the question at the moment is: 'Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the "alternative vote" system instead of the current 'first past the post' system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?Two points; first ss the second wording much, if at all, clearer than the first and second if someone doesn't understand either question then should they be allowed to vote? The natural extension of this second point is that all electors should have to sit a short economics, history, mathematics and English test to see if they are intelligent enough, and have enough knowledge of the historical context to issues, to be allowed to vote. This is of course in addition to my 'no representation without taxation' rule. So long as the unemployable, dispossessed and intellectually challenged can vote on a par with taxpayers and intelligent human beings, this country will have to fear a return of the Labour party to power and that must not be allowed to happen.... (Only slightly tongue in cheek).
The Electoral Commission's suggested redraft is: At present, the UK uses the 'first past the post' system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the 'alternative vote' system be used instead?'
5 comments:
in my opinion, you would fail that test, notasheep.
nice eugenics-based argument as well. you could have gone the whole way and said "only white people with lots of money can vote, just like the good old days!" the fact that you said 'slightly toungue in cheek' must mean that you know you're being elitist and you think that that is fine.
i suggest you get in contact with nick griffin, his party needs some intellectual big hitters like yourself and i'm sure you'd fit straight in.
Ah the anonymous poster with the ready insult, how lovely.
Do you even know what eugenics is? From your comment it would seem not.
Oh and straight to the equating my views with racism and suggesting I join the BNP.
Trolls are not welcome here, so please go play elsewhere.
you're correct, i didnt mean eugenics, i meant to type 'elitist'.
but you don't like the insult? you spend all your time writing very bias and hateful insults, often full of bullshit, about public figures that you dont like! you compare gordon brown to stalin! but thats ok because he's a public figure? ok - so its ok for you to call gordon brown a mass murderer and dictator because he's a public figure, but its not ok for me to call you a far-right political theorist, even though you are in the top 100 right wing blogs and BNP members probably read some things in the top 100 right wing blogs, so you've got some crossover appeal, but its not ok for me to insult you because you're not a public figure. i mean, that is the difference, right? theres no other difference between you and gordon brown, other than he's a mass murderer and you're not a racist?
oh but actually you ARE a public figure because you write a blog for public consumption, in fact you WANT public consumption because other wise it just makes this a pretty dusty place where you just rant and rant to nobody.
What is wrong with being elitist? Would you rather the most intelligent and able rose to the top of professions or would you rather it was on a quota system?
I have never suggested that Gordon Brown was a mass murderer. My comparison of Gordon Brown to Josef Stalin was based on his control-freakery and love of surveilance systems and power amongst other factors.
I have no problem with calling me a right-wing political theorist, although I wouldn't claim to be such. However I do have a problem with you implying that I am a racist. If you knew me you would realise quite how far from the truth that is and quite how insulting.
I doubt that more than 1 in 500,000 people in the UK have even heard of this blog so I doubt that I am in any way a public figure. I would guess that the proportion who have heard of Gordon Brown is somewhat higher.
re my point about why I have compared Gordon Brown to Josef Stalin, here's something I wrote in another recent piece: 'The need to monitor everything and know everything has been a feature of left wing regimes from Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Honecker through Gordon Brown & his team of control freaks to the frankly scary Barack Obama.'
Gordon Brown mass murderer - No, control freak - Yes
Post a Comment