I was pretty certain a few weeks ago that the only way to vote in the referendum on the voting system in May was for the Alternative Vote. But I'm not so sure now.
If your candidate comes first but only just, he could still lose when other votes are redistributed. So those having second or third votes counted have trumped your one vote. That doesn't seem fair to me.
Furthermore we have a democracatic system based on constituences electing a representative for their areas. It is blindingly obvious then, that if you have more than two candidates there is a high possibility that the winner could be elected with less than 50% of the votes. AV means you have extra votes to botch a candidate over 50% who can't get 50% of people to support him otherwise.
It seems to me that with AV the vote could be skewed by people voting to keep another candidate out much more easily than it can under FPTP. Therefore FPTP, under our system, seems fairer than AV. Of course there is the whole deate about Proportional Representation to have, but not now.
If I have the following candidates:
There is only one candidate I would want to vote for. I could never bring myself to vote for the others just because I can when I don't support them or their policies. I am therefore immediately disadvantaged by those who may vote for all seven, two or something in between.
It seems to me that tinkering with the system isn't going to suddenly make people want to rush out and vote if they don't already. It will just create a mirage that democracy has been reinvigorated because a candidate got over 50%. In other words it's a con, they just kept shuffling the pack until the magical 50% was reached.
I am still open to being convinced, but nothing I've heard from the Yes campaign has persuaded me yet. Indeed the Yes campaign are the ones who have made me wonder about voting yes to AV ironically.