A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority – Left Foot Forward http://ff.im/-CO8tt

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

According to @leftfootfwd, #AV was never about "fairer votes", it was about silencing dissent http://bit.ly/jqBnOs

Um… look at where has actually voted yes so far, would you? Camden, Islington, Haringey, Lambeth, Southwark (plus central Glasgow & Edinburgh & Cambridge). What that looks like to me is not a “progressive majority surrendering”, but a severe disconnect between a self-appointed liberal-left largely London political class & the rest of us, whether we’re on the liberal/left or not. Now until they recognize that, stop patronising us, stop dismissing us as “tribal” (pretty offensive in my book)& have a bit of humility, the “progressive” (if you want to call it that) cause is pretty much lost.

Seriously, THAT is your conclusion?

God, you really are deluded.

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

Web: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority http://bit.ly/mQn69j

“The referendum on the Alternative Vote was a once-in-a-lifetime chance to change politics for the better, and to mainstream red, green and liberal politics, and sideline Conservative.”

Come again?

Wasn’t this supposed to be about “fairer votes”?

Didn’t the YES campaign drone on and on about making people feel their votes would count?

No mention of any of this in your article.

The only regret you express appears to be that those of a different political persuasion to you might continue to be represented.

If AV was designed to serve the purpose to which you seem to have assigned it, it should be a cause of celebration to ALL voters that it is now dead in the water.

Congratulations: you’ve exposed yourself as the charlatan you are.

Or Emily, you might find that certainly in the cases of London and Glasgow, the yes vote has more to do with inner city deprivation. No one will know until the voters are assessed. Whether the progressive side is a majority or minority, sticking with the antiquated FPTP system is stagnant, if not regressive. Change is hard to swallow but as society changes its systems have to change with it.

Emily – Individuals vote not places. More individuals voted yes in some cosmopolitan areas where, in my experience, the melting pot of ideas and debate is often at its most challenging. I voted Yes in my sleepy rural market town for what it was worth.

If Britain is to find its way in the 21st century – a way that favours the majority population that is – more people are going to have to move out of the small c conservative comfort zone that is increasingly eroding our chances and step up to the plate of genuine change. Outdated political, economic and aristocrat friendly institutions make sense for a smaller and smaller minority every year. Their defence in narrow vested interests is literally destroying prospects for a prosperous majority future.

Also, I agree with 13eastie, this has never been for me about party politics, the reform was simply a means to have a fairer representation of ALL political views and social interests in parliament, whatever your beliefs & leanings, now or in the future. I despise that this referendum has become a political football and absorbed in self interest- on the left as well as right. There must be a equally weighted space for EVERYONE. PR all the way.

Dave, there are plenty of other “cosmopolitan” places outside London, you know. Why did they not vote the same way? People vote & not places? Yes, they do, but people in places often vote in similar ways, which is why there are few Tories in northern cities and few Labour voters in, say, Northumberland or the South West. Are you really saying the blatant pattern in ‘yes’ voting areas is mere coincidence?

Equally, Anon, I live in a “deprived” inner city district. There are plenty of those outside London & none of those have voted yes either. Unless you count the oh so deprived city of Cambridge, that is. Is it really convincing to suggest that the 20% of the electorate in Islington or the 18% in Lambeth who actually voted for AV were the most impoverished residents of those boroughs clamouring for electoral reform? Probably not.

I’m not saying that IS the reason, I was putting it forward as a suggestion, and you don;t have to be a deprived voter to see that there’s deprivation around you. But I am well aware that there are other parts of the country that are deprived. Alternatively it could be that London uses a system very similar to AV for their mayoral elections so its easy to understand why they wouldn’t have too much of a problem with AV. It could well be that Scotland rejected AV, not because they reject reform but because they champion PR, the system that MSPs chose to use last year for future elections, again, my point is, that until people are asked WHY they voted one way or the other, we don;t know – a No2AV vote does not equal yes2FPTP, for many a NO2AV was a yes2FPTP.

I think what put a lot of progressives off was Nick Clegg et al having the nurve to talk about shutting out the Tories given what he is propping up…

The fact is there never was a “progressive” majority in this country. It is nothing more than a minority scam by Guardian reading hypocritical middle class toffs.

There is however a majority of normal people who reallly dislike unpleasant and dishonest individuals like Rupert Read and his pointless ilk.

The people have spoken and it’s a good day for democracy…

I always thought that you decided who is the majority and who is the minority by counting the votes – anything else is the first step to…. (well you can complete the sentence)

I have to say that this piece is pretty extraordinarily misguided in my view. I supported the ‘Yes’ campaign but the scale of the defeat shows that no campaign, no amount of money, no better messaging could have won the day. The British people just didnt want to change the electoral system and that, I’m afraid, is that.

Will

Will Straw and I agree on something for once.

Wow I need to sit down now ;-}

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

I wqs listening to Ed M who said that there is an anti Tory majority and this isnt reflected in FPTP elections. This isnt quite right. There is a centre left majority in this country and it is refelcted in MPs. All but Tories and Unionists are left of centre. The problem is we dont behave like it. We, unlike the centre right, are fragmented. Its time to look for a realignment of the left

I’m sorry to see such a range of disappointing comments from right-wingers. This is a left-wing blog. Please go somewhere else if you wish to hate. K THX BYE.

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

er……. obviously what I meant was “a No2AV vote does not equal yes2FPTP, for many a NO2AV was a yes2PR…..” Either way, the shocking defeat of yes cannot be explained away by this, but I would think that the amount of money that funded each campaign, the fact it coincided with local elections, the bitterness towards Libdems DOES count for something. Lets not forget that if this vote had happened 3 weeks ago, the outcome could well have been a yes vote. People are incredibly fickle and CAN be swayed easily by grandiose claims/lies and increased visibility, advertising, etc. I don;t think the result proves much other than one campaign was better than the other – even if some of that campaign was based on fabrication.

Um… Matt Wooton – I hope you aren’t referring to me there?

If you are, why? Because I disagree? If so, I think that’s a good indication of why the “yes” campaign lost. Too many voters were simply dismissed instead of engaged with.

Anon 8/15: Agree with a lot of that, though still not the London point: I don’t think we can get away with saying that people outside certain London boroughs “understood” AV any less; that’s what I mean about being careful we don’t patronise people. But I absolutely agree that a vote against AV wasn’t necessarily a vote for FPTP: mine certainly wasn’t.

The problem with the yes campaign (for me) was that it didn’t really make its case: it relied on appealing to a notional “progressive” political majority instead of promoting AV as the best (impossible since it isn’t?) or at least a better system in a reasonably objective manner. It should have approached all voters left, right and centre. It should have tried to persuade its opponents instead of dismissing them as “conservative,”tribal” or “Tories”. It should have avoided the “all the cool kids” approach, trotting out Stephen Fry & Eddie Izzard or whoever. It should have disowned that nonsensical coffee/beer diagram. & most of all, its left supporters should have not tried to link it to opposition to the cuts, when the Lib Dems who were the referendum’s instigators were enabling the Tory government to make them.

But even then AV still wouldn’t be a very good system.

God, once again we get what we didn’t vote for.

I’ll leave you to dwell on the irony of that.

As a Scot, I’m worried about the collapse of Labour in a traditionally socialst country – are we just not trying hard enough?

A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: The awful feeling of Conservative h… http://bit.ly/iKHOPm

Hey @mattwootton – they're tearing you a new one for your hypocrisy and sour grapes at @leftfootfwd http://bit.ly/ktYxqY #No2AV #Yes2AV

Since @wdjstraw departed, @leftfootfwd has gone down the pan and it's actually a pity: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY

“we have failed – even though we know that we are in the majority, and the Conservatives and Conservative voters are in the minority”

You’re talking as if the “we” who supported AV = the “we” who go out and vote Labour, Lib Dem or Green. But plainly it doesn’t, or we’d have won the referendum yesterday.

You can’t present the success of the No campaign as a failure of the millions of Left and Centrist voters who went out and voted No. They, just as much as Tory voters, got what they wanted – they successfully prevented the adoption of AV.

It’s no use presenting ourselves as champions of democracy and then refusing to accept that a 69:31 defeat in a democratic referendum proves we’re in a minority on this issue.

(…though it is pretty excruciating to think that a parliamentary candidate rejected by the same 69:31 margin might well be celebrating a clear victory under FPTP…)

Emily – I agree with your last comment about the Yes campaign. It did fail to make the ‘democratic’ arguements for AV and did resort to a petty political fight. I thought the No campaign too was an insult. After all is said and done voters are supposed to be in charge of this country, not some bunch of plebs to be corralled and manipulated by whoever has the best contacts in the media or the most money to push its lines.

Real change is what I think we need – getting it is going to mean stepping out of some comfort zones. I’ll be watching what the Scots have done with interest!

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

This nonsense from @MattWootton on @leftfootfwd is a perfect illustration of why #Yes2AV was completely hammered: http://bit.ly/mws8CL

Your conclusion is that a campaign which wrote off 40%+ of the electorate as “against” would have done even better if it had focussed on the 60%-minus better?

Ridiculous. No wonder you lost, and deservedly so. You can’t win a referendum by ignoring the right.

“Progressive” is such a pointless, distracting tag that it is no wonder that it seems immediately to sound the death knell for any political project – though it keeps the bloggers happy. I do hope Mr Milliband will divorce himself absolutely from this ridiculous concept and try to build a sellable story based on some real constituency. How about “ordinary people” = people with no privileged access to the levers of political or economic power? But dump – dump! – the progressives (which, incidentally, used to be the banner under which Tories fought local elections in Scotland. Where are they now?)

This analysis is so flawed on so many levels.

- There is no ‘progressive majority’. It is a delusion brought about by adding the votes of all the parties who are not those you really dislike. But those parties’ leaderships are not representative of all their voters. Check out C2/D/E attitudes towards the death penalty, for example.

- Winning a referendum means winning 50% of the vote (appropriately enough for AV). How was this ever going to be achieved when anyone to the right of Vince Cable was excluded from the party? Compare and contrast with Cameron working with Reid, Beckett etc.

- Large parts of Labour is perfectly happy with FPTP because it delivers them majorities from time to time. Even to the extent that there is a ‘progressive alliance’, it is not the same as pro-AV.

- The Lib Dems are not a centre-left party. They are a centre party spanning centre-left and centre-right. That is why they are able to be in coalition with the Conservatives – there is a broad agreement on large sections of policy, especially around freedoms.

- The Yes campaign too often sounded like it didn’t believe in its case; that it would rather have been campaigning for PR. In so doing, it reinforced the ‘miserable little compromise’ message from No.

- AV, even if implemented, would not prevent a future Conservative government. The 1983 and 1987 elections would have produced even larger Tory wins under AV, and a Con-led government would have still been the most practicable result in 2010.

RT @leftfootfwd: A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY writes @MattWootton

I think you need to study your own “cognitive policy”. The result shatters the delusion that every vote that isn’t cast for a tory is a de-facto “anti-tory” vote.

If there were a majority interest in replacing the Government with “progressive” politics then Yes may still have lost but not by the huge scale that it did. The ever-present sub-text of the desire for 50% approval was entrenching of narrow 2-party partisanship AV deceitfully claimed to eliminate. A condescending ignorance of the genuine plurality of feeling that our pluralistic political system allows, born of tribal anti-tory sentiment.

Electoral reform has been damaged by the Lib-Dems accepting this 3rd rate system that benefits 2nd rate candidates, when this country already has regional election systems that are vastly more proportional, and much fairer than the abomination we were offered.

The worst damage is from the “once in a generation chance” narrative; a defeatists, and self-defeating strategy that sounded half-way between a sideshow Huckster and a suicidal ex-girlfriend’s emotional blackmail.

This harmful narrative was entirely generated by the Yes side, peddling what they know is a poor system with cheap and artificial ultimatums that have predictably become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

At least I live in Wales, where the Additional Member System delivers the best of both worlds: a local representative, and a nationally proportional Government. The chances of achieving that for the UK as a whole suffered not because people rejected replacing a bad system with another bad system, but because they weren’t offered anything worth having.

YES!!!!!

Great news. The overwhelming majority comprehensively rejected the miserable little compromise known as AV.

Now we can all enjoy the pathetic post mortem from the so-called ‘progressive majority’ who, once again, were desperately out of touch with public opinion.

Eddie Izzard, Stephen Fry, Caroline Lucas, Chris Huhne, Rupert Read….

Your boys took one hell of a beating.

Ed’s Talking Balls – I was in support of AV but once Izzard got involved that did it for me. I really don’t need people using their celebrity to sway my view. How stupid do the likes of these people think we are?

Even in this article the author asks “How many people in Britain describe themselves as left, Labour, Liberal, Green, or radical? Where were they all?”

I would argue that there are way less than the results show since the NO turnout was low because people knew that the YES were going to lose.

What this author doesn’t understand is the reason there is only one Green MP is because no one agrees with their views. It’s that simple. The polls show it and the sooner the likes of Rupert Read and his dishonest cohorts realise that, the sooner they can crawl back under whatever stone they came from and just leave us all alone.

And take that posh boy eco-toff Joss Garman with you when you go…

A “progressive” minority ignoring the majority (again). So thats “progressive” disconnect with the majority on;

Capital punishment
Immigration
EU membership
Prison sentencing
Abortion on demand
Electoral reform

And thats just off the top of my head. Just what do “progressives” agree with the majority on?

Too right, Anon E Mouse.

This article will be one of many, all bemoaning the ignorance of the British public. Sort of a mass wailing session, as these ‘progressives’ are forced to accept that other people are entitled to have a different point of view.

I cannot wait to see Chris Huhne’s face. It’ll be a genuine pleasure. As delighted as I am that FPTP has been retained, I am equally delighted to see the truly pathetic reactions of people trying to explain away the vote.

Put simply: you were wrong, the people knew you were wrong, you wasted a lot of time and money on this silly referendum and there are now lots of toys being thrown out of assorted Lib Dem prams.

Mr Mouse and Ed – so much anger. Perhaps you should take posh boy spoilt-toff Cameron’s advice and hug a hoody.

Dave Citizen – Not being a Tory voter it’s unlikely I’d start hugging hoodies and as for anger it’s not something I suffer from. Plus the drubbing Labour got gave me a great deal of pleasure.

As for the posh boy spoilt-toff Cameron, he is after all a Tory – what did you expect?

This blog has become an exercise in spin and delusion and it genuinely is great fun.

How anyone can present a situation as bad as the dire election results labour suffered May 5 is beyond me but it’s great when the least popular leader currently actually has the gaul to suggest it’s the start of a comeback.

I have admire Miliband for something I suppose…

Gall sorry

Not anger Dave, not at all. I’m very happy with the result of the referendum. 69% of the country is too. And seeing Miliband and Denham trying to spin a poor day for Labour into a good one made me chuckle as well.

As for the class warfare remark, go for it. It’s clearly a successful tactic for Labour, so no need to change a winning formula, I guess. All I would ask for is consistency, so that you direct your jibes at the shadow cabinet of millionaires too, in the interests of fairness.

Ed, in the interests of fairness, I think there is a difference between a millionaire who has worked hard to build up a small fortune and a bunch of old Etonians who have inherited large fortunes along with the unfair advantages that come with it. It seems some people just enjoy being lorded over.

Mr Mouse – if Labour continue on their current path under EM I expect to be voting for them. I thought the result in Scotland was particularly uplifting as it confirms there are lots of people in the UK who don’t like to be lorded over!

Why the assumption that AV would sideline the Tories? What have we got now? The Lib Dems supporting the Tories. If AV went through there could easily have been a pact between the Tories and Lib Dems at the next election.

It might also have had something to do with the fact that people simply didn’t want AV or FPTP at all. The vast majority of eligible voters didn’t vote for either of them. While there was plenty of energy emanating from both camps, the bottom line is, neither of these systems is particularly good, and they certainly won’t make one iota of difference to the way governance takes place in this country. just because it’s there, that doesn’t mean you have to vote for it or approve of it. You can lead a horse to water, and all that… And in this casse, both campagins failed to lead close to 60% of the electorate anywhere. It’s not that people don’t care. they’re just not that dumb. Coke or pepsi? what a choice…

And there was me thinking that the Milibands come from a very rich family and have benefited from a substantial inheritance. I must be wrong about that, and wrong too to think that Ed Balls went to private school and that Diane Abbott sent her son to one.

That’s more like it Ed – now you’re focussing on the distortions and imbalances that hold this country back – there’s hope for us yet.

Regardless of the systems and their merits, and those who have advertised them, one issue hasn’t been explored en-masse. We should be asking what it is the British public actually want from avoting system – whether AV, FPTP or even the Lib-Dem’s not-so-subtle long-term aim of PR.

If Brits want democracy, then surely we want Proportional Representation, the crudest form of “one man, one vote”. If it is practicality and pragmatism we strive for, then FPTP serves perfectly with its constituency-tailored constitution and easy way of electing MPs. If it is somewhere in between, the solution is not so clear. Additionally we have a significant moral issue to deal with. Is it “right” to want a system that ignores the majority of people’s opinions in exchange for one well-liked, strong candidate? In 1951, Labour won 600,000 more votes, yet lost 20 seats and their majority. Then again, in the case of AV, it is hardly “right” to use a pseudo-plural democracy where voters could get an extra vote for every ‘loser’ party they vote for either. One must consider whether PR be considered morally justifiable as well. Fringe candidates often decide the balance of power, the ramifications of which well outweigh the number of votes they ever received. Israel’s PR system for example, allows ultra-conservative Shas Party to win just 11 of the 120 seats, yet gain 4 major cabinet positions. Essentially, should this referendum be a moral choice – even if the less efficient system is the outcome? Or should it be one based on practicality? Ideally, we would choose both.

Indeed, it is undecided which system best combines true democracy and practicality – or if there is one at all. Winston Churchill said that democracy “is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time”. That is undeniable, and of course democracy is secure as the UK’s governing system. However, the way in which democracy is orchestrated won’t be totally secure until a satisfactory system is found and refined – one that eliminates the undemocratic elements of FPTP and the unfair elements of AV. I doubt that we’ll see it in David Cameron or Nick Cleggs’ lifetime. Hopefully though, the referendum will take us in the right direction.

Yes, like you Dave I’m keen on making life in this country fairer. Clearly, we differ regarding what methods we believe appropriate to achieve that end, but I would imagine that there are a number of things we’d agree on.

I do feel that we should be careful of painting a Tory bogeyman when it comes to wealth and greed, however. There are plenty of creeps right across the political spectrum and we shouldn’t just focus on some because they belong to a different political party.

@14 Matt Wootton (original poster)

“I’m sorry to see such a range of disappointing comments from right-wingers. This is a left-wing blog. Please go somewhere else if you wish to hate. K THX BYE.”

Everyone is on tenterhooks waiting for your lesson on humility and tolerance!

You’ve even been slapped down by Will Straw.

Perhaps you’re just talking garbage?

You don’t need post on a political blog if all you wanted was a circle-jerk.

Mr Wootton,
I don’t know if you were paying any attention a few days ago but Labour voters voted solidly against AV. Even 25% of Lib Dem voters voted against AV. And nobody cares how Green voters voted because there are so few of them.

Well done to Will Straw for saying it like it is. The simple fact is that the No vote was so massive that no single piece of NO campaign dishonesty, no relative lack of funding, no single cause could possibly explain it. AV was just utterly rejected by the People.

@11 I have to agree with Will – the people were asked and have expressed their opinion – it will be disappointing for those who wanted a yes but surely this is what democracy is about.

It was almost 2 votes to 1 in favour of NO to AV.

And the Tories hold more council seats than all the other parties COMBINED.

Your ‘progressive’ argument were rubbish and put forward with no conviction whatsoever.

Must try harder because no-one is buying it.

"A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority" | http://ow.ly/4PFWW | #UKpolitics #ConDem #Elections

Mike,

Wasn’t it more than 2:1 against AV?

The ‘progressives’ took one hell of a hiding. No-one was buying AV because the product was so awful and I’m far from convinced that simply trying harder will successfully sell similar terrible ‘progressive’ ideas to the public.

“But somehow, if not individually but collectively, we have failed – even though we know that we are in the majority, and the Conservatives and Conservative voters are in the minority.”

I you can’t see what is wrong with this sentence the it is no wonder you lost

A progressive majority has surrendered Britain to the conservative minority: http://bit.ly/ktYxqY #ConDemNation

What seems to be the problem with FPTP? It’s equal and fair in that everyone gets the same number of votes, 1, and each vote is weighted with an equal value. The fact that the person who wins the election doesn’t have an OVERALL majority shouldn’t be a problem – more people voted for him than any other candidate. AV is ‘a miserable little compromise’ after all, and I can understand why progressives and Left-Wingers who are in favour of electoral reform and generally some form of PR voted against it – the idea of Nick Clegg in future governments. I am personally in favour of FPTP, even over a genuinely proportionately representative system – not because i like ‘stability’ or tradition but because even small parties, with real policies and supporters can win seats under it but lunatic, extremist parties who could never realistically expand their base of support cant, but could under PR.

We must keep the fascists out at all costs

On the basis of what canvassing I did, and it was close down our way, the no vote was considerably boosted by ‘don’t knows’; people who started out the referendum saying they would probably vote ‘yes’ but switched to ‘no’ when the NO2AV campaign stepped up with various falsehoods – ‘it violates one man one vote’ (it doesn’t violate voter parity, which is the important norm) ‘it strengthens the BNP’ (no) ‘it hurts minority parties’ (no relative to the greens) ‘it would be expensive’ (nah, you can handcount it easy enough) ‘it’s complicated’ (if the Irish can understand it) – the volume of negativity meant that those voting anyway – it was a LibDem seat which went SNP, both YES2AV parties – opted for a No vote because they thought there was no smoke without fire and the status quo wasn’t that bad. Epic fail on the YES campaigns part, but I think it’s pretty clear to most of us that Will Straw is wrong; at least here, if the Yes campaign has been more active (and we less focused on our own elections) the ‘don’t know’ vote wouldn’t have been as strong.

Anyone who voted NO2AV to get YES2PR, you’re crazy; it’ll now never happen (not for years, anyway) whereas it could have been part of the next coalition deal one or two general elections from now if we’d adopted AV. The alternative vote is half of the PR-STV system (the STV half); I find it difficult to be unsympathetic towards the general public for their ‘ignorance’ if the so-called advocates of electoral reform are this stupid.

P.S. – Surely if ‘cognitive policy’ was a thing, there would be ‘non-cognitive policy’. Have to say the article reads as being a bit ‘non-cognitive’. Having gone into the referendum assuming it was in the bag you seem to be inclined to blame everyone else for it failing, including to the ludicrous point of asserting there was nothing wrong with the YES campaign, whereas the rest of us are happy enough with the idea that we all failed by not gutting the campaign leadership the second it looked to be going off the rails. Two obvious failings; the ‘this is the progressive vote’ message when a lot of right wingers would prefer AV as well (I remember thinking on election night, having seen him give a clear common sense defense of it, that Nigel Farage would have been a better choice to head the YES2AV campaign) and the ‘make your MP work harder message’ which isn’t a great, practical idea when the largest deliver networks in most constituencies are that of the party of the incumbent and most incumbents think they work pretty hard. Better would have been to stress the clear scope for a corruption in a system where you can guarantee re-election so long as a sizable enough minority will vote for you time and again (see Labour in Glasgow).

Wow. From this description “Material policies each have a cognitive dimension, often unconscious and implicit. This includes the ideas, frames, values, and modes of thought that inform the political understanding of the material policy” of what cognitive policy is from the cognitivepolicyworks website I have to say if the above is any indicator of your understanding of ‘ideas, frames, values and modes of thought’ at play during the referendum, respectfully I think you should look for another job.