In response to my piece criticising Charlotte Vere, earlier today. Read UP from the bottom to the top, to follow the correspondence:
AV...will lead to pandering to extremist parties like the Greens and BNP by mainstream politicians.
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Rupert Read <email@example.com> wrote:
yes, but he DOESN'T want AV! he wants PR. those are the facts.On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:10 +0000, "Guy Fawkes" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Nick Griffin wants electoral reform.On 17 Feb 2011 15:00, "Rupert Read" <email@example.com> wrote:
> dear Guido;
> (1) The BNP are AGAINST
> AV:  http://isupportav.co.uk/2010/11/the-bnp-are-campaigning-against-av . AV would be disastrous for the BNP, because the BNP
> only get elected under FPTP when people don't know who to
> tactically vote for to beat them. Under AV, lower preferences
> combine against them and invariaby would defeat them.
> (2) You can call us Greens 'extremists' if it floats your boat, but it would
> be helpful if you were to address the substantive point I make:
> that Vere is tacitly and pretty-disgracefully misrepresenting
> Greens as closet-BNP supporters. Which is just ridiculous: there
> is virtually no overlap between Green and BNP support, virtually
> no overlap whatsoever between our policies and politics (which
> can't be said for example of the UKIP-BNP nexus, where there is
> quite a bit of common ground.).
> best, Rupert.
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:25 +0000, "Guy Fawkes"
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I think it would be a disaster if extremists like the Greens
> and BNP benefited from AV.
> Ask yourself why the Greens and BNP are in favour of AV?
> Because they know it will boost their chances.