Friday, 8 April 2011
Twix gives two fingers to Mars
On last night's Question Time there was a discussion on AV voting. The example given was if you sent someone to buy you a Mars bar, but they didn't have any, then you'd rather they came back with a Twix, than nothing at all.
Is that right?
If you vote for Labour, but they don't win, you can console yourself that the Greens are in?
Swinson was using this Twix/Mars example that has become a sort of unofficial explanation for AV, but I think she phrased it badly.
I think its supposed to go 'Get me a Mars, or if no Mars a Twix, or a Double Decker or a packet of Cheesey Whatsits, or anything with a crispy shell but if they've only got nougat based chocs, forget it!
At the risk of unleashing the forces of the converted, pointing out my stupidity, is this really right? The preference that is listed is the preference that is accorded. No choices count twice? Its not 49% of people wanted Mars, there wasn't any, but when they added in the people who wanted a Twix first and Mars second , they decided to go to another confectioner and everyone got a Mars, even those that wanted a Twix?
Not being facetious. Just haven't paid much attention as I'm party bound to vote NO.
Of course if there was an advantage to BQMP in voting yes.....Well i'm fanatically loyal, not stupidly so..
It seemed to cause some confusion in the comments last night too..
Philipa said... Twix & Mars:
If I sent you to the shop and asked you to get a Mars but if they didn't have one asked you to get a Twix then that would be OK because I'd still have a chocolate bar.
ie. any MP is just as corrupt and a lying XXXXbag as any other - it doesn't matter who you vote for.
Nick Drew said... OK. Under the terms of the Treaty of Unslicker 2011:
1) HMS Quango to sail up the Tagus and deliver 4 billion Mars Bars and a consignment of Wellington Boots;