Dennis Pilon pillories the NoSTV campaign for spin-doctoring and fear-mongering
On their overall approach:
Their advantages? Ruthlessness, campaign experience, media framing savvy and a recognition that in politics truth is less important than what people can be led to believe.?
And the No STV crew, themselves all veterans of major party campaigning, understand how to toss political bombs into the public discourse in such a way that reasonable public discussion becomes impossible.?
On how NOSTV has argued on results for women:
As demonstration of their techniques in research, in an April 17 press release they decried Yes STV attempts to highlight possible progress for women with STV by citing claims from two female politicians that STV has not produced results for women. But both women turned out to be on the No STV board of directors and neither had any credentials in research questions about women's representation. In other words, No STV cited themselves as the experts to back up their claims. Well, that makes things easy!
And on the credibility of NOSTV:
What people need to understand is that No STV is a political organization. Their claims about STV or the current system make no sense in light of what we know about comparative elections and institutions across western industrialized countries. There is a reason it is getting harder and harder to find ‘experts' willing to endorse our existing FPTP voting system -- the present system is largely indefensible by any democratic criteria we might fashion. But No STV's arguments make sense when we understand them as part of a political battle to keep the status quo power arrangements in place.
It would be tragic if Dr. Pilon's eloquent commentary on the STV debate became the euology of electoral reform in Canada.?
If you want proportional representation, vote yes to BC-STV.