No one is perfect, but if someone is sincere and sticks to their guns they can at least be given credit for that.
Alas the board of #No2AV.
Producing posters that even as a parody would have been thought 'over the top'.
http://order-order.com/2011/02/15/no-holds-barred/ - "Vote no to AV or the Baby gets it"
The compromised principles of Charlotte Vere - back in December she thought domain squatting (yes2av.org) was not great, but as long as it didn't lead to any content then it could not be 'deceitful'.
How her tone has changed, supporting the no campaigns refusal to hand over the domains, and supporting their ongoing redirection of 'yes2av' domains to 'no2av' content.
The highly dubious position of Matthew Elliott who left the TPA (Tax Payers Alliance) to lead the 'No' campaign - having founded and built the TPA and presented it as a force for fair taxation in a democratic society, he is now running a No2AV campaign saying that democracy has a price on it, and £250 million is too much. The Yes2AV campaign claim this is more than twice the likely cost, but either way, what price democracy to the founder of the TPA?
I am no fan of taxation - but one of the things that the state certainly does have to provide the machinery of democracy - if we can't afford that then we don't have a viable democracy at all.
What induced these two to change their positions (on squatting and on what taxation is for)? I think we should be told!