Voter ID

[Dawson Park Boy]

7 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Voter ID isn’t a topic I know much about but I haven’t heard of much fraud taking place in Scotland.
I have heard of fraud in certain Midlands and London areas but how prevalent it is, I don’t know.
However, in principle, I don’t think it should be too easy to vote as the right to vote is an important privilege and shouldn’t be looked on lightly.
At the risk of being branded ‘evil and a moron’ Ill state that I think it needs to be made such that at least some effort is required to exercise that privilege. We use postal voting but maybe that’s too easy and we should be made to attend in person unless we were away or through Illness.
Ideologically, I’m certainly not against any move to tighten things up.

You evil moron

Oh dear.

Back to abuse.

Says it all!

[Dawson Park Boy]

43 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Could anyone explain the merits of making voting more difficult?

Are there any other areas of civic life that we should make less convenient for absolutely no purpose whatsoever? How about making it so you can only pay your council tax in rubles?

In fact, one lesson from this election might be that turnout was higher because more folk were around on polling day, so maybe we should move to weekend voting like most of Europe does.

Weekend voting. Great idea.

[lichtgilphead]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

1) Voter ID isn’t a topic I know much about

2) but I haven’t heard of much fraud taking place in Scotland.

I have heard of fraud in certain Midlands and London areas but how prevalent it is, I don’t know.

However, in principle, I don’t think it should be too easy to vote as the right to vote is an important privilege and shouldn’t be looked on lightly.

At the risk of being branded ‘evil and a moron’ Ill state that I think it needs to be made such that at least some effort is required to exercise that privilege.

3) We use postal voting but maybe that’s too easy and we should be made to attend in person unless we were away or through Illness.

Ideologically, I’m certainly not against any move to tighten things up.

1) If you don't know much about it, why comment? Become informed, then post from a position of knowledge.

2) Try googling "marked register" and "Glenrothes by-election"

3) More checks are made on postsl votes than are made on voters attending in person. You need to provide a copy of your signature when you register for a postsl vote, and then sign a slip enclosed with your vote. The signatures are compared by both election staff & observers for the candidates. To vote in person, all you need to do is turn up & give your neme & address - you don't even need your polling card. No further checks are normally made.

I would suggest that it's the lamentable standard of your posting that leads people to call you a moron rather than any specific intent to abuse you.

[John Lambies Doos]

Oh dear.
Back to abuse.
Says it all!

It really doesn't. Try and have a sense of humour

[Merkie84]

Requiring people to have photo ID to vote , without providing photo ID for free is essentially making people pay to vote. 

Get it in the sea. 

[Michael W]

13 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

 

3) More checks are made on postsl votes than are made on voters attending in person. You need to provide a copy of your signature when you register for a postsl vote, and then sign a slip enclosed with your vote. The signatures are compared by both election staff & observers for the candidates. 

Interested in how this works where a 'suspect' ballot is identified. I assume that the vote is simply disregarded and is passed on for investigation? 

In the event the election was very close, and you had a number of suspect ballots that could potentially alter the outcome, would the result be declared or would it be on hold pending investigation? Probably highly unlikely to happen, right enough. 

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

 fact, one lesson from this election might be that turnout was higher because more folk were around on polling day, so maybe we should move to weekend voting like most of Europe does.

More than a few countries in Europe do also require voter ID tbf. I can see why people might be concerned how easy it is to commit electoral fraud, but there is no evidence at all it's an issue in the UK. If someone does have evidence then they had best present it. As far as I can see, it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Michael W

[Ira Gaines]

People still biting to Dawson's pish

[lichtgilphead]

6 minutes ago, Michael W said:

Interested in how this works where a 'suspect' ballot is identified. I assume that the vote is simply disregarded and is passed on for investigation? 

In the event the election was very close, and you had a number of suspect ballots that could potentially alter the outcome, would the result be declared or would it be in hold pending investigation? Probably highly unlikely to happen, right enough. 

There's a second element to the check - you also have to confirm your date of birth. In Scotland, I believe that more papers are rejected because the date of birth and/or signature is missing, rather than being incorrect.

My understanding is that the returning officer will adjudicate whether any suspect ballot is counted or not and will announce the result based on his decision. If a candidate wishes to object, he would need to go to court to get it overturned.

 

[Dawson Park Boy]

28 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

1) If you don't know much about it, why comment? Become informed, then post from a position of knowledge.

2) Try googling "marked register" and "Glenrothes by-election"

3) More checks are made on postsl votes than are made on voters attending in person. You need to provide a copy of your signature when you register for a postsl vote, and then sign a slip enclosed with your vote. The signatures are compared by both election staff & observers for the candidates. To vote in person, all you need to do is turn up & give your neme & address - you don't even need your polling card. No further checks are normally made.

I would suggest that it's the lamentable standard of your posting that leads people to call you a moron rather than any specific intent to abuse you.

Thank you for that.

Im afraid life’s too short to delve into all the minutiae of voting.

As I said, my wife and I have used postal voting for years which is very simple. If voting in person is even simpler, as you say, then why not require voters to show a passport or driving licence or some other means of identification to prove your authenticity. Actually quite shocked by how easy it is to vote in person without verification, as you outline.

Maybe there is quite a bit of fraud and it’s not picked up?

As I said earlier, the right to vote is an important thing and should be treated with due seriousness.

If someone can’t be bothered to follow the correct procedures, then they don’t deserve to have that privilege.

[G51]

You’d have to be a genuine dunce not to see that this is a brazen attempt to introduce further voter suppression.

Good news for armed insurrection accelerationists I suppose.

[GordonS]

23 minutes ago, Michael W said:

Interested in how this works where a 'suspect' ballot is identified. I assume that the vote is simply disregarded and is passed on for investigation? 

In the event the election was very close, and you had a number of suspect ballots that could potentially alter the outcome, would the result be declared or would it be on hold pending investigation? Probably highly unlikely to happen, right enough. 

 

How it is handled depends on the stage at which it's challenged and what the challenge is for. There would be an investigation, and each ballot paper has to have a number on the back that matches with the marked-up register - that's the list you see them looking up when you go to vote, and on which they write the number and score out your name when they give you your ballot papers. They can use that to check the vote was cast by the person listed. These cases do happen, usually when someone turns up to vote and gets told they've already voted, but they are fantastically rare. I've never known one to affect the outcome of an election.

Quote

More than a few countries in Europe do also require voter ID tbf. I can see why people might be concerned how easy it is to commit electoral fraud, but there is no evidence at all it's an issue in the UK. If someone does have evidence then they had best present it. As far as I can see, it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. 

The Electoral Commission has done stacks of work on voter fraud at every election for quite a long time now and the evidence is that it's miniscule. It's in the nature of the UK electoral systems that it's incredibly easy to cheat a small number of voters, but pretty much impossible to do it in a systematic way and not get caught. It's because it's so low-tech that it's very secure.

The two main ways are personation - where you turn up at the polling place and claim to be someone else - and postal votes. The system for PVs has been tightened and you couldn't have multiple PVs going to one address without it getting flagged up by the council.

I don't know the circumstances of the other countries that use voter ID so I couldn't comment. They use it in Northern Ireland where there's a solid justification for it, obviously. Some may just be suppressing their vote too, I don't know.

You're 100% bang on though - it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

[madwullie]

Maybe to reflect the seriousness of voting we could make it that only those who own a house can vote? Or possibly only those with a cock in their pants. I suppose that would cause yet more issues with self id though. Woke idiots. 

I mean I don't know anything about it, but christ knows it's far too easy to vote as it is. People fought and died on the beaches of Normandy so we can vote and now any old scruff can just wander up to a polling station and place a vote without even really thinking about it. Absolutely outrageous. I mean, I've not personally heard of any voter fraud (well apart from what I've read in the paper about the West Midlands and certain parts of London wink wink) but one things for sure, it needs tightened up. 

You absolute fucking moron. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by madwullie

[Michael W]

25 minutes ago, GordonS said:

How it is handled depends on the stage at which it's challenged and what the challenge is for. There would be an investigation, and each ballot paper has to have a number on the back that matches with the marked-up register - that's the list you see them looking up when you go to vote, and on which they write the number and score out your name when they give you your ballot papers. They can use that to check the vote was cast by the person listed. These cases do happen, usually when someone turns up to vote and gets told they've already voted, but they are fantastically rare. I've never known one to affect the outcome of an election.

The Electoral Commission has done stacks of work on voter fraud at every election for quite a long time now and the evidence is that it's miniscule. It's in the nature of the UK electoral systems that it's incredibly easy to cheat a small number of voters, but pretty much impossible to do it in a systematic way and not get caught. It's because it's so low-tech that it's very secure.

The two main ways are personation - where you turn up at the polling place and claim to be someone else - and postal votes. The system for PVs has been tightened and you couldn't have multiple PVs going to one address without it getting flagged up by the council.

I don't know the circumstances of the other countries that use voter ID so I couldn't comment. They use it in Northern Ireland where there's a solid justification for it, obviously. Some may just be suppressing their vote too, I don't know.

You're 100% bang on though - it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

It varies from country to country as one may expect. Photo ID in a lot of cases, seemingly. I didn't enquire further if this had to be a drivers licence or passport. 

I was at a course in Belgium at the time of the 2017 election with a number of people from the firm I work for's local offices. Many of them were astounded you didn't need ID to vote in the UK and thought this was a clear fraud risk. I don't know if perhaps there have been instances of that or maybe that's just the way it's always been done there, but many were shocked we didn't ask for it. I didnt bother trying to explain the NI situation here as it seemed like it would just cause confusion. 

It's a bit like the police situation as well, I guess, where the UK goes against the general trend and they are not routinely armed*, which surprises a lot of people. 

*again ignoring NI here. 

[Miguel Sanchez]

If you think about it, it's kind of surprising that something as important and voting can be done as easily as it is. You turn up, you give your address, you give your name, that's it. I could be anyone going into a polling station. I don't know what the methods are for monitoring actual voting fraud (it's probably more sophisticated than I'm imagining) but it seems like it could be easy to do.

That said, it's clear that this is a non issue and any government trying to introduce laws or regulations to counter something that isn't a problem are at it. Since we have a government comprised entirely of vermin it's obviously something that shouldn't happen.

[Steve_Wilkos]

What's the issue? If you have nothing to hide then there is nothing to fear - #fact.

[GordonS]

26 minutes ago, Michael W said:

It varies from country to country as one may expect. Photo ID in a lot of cases, seemingly. I didn't enquire further if this had to be a drivers licence or passport. 

I was at a course in Belgium at the time of the 2017 election with a number of people from the firm I work for's local offices. Many of them were astounded you didn't need ID to vote in the UK and thought this was a clear fraud risk. I don't know if perhaps there have been instances of that or maybe that's just the way it's always been done there, but many were shocked we didn't ask for it. I didnt bother trying to explain the NI situation here as it seemed like it would just cause confusion. 

It's a bit like the police situation as well, I guess, where the UK goes against the general trend and they are not routinely armed*, which surprises a lot of people. 

*again ignoring NI here. 

If they do electronic voting or counting (which are terrible ideas, btw) then identity becomes a much bigger concern. They may be countries where everyone has ID anyway, like France. But we don't - for example, only 52% of black adults in the Uk have a drivers licence and a very high proportion of that group won't have a passport either. 

Of course it's a fraud risk, but it's one vote. It's not a bank account. What's someone going to do with one vote?

And yes, Britain is still better than many countries at some things.

19 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

If you think about it, it's kind of surprising that something as important and voting can be done as easily as it is. You turn up, you give your address, you give your name, that's it. I could be anyone going into a polling station. I don't know what the methods are for monitoring actual voting fraud (it's probably more sophisticated than I'm imagining) but it seems like it could be easy to do.

That said, it's clear that this is a non issue and any government trying to introduce laws or regulations to counter something that isn't a problem are at it. Since we have a government comprised entirely of vermin it's obviously something that shouldn't happen.

You couldn't really be anyone, you'd need to give the name and address of someone who has 1) registered to vote 2) not already voted 3) hasn't got a postal vote. If you get number 2 or 3 wrong you're likely to be talking to a constable. If that person subsequently turns up to vote then your ballot will likely be identified and cancelled.

Even then that's one vote. If you go back into the same polling place again you run the risk of being identified. Say you manage to find details of one person per polling station (there are multiple stations in many polling places). You can maybe cast 50 votes in a constituency. You find 5 fellow crooks, and none of them blab or screw up, that's 300 votes in a constieucny. That's still not likely to affect a constituency.

But even if it does, it's just one constituency. Maybe you manage to get round 5 constituencies. Odds are incredibly slim that you'd change more than one constituency, and even then you're extremely unlikely to change a general election. And your chances of getting away with it are poor - how are you finding the details of all those people who you know are on the register but definitely aren't going to vote? The parties can do that through use of the marked-up registers, seeing who habitually never votes, but it's still a huge gamble and only a small number of people in each party could access all the information needed.

Because we do our voting manually, on pieces of paper, it's easy to steal a vote but effectively impossible to steal an election.

[Florentine_Pogen]

"If I am ever asked,” Boris Johnson once wrote of ID cards, “on the streets of London, or in any other venue, public or private, to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am, when I have done nothing wrong and am simply ambling along and breathing God’s fresh air like any other freeborn Englishman, then I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it in the presence of whatever emanation of the state has demanded I produce it.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/11/johnson-civil-libertarian-voter-id-card-fraud-tories?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[doulikefish]

Are they going to provide a free national Id card? And which tory owns a card printing company that will get the contract 

[Jambomo]

If they want an additional check then why not just tell people to take the polling card along as proof of residing in the address its delivered to? or proof of address of some kind? Voter fraud doesn't seem to be a massive problem though and this is very Trump-like in trying to cast doubt on the legitimacy of votes when there is nothing wrong in reality. 

[Juanhourjoe]

1 hour ago, Steve_Wilkos said:

What's the issue? If you have nothing to hide then there is nothing to fear - #fact.

We can also record who you vote for on these cards. And make it available for anyone to see. A more transparent election.