Evidence of General Election Voting Fraud
Discussion
Kccv23highliftcam said:
Well I'm not paying for an ID card to vote when the current system works just fine at the ballot box thank you.
Postal voting, always has and always will be more open to fraud.
That's it.
Postal voting, always has and always will be more open to fraud.
That's it.
The only argument in favour seems to be:
"Something must be done. This is something. Therefore we must do this."
sidicks said:
My wife didn’t vote in the most recent election - how do we know that someone didn’t pretend to be her and use her vote?
That would mean somebody needing to know that she wouldn't be voting and pick a time when neither you or any of your neighbours were in the queue.A lot of time and effort for a single vote.
Quite simply, implausible.
mx5nut said:
That would mean somebody needing to know that she wouldn't be voting and pick a time when neither you or any of your neighbours were in the queue.
A lot of time and effort for a single vote.
Quite simply, implausible.
Except is isn’t, but it is unlikely. But, as explained, it is possible that there is more fraud taking place that no one currently knows about.A lot of time and effort for a single vote.
Quite simply, implausible.
You’ve still yet to explain why we shouldn’t have this (given how common Photo ID requirements are in other countries).
You’ve also failed to justify your claim that ‘we already have this’?
Kccv23highliftcam said:
Well I'm not paying for an ID card to vote when the current system works just fine at the ballot box thank you.
Postal voting, always has and always will be more open to fraud.
That's it.
Certainly postal voting is the bigger issue that needs to be addressed.Postal voting, always has and always will be more open to fraud.
That's it.
Don’t you already have a valid form of photo ID?
Who is proposing that you should have to pay for another one?
mx5nut said:
sidicks said:
My wife didn’t vote in the most recent election - how do we know that someone didn’t pretend to be her and use her vote?
That would mean somebody needing to know that she wouldn't be voting and pick a time when neither you or any of your neighbours were in the queue.A lot of time and effort for a single vote.
Quite simply, implausible.
You keep watch over chez Dick while l dress up as Mrs Dick. When you tell me the coast is clear, I'll nip down to the polling station sharpish and put the cross against ooh Jeremy Corbyn. Just make sure that Mr Dick doesn't catch sight of me and is unable to control his natural urges. Probably best if you bring a bucket of water and ear plugs - you know what a smooth talker he can be. I'll bring my old service revolver in case I have to put myself down.
sidicks said:
edh said:
You're really suggesting disenfranchising poor people who don't have a photo driving licence or passport? Shameful.
No, the shameful one would be you, suggesting that I’m proposing to disenfranchise anyone.Why couldn’t the government provide photo ID for those that request it?
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 8th March 12:17
edh said:
sidicks said:
edh said:
You're really suggesting disenfranchising poor people who don't have a photo driving licence or passport? Shameful.
No, the shameful one would be you, suggesting that I’m proposing to disenfranchise anyone.Why couldn’t the government provide photo ID for those that request it?
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 8th March 12:17
sidicks said:
At no point have I suggested the need for a national identify card system. Indeed, quite the opposite.
Oh dear, I seem to be doing the ignorant bile thing again?Kccv23highliftcam said:
Postal voting, always has and always will be more open to fraud.
Having never conducted postal voting fraud before, I'm guessing the process is that the person about to commit the crime has already received a ballot card, but before the election date they also register for postal voting?Once registered for postal voting they cast their vote for Labour and send it back.
However they also turn up on election day and vote Labour using the ballot card they received.
This allows an individual two votes for Labour.
Then is it correct that another version of this fraud is that an individual would register many names on to a postal vote and then cast a Labour vote on each one of those?
Personal ID would certainly help the matter to identify and place more of the liability on to the individual casting numerous Labour votes would it not?
It would be a harder process to defend oneself if your personal ID has been used, and that a personal ID would then have to match the individual on postal voting? Making it harder to simply submit a list of names.
sidicks said:
edh said:
Oh I see, you're suggesting a shameful waste of govt money.... it's one or the other
Shameful? To ensure that only those who are entitled to vote, do vote?What proportion of people do you think don’t already have valid photo ID, but do want to vote?
I think the onus is on you to quantify
a. The problem
b. The solution
& we can have an evidence based discussion on the cost/benefit of this proposal.
I'm proposing no change. No cost.
edh said:
I have no idea. I bet it is more than the number of fraudulent voters though...
I think the onus is on you to quantify
a. The problem
b. The solution
& we can have an evidence based discussion on the cost/benefit of this proposal.
I'm proposing no change. No cost.
An entirely reasonable position to take (and I agree that there maybe other issues that need to be addressed first - e.g. postal voting). However, the proposal is not mine, it is from the electoral commission, who have said:I think the onus is on you to quantify
a. The problem
b. The solution
& we can have an evidence based discussion on the cost/benefit of this proposal.
I'm proposing no change. No cost.
‘Our review of electoral fraud in the UK, which reported in January 2014, concluded that polling station voting in Great Britain remains vulnerable to personation fraud. There are currently few checks available at polling stations to prevent someone claiming to be an elector and voting in their name. We are concerned that polling station voting could become more vulnerable to fraud now that the electoral registration system has been tightened up.”
As above, ensuring that votes are only placed by those entitled to do so is important to ensure democracy is enacted (and seen to be enacted). What is the price of that?!
Edited by sidicks on Thursday 8th March 14:04
sidicks said:
Shameful? To ensure that only those who are entitled to vote, do vote?
We already ensure that. Already covered 
sidicks said:
What proportion of people do you think don’t already have valid photo ID, but do want to vote?
How many people would you be happy to stop from voting in your quest to solve a problem that doesn't exist? A rough number is fine.sidicks said:
An entirely reasonable position to take (and I agree that there maybe other issues that need to be addressed first - e.g. postal voting)
However, the proposal is not mine, it is from the electoral commission, which have said:
‘Our review of electoral fraud in the UK, which reported in January 2014, concluded that polling station voting in Great Britain remains vulnerable to personation fraud. There are currently few checks available at polling stations to prevent someone claiming to be an elector and voting in their name. We are concerned that polling station voting could become more vulnerable to fraud now that the electoral registration system has been tightened up.”
As above, ensuring that votes are only placed by those entitled to do so is important to ensure democracy is enacted (and seen to be enacted).
The Electoral Commission "proposes" nothing about ID cards in that statement. In fact, the quote contains nothing that even resembles a proposal.However, the proposal is not mine, it is from the electoral commission, which have said:
‘Our review of electoral fraud in the UK, which reported in January 2014, concluded that polling station voting in Great Britain remains vulnerable to personation fraud. There are currently few checks available at polling stations to prevent someone claiming to be an elector and voting in their name. We are concerned that polling station voting could become more vulnerable to fraud now that the electoral registration system has been tightened up.”
As above, ensuring that votes are only placed by those entitled to do so is important to ensure democracy is enacted (and seen to be enacted).
I know, more ignorant bile. Funny how the ignoranter I seem to become the more cleverer you look.
mx5nut said:
sidicks said:
Shameful? To ensure that only those who are entitled to vote, do vote?
We already ensure that. Already covered sidicks said:
What proportion of people do you think don’t already have valid photo ID, but do want to vote?
How many people would you be happy to stop from voting in your quest to solve a problem that doesn't exist? A rough number is fine.Turbotbloke said:
The Electoral Commission "proposes" nothing about ID cards in that statement. In fact, the quote contains nothing that even resembles a proposal.
Where did I say the Electoral Commission proposed ID cards? Clue: I didn’t!Turbotbloke said:
I know, more ignorant bile. Funny how the ignoranter I seem to become the more cleverer you look.
The statement goes on to say:‘We therefore recommended that there should be a requirement for electors across Great Britain to present an acceptable form of identification prior to being issued with a ballot paper and voting at the polling station. Similar requirements are already in place in Northern Ireland and several other comparable democracies”.
What do you think they were referring to?
sidicks said:
Turbotbloke said:
The Electoral Commission "proposes" nothing about ID cards in that statement. In fact, the quote contains nothing that even resembles a proposal.
I know, more ignorant bile. Funny how the ignoranter I seem to become the more cleverer you look.
The statement goes on to say:I know, more ignorant bile. Funny how the ignoranter I seem to become the more cleverer you look.
‘We therefore recommended that there should be a requirement for electors across Great Britain to present an acceptable form of identification prior to being issued with a ballot paper and voting at the polling station. Similar requirements are already in place in Northern Ireland and several other comparable democracies”.
What do you think they were referring to?
I know what they were referring to, I'd already read the rest of the report. It was me that first introduced it to this thread. But you, you didn't quote the bit you said proposed ID cards and so you're wrong. As usual. HTH
[/sidicks mode]
Irritating, isn't it?
Turbotbloke said:
I know what they were referring to, I'd already read the rest of the report. It was me that first introduced it to this thread. But you, you didn't quote the bit you said proposed ID cards and so you're wrong. As usual. HTH
Irritating, isn't it?
I clearly wasn’t wrong. But yes, You are extremely irritating, repeatedly pretending I’ve said something entirely different to what I’ve actually said. But others can see this too.Irritating, isn't it?
No doubt you’ll be banned again soon.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff