Evidence of General Election Voting Fraud
Discussion
Challo said:
I dont get the point around disenfranchising voters? In this day and age how many people dont have a passport, driving licence, or even a utility bill to somehow prove who they say they are?
Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
It is possible to not have any form of photo ID, there was a solution to this, what happened to the ID cards that Labour were introducing?Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
Perhaps there's an argument for making it possible to get photo ID that isn't a passport or a driving license and that doesn't cost what they cost, but there's no argument that it should be possible to vote just by turning up and making claims that are unverifiable. There's no point enfranchising small numbers of people when it allows many more people to undermine their vote. There are currently no checks on the electoral roll, so I can add myself at home and at another 10 or so addresses that I have access to and then get postal votes at all of them as well. It's nonsense.
The whole story is driven by Labour's historic gerrymandering and their opposition to that being rolled back for political rather than principled reasons.
Off-topic but there's so much joined up identification data held via the Government Gateway, including verified photo cross-referencing between passport and driving licenses, that ID Cards pretty much exist now, just not the physical card bit. The benefits of getting this all joined up and working would be huge, both in terms of ease of access to public services, joined-up state understanding of society and in reduced administration costs.
ZedLeg said:
Challo said:
I dont get the point around disenfranchising voters? In this day and age how many people dont have a passport, driving licence, or even a utility bill to somehow prove who they say they are?
Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
Poor people, why bother paying for a driving license or passport when you can't afford to drive or go on foreign holidays? Since when has a utility bill been photo id?Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
It will disenfranchise people, handily the type of people who wouldn't vote tory anyway. I wonder what the May's reasoning for this was.
ZedLeg said:
Challo said:
I dont get the point around disenfranchising voters? In this day and age how many people dont have a passport, driving licence, or even a utility bill to somehow prove who they say they are?
Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
Poor people, why bother paying for a driving license or passport when you can't afford to drive or go on foreign holidays? Since when has a utility bill been photo id?Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
It will disenfranchise people, handily the type of people who wouldn't vote tory anyway. I wonder what the May's reasoning for this was.
sidicks said:
ZedLeg said:
Poor people, why bother paying for a driving license or passport when you can't afford to drive or go on foreign holidays? Since when has a utility bill been photo id?
It will disenfranchise people, handily the type of people who wouldn't vote tory anyway. I wonder what the May's reasoning for this was.
To reduce voting fraud. HTHIt will disenfranchise people, handily the type of people who wouldn't vote tory anyway. I wonder what the May's reasoning for this was.
What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
ZedLeg said:
Of course it is, it would be pure conspiracy to suggest she'd try anything to claw back the majority she threw down the s
tter last year 
.
It would be worth giving the photo ID thing a go for the next GE just to see what the conspiracy loons come up with next to explain any shift towards Labour tter last year .98elise said:
ZedLeg said:
Challo said:
I dont get the point around disenfranchising voters? In this day and age how many people dont have a passport, driving licence, or even a utility bill to somehow prove who they say they are?
Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
Poor people, why bother paying for a driving license or passport when you can't afford to drive or go on foreign holidays? Since when has a utility bill been photo id?Do Labour somehow claim that there voters dont have simple photo ID?
It will disenfranchise people, handily the type of people who wouldn't vote tory anyway. I wonder what the May's reasoning for this was.
paulrockliffe said:
Off-topic but there's so much joined up identification data held via the Government Gateway, including verified photo cross-referencing between passport and driving licenses, that ID Cards pretty much exist now, just not the physical card bit. The benefits of getting this all joined up and working would be huge, both in terms of ease of access to public services, joined-up state understanding of society and in reduced administration costs.
So there's the answer in a nutshell - poling stations are provided with laptops and bar code readers and voting forms have a barcode on them. Voter presents themselves, the barcode is scanned and the poling officer gets immediate visual confirmation of the voters ID from whichever database has it. For those not on a database, the voting form has a nice easy instruction in big, bold print that says that they do have to bring formal ID with them.Similarly, postal vote duplicates are avoided by the simple expedient of only allowing one voting opportunity per NI number.
I'm happy to quote for the implementation of this - bargain price of £5billion. I can start tomorrow
mx5nut said:
Despite there being no evidence of any that would be stopped with photo ID other than tabloid hysteria.
What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
The proposals are trying to preserve / enforce democracy, which bits are you struggling to understand?What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
Despite there being no evidence of any that would be stopped with photo ID other than tabloid hysteria.
What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
The proposals are trying to preserve / enforce democracy, which bits are you struggling to understand?What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
mx5nut said:
Taking away some peoples' ability to vote without unnecessary red tape, expense and bureaucracy makes things less democratic. Do keep up, this isn't hard to understand.
Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
‘Unnecessary red tape”? You mean being able to prove who you are?Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
Despite there being no evidence of any that would be stopped with photo ID other than tabloid hysteria.
What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
The proposals are trying to preserve / enforce democracy, which bits are you struggling to understand?What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
CambsBill said:
paulrockliffe said:
Off-topic but there's so much joined up identification data held via the Government Gateway, including verified photo cross-referencing between passport and driving licenses, that ID Cards pretty much exist now, just not the physical card bit. The benefits of getting this all joined up and working would be huge, both in terms of ease of access to public services, joined-up state understanding of society and in reduced administration costs.
So there's the answer in a nutshell - poling stations are provided with laptops and bar code readers and voting forms have a barcode on them. Voter presents themselves, the barcode is scanned and the poling officer gets immediate visual confirmation of the voters ID from whichever database has it. For those not on a database, the voting form has a nice easy instruction in big, bold print that says that they do have to bring formal ID with them.Similarly, postal vote duplicates are avoided by the simple expedient of only allowing one voting opportunity per NI number.
I'm happy to quote for the implementation of this - bargain price of £5billion. I can start tomorrow
There's nothing so disenfranchising as having to go out of your way to vote surely?
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
Taking away some peoples' ability to vote without unnecessary red tape, expense and bureaucracy makes things less democratic. Do keep up, this isn't hard to understand.
Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
‘Unnecessary red tape”? You mean being able to prove who you are?Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
mx5nut said:
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
Despite there being no evidence of any that would be stopped with photo ID other than tabloid hysteria.
What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
The proposals are trying to preserve / enforce democracy, which bits are you struggling to understand?What's wrong with our democracy that makes some here hate it so much?
Perhaps you'd care to share some examples of recent votes that would have been more democratic if everybody had produced photo ID before going in to the polling booth?
I too am suspicious as to the merit of this particular method to do it though - especially when it's something that not everyone has access too - that seems as unfair as deliberate fraud, but I'm equally suspicious of any 'papieren bitte!' style of big govt. initiative, so would be loath to go down that road also.
However knowing human nature as we do, it's hard to deny that if a system is able to be tricked, it most definitely will where there is advantage and incentive to do so.
I do think in this modern era that it should be easy enough to find a better identification system within all the existing identification systems to eliminate multiple vote/postal vote abuse but rather like govt.IT-think, they're probably off the mark in this instance..
just in case anyone thinks I'm making it it about Bradford
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1524561...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/uk_national_...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1147319...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1468020..._39_good_look__39__at_Sir_Eric_Pickles__39election_fraud_report/
a common theme of course (if you handed guessed it) is:
"Tory former minister concluded that political correctness had led the Government to turn a blind eye to corruption in local government.
Mr Pickles, from Keighley, said pressure was being put on vulnerable members of some ethnic minority communities to vote according to the will of elders, especially in communities with a Pakistani or Bangladeshi background.
“There were concerns that influence and intimidation within households may not be reported, and that state institutions had turned a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion,” his report said."
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1524561...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/uk_national_...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1147319...
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/1468020..._39_good_look__39__at_Sir_Eric_Pickles__39election_fraud_report/
a common theme of course (if you handed guessed it) is:
"Tory former minister concluded that political correctness had led the Government to turn a blind eye to corruption in local government.
Mr Pickles, from Keighley, said pressure was being put on vulnerable members of some ethnic minority communities to vote according to the will of elders, especially in communities with a Pakistani or Bangladeshi background.
“There were concerns that influence and intimidation within households may not be reported, and that state institutions had turned a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion,” his report said."
paulrockliffe said:
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
I've not even taken so much as a polling card along the last few times - never had a problem proving who I am.
How did you prove who you were?
Has there been any actual proof of widespread electoral fraud? the linked articles have a lot of reports and allegations but seem a little light on actual evidence.
austinsmirk said:
Mr Pickles, from Keighley, said pressure was being put on vulnerable members of some ethnic minority communities to vote according to the will of elders, especially in communities with a Pakistani or Bangladeshi background.
“There were concerns that influence and intimidation within households may not be reported, and that state institutions had turned a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion,” his report said."
How would demanding ID stop this happening?“There were concerns that influence and intimidation within households may not be reported, and that state institutions had turned a blind eye to such behaviour because of ‘politically correct’ over-sensitivities about ethnicity and religion,” his report said."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff