Got Your ID To Allow You To Vote

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

On 07/05/2023 at 17:15, Herman said:

 

Not sure what you're suggesting with this. An election rigged in favour of an independent candidate?

[Herman 9,820]

Better put this in here too just in case anyone thought that it was a good idea.

 

[Icecream Snow 762]

Same quote but shorter

 

[MooreMarriot 311]

News from Norfolk :

Norfolk 2023 elections: 667 voters turned away with no ID

 

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23523224.norfolk-2023-elections-667-voters-turned-away-no-id/

[KiwiScot 1,460]

1 hour ago, Icecream Snow said:

Same quote but shorter

 

Basically it doesn't matter that it might have been bad for the tories we wanted it and still do, but now it's after the fact we can use it critise others even though some of them are ourselves.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

On 13/05/2023 at 12:26, Herman said:

So inept that they can't even rig an election.

 

I still haven't seen any evidence to say the motive was to gerrymander the elections. Given that the case that it could work in the Conservatives favour made by those asserting it was gerrymandering in the first place was pretty weak, it's very clear that it hasn't worked in the Conservaitives favour at all, and the old method of gerrymandering involving moving boundaries is tried and tested, .I think it's far more likely that the motive was simply tightening up opportunities for fraud in line with most other democracies.

Edited May 15, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,820]

No, there isn't any evidence. Other than your boys Mogg and Cruddas saying the quiet bit out loud and actually admitting it.

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,192]

12 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I still haven't seen any evidence to say the motive was to gerrymander the elections. Given that the case that it could work in the Conservatives favour made by those asserting it was gerrymandering in the first place was pretty weak, it's very clear that it hasn't worked in the Conservaitives favour at all, and the old method of gerrymandering involving moving boundaries is tried and tested, .I think it's far more likely that the motive was simply tightening up opportunities for fraud in line with most other democracies.

Check out Jacob Rees-Mogg's comments 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

13 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

Check out Jacob Rees-Mogg's comments 

That means absolutely nothing given he's very much an outsider and in the bring back Boris Johnson camp.

[A Load of Squit 5,215]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That means absolutely nothing given he's very much an outsider and in the bring back Boris Johnson camp.

He was a cabinet minister when the law passed.

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

Of course they were attempting to gerrymander the elections - that was the only logical reason why they limited what sort of photo ID was acceptable, excluding those that a younger person / student say would likely have (rail cards and the like) acceptable everywhere else but allowing OAP bus passes. Duh!

It also however may well of worked, but to smaller extent than they hoped (they could of lost 1500 seats) - a youngster in front of me (with friends) didn't have appropriate ID and simply said I wont bother. Not going back home to find something else.

I've no concerns with ID albeit it solves a problem that didn't really exist - but now they've created a new one. I'm sure SKS will put it right alongside much else in 2024.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

43 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Of course they were attempting to gerrymander the elections - that was the only logical reason why they limited what sort of photo ID was acceptable, excluding those that a younger person / student say would likely have (rail cards and the like) acceptable everywhere else but allowing OAP bus passes. Duh!

It also however may well of worked, but to smaller extent than they hoped (they could of lost 1500 seats) - a youngster in front of me (with friends) didn't have appropriate ID and simply said I wont bother. Not going back home to find something else.

I've no concerns with ID albeit it solves a problem that didn't really exist - but now they've created a new one. I'm sure SKS will put it right alongside much else in 2024.

 

Rubbish. Are you telling me all of the rest of Europe has voter ID for the sake of gerrymandering? Why is the old tried and tested method of moving boundaries no longer any good for gerrymandering so that supposedly this is now the best method for 'gerrymandering' when it so obviously would not have the suggested effect in the government's favour? Let's remember it was purely opponents arguing that it would benefit the Conservatives in the first place, and they were clearly spectacularly wrong. 

Incidentally, given your citation of the youngster in the queue, is 'anecdotal' evidence now back on the menu now it suits you, mlud?

Edited May 15, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

He was a cabinet minister when the law passed.

And he wasn't saying it was gerrymandering when he was a cabinet minister. He's only saying it now he's in the boomdocks looking to destabilise Sunak.

[A Load of Squit 5,215]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

And he wasn't saying it was gerrymandering when he was a cabinet minister. He's only saying it now he's in the boomdocks looking to destabilise Sunak.

You really are stupid.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

34 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

You really are stupid.

No; you are. In fact, you're almost as stupid as you are repetitive.

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I still haven't seen any evidence to say the motive was to gerrymander the elections.

That's because the evidence is common sense.

And you don't have any.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

That's because the evidence is common sense.

And you don't have any.

Suggesting 'common sense' counts as evidence has to be the least common sense thing I've heard in a while.

Although, I would have thought common sense supports the notion that it wasn't gerrymandering given that there was no gain for the Conservatives from it, and the arguments that they would never really made much sense in the first place, which fits well with the lack of evidence supporting the gerrymandering assertion other than a discontented Conservative backbencher looking to undermine Sunak.

Edited May 15, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,820]

The geezer is arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

11 hours ago, Herman said:

The geezer is arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

He is doing everything he can to undermine Sunak.

Keep your enemies close etc

[SwindonCanary 455]

If you have not got a passport or driving licence you can't vote ! 

[Herman 9,820]

1 hour ago, SwindonCanary said:

If you have not got a passport or driving licence you can't vote ! 

Don't forget the bus passes. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

1 hour ago, SwindonCanary said:

If you have not got a passport or driving licence you can't vote ! 

Yes you can.

https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-photo-id-voter-authority-certificate

[KiwiScot 1,460]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/27/voting-changes-prompt-fears-among-electoral-staff-for-general-election

Basically saying while the May elections went ok in terms of Voter ID, there are signs that on a bigger scale it might not be, mainly due to staffing issues and additional paperwork needing filled in at the polling station and applying for the free voter authority certificate.

Good to know they are identifying the problems ahead of time

"Other changes due to come into force later this year include a shorter timetable for people to re-apply for postal votes, limits on how many postal and proxy votes one person may handle, and an extension to voting for overseas-based UK citizens."

You know what. Take the electorial register and compare it with registers of passports etc and everyone who doesn't have an ID write to them.

[Barbe bleu 832]

On 27/06/2023 at 09:20, KiwiScot said:

 

You know what. Take the electorial register and compare it with registers of passports etc and everyone who doesn't have an ID write to them.

Seems like quite a sensible idea.  I liked the idea of that emergency alarm on the phone being used though...

Edited September 11, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[KiwiScot 1,460]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/11/voter-id-in-england-led-to-racial-and-disability-discrimination-report-finds

More problems found. Doesn't sound that widespread, but it's stated while this didn't affect any council results they are concerned it could affect swing seats in a general election

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

1 hour ago, KiwiScot said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/11/voter-id-in-england-led-to-racial-and-disability-discrimination-report-finds

More problems found. Doesn't sound that widespread, but it's stated while this didn't affect any council results they are concerned it could affect swing seats in a general election

Yes - 

"MPs and peers on the all-party parliamentary group on democracy and the constitution will publish a report on Monday saying that the rules caused more harm than they prevented when they came into force in May, and will call for changes, including the acceptance of a greater range of ID documents.

"caused more harm than they prevented "

Seem like the correct epitaph for Brexit and this government.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

13 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

1 hour ago, KiwiScot said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/11/voter-id-in-england-led-to-racial-and-disability-discrimination-report-finds

More problems found. Doesn't sound that widespread, but it's stated while this didn't affect any council results they are concerned it could affect swing seats in a general election

 

Is there any rationale stated for that assertion? Along with the 'more harm than they prevented' line - the system was so open to abuse before that nobody could possibly know how much harm was prevented - it's either the report's yet another bit of grandstanding or the Guardian has cherry-picked criticisms for its own purposes.

I guess we'll see later today.

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Is there any rationale stated for that assertion? Along with the 'more harm than they prevented' line - the system was so open to abuse before that nobody could possibly know how much harm was prevented - it's either the report's yet another bit of grandstanding or the Guardian has cherry-picked criticisms for its own purposes.

I guess we'll see later today.

There was a lots of investigations before the ID change as to voter fraud  - very very little - only a handful of cases - postal voting was and is the more obvious place to look.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,588]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

There was a lots of investigations before the ID change as to voter fraud  - very very little - only a handful of cases - postal voting was and is the more obvious place to look.

Again, simply a reflection that the system was so loose that fraud was very unlikely to be detected.

Completely agree re postal voting though.

Edited September 11, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[KiwiScot 1,460]

On 11/09/2023 at 11:01, littleyellowbirdie said:

Again, simply a reflection that the system was so loose that fraud was very unlikely to be detected.

Not much new now the report is out. Warnings to increase variety of accepted IDs, assist councils in hiring election staff and for raising awareness. General feel from the reporting that the system has hindered more and reduced turn out. Again for me a pointless excercise.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/14/photo-id-voters-uk-cards-expansion-electoral-commisison-report

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66788130