To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 25180
25179  |  25181
Subject: 
Re: "In order to do a proper count one has to know how many people voted in the first place."
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:18:38 GMT
Viewed: 
1793 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
   Postal votes have been used in the UK for yonks. However, they have been used recently as a tool to improve voter turnout. This has led to three problems:

We’ve got Absentee Ballots, but they’re primarily aimed at those who either can’t be in their district on voting day (such as deployed troops), or can’t reasonably be expected to travel to their voting place (such as the elderly or handicapped). I don’t believe there are any current requirements that you not be able to vote in person to qualify for an AB.

   Party workers have been “assisting” voters with the paperwork.

Yup, we’ve had that, but not always even restricted to ABs. Some polling places have reportedly had “assistants” standing by to “help” anyone who might be having difficulty figuring out who to vote for.

   Within some ethnic minorities and workplaces there has been a great deal of coercion.

Again, we’ve had that, and not limited to ABs. Even as late as the 2000 election I believe there were reportedly some districts where minorities were “discouraged” from entering their assigned voting location. And there are probably bosses out there who will decide whether to let an infraction slide or not based on your announced voting intentions. They can’t fire you outright for voting “wrong,” but they can probably find a more legitimate reason to fire or penalize you if they really work at it, and depending on the specific reason, it could be very difficult for you to prove that it was really based on voter discrimination.

   Outright fraud: “A councillor was allegedly seen sorting through ballot papers in a car park and a postman was offered £500 for his sack of postal votes”

I don’t think any voting fraud quite approaches that of Chicago, where “the dead vote twice,” but I’m sure there are still a lot of voting districts where dishonest poll supervisors weed out non-compliant votes. Hopefully such action is fairly evenly matched on both sides of any election so their actions will cancel each other out, or the vote is so disproportionately skewed to one side as to render all such actions pointless (like weeding out Dem votes in Texas, or Rep votes in New York).



Message is in Reply To:
  "In order to do a proper count one has to know how many people voted in the first place."
 
(...) Postal votes have been used in the UK for yonks. However, they have been used recently as a tool to improve voter turnout. This has led to three problems: Party workers have been "assisting" voters with the paperwork. Within some ethnic (...) (20 years ago, 6-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR