Thanks for this, you're post just reminded me to go and vote.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Standard stuff from someone who is presumably quite religious. Go to any church or mosque or whatever and you'll probably find a majority share his views.
Not in Alabama they don't
Can this guy keep a single promise.
I'm old school. I still like the feeling of placing my ballot paper in the ballot box. I know that sounds sexual but is not meant to be.
The butterfly effect in motion.
Yeh me too!
By the way how does the postal vote photo ID (proof) stuff work?
Thought the whole point was the comparison between the person voting (in real time)and their photograph on a Passport or Driving licence, or other authorised document etc
Thankfully it's a declining proportion, but he is of course entitled to his views. It's his constituents who will decide how those views sit with them.
No photo ID is required for a postal vote.
Ok, thanks, just curious...
However, when you think about it that doesn't seem to make much sense?
If you turn up in person you need a photograph on an official form so they can compare, and confirm its you, actually voting, but with a postal vote presumably they take as proof its your actual vote if it has your name and number on it, and therefore accept anything that's sent in whether its your vote or not???
Sure I must have misunderstood but on the face of it the phrase "unable to organise a pi** up in a brewery" does come to mind
Ok, thanks, just curious...
However, when you think about it that doesn't seem to make much sense?
If you turn up in person you need a photograph on an official form so they can compare, and confirm its you, actually voting, but with a postal vote presumably they take as proof its your actual vote if it has your name and number on it, and therefore accept anything that's sent in whether its your vote or not???
Sure I must have misunderstood but on the face of it the phrase "unable to organise a pi** up in a brewery" does come to mind
Voter ID in its current form is a voter suppression measure. It makes a lot more sense when you have 16 or so valid forms of ID for voters over 60, and very few for younger voters. Voter fraud was practically non-existent.
If any government issued a free photo ID card to all adults that could be used for voting, I would have no complaints.
For some people a zero hour contract works for them, having a choice makes sense, but no one should be forced or intimidated in to having them
I understand (I think) what you are getting at, that for younger eligible voters there is less official formats they can use to establish their identity, but that doesn't answer the question about authenticity of postal votes, for old or young?
Voter suppression laws don't have to make sense, they're only there to make it harder for young people and poor people to vote.Ok, thanks, just curious...
However, when you think about it that doesn't seem to make much sense?
If you turn up in person you need a photograph on an official form so they can compare, and confirm its you, actually voting, but with a postal vote presumably they take as proof its your actual vote if it has your name and number on it, and therefore accept anything that's sent in whether its your vote or not???
Sure I must have misunderstood but on the face of it the phrase "unable to organise a pi** up in a brewery" does come to mind
I understand from what @Frosty says that the rules for presenting in person and supplying a legal photo is stacked against certain sections mainly young people or poor people. But how does that effect postal votes, when there does not seem to be any photographic evidence require to confirm/authenticate who is voting by post, old or young?
Requirements have been made more stringent:
https://www.local.gov.uk/about/our-...ion/local-government-elections/changes-postal
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/voter/apply-vote-post
It has now become more difficult. I have had three applications rejected by my local council without explanation.
I believe your identity is checked via records held by the DWP. Which raises a number of other questions given the state of their records.
Also there is a move in many political circles to ban postal voting because of more non-existent 'fraud'.
This is one of the first real looks at postal voting in the UK and who does it https://academic.oup.com/pa/article/76/1/43/6361031 it's a long read but quite a good one if you're into that sort of thing!
Basically elderly people are more likely to vote by post and those age demographics are more likely to vote Tory. Also supporters of centre left and left wing parties are less likely to vote by post.
A couple of quotes here:
"We find strong support to the notion that voters who are older and disabled are much more prone to casting a postal ballot than their younger and more mobile peers."
" It is the supporters of the centre-left parties that contest seats across Britain who are least likely to vote by post, as evident in the negative coefficients of −0.22 for the Labour Party, −0.27 for Liberal Democrats and −0.31 for the Green Party. We do not find a significant effect for voters who identify with the Conservative Party, UKIP, the Brexit Party or the nationalist parties."
Interestingly people in marginal constituencies are also more likely to vote by post, which is also handy for the Tories given the elderly demographic.
So basically it is more difficult for young people to vote in their preferred way but easier for the elderly to vote with their preferred method and this is exaggerated in marginal seats.
Basically the voter ID rules (supported by Labour and Tories) go further than any measures passed by the Republican Party in any US state. It is basically a poll tax for many.
Didn't Labour vote against it when it was proposed in Parliament? Also I literally just saw Khan railing against it and said it was some US policy being put over here.
Voted against it, shadow ministers later said no plans to remove it.
That's not just a dig at Labour, it is more bemoaning the fact that there are no constitutional safeguards here.
Even the Supreme Court has said there was no common law or constitutional right to vote.
And a lot of local Labour branches oppose the law to be fair:
"Data from the Government itself shows that 38% of Asian people, 31% of mixed ethnicity and 48% of black people do not have the right form of ID to vote under this new law."
https://www.islington-labour.org.uk...ws-what-they-are-a-form-of-voter-suppression/
"Data from the Government itself shows that 38% of Asian people, 31% of mixed ethnicity and 48% of black people do not have the right form of ID to vote under this new law."
https://www.islington-labour.org.uk...ws-what-they-are-a-form-of-voter-suppression/
It's odd that the younger demographic - ie people with jobs and commitments and places to be - favour voting in person. I've always voted by post because I have never been able to guarantee I can get to the poling station.
So? Labour conference backed an increased minimum wage and support for PR. Starmer wants neither, so neither have been mentioned since.
These branches are less than pointless, because not only do their opinions do nothing, they actively work to ensure that those opinions do nothing.
Voted. Not for Labour or Tory though. Will be interesting to see how many protest votes are won tonight. Microcosm for the generals.
I was trying to make the point that the leadership is out of step with the membership. I would say that the leadership in branches often work to ensure the opinions do nothing. Not necessarily those who are still members.
Johnson as well apparently
He's perfectly in step with the membership. He does whatever the feck he wants and they tut a bit before doing everything he wants of them anyway.
Having ran elections for many years whilst working at the Council, voter ID is the biggest waste of money and is a clear line from the Tories to prevent people from voting. Voter fraud is miniscule and there are already several safeguards in place to ensure the correct people vote. All this has done is create more work for people running elections and disenfranchise certain voters.
And you are right, now you have Farage et al speaking up against postal voting which they know people who vote that way don't vote for them. Postal voting again is one of the most secure ways to vote. This is all a big plan to disenfranchise certain voters.
Joseph Stiglitz is on QT today. Maybe I’ll give this a watch.
You have to laugh.
FFS...I'm laughing, but what a cnut.
Is there any exit poll or data that we get at 10pm today? Or is it just a waiting game?
Hopefully tonights a precursor for the general election. Will be staying up to watch the drama unfold despite not voting
It is not like the GE sadly.
Councils count tonight and tomorrow and will report sporadically. PCC elections will be announced depending on the size of the county.
London should announce in the early hours given the election is now FPTP.
i just wrote “brexit” on my ballot paper. as i have done for every vote since 2016.
Here is a breakdown of what we are expecting to be called overnight:
Councils:
12.30am: Broxbourne
1.30am: Hartlepool, Rochford, Sunderland
2am: Bolton, Gosport, Ipswich, Newcastle upon Tyne, North East Lincolnshire, South Tyneside, Wigan
2.30am: Chorley, Eastleigh, Fareham, Hart, Oldham, Portsmouth, Rushmoor, Southend-on-Sea
2.45am: Exeter
3am: Harlow, Kingston upon Hull, Lincoln, Sefton, Tameside, Thurrock
3.15am: Reading
3.30am: Colchester, Gateshead, Redditch, Stockport
4am: Peterborough, Plymouth
4.30am: Southampton
5.30am: Winchester
Police & crime commissioners:
1.30am: Cumbria
2.30am: Avon & Somerset
3.00am: Lincolnshire
Sounds like most results won't be out until tomorrow. West Midlands mayor won't be announced until Saturday.
Councils:
12.30am: Broxbourne
1.30am: Hartlepool, Rochford, Sunderland
2am: Bolton, Gosport, Ipswich, Newcastle upon Tyne, North East Lincolnshire, South Tyneside, Wigan
2.30am: Chorley, Eastleigh, Fareham, Hart, Oldham, Portsmouth, Rushmoor, Southend-on-Sea
2.45am: Exeter
3am: Harlow, Kingston upon Hull, Lincoln, Sefton, Tameside, Thurrock
3.15am: Reading
3.30am: Colchester, Gateshead, Redditch, Stockport
4am: Peterborough, Plymouth
4.30am: Southampton
5.30am: Winchester
Police & crime commissioners:
1.30am: Cumbria
2.30am: Avon & Somerset
3.00am: Lincolnshire
Sounds like most results won't be out until tomorrow. West Midlands mayor won't be announced until Saturday.
If you used a pencil they would have just rubbed it out and written "EU 4eva" instead.
No idea why Councils count overnight because they don’t need to for local elections. I used to hate it but you had to do it for General but we didn’t do it for others.
It is bizarre, especially given the cost and the inconvenience to the workers. It is a bit random too as some city councils do it and others don't. I can understand why rural councils do not.