May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Thanks. But the registration bumf comes automatically to everyone in the UK by post, anyway, so you don't need anything electronic for that. Or even a stamp.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Thanks. But the registration bumf comes automatically to everyone in the UK by post, anyway, so you don't need anything electronic for that. Or even a stamp.
Does it still? It used to be sent in the autumn but we definitely didn't get anything this year.
He’s keeping his nose clean for 2028 or 2032, knows that 2024 is going to be dominated by the Trump sh!t-show.
Lots of smart Democrats decided to sit out 1992 and to wait for a better opportunity in 1996.
That turned out to be a mistake.
If Biden is re elected and as rumoured moves Harris to the SC and replaces her with Buttigieg as his VP, the Democrats could be in the White House for 16 years.
Beating Biden in 2024 may be the only chance Republicans get to become President for a generation
Really? Why so pessimistic for the GOP over that timeframe?
If Biden is re elected after replacing Harris with Buttigieg then VP Buttigieg could certainly win 2 further terms for the Democrats.
If the GOP don't win in 2024 they could be out of the White House for their longest period since FDR and Truman
Ah so you think Pete B has the Right Stuff. That's interesting. He's impressive but I didn't think he was that popular.
How many presidents really were though before they ran ?
VP can be a launch pad but it doesn't seem to have worked for Harris. When Biden won she was my fav for next time but I'm glad I didn't bet that view.
Before Biden only one former Vice President had been elected president in the previous fifty years - Bush Sr in 1988.
(Discounting Ford, who was not elected, and interestingly, replaced the second consecutive former Vice President to be elected in his own right.)
That's true. Although - you'll like this - we maybe shouldn't count LBJ as an elected former VP because by the time he was elected it was as an incumbent President.
Also, both Biden and Nixon were elected as former VPs - yes - but in neither case were they a current VP trying to upgrade via election to P.
So, what Bush 88 did - which intuitively feels like a common occurrence - is actually v rare in modern times.
Bush 41 was helped by the fact the Democrats put up too left liberal candidates for the average American after Carter lost, first Mondale, then Dukakis. Hart in 1984 or Biden or Gore in 1988 would have been more electable. Only in Clinton in 1992 did the Democrats pick a centrist, charismatic winner.
It looks like the GOP are going to pick candidates too Trumpite or socially conservative for the average American now in turn for the next few cycles
Northern Ireland has a history of people thinking there was electoral fraud going on, but there is basically no evidence that plural voting was a big problem. Intimidation of electors for sure, but that was a lot simpler than voting early and often. That perception is probably why they have stricter voter ID rules than its neighbouring jurisdictions. The costs are similar, but the perceived benefits are greater. A cynic might also say that the early-2000s UUP and SDLP thought it was overall in their interest to exclude the poorer and younger socio-economic groups.
In Northern Ireland, during the Troubles, the Driving Licence was a de-facto ID card. It was also suitable for elections.
No one was overly bothered and it did not require the National Identity Card sort of thing so beloved of recent politicians (esp. Blair's Labour Party).
He’s keeping his nose clean for 2028 or 2032, knows that 2024 is going to be dominated by the Trump sh!t-show.
Lots of smart Democrats decided to sit out 1992 and to wait for a better opportunity in 1996.
That turned out to be a mistake.
If Biden is re elected and as rumoured moves Harris to the SC and replaces her with Buttigieg as his VP, the Democrats could be in the White House for 16 years.
Beating Biden in 2024 may be the only chance Republicans get to become President for a generation
Really? Why so pessimistic for the GOP over that timeframe?
If Biden is re elected after replacing Harris with Buttigieg then VP Buttigieg could certainly win 2 further terms for the Democrats.
If the GOP don't win in 2024 they could be out of the White House for their longest period since FDR and Truman
Ah so you think Pete B has the Right Stuff. That's interesting. He's impressive but I didn't think he was that popular.
How many presidents really were though before they ran ?
VP can be a launch pad but it doesn't seem to have worked for Harris. When Biden won she was my fav for next time but I'm glad I didn't bet that view.
Before Biden only one former Vice President had been elected president in the previous fifty years - Bush Sr in 1988.
(Discounting Ford, who was not elected, and interestingly, replaced the second consecutive former Vice President to be elected in his own right.)
That's true. Although - you'll like this - we maybe shouldn't count LBJ as an elected former VP because by the time he was elected it was as an incumbent President.
Also, both Biden and Nixon were elected as former VPs - yes - but in neither case were they a current VP trying to upgrade via election to P.
So, what Bush 88 did - which intuitively feels like a common occurrence - is actually v rare in modern times.
Bush 41 was helped by the fact the Democrats put up too left liberal candidates for the average American after Carter lost, first Mondale, then Dukakis. Hart in 1984 or Biden or Gore in 1988 would have been more electable. Only in Clinton in 1992 did the Democrats pick a centrist, charismatic winner.
It looks like the GOP are going to pick candidates too Trumpite or socially conservative for the average American now in turn for the next few cycles
Was it 84 or 88 that Hart was caught in bed with that model, after he ill-advisedly told the press 'Follow me and see how bored you get?'
Biden of course in 88 had that plagiarism scandal, amusingly copying a speech by Kinnock.
So it's not altogether the Dems fault they didn't pick the candidates you suggest...
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
But they do need help. Don't you have an elderly or disabled relative? And can't you see that they have to prioritise things like sorting out the electricity board first?
This takes less time than actually going to vote. The biggest risk is people talking up how difficult it is for partisan reasons.
With the Tories getting so many votes from low information voters post Brexit it's not even clear to me that this will help them. But I actually don't care. What bothers me is that we are disenfranchising a load of vulnerable and marginalised people from the democratic process, people whose voices are already barely heard in the corridors of power. And all to fix a "problem" whose magnitude barely registers. For anyone who cares about the health of our democracy this has to be deeply troubling.
This will be a shambles. I'll bet that the majority of those turning up to vote in May won't know anything about this change (or will forget) and will be turned away (and may or may not go to retrieve docs and return to vote).
I notice on the list of acceptable forms of photo I.D. is "Older Person’s Bus Pass" - does that have a photo on it? If so, I'm thinking that this may help my dad as he has one of those. Otherwise, there is no way he is faffing about getting a new I.D. at age 86 and has no passport or driving license.
He’s keeping his nose clean for 2028 or 2032, knows that 2024 is going to be dominated by the Trump sh!t-show.
Lots of smart Democrats decided to sit out 1992 and to wait for a better opportunity in 1996.
That turned out to be a mistake.
If Biden is re elected and as rumoured moves Harris to the SC and replaces her with Buttigieg as his VP, the Democrats could be in the White House for 16 years.
Beating Biden in 2024 may be the only chance Republicans get to become President for a generation
Really? Why so pessimistic for the GOP over that timeframe?
If Biden is re elected after replacing Harris with Buttigieg then VP Buttigieg could certainly win 2 further terms for the Democrats.
If the GOP don't win in 2024 they could be out of the White House for their longest period since FDR and Truman
Ah so you think Pete B has the Right Stuff. That's interesting. He's impressive but I didn't think he was that popular.
How many presidents really were though before they ran ?
VP can be a launch pad but it doesn't seem to have worked for Harris. When Biden won she was my fav for next time but I'm glad I didn't bet that view.
Before Biden only one former Vice President had been elected president in the previous fifty years - Bush Sr in 1988.
(Discounting Ford, who was not elected, and interestingly, replaced the second consecutive former Vice President to be elected in his own right.)
That's true. Although - you'll like this - we maybe shouldn't count LBJ as an elected former VP because by the time he was elected it was as an incumbent President.
Also, both Biden and Nixon were elected as former VPs - yes - but in neither case were they a current VP trying to upgrade via election to P.
So, what Bush 88 did - which intuitively feels like a common occurrence - is actually v rare in modern times.
Bush 41 was helped by the fact the Democrats put up too left liberal candidates for the average American after Carter lost, first Mondale, then Dukakis. Hart in 1984 or Biden or Gore in 1988 would have been more electable. Only in Clinton in 1992 did the Democrats pick a centrist, charismatic winner.
It looks like the GOP are going to pick candidates too Trumpite or socially conservative for the average American now in turn for the next few cycles
Was it 84 or 88 that Hart was caught in bed with that model, after he ill-advisedly told the press 'Follow me and see how bored you get?'
Biden of course in 88 had that plagiarism scandal, amusingly copying a speech by Kinnock.
So it's not altogether the Dems fault they didn't pick the candidates you suggest...
88, 84 Hart had no problems and Clinton was a re elected womaniser anyway.
Even if not Biden in 1988, Gore would have been more electable than Dukakis.
Dukakis was trounced by Bush 41 in 1988, Gore won the popular vote and nearly the EC v Bush 43 in 2000
Northern Ireland has a history of people thinking there was electoral fraud going on, but there is basically no evidence that plural voting was a big problem. Intimidation of electors for sure, but that was a lot simpler than voting early and often. That perception is probably why they have stricter voter ID rules than its neighbouring jurisdictions. The costs are similar, but the perceived benefits are greater. A cynic might also say that the early-2000s UUP and SDLP thought it was overall in their interest to exclude the poorer and younger socio-economic groups.
In Northern Ireland, during the Troubles, the Driving Licence was a de-facto ID card. It was also suitable for elections.
No one was overly bothered and it did not require the National Identity Card sort of thing so beloved of recent politicians (esp. Blair's Labour Party).
I'd be happy with a national ID card - which would make life simpler in all sorts of ways - on four conditions:
1) You don't have to carry it at all times
2) You have access to the database associated with it and a mechanism to swiftly correct any errors
3) It replaces the passport and driving licence and is in itself sufficient proof of identity for any purpose
4) You can see who has accessed the aforesaid database and for what reason, and raise a complaint about anyone who should not have done.
Hell will freeze over before (4) is agreed to, and it will certainly be chilly before (2) is agreed to, while the police would see no point to it without (1).
Note, the photo ID does not have to be in-date, as long as the photo is recognisable.
That's my vote up the Swanny Carlotta. Just as well it won't be Conservative.
Every time I enter a UK airport the automated reader pauses, takes my photograph and rejects me. I thought it might be the clean shaven photo on my EU passport didn't correspond to my post lockdown Santa Claus look. But no! Even my new Brexit passport gives me an emphatic "seek assistance". I then have to queue with the 3rd worlders for the official to look, stare, ponder and give me the third degree before I am allowed back into blighty.
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
The GOP Is Starting to Plot Against Donald Trump Republican Party donors and leaders are talking about how best to stop Trump from running away with the nomination again in 2024. But they don’t (yet) have a clear plan to stop him. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/09/gop-trump-2024-election-00081944 ...“I don’t think it is fair to call Donald Trump a damaged candidate,” said Eric Levine, a top GOP fundraiser who has been calling on the party to move on from Trump since the 2020 election and the uprising at the Capitol. “He is a metastasizing cancer who if he is not stopped is going to destroy the party. Donald Trump is a loser. He is the first president since Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term. ...
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
I've mentioned on here before that I've been receiving treatment for depression for a while, and during that period, about a year of which was spent in Scotland, I wasn't seen by a single doctor in person - all my consultations were over the phone.
In one of these consultations I mentioned that I'd been uncharacteristically tired, sleeping during the day, and I thought it might be a post-Covid symptom, but it was brushed off as a typical symptom of depression, though my depression had never presented in that way before.
I've recently moved to Ireland, which I'd always thought had an even worse health system than Britain, and had an appointment with a GP, in person, recently for a repeat prescription. They decided to order some blood tests, and the result of these tests is that I am severely iron-deficient, and the resulting anaemia would explain my extreme tiredness and lethargy, which hasn't helped to deal with my depression.
With iron supplements I should start to feel more energetic relatively quickly, but under the care of the NHS this would have remained undiagnosed.
My wife moved from Ireland to live with me in 2009, and her experience was the main reason I thought the Irish health system was worse than the NHS, but she says it is clear that it has deteriorated severely since then.
It's obvious to a lot of people in Britain that the NHS is struggling, but you don't know the half of it until you experience health care in another modern European country. It is so much worse then you realise. You deserve better.
+1
But is it not just because Ireland is much wealthier these days and therefore invests properly in public services?
Ireland isn’t “much wealthier” these days - it’s national GDP is distorted by tax dodging multinationals
Irish GDP data is increasingly driven by the island's status as a global tax haven, especially for tech companies.
I've mentioned on here before that I've been receiving treatment for depression for a while, and during that period, about a year of which was spent in Scotland, I wasn't seen by a single doctor in person - all my consultations were over the phone.
In one of these consultations I mentioned that I'd been uncharacteristically tired, sleeping during the day, and I thought it might be a post-Covid symptom, but it was brushed off as a typical symptom of depression, though my depression had never presented in that way before.
I've recently moved to Ireland, which I'd always thought had an even worse health system than Britain, and had an appointment with a GP, in person, recently for a repeat prescription. They decided to order some blood tests, and the result of these tests is that I am severely iron-deficient, and the resulting anaemia would explain my extreme tiredness and lethargy, which hasn't helped to deal with my depression.
With iron supplements I should start to feel more energetic relatively quickly, but under the care of the NHS this would have remained undiagnosed.
My wife moved from Ireland to live with me in 2009, and her experience was the main reason I thought the Irish health system was worse than the NHS, but she says it is clear that it has deteriorated severely since then.
It's obvious to a lot of people in Britain that the NHS is struggling, but you don't know the half of it until you experience health care in another modern European country. It is so much worse then you realise. You deserve better.
I suspect the politicians realise, but politically it's impossible to fix, at least for a Tory government. Maybe Sir Keir can be Nixon going to China.
We had better hope so. Yes, there's plenty of great stories a lot of people can tell of the service they received, but the number of those with horror stories and of general shittiness is too big to ignore any further. It doesn't need to be the average experience to be a big problem.
Note, the photo ID does not have to be in-date, as long as the photo is recognisable.
I still don't support this policy, I don't think the potentiality of problems versus the actuality justified any additional level of disruption. But opponents have at times really overdone how outrageous it might be (as comapred to many 'good' countries, and of the range of options).
As I say I still don't think it is worth it, as there will be some disruption which I think unnecessary, but the level of it can still be exagerrated.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
It is perhaps worth reflecting, re Veeps, that only one incumbent Vice President has been elected President (as opposed to inheriting the office) since 1836 when Vice President Martin van Buuren was elected for a single term.
Before that, it had happened twice - Adams and Jefferson, the first two vice presidents, when the electoral college worked differently and the runner-up became Veep.
Hadn’t seen this before but Rishi’s wife uses her maiden name - with “Mrs”…The Prime Minister and Mrs Murty met parents, children and staff at the St Austell Family Hub in Cornwall today.
👨👩👧👦 From pregnancy through to perinatal mental health and infant feeding, family hubs provide vital support so every child can get the best start in life.
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
I can see a lot of councils needing to have a digital camera ready to go in reception when people come in to get Id.
Heck I don't need a photo id as I'm a postal voter (where fraud is way more rampant) and have both a passport and driving licence but I would be tempted to waste an hour to get a voter id card on principle of giving them work to do for being stupid.
You can't do that. You have to *post* a form, with a physical photo, to your local elevctoral registration office. Where does the photo come from? Either a photo booth or a decent printer.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
I can see a lot of councils needing to have a digital camera ready to go in reception when people come in to get Id.
Heck I don't need a photo id as I'm a postal voter (where fraud is way more rampant) and have both a passport and driving licence but I would be tempted to waste an hour to get a voter id card on principle of giving them work to do for being stupid.
You can't do that. You have to *post* a form, with a physical photo, to your local elevctoral registration office. Where does the photo come from? Either a photo booth or a decent printer.
Was discussing paper forms if one can't use a camera.
As of 2021, 88% of all adults in the UK had a smartphone. When broken down by age, 96% of those aged 16-24 owned a smartphone device compared to 78% aged 55 and above.
These figures have increased dramatically since 2008, when only 17% of adults had a smartphone. In 2008, only 4% of people in the 55+ age bracket owned a phone, compared to 29% of 16-24-year-olds.
So 22% of the over 55s don’t own a smart phone - but we don’t know how many of them don’t have access to one - friends, family etc. Northern Ireland introduced this 22 years ago before smart phones existed.
If that trend continues I think my math is correct that every adult in the country will have a smartphone by next year, apart from AndyJS.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
But they do need help. Don't you have an elderly or disabled relative? And can't you see that they have to prioritise things like sorting out the electricity board first?
This takes less time than actually going to vote. The biggest risk is people talking up how difficult it is for partisan reasons.
With the Tories getting so many votes from low information voters post Brexit it's not even clear to me that this will help them. But I actually don't care. What bothers me is that we are disenfranchising a load of vulnerable and marginalised people from the democratic process, people whose voices are already barely heard in the corridors of power. And all to fix a "problem" whose magnitude barely registers. For anyone who cares about the health of our democracy this has to be deeply troubling.
This will be a shambles. I'll bet that the majority of those turning up to vote in May won't know anything about this change (or will forget) and will be turned away (and may or may not go to retrieve docs and return to vote).
I notice on the list of acceptable forms of photo I.D. is "Older Person’s Bus Pass" - does that have a photo on it? If so, I'm thinking that this may help my dad as he has one of those. Otherwise, there is no way he is faffing about getting a new I.D. at age 86 and has no passport or driving license.
My mum's does, and I think that may be general. Certainly there was some consternation when the list of acceptable Ids came out and some Oyster cards were on it and some weren't - and it turned out that the ones that were on it had photos on them and the ones that weren't don't
The GOP Is Starting to Plot Against Donald Trump Republican Party donors and leaders are talking about how best to stop Trump from running away with the nomination again in 2024. But they don’t (yet) have a clear plan to stop him. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/09/gop-trump-2024-election-00081944 ...“I don’t think it is fair to call Donald Trump a damaged candidate,” said Eric Levine, a top GOP fundraiser who has been calling on the party to move on from Trump since the 2020 election and the uprising at the Capitol. “He is a metastasizing cancer who if he is not stopped is going to destroy the party. Donald Trump is a loser. He is the first president since Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term. ...
It may not be as complicated as they imagine. Sure, plenty of people didn't want him last time, but they bent the knee soon enough and it didn't help any. They need to be strong and just say no, even if it is on the basis of 'I love you so much Donald, but you cannot win'.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
In Northern Ireland, when it was introduced, very few problems.
If the track suited types who burn towers of pallets* each year and their oppos in the other community can figure out voting for their miniature hate parties**.
*Moved on from the car tires. Progress. **Every gangster has his miniature party, for those who think that the Shinners, PUP etc are a bit light. Think BNP, but without the MENSA level genius.
He’s keeping his nose clean for 2028 or 2032, knows that 2024 is going to be dominated by the Trump sh!t-show.
Lots of smart Democrats decided to sit out 1992 and to wait for a better opportunity in 1996.
That turned out to be a mistake.
If Biden is re elected and as rumoured moves Harris to the SC and replaces her with Buttigieg as his VP, the Democrats could be in the White House for 16 years.
Beating Biden in 2024 may be the only chance Republicans get to become President for a generation
Really? Why so pessimistic for the GOP over that timeframe?
If Biden is re elected after replacing Harris with Buttigieg then VP Buttigieg could certainly win 2 further terms for the Democrats.
If the GOP don't win in 2024 they could be out of the White House for their longest period since FDR and Truman
Ah so you think Pete B has the Right Stuff. That's interesting. He's impressive but I didn't think he was that popular.
How many presidents really were though before they ran ?
VP can be a launch pad but it doesn't seem to have worked for Harris. When Biden won she was my fav for next time but I'm glad I didn't bet that view.
Before Biden only one former Vice President had been elected president in the previous fifty years - Bush Sr in 1988.
(Discounting Ford, who was not elected, and interestingly, replaced the second consecutive former Vice President to be elected in his own right.)
That's true. Although - you'll like this - we maybe shouldn't count LBJ as an elected former VP because by the time he was elected it was as an incumbent President.
Also, both Biden and Nixon were elected as former VPs - yes - but in neither case were they a current VP trying to upgrade via election to P.
So, what Bush 88 did - which intuitively feels like a common occurrence - is actually v rare in modern times.
For a second I thought Bush 88 must refer to yet another member of the dynasty putting his name forward for the next election. Go big, go old.
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
Even Aaron Bastani has been known to make sensible comments from time to time. And he may be dogmatic, but he isn't entirely stupid.
Disagree. They should be allowed to participate in politics to the extent they already are, by electing MPs. Direct democracy leads to the murder of the generals after Arginusae, and of Socrates. /And Brexit.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
Spot on. Why didn't they clamp down on postal voting? When they first talked of this I assumed any ID would do - inc credit card, utility bill or bank statement.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
Always ask:
a) What is the problem X is designed to fix? b) Is this a proportonate way to address that problem? c) In assessing b), what is the scale of the problem and what are the potential other impacts and costs of the fix?
He’s keeping his nose clean for 2028 or 2032, knows that 2024 is going to be dominated by the Trump sh!t-show.
Lots of smart Democrats decided to sit out 1992 and to wait for a better opportunity in 1996.
That turned out to be a mistake.
If Biden is re elected and as rumoured moves Harris to the SC and replaces her with Buttigieg as his VP, the Democrats could be in the White House for 16 years.
Beating Biden in 2024 may be the only chance Republicans get to become President for a generation
Really? Why so pessimistic for the GOP over that timeframe?
If Biden is re elected after replacing Harris with Buttigieg then VP Buttigieg could certainly win 2 further terms for the Democrats.
If the GOP don't win in 2024 they could be out of the White House for their longest period since FDR and Truman
Ah so you think Pete B has the Right Stuff. That's interesting. He's impressive but I didn't think he was that popular.
How many presidents really were though before they ran ?
VP can be a launch pad but it doesn't seem to have worked for Harris. When Biden won she was my fav for next time but I'm glad I didn't bet that view.
Before Biden only one former Vice President had been elected president in the previous fifty years - Bush Sr in 1988.
(Discounting Ford, who was not elected, and interestingly, replaced the second consecutive former Vice President to be elected in his own right.)
That's true. Although - you'll like this - we maybe shouldn't count LBJ as an elected former VP because by the time he was elected it was as an incumbent President.
Also, both Biden and Nixon were elected as former VPs - yes - but in neither case were they a current VP trying to upgrade via election to P.
So, what Bush 88 did - which intuitively feels like a common occurrence - is actually v rare in modern times.
And the winner for today's PedanticBetting.com arcane knowledge award is *drumroll* KINABALU by the proverbial distance
Blush. I can't believe I'm standing here. I'd like to thank every single member of the site and - gosh I'm struggling here - and my mum and dad for having me
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
100% agree. (And I would note that I have a solution that would eliminate what personation there is without increasing the burden on the young and those without driving licences.)
Interesting gossip heard from an insider - Harry and Meghan are getting a divorce.
That would be terribly sad news, for him particularly. He seems to have a lot of internal doubts and demons, and one would hope his marriage and chosen family would help with that.
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
Even Aaron Bastani has been known to make sensible comments from time to time. And he may be dogmatic, but he isn't entirely stupid.
Disagree. They should be allowed to participate in politics to the extent they already are, by electing MPs. Direct democracy leads to the murder of the generals after Arginusae, and of Socrates. /And Brexit.
Thatcher, more than once, said that the way to keep the death penalty abolished was precisely by having votes on it.
If your only recourse, in a democracy, to preventing stuff in the long term, is banning advocacy of X, then you have already lost.
The GOP Is Starting to Plot Against Donald Trump Republican Party donors and leaders are talking about how best to stop Trump from running away with the nomination again in 2024. But they don’t (yet) have a clear plan to stop him. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/09/gop-trump-2024-election-00081944 ...“I don’t think it is fair to call Donald Trump a damaged candidate,” said Eric Levine, a top GOP fundraiser who has been calling on the party to move on from Trump since the 2020 election and the uprising at the Capitol. “He is a metastasizing cancer who if he is not stopped is going to destroy the party. Donald Trump is a loser. He is the first president since Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term. ...
It may not be as complicated as they imagine. Sure, plenty of people didn't want him last time, but they bent the knee soon enough and it didn't help any. They need to be strong and just say no, even if it is on the basis of 'I love you so much Donald, but you cannot win'.
They're not quick, but I think they will, as you say, work it out eventually. 'Loser' is absolutely the best thing they can throw at him.
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
The GOP Is Starting to Plot Against Donald Trump Republican Party donors and leaders are talking about how best to stop Trump from running away with the nomination again in 2024. But they don’t (yet) have a clear plan to stop him. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/09/gop-trump-2024-election-00081944 ...“I don’t think it is fair to call Donald Trump a damaged candidate,” said Eric Levine, a top GOP fundraiser who has been calling on the party to move on from Trump since the 2020 election and the uprising at the Capitol. “He is a metastasizing cancer who if he is not stopped is going to destroy the party. Donald Trump is a loser. He is the first president since Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term. ...
It may not be as complicated as they imagine. Sure, plenty of people didn't want him last time, but they bent the knee soon enough and it didn't help any. They need to be strong and just say no, even if it is on the basis of 'I love you so much Donald, but you cannot win'.
My blue badge is acceptable. No one has ever checked the photo on it mind. Similarly, my driving licence.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
Shhhh. Disenfranchising Tory voters. Labour voters are young, have these ID things and switched on via being wired to internet news to remember to take it along. This is a confused Tory party hacking lumps off its own voters to clamp down on a massive and disgusting electoral fraud issue that doesn’t even exist.
Hadn’t seen this before but Rishi’s wife uses her maiden name - with “Mrs”…The Prime Minister and Mrs Murty met parents, children and staff at the St Austell Family Hub in Cornwall today.
👨👩👧👦 From pregnancy through to perinatal mental health and infant feeding, family hubs provide vital support so every child can get the best start in life.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
I genuinely can't see that there can be a problem for people who can register to vote and vote but not get a free ID.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Isn't it postal voting where the problem of voter fraud mainly lies if indeed there is a problem?
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
Shhhh. Disenfranchising Tory voters. Labour voters are young, have these ID things and switched on via being wired to internet news to remember to take it along. This is a confused Tory party hacking lumps off its own voters to clamp down on a massive and disgusting electoral fraud issue that doesn’t even exist.
It may turn out that way.
I don't think it is as simple as that. A lot of people are in principle in favour of making elections more secure, and of the use of photo idea (at least in theory - when they come up against it they may not), and the supposed partisan benefit seems rather uncertain, definitely not reliable as a suppression method, and as you say might even backfire. So I think really it is just reaching for a simplistic solution in overreaction to a potential issue.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Isn't it postal voting where the problem of voter fraud mainly lies if indeed there is a problem?
The bottom line is, we really don't know what the extent of voter fraud is - investigation of complaints of it are (to be kind) haphazard.
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
Interesting gossip heard from an insider - Harry and Meghan are getting a divorce.
I’ve seen a few comments along these lines on Twitter recently. But dismissed them based on who the posters were. Not fans of the Sussexes. I guess if it is true it will keep,the circus in the headlines.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Isn't it postal voting where the problem of voter fraud mainly lies if indeed there is a problem?
It definitely seems more open to the possibility of fraud issues on a larger scale. And if the reasoning for ID changes is that even low risk must be addressed, it really makes no sense not to do more on postal voting.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
Shhhh. Disenfranchising Tory voters. Labour voters are young, have these ID things and switched on via being wired to internet news to remember to take it along. This is a confused Tory party hacking lumps off its own voters to clamp down on a massive and disgusting electoral fraud issue that doesn’t even exist.
It may turn out that way.
I don't think it is as simple as that. A lot of people are in principle in favour of making elections more secure, and of the use of photo idea (at least in theory - when they come up against it they may not), and the supposed partisan benefit seems rather uncertain, definitely not reliable as a suppression method, and as you say might even backfire. So I think really it is just reaching for a simplistic solution in overreaction to a potential issue.
No it is definitely that straightforward. The Tories will definitely frustrate and anger their own voters with this.
May's local elections could turn into a disastrous exercise in disenfranchisement. The unemployed and the disabled especially likely to not have the required ID.
Any old mobey snap won't do. Probably need to go to a photo booth. Too far? Too expensive? Too hard to get your wheelchair in? THis digital stuff all incomprehensible to you? Tough, you're not wanted.
HMG:
" Photo guidelines
Your digital photo must be:
clear and in focus in colour against a plain, light-coloured background your true likeness, with no photoshop or filters at least 600×750 pixels JPG, PNG or GIF format — min 50KB, max 20MB
In your photo you must:
face forwards, looking straight at the camera be alone, with no other objects or people have a plain expression have eyes open and visible, with no hair in front of them not wear sunglasses, but normal glasses are fine if you typically wear them not have a head covering (apart from religious or medical reasons) not have ‘red-eye’, glare or shadows over your face"
The technical requirements in the first part are easily met by any phone camera of the last 10 years.
The requirements of the second part are trivially easy to meet.
I see a lot of people at Citizens Advice for whom this will be too complicated without help. Most will probably just not be bothered.
If this is too complicated, how do they get through ordinary normal life? If they need help for that then they can use the same help for this, surely?
Driver, many of them struggle to get through ordinary life. Since this isn't going to put food on the table or heat their homes, many will simply not bother.
But previously they would bother to vote? That doesn't seem at all logical.
It's one thing to vote just down the road with the card that comes in the post. It's quite another when ytou need to sort out the ID first.
But the card doesn't just "come in the post", you need to bother to register first.
On the documents that come [edit] automatically to every house in the UK in the post with reply paid envelopes. (I'm talking abotut he postcard that every elector gets when an election is due.)
I assumed you meant the poll card. You can't get one of those without bothering to register first.
One improvement definitely does need to be made, though - at present the online registration form doesn't mention ID, and it absolutely should.
Thanks. But the registration bumf comes automatically to everyone in the UK by post, anyway, so you don't need anything electronic for that. Or even a stamp.
Does it still? It used to be sent in the autumn but we definitely didn't get anything this year.
Haw, someone's got his eye on your vote ... ours came all right and was carefully checked as always.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
I'm actually going to defend the Met (and other organisations) a little here. The Met employs >30k officers.
My rule of thumb is that 1% of people are potential angels, and 1% are potential devils. That means that in the Met, there will 300 officers who could be seen as devils. And the problem is that you often cannot tell who they are until they commit a crime.
Therefore the important thing becomes detecting, and reacting. In the case above, how long was there between the crime realistically becoming detectable by the authorities and the officer's suspension/ prosecution?
That's where the Met utterly failed in the Couzens case: there were many warning signs that had been picked up. But if your organisation has more than (say) 200 people, there will be wrong 'un's amongst them. Maybe not rapists, but thugs. Or fraudsters. Or whatever.
This is where culture plays into it: if you have a culture where: "Hey, he chatted that member of the public up" is okay, then you might have a problem. If you have a culture where it's okay to refer to another employee as 'the rapist', then you have a problem for multiple reasons.
Most of that 1% devils can be diverted from devilry by a culture that frowns on devilry. If your culture excuses it, or worse condones it, then you have major issues.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
I'm sure if Labour was in power and trying to introduce this law, the Tories would be calling it draconian, a waste of money and intended to reduce the Tory vote.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
We should be looking at tightening up that process first before making in-person voting harder.
Hmm. If you fill in the bumf to redirect your mail, the Royal Mail insist on sending a confirmation of redirection to the actual address from which the mail is being transferred, which is an obvious security check of some value. (And the envelope is plastered with warnings to RM delivery staff not to redirect that letter, for obvious reasons.)
I can't see anything here that says the ERO likewise writes to the original address.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
I'm sure if Labour was in power and trying to introduce this law, the Tories would be calling it draconian, a waste of money and intended to reduce the Tory vote.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
I genuinely can't see that there can be a problem for people who can register to vote and vote but not get a free ID.
I think there's a large disconnect between the process for registering to vote and getting a 'free' ID. To register to vote online, you need your NI number. Getting photo IDs seems much more complex for many people. As an example, for a driving licence you need to be able to drive, or be learning to. To get a passport, you need a will / ability to travel abroad, and a whole series of documents. And money for both.
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
I genuinely can't see that there can be a problem for people who can register to vote and vote but not get a free ID.
I think there's a large disconnect between the process for registering to vote and getting a 'free' ID. To register to vote online, you need your NI number. Getting photo IDs seems much more complex for many people. As an example, for a driving licence you need to be able to drive, or be learning to. To get a passport, you need a will / ability to travel abroad, and a whole series of documents. And money for both.
To get a voter ID online is pretty much the same process as registering to vote online, with the exception of uploading a photo. In fact, they're so similar that they look to have been designed so as to be easy to merge in the future.
An interesting line in that is the following: "Investigators believe the company brokered sale agreements to supply nitrile gloves to companies in the USA and Germany worth over $35 million."
In this conversation, we yet again get onto PB's biases.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
I genuinely can't see that there can be a problem for people who can register to vote and vote but not get a free ID.
I think there's a large disconnect between the process for registering to vote and getting a 'free' ID. To register to vote online, you need your NI number. Getting photo IDs seems much more complex for many people. As an example, for a driving licence you need to be able to drive, or be learning to. To get a passport, you need a will / ability to travel abroad, and a whole series of documents. And money for both.
To get a voter ID online is pretty much the same process as registering to vote online, with the exception of uploading a photo. In fact, they're so similar that they look to have been designed so as to be easy to merge in the future.
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
I'm actually going to defend the Met (and other organisations) a little here. The Met employs >30k officers.
My rule of thumb is that 1% of people are potential angels, and 1% are potential devils. That means that in the Met, there will 300 officers who could be seen as devils. And the problem is that you often cannot tell who they are until they commit a crime.
Therefore the important thing becomes detecting, and reacting. In the case above, how long was there between the crime realistically becoming detectable by the authorities and the officer's suspension/ prosecution?
That's where the Met utterly failed in the Couzens case: there were many warning signs that had been picked up. But if your organisation has more than (say) 200 people, there will be wrong 'un's amongst them. Maybe not rapists, but thugs. Or fraudsters. Or whatever.
This is where culture plays into it: if you have a culture where: "Hey, he chatted that member of the public up" is okay, then you might have a problem. If you have a culture where it's okay to refer to another employee as 'the rapist', then you have a problem for multiple reasons.
Most of that 1% devils can be diverted from devilry by a culture that frowns on devilry. If your culture excuses it, or worse condones it, then you have major issues.
What you say is true to a point, but the conclusion is why the Met don't deserve any benefit of the doubt about their culture - the impression I get is they only cared about bad eggs when it hit the press, and up to that point their culture, like most organisations, was to close their eyes and ears to bad eggs and discourage anyone else from looking.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Bugger that. If democracy means that little to you, you should voluntarily disenfranchise yourself to prove the point. A fraudulent vote is the theft of the democratic right to say who governs the country, of one voter for the opposing party. One is one too many.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
I'm actually going to defend the Met (and other organisations) a little here. The Met employs >30k officers.
My rule of thumb is that 1% of people are potential angels, and 1% are potential devils. That means that in the Met, there will 300 officers who could be seen as devils. And the problem is that you often cannot tell who they are until they commit a crime.
Therefore the important thing becomes detecting, and reacting. In the case above, how long was there between the crime realistically becoming detectable by the authorities and the officer's suspension/ prosecution?
That's where the Met utterly failed in the Couzens case: there were many warning signs that had been picked up. But if your organisation has more than (say) 200 people, there will be wrong 'un's amongst them. Maybe not rapists, but thugs. Or fraudsters. Or whatever.
This is where culture plays into it: if you have a culture where: "Hey, he chatted that member of the public up" is okay, then you might have a problem. If you have a culture where it's okay to refer to another employee as 'the rapist', then you have a problem for multiple reasons.
Most of that 1% devils can be diverted from devilry by a culture that frowns on devilry. If your culture excuses it, or worse condones it, then you have major issues.
What you say is true to a point, but the conclusion is why the Met don't deserve any benefit of the doubt about their culture - the impression I get is they only cared about bad eggs when it hit the press, and up to that point their culture, like most organisations, was to close their eyes and ears to bad eggs and discourage anyone else from looking.
I agree, but my point (perhaps poorly expressed) is that you cannot stop bad eggs from being in an organisation; you can only detect and react. Even in the best-run organisation, with a brilliant culture.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Don't know about the first one, but the second is zero.
No it's not going to be zero, is it?
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
The wife wrote songs with John Bettis in LA (he wrote many of the Carpenters songs, amongst many others for massive names). One day they were working a song on the piano. There was a knock on the door. "Oh hell...that'll be Burt...." Burt Bacharach lived beneath him.
Burt had a radar for a song - and had heard what they were composing. There then followed a bizarre hour where he tried to muscle in. Wifey was singing. He tried to sing along. Led to the great exchange from Bettis. "Burt, shut up. You can't sing...Go home! Go home!!"
Wifey was mortified - she just wanted to write with Burt!
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Bugger that. If democracy means that little to you, you should voluntarily disenfranchise yourself to prove the point. A fraudulent vote is the theft of the democratic right to say who governs the country, of one voter for the opposing party. One is one too many.
Someone eligible to vote, who is prevented from voting by too many barriers, is just as bad for democracy as one person fraudulently voting.
And the question is where the 'too many barriers' lies. Too few barriers, and you will aid fraud. Too many, and you will disenfranchise too many.
But there's another point here; in FPTP, in most constituencies, you would need thousands of votes to swing in order to create a difference to the electoral outcome. Doing that via personation is really hard. Whereas large-scale postal fraud is an interesting concept to consider, and potentially doable.
The voter ID requirements are nothing but a blatant attempt by the Tories to reduce those voting for opposition parties .
There has never been an issue with voter fraud in the UK. In European countries where ID is required they already have ID cards which legally all adults must have so it’s a level playing field .
Why do you think left-wing voters are too stupid to get a free ID?
Whets to stop the next labour government from introducing restrictions in postal voting?
I wouldn't necessarily object to that, I'm not sure postal voting on demand is necessary or secure.
Currently, it looks to me like a five-year old could fraudulently request my postal vote and get it sent to their address rather than mine. (No proof of ID required.)
If you want to understand Gen Z, there is a Twitch steamer called f1nn5ter who likes to dress up like a stereotypical woman whilst streaming - but he’s not trans, he uses he/him pronouns and likes to talk about being alpha. He’s also just been banned for showing too much boob.
The wife wrote songs with John Bettis in LA (he wrote many of the Carpenters songs, amongst many others for massive names). One day they were working a song on the piano. There was a knock on the door. "Oh hell...that'll be Burt...." Burt Bacharach lived beneath him.
Burt had a radar for a song - and had heard what they were composing. There then followed a bizarre hour where he tried to muscle in. Wifey was singing. He tried to sing along. Led to the great exchange from Bettis. "Burt, shut up. You can't sing...Go home! Go home!!"
Wifey was mortified - she just wanted to write with Burt!
If you want to understand Gen Z, there is a Twitch steamer called f1nn5ter who likes to dress up like a stereotypical woman whilst streaming - but he’s not trans, he uses he/him pronouns and likes to talk about being alpha. He’s also just been banned for showing too much boob.
The future ladies and gents
And that future's no different from the past, aside from the streaming. Trans is a spectrum, and always has been. The only new thing is 'streaming'.
Over all the many elections of 2019, 1 conviction and 1 caution for using someone else's vote. And both cases involving a relative, curiously enough.
Which given the risk of either claiming the vote of somebody who was voted, or a voter turning up wanting to use their vote later, is probably a fair measure of the scale of the problem.
The government's plans are a bad solution looking for a problem.
A glorious lunch time in East London so I thought I'd take the benefit and help out Mrs Stodge by getting her laest parcel away to her mother in NZ.
No chance - apparently there has been a "cyber incident" which means Royal Mail is unable to send anything other than a letter abroad. This incident occurred in early January and is still affecting the service so I can't walk into a Post Office and send a parcel anywhere outside the UK.
Well, I can but I have to use Parcelforce and pay £53 for the privilege - I was offered another service but still £41 to send a £20 parcel and delays to delivery.
I could set out on some generalised rant about the decline of the country but what would be the point - 49% of us apparently would leave if we could, about the same proportion opting to vote Labour. I'd better not use terms like Remainers and Leavers as that'll get some on here over-excited even after nearly seven years.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Bugger that. If democracy means that little to you, you should voluntarily disenfranchise yourself to prove the point. A fraudulent vote is the theft of the democratic right to say who governs the country, of one voter for the opposing party. One is one too many.
Democracy means so little to you that you'll happily see 1000s of vulnerable people disenfranchised because they are not aware of the need to have photo ID.
At the same time the actual controls over said photo id are laughable. Any fraudster could apply for a Voter Authority Certificate - no one checks the photo when you apply.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
Pre Boris there was an idea that Labour voters were thickos. Anything that made voting more complicated than remembering their own name benefited the Tories.
Since Boris and Brexit the hangers floggers and serially stupid vote Tory
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Don't know about the first one, but the second is zero.
No it's not going to be zero, is it?
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
I fully expect it to top the news on 4 May.
Quasi-Darwinian filter excluding the dim, apathetic and ill informed. What a shame.
The wife wrote songs with John Bettis in LA (he wrote many of the Carpenters songs, amongst many others for massive names). One day they were working a song on the piano. There was a knock on the door. "Oh hell...that'll be Burt...." Burt Bacharach lived beneath him.
Burt had a radar for a song - and had heard what they were composing. There then followed a bizarre hour where he tried to muscle in. Wifey was singing. He tried to sing along. Led to the great exchange from Bettis. "Burt, shut up. You can't sing...Go home! Go home!!"
Wifey was mortified - she just wanted to write with Burt!
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Don't know about the first one, but the second is zero.
No it's not going to be zero, is it?
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
I fully expect it to top the news on 4 May.
Quasi-Darwinian filter excluding the dim, apathetic and ill informed. What a shame.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Don't know about the first one, but the second is zero.
No it's not going to be zero, is it?
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
I fully expect it to top the news on 4 May.
Quasi-Darwinian filter excluding the dim, apathetic and ill informed. What a shame.
Why is photo ID needed? What issue is it solving beyond disenfranchising voters?
I’ve seen this as a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There is no evidence of large scale voter fraud.
One stolen vote is one too many if it's your vote.
Sledgehammer and nut.
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
Don't know about the first one, but the second is zero.
No it's not going to be zero, is it?
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
I fully expect it to top the news on 4 May.
Quasi-Darwinian filter excluding the dim, apathetic and ill informed. What a shame.
Why stop there? IQ of 110+ to vote? Graduates-only?
Comments
It looks like the GOP are going to pick candidates too Trumpite or socially conservative for the average American now in turn for the next few cycles
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-ceo-discouraging-uk-tax-policies-led-company-invest-400-mln-ireland-2023-02-09/
No one was overly bothered and it did not require the National Identity Card sort of thing so beloved of recent politicians (esp. Blair's Labour Party).
Biden of course in 88 had that plagiarism scandal, amusingly copying a speech by Kinnock.
So it's not altogether the Dems fault they didn't pick the candidates you suggest...
I notice on the list of acceptable forms of photo I.D. is "Older Person’s Bus Pass" - does that have a photo on it? If so, I'm thinking that this may help my dad as he has one of those. Otherwise, there is no way he is faffing about getting a new I.D. at age 86 and has no passport or driving license.
Even if not Biden in 1988, Gore would have been more electable than Dukakis.
Dukakis was trounced by Bush 41 in 1988, Gore won the popular vote and nearly the EC v Bush 43 in 2000
1) You don't have to carry it at all times
2) You have access to the database associated with it and a mechanism to swiftly correct any errors
3) It replaces the passport and driving licence and is in itself sufficient proof of identity for any purpose
4) You can see who has accessed the aforesaid database and for what reason, and raise a complaint about anyone who should not have done.
Hell will freeze over before (4) is agreed to, and it will certainly be chilly before (2) is agreed to, while the police would see no point to it without (1).
So - I am opposed to them in practice.
Every time I enter a UK airport the automated reader pauses, takes my photograph and rejects me. I thought it might be the clean shaven photo on my EU passport didn't correspond to my post lockdown Santa Claus look. But no! Even my new Brexit passport gives me an emphatic "seek assistance". I then have to queue with the 3rd worlders for the official to look, stare, ponder and give me the third degree before I am allowed back into blighty.
I don’t support the death penalty, because of miscarriages of justice, but a recent debate I had with @ClarkeMicah demonstrated it’s not as simple as this.
Half the country supports it - do you think they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in politics? Really?
https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1623682693845114880
Republican Party donors and leaders are talking about how best to stop Trump from running away with the nomination again in 2024. But they don’t (yet) have a clear plan to stop him.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/09/gop-trump-2024-election-00081944
...“I don’t think it is fair to call Donald Trump a damaged candidate,” said Eric Levine, a top GOP fundraiser who has been calling on the party to move on from Trump since the 2020 election and the uprising at the Capitol. “He is a metastasizing cancer who if he is not stopped is going to destroy the party. Donald Trump is a loser. He is the first president since Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term. ...
As I say I still don't think it is worth it, as there will be some disruption which I think unnecessary, but the level of it can still be exagerrated.
To reiterate a point I've made many times before: 15-20% of the electorate are functionally illiterate.
By nature, I'm small-c conservative. I'm all for change, but change is best done by evolution over revolution, and based on DATA. There's f-all evidence that these anti-personation changes will make voting better represent the will of the eligible population. Personation is a tiny issue, compared to (say) postal voting fraud.
I'm therefore dead-set against these changes. There's no evidence there's a significant problem, and the downsides of preventing eligible people from voting seem to far outweigh the benefits.
I'd hope (yeah, right) that people across the political spectrum would agree with that.
Before that, it had happened twice - Adams and Jefferson, the first two vice presidents, when the electoral college worked differently and the runner-up became Veep.
So it's actually quite an unusual occurrence.
If the track suited types who burn towers of pallets* each year and their oppos in the other community can figure out voting for their miniature hate parties**.
*Moved on from the car tires. Progress.
**Every gangster has his miniature party, for those who think that the Shinners, PUP etc are a bit light. Think BNP, but without the MENSA level genius.
a) What is the problem X is designed to fix?
b) Is this a proportonate way to address that problem?
c) In assessing b), what is the scale of the problem and what are the potential other impacts and costs of the fix?
If your only recourse, in a democracy, to preventing stuff in the long term, is banning advocacy of X, then you have already lost.
'Loser' is absolutely the best thing they can throw at him.
A serving Metropolitan Police officer has appeared in court charged with rape and assault of one alleged victim.
PC Jorden Brown, 40, allegedly carried out the attacks between November 2018 and February 2019.
Barkingside magistrates’ court was told that Brown, of Dagenham, east London, was charged with one count of rape and three counts of actual bodily harm against one woman by postal requisition last month. He appeared in the dock and spoke only to confirm his name and address.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/serving-metropolitan-police-officer-charged-with-rape-and-assault-xvzzkq93t
I don't think it is as simple as that. A lot of people are in principle in favour of making elections more secure, and of the use of photo idea (at least in theory - when they come up against it they may not), and the supposed partisan benefit seems rather uncertain, definitely not reliable as a suppression method, and as you say might even backfire. So I think really it is just reaching for a simplistic solution in overreaction to a potential issue.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1003093/Postal-vote-application-form-English.pdf
We should be looking at tightening up that process first before making in-person voting harder.
My rule of thumb is that 1% of people are potential angels, and 1% are potential devils. That means that in the Met, there will 300 officers who could be seen as devils. And the problem is that you often cannot tell who they are until they commit a crime.
Therefore the important thing becomes detecting, and reacting. In the case above, how long was there between the crime realistically becoming detectable by the authorities and the officer's suspension/ prosecution?
That's where the Met utterly failed in the Couzens case: there were many warning signs that had been picked up. But if your organisation has more than (say) 200 people, there will be wrong 'un's amongst them. Maybe not rapists, but thugs. Or fraudsters. Or whatever.
This is where culture plays into it: if you have a culture where: "Hey, he chatted that member of the public up" is okay, then you might have a problem. If you have a culture where it's okay to refer to another employee as 'the rapist', then you have a problem for multiple reasons.
Most of that 1% devils can be diverted from devilry by a culture that frowns on devilry. If your culture excuses it, or worse condones it, then you have major issues.
But, I thought it'd be in several years time.
I can't see anything here that says the ERO likewise writes to the original address.
https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
How many people claim their vote was stolen at the last GE? How many people are going to have their vote effectively stolen by these measures?
I could argue that one night-time house burglary was one too many. How about we introduce a blanket night curfew to stop them?
"Investigators believe the company brokered sale agreements to supply nitrile gloves to companies in the USA and Germany worth over $35 million."
Note the countries...
God, it's good. My sister had a copy on tape that I used to listen to, and I'd forgotten how good it is.
https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity-life/king-charles-iii-reportedly-plans-50-million-divorce-deal-with-meghan-markle-to-stop-prince-harry-from-throwing-his-life-away/news-story/15fc829b56fbcfb1f3f91f8e371568a8?amp
Best guess - they're not interested because they weren't selling to the UK.
There are going to be lots of people who, despite everything, fail to realise they need ID to vote, and therefore fail to secure it, and therefore lose their vote.
I fully expect it to top the news on 4 May.
Burt had a radar for a song - and had heard what they were composing. There then followed a bizarre hour where he tried to muscle in. Wifey was singing. He tried to sing along. Led to the great exchange from Bettis. "Burt, shut up. You can't sing...Go home! Go home!!"
Wifey was mortified - she just wanted to write with Burt!
And the question is where the 'too many barriers' lies. Too few barriers, and you will aid fraud. Too many, and you will disenfranchise too many.
But there's another point here; in FPTP, in most constituencies, you would need thousands of votes to swing in order to create a difference to the electoral outcome. Doing that via personation is really hard. Whereas large-scale postal fraud is an interesting concept to consider, and potentially doable.
The future ladies and gents
What an amazing life.
Edit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quentin_Crisp
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/our-views-and-research/our-research/electoral-fraud-data/2019-electoral-fraud-data
Over all the many elections of 2019, 1 conviction and 1 caution for using someone else's vote. And both cases involving a relative, curiously enough.
Which given the risk of either claiming the vote of somebody who was voted, or a voter turning up wanting to use their vote later, is probably a fair measure of the scale of the problem.
The government's plans are a bad solution looking for a problem.
A glorious lunch time in East London so I thought I'd take the benefit and help out Mrs Stodge by getting her laest parcel away to her mother in NZ.
No chance - apparently there has been a "cyber incident" which means Royal Mail is unable to send anything other than a letter abroad. This incident occurred in early January and is still affecting the service so I can't walk into a Post Office and send a parcel anywhere outside the UK.
Well, I can but I have to use Parcelforce and pay £53 for the privilege - I was offered another service but still £41 to send a £20 parcel and delays to delivery.
I could set out on some generalised rant about the decline of the country but what would be the point - 49% of us apparently would leave if we could, about the same proportion opting to vote Labour. I'd better not use terms like Remainers and Leavers as that'll get some on here over-excited even after nearly seven years.
At the same time the actual controls over said photo id are laughable. Any fraudster could apply for a Voter Authority Certificate - no one checks the photo when you apply.
They didn’t even have to “learn lessons”!
OK, everyone can move on now. The Scottish Prison Service has cleared itself over the Isla Bryson affair and the Scottish Government has welcomed this
https://twitter.com/chrismusson/status/1623721969106518017
Since Boris and Brexit the hangers floggers and serially stupid vote Tory