Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly a year ago this weekend ComRes had TMay’s Tories 25% a

SystemSystem Posts: 12,683
edited April 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly a year ago this weekend ComRes had TMay’s Tories 25% ahead

It is just a year since Theresa May made her fateful and what will be her career defining announcement about calling a general election to secure a bigger majority.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,705
    First, like the Tories!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,399
    Amazing to think the LibDems were polling 12% with some pollsters a year ago.
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    FPT
    JohnLoony said:

    Charles said:

    Ed Balls on BBC playing the eukaleli and singing “when I’m cleaning windows”

    If you think that's how to spell "ukulele" then you should be beaten to death with a four-foot-long frozen-solid armadillo.

    It’s the little-known Basque version of the instrument.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    I suspect OGH is right when he says that at least part of the Tories’ problems were caused by Mrs May leaving the TV debates to deputies and to Corbyn. The Daily Mail and Sun reading public were faced, not with the pitchfork-wielding wild revolutionary they’d been led to expect, but a mild-mannered chap, prepared to argue and debate. And seemed to have some good ideas.
    So, they began to wonder, what else is wrong with what we;ve been told. Then came the discussions over the manifesto and, from the Tories point of view it all went downhill.
    At the time of the locals the Tories had only just started to implode.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Good morning, everyone.

    'tis depressing. Corbyn might've been gone, the Lib Dems resurgent had he remained. May made some obvious and enormous errors. I wonder if she took advice from Clinton.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    The Tories figures aren't far off...

    It all changed of course once the masses heard the Jezziah speak.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Will the identity checks being trialled affect local election results? Presumably CCHQ hopes so, else what is the point of its gerrymandering project?

    The Observer reports the EHRC has objected:
    Tories in new race row over identity checks for elections
    New rules ‘will deter migrant voters’, watchdog claims, adding to Windrush scandal
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/21/identity-checks-election-disenfranchise-ethnic-minorities
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Labour did well.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'tis depressing. Corbyn might've been gone, the Lib Dems resurgent had he remained. May made some obvious and enormous errors. I wonder if she took advice from Clinton.

    No, not Hillary Clinton. Theresa May's errors were due largely to Lynton Crosby although he has managed to blame Nick and Fiona, so that's all right then. Endlessly parroting strong and stable while avoiding debate -- Crosby, who failed to notice the one gave the lie to the other. A presidential campaign based on May alone, with the rest of the cabinet locked in a cupboard -- Crosby, who did not realise May was not Cameron (and Labour had earlier made the same mistake when it asked Brown to act like Blair).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,885
    Campaign. From. Hell.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Its very hard to imagine Pollsterscoming up with such rogue polls They were always going to be wrong.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,388
    Mr Cole,

    Surely exaggerating the opponents' faults is normal politics. It happened with Ken Livingstone too; he was portrayed as a fiery Karl Marx on steroids and when he came over as a mild mannered man with a soft voice and a liking for newts, he became cuddly Ken for a while.

    To the Corbynistas, Mrs May is a vicious, blood-curdling, spittle-flecked Hitler intent on exterminating the lower classes, when in reality, she's a pleasant, if slightly incompetent, elderly woman with an interest in politics, and the Windrush cock-up isn't the beginnings of her attempt to foment race-war.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. Jonathan, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Indeed, one might argue they're closely linked in the blue case.

    Corbyn, however, is a good campaigner, but an absolutely horrendous politician.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The big change was not in the Conservative polling but in Labour’s eventual result.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,391
    Jonathan said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
    Bad products get sold all the time, very successfully. Marketing is key.

    Of course it helps if the product is good too.

    I never quite understood why May was registering as popular as such polls indicated, but there did seem to be some supporting evidence it was true to an extent. Corbyn really did well in the campaign, and Farron very badly - as his pitch was about replacing the opposition, the failure to cut through in any way really helped Corbyn steal the show.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    Not incapable but proportionally less likely to do so, perhaps.

    Northern Ireland did have a clear personation problem -- vote early, vote often! The rest of the country did not and does not. The only electoral fraud for which there is any real evidence has surrounded postal votes, which this does nothing to address (and quite by coincidence, postal voters are widely held to lean Conservative).

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
    Bad products get sold all the time, very successfully. Marketing is key.

    Of course it helps if the product is good too.

    I never quite understood why May was registering as popular as such polls indicated, but there did seem to be some supporting evidence it was true to an extent. Corbyn really did well in the campaign, and Farron very badly - as his pitch was about replacing the opposition, the failure to cut through in any way really helped Corbyn steal the show.
    Cameron was a good salesman, May wasn’t. If you have a bad product you will be found out in the end.

    Tories suffered from a poor salesman and a poor product.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    AlastairMeeks said:

    The big change was not in the Conservative polling but in Labour’s eventual result.

    If you'd offered the Tories 42% of the vote at the start of the campaign I suspect they'd have gladly taken it.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,086
    rcs1000 said:

    Amazing to think the LibDems were polling 12% with some pollsters a year ago.

    ... and UKIP 10% (actual result 1.8%).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,391
    rkrkrk said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    The big change was not in the Conservative polling but in Labour’s eventual result.

    If you'd offered the Tories 42% of the vote at the start of the campaign I suspect they'd have gladly taken it.
    That would be dependent on the gap between them and Labour. 42% is pretty good, but doesn't do them much good when Labour close the gap to a few percent. If they'd been offered 36%, but Labour would be on 25%, they'd take that over 42/40.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,391
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    Not incapable but proportionally less likely to do so, perhaps.

    Northern Ireland did have a clear personation problem -- vote early, vote often! The rest of the country did not and does not. The only electoral fraud for which there is any real evidence has surrounded postal votes, which this does nothing to address (and quite by coincidence, postal voters are widely held to lean Conservative).

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
    Boundaries do need reviewing, and surely our way of redrawing them is not as blatantly partisan as in the USA?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. L, none of those changes have been unfair or gerrymandering.

    On postal voting: I'd like that massively restricted once again. People who can't be bothered to wander a short distance once every four to five years don't feel strongly enough to have their opinions count.

    Obviously, exceptions should be made for those working overseas but still entitled to a vote (armed forces standing out), or who are seriously ill.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    CD13 said:

    Mr Cole,

    Surely exaggerating the opponents' faults is normal politics. It happened with Ken Livingstone too; he was portrayed as a fiery Karl Marx on steroids and when he came over as a mild mannered man with a soft voice and a liking for newts, he became cuddly Ken for a while.

    To the Corbynistas, Mrs May is a vicious, blood-curdling, spittle-flecked Hitler intent on exterminating the lower classes, when in reality, she's a pleasant, if slightly incompetent, elderly woman with an interest in politics, and the Windrush cock-up isn't the beginnings of her attempt to foment race-war.

    As a Left voter, I think your description of May is reasonably accurate. I think though that I’d add that she seems to have a gift for choosing poor advisors.
    And I find it difficult to belive that anyone woulkd think Mrs May 'intent on exterminating the lower classes’. After all, she’s reasonably pragmatic; who would do the cleaning? I know, of course, that Mr M takes out the bins!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    kle4 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    Not incapable but proportionally less likely to do so, perhaps.

    Northern Ireland did have a clear personation problem -- vote early, vote often! The rest of the country did not and does not. The only electoral fraud for which there is any real evidence has surrounded postal votes, which this does nothing to address (and quite by coincidence, postal voters are widely held to lean Conservative).

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
    Boundaries do need reviewing, and surely our way of redrawing them is not as blatantly partisan as in the USA?
    Very few places atr, apart perhaps from Zimbabwe.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,391
    CD13 said:



    Surely exaggerating the opponents' faults is normal politics. It happened with Ken Livingstone too; he was portrayed as a fiery Karl Marx on steroids and when he came over as a mild mannered man with a soft voice and a liking for newts, he became cuddly Ken for a while.


    Haven't seen Ken in the news much lately - is he finally keeping a low profile, or have the media gotten bored of reporting on his latest ramblings?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
    Yes. How many legitimate voters are you prepared to effectively disenfranchise to remove any illegitimate voters?

    The ID requirements could have a ratio of many 1000's to 1.
    44 allegations of impersonation in 2016.
    https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/223184/Fraud-allegations-data-report-2016.pdf


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    O/T dbut in the BBC report of Jeremy Hunts criticism of social media, that the minimum age of posting on Instagram is 13.

    My 12 year old granddaughter posts regularly, with a group of friends. And yes, her parents know, and at lkeast ttry to monitor.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    kle4 said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    Not incapable but proportionally less likely to do so, perhaps.

    Northern Ireland did have a clear personation problem -- vote early, vote often! The rest of the country did not and does not. The only electoral fraud for which there is any real evidence has surrounded postal votes, which this does nothing to address (and quite by coincidence, postal voters are widely held to lean Conservative).

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
    Boundaries do need reviewing, and surely our way of redrawing them is not as blatantly partisan as in the USA?
    We do not give the ruling party a map and a box of crayons. But this tactic, like the others, is taken from America. First bias the register so that Labour-leaning areas seem less populated than they really are, then set the scrupulously neutral Boundary Commissions to work on the basis of those registers.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,388
    edited April 2018
    Mr Cole,

    "I find it difficult to belive that anyone woulkd think Mrs May 'intent on exterminating the lower classes’.

    I always wondered if some of these loons actually believe what they say sometimes but they do say it in argument. Personally I don't think all Tories are vermin. Some are very nice, as are some of Jezza's pals. And it's only politics, not real life anyway.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,344
    OldKingCole said:

    CD13 said:

    Mr Cole,

    Surely exaggerating the opponents' faults is normal politics. It happened with Ken Livingstone too; he was portrayed as a fiery Karl Marx on steroids and when he came over as a mild mannered man with a soft voice and a liking for newts, he became cuddly Ken for a while.

    To the Corbynistas, Mrs May is a vicious, blood-curdling, spittle-flecked Hitler intent on exterminating the lower classes, when in reality, she's a pleasant, if slightly incompetent, elderly woman with an interest in politics, and the Windrush cock-up isn't the beginnings of her attempt to foment race-war.

    As a Left voter, I think your description of May is reasonably accurate. I think though that I’d add that she seems to have a gift for choosing poor advisors.
    And I find it difficult to belive that anyone woulkd think Mrs May 'intent on exterminating the lower classes’. After all, she’s reasonably pragmatic; who would do the cleaning? I know, of course, that Mr M takes out the bins!
    'Pleasant' is not an adjective I'd ever use to describe her.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    King Cole, I just skimmed the article but apparently there is an under 13s version.

    Also, young people lie about stuff for things like that. Frankly, thinking you can make the internet safe for children is about as dumb as thinking you can make the roads safe. Risk can be reduced but it will *always* be there, and pretending otherwise is plain daft (not to mention a world safe for the stupidest man imaginable would be a damned tedious place for everyone else in which to live).
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, none of those changes have been unfair or gerrymandering.

    On postal voting: I'd like that massively restricted once again. People who can't be bothered to wander a short distance once every four to five years don't feel strongly enough to have their opinions count.

    Obviously, exceptions should be made for those working overseas but still entitled to a vote (armed forces standing out), or who are seriously ill.

    Yes they have, and that is their purpose. Read again and see how they work together to the advantage of the Conservative Party, and then see how they originated with the Republican Party in the United States. It is of no consequence that you can defend each measure in isolation -- indeed, that is part of their design.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. L, it's an interesting approach to say every measure is defensible but that means they can't be defended collectively. Why not?

    Also, I did agree with your implied suggestion postal voting should be restricted.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,066


    48% did NOT want to be dragged kicking and screaming into her promised land while they could still do something about it.

    By making it a done deal the pollsters just encouraged those who feared Corbyn to relax.




  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    edited April 2018
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,344
    Roger said:



    48% did NOT want to be dragged kicking and screaming into her promised land while they could still do something about it.

    By making it a done deal the pollsters just encouraged those who feared Corbyn to relax.




    I'd agree with those two, and add a third: having f--- all to offer anyone under 35.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Will the identity checks being trialled affect local election results? Presumably CCHQ hopes so, else what is the point of its gerrymandering project?

    The Observer reports the EHRC has objected:
    Tories in new race row over identity checks for elections
    New rules ‘will deter migrant voters’, watchdog claims, adding to Windrush scandal
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/21/identity-checks-election-disenfranchise-ethnic-minorities

    I think it depends on what’s been asked. Royal Mail now insist on Id to pick up missed deliveries. But they’ll accept a bank card etc. Anything with name on. That’s fine. It annoys me that we now once again need to show our papers because some groups can’t control themselves from cheating.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    The innocent have nothing to fear!
    Impressive that you can make this argument so soon after the Windrush debacle.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. Meeks, I agree with your sentiments.

    That is not, however, the same as being asked for ID in specific situations (buying alcohol, for example).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,258
    edited April 2018
    If you look at those polls ORB and Opinium were not far off the final Tory voteshare, the big difference was the Labour voteshare was too low and the LD and UKIP votes too high.

    It was a similar story in the county council elections when the Tories actually rose from 38% to 42% in the general election. It was just Labour rose even more from 28% in the local elections to 40% at the general election as the LDs collapsed from 18% to 7% and UKIP from 5% to 1% in Labour's failure
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Meeks, I agree with your sentiments.

    That is not, however, the same as being asked for ID in specific situations (buying alcohol, for example).

    ID for voting might be worth considering if there were any evidence that electoral fraud was having a material impact on results. There isn’t, so the question whether it might deter some from participating in the electoral process becomes determinative of the question. Why actually put off large numbers of people from voting from what seems to be at present an essentially negligible problem?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    Fine; that’s up to you.
    When ID cards were first suggested ...... in their most recent incarnation, anyway; think I still have my mothers WWII one........ I was opposed to the idea. However, given the way the world has moved on, I’m now not so sure. After all, I routinely carry a driving licence, which has my picture, and bus pass (ditto) plus several cards..... Railcard, credit cards, gym and co-op membership cards which don’t.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    edited April 2018
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,345
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Showing identity papers doesn't solve the double voting problem and there is already an identity check with postal voting - so that disposes of your counter arguments.

    Your last point is plain daft! How about legislating against morris dancing before it becomes endemic and affects UK productivity and mental health?
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,045
    I remember idly wishing that the YouGov had shifted one point from Labour to UKIP, because 48/24/12/6 (and Greens on 3) would be such a mathematically satisfying score...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,271
    rcs1000 said:

    david_herdson said:

    GIN1138 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    The Great Brexit betrayal is coming according to The Sunday Times, Sir Graham Brady's postie is going to get a hernia.

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/987791875041124354

    It will be the last thing she does (as PM) if she does.
    I'm not sure it will. It'll depend on what conditions come with it. The alternative is that come March next year, Britain is out of every FTA the EU has, bar those where the other signatory has agreed to roll it over. As yet, I don't think a single one has?

    The problems will come if there has to be significant and ongoing regulatory alignment, and if the ECJ is the sole arbiter of internal UK-EU disputes.
    I've said it before, but it bears repeating, the Department for International Trade should have spent the last two years ensuring that we replicated the existing trade deals of the EU. instead, Dr Fox has spent his time in Washington chasing the chimera of an easy UK-US free trade deal.
    I don't think this is correct. The DiT has mostly been concentrated on rolling over existing agreements. It's not a quick and easy thing to do and many partners don't want to be rolled over. They see an opportunity to get advantage of us because we need the deal and we're weaker than the EU as a trading partner. Ironically the UK has had to rely on the EU to keep the current relationships in place, at least for the transition.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    How do you manage in Hungary? When I came to Spain I could do nothing without an NIE and then residencia as is the norm in most countries.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    edited April 2018
    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Surely the Windrush problem demonstrates a use for ID cards. If the WG’s had had, at the age of 16, to get a valid ID card, then the problems would have been sorted out much closer to the time they originated.

    Incidentally, when I, born in 1938, reached the age of 18 I had to apply for a National Service ID card (of some sort, cant recall the exact details) which had to be produced to an ‘official” ..... policemen that sort of thing. That went on for another 5 years or so.
    How did the WG’s who got to 18 during that period ...... there muast have been some .....manage?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    felix said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    How do you manage in Hungary? When I came to Spain I could do nothing without an NIE and then residencia as is the norm in most countries.
    When in Rome.

    I feel entitled to take a stand on British laws.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 821
    CD13 said:

    Mr Cole,

    Surely exaggerating the opponents' faults is normal politics. It happened with Ken Livingstone too; he was portrayed as a fiery Karl Marx on steroids and when he came over as a mild mannered man with a soft voice and a liking for newts, he became cuddly Ken for a while.

    To the Corbynistas, Mrs May is a vicious, blood-curdling, spittle-flecked Hitler intent on exterminating the lower classes, when in reality, she's a pleasant, if slightly incompetent, elderly woman with an interest in politics, and the Windrush cock-up isn't the beginnings of her attempt to foment race-war.

    TM is a WASP and has the typical English disdain for people who are not "one of us". Tolerant on the surface, and not prone to violence, but with hidden contempt. Occasionally it surfaces, hence the disparaging comment about "citizens of nowhere", similar to the Soviet slur "rootless cosmopolitans".
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,983
    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    I am surprised they are not suggesting 2 votes for the over 70s.

    It would only be fair due to their service to the country.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,694
    ‘Bye folks. off to watch, I hope, Essex win their first game of the season. Especially after the Yorkshire washout,
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    'tis depressing. Corbyn might've been gone, the Lib Dems resurgent had he remained. May made some obvious and enormous errors. I wonder if she took advice from Clinton.

    No, not Hillary Clinton. Theresa May's errors were due largely to Lynton Crosby although he has managed to blame Nick and Fiona, so that's all right then. Endlessly parroting strong and stable while avoiding debate -- Crosby, who failed to notice the one gave the lie to the other. A presidential campaign based on May alone, with the rest of the cabinet locked in a cupboard -- Crosby, who did not realise May was not Cameron (and Labour had earlier made the same mistake when it asked Brown to act like Blair).
    Ironically 'strong and stable' was very much the imagery created for Gordon Brown in the summer of 2007.

    He then marched the country to the brink of a general election before losing his bottle.

    His 2007 Conference speech could, with a few name changes, have almost been given by May:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7010664.stm

    This bit seems amusing in retrospect:

    ' In July I announced a new unified border force. And already the first elements are in place - a stronger uniformed presence at ports, customs officers targeting illegal immigration, stronger security checks at passport control, by next year ID cards for foreign nationals and we will start to count people in and out.

    And we will move forward with our new Australian-style points-based approach to immigration. So Britain will continue to benefit from skilled workers from abroad and they will understand their responsibilities to earn the right to settle in Britain. '
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,961
    Could it be true? Could the inner cult be beginning to have doubts?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5643037/DAN-HODGES-Loyal-lieutenants-starting-whisper-cut-Corbyn-Corbynism.html#ixzz5DNlJGuwp
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,885
    Jonathan said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
    Product that should never have been put on the market without far, far more testing.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. Barnesian, you're clearly not being serious. The greater the number of morris dancers, the greater the gaiety of the nation.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,885
    I see the Sunday Times has picked up on Labour's candidate for Worcester - an, er, interesting choice! A fantasist who has been under 14 extended civil restraint orders by the High Court.

    Typical of Worcester Woman?
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Andy_Cooke said:

    I remember idly wishing that the YouGov had shifted one point from Labour to UKIP, because 48/24/12/6 (and Greens on 3) would be such a mathematically satisfying score...

    Maybe, it was. The pollsters got it wrong. They always do.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    MarqueeMark said:

    Jonathan said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
    Product that should never have been put on the market without far, far more testing.
    OGH should rent out this site for political ideas testing.

    It should be remembered that Osborne's freezing of the student debt repayment threshold was a self-harming booby-trap waiting to be activated.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TGOHF said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.
    I’m attending a wedding in Northern Ireland on 3 May. How do you propose I cast my vote in person in Islington?
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    edited April 2018
    What utter rubbish from the EHRC. They have swallowed wholesale the US racialised dialogue around photo ID when it is simply not applicable here.

    I work with lots of people from developing countries who now work in the U.K. They are generally horrified that they can vote without presenting ID, because that requirement has been normal in their countries of origin for decades. On a related topic, they think that being able to vote because they’re Commonwealth citizens is ridiculous - because it is.

    The EHRC should be wound up, pronto.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,961
    https://twitter.com/owenjbennett/status/987973142411857921
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    For those here who like doom and disaster predictions Gardenwalker's is one worth noting:

    ' All cultural interactions are going to cease, and Stratford is going to be closed down.

    Thats exactly what the article I posted some hours ago suggested, and what I’m predicting now. '

    Aside from the previous Brexit related ones - the car factories will close down, the City will move to Frankfurt, the crops will not be harvested and we'll all starve - I wonder how many other doom and disaster predictions have been made during the last 50 years ?

    Nuclear war will kill us all
    A new ice age will end civilisation
    Global warming will end civilisation
    The millenium bug will end civilisation
    The oil will run out by 2000
    The rainforests / oceans will be destroyed
    All the birds / bees will die leading to crop failures
    We'll all die of AIDS / nvCJD / bird flu
    The banking system will collapse and with it the world economy
    Arab governments will be overthrown by supporters of Saddam Hussein / Osama bin Laden

    Perhaps I'm getting old and cynical but has any doom and disaster prediction ever come true ?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,345
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Barnesian, you're clearly not being serious. The greater the number of morris dancers, the greater the gaiety of the nation.

    No doubt. But if a significant number took it up it would be clearly seen as a mental health issue. We should take action NOW before it becomes endemic.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 81,149
    edited April 2018
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. L, how does it pertain to Windrush? Or racism generally?

    Are black people incapable of driving cars? Do those of Far Eastern ancestry find it impossible to acquire a utility bill or passport?

    This works in Northern Ireland. Why shouldn't it work here?

    Not incapable but proportionally less likely to do so, perhaps.

    Northern Ireland did have a clear personation problem -- vote early, vote often! The rest of the country did not and does not. The only electoral fraud for which there is any real evidence has surrounded postal votes, which this does nothing to address (and quite by coincidence, postal voters are widely held to lean Conservative).

    What has happened, I fear, is that the Cameron/Osborne-led party imported the gerrymandering toolkit from the American Republican party. Hence the purging of the registers (which ironically cost the Cameroons their existence as it lost them the EU referendum), the redrawn boundaries on the new, blue-tilted registers, the reduction in seats to ensure that every boundary was so redrawn, and of course this ID requirement.
    Strictly speaking what you’re discussing (aside from the redrawn boundaries) is vote suppression, rather than gerrymandering. But it is indeed a persistent tactic in the US.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/owenjbennett/status/987973142411857921

    That will be in the 'progressive' constituency of Islington South.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    At the very least it hardly seems an issue of priority.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    Voter suppression.. LOL
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,381
    AlastairMeeks said:

    TGOHF said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.
    I’m attending a wedding in Northern Ireland on 3 May. How do you propose I cast my vote in person in Islington?
    An obvious example. It is enough that these politicians seek to bother us. Why should we vote only at their convenience?
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    It won't be given to you. We'll be made to pay for it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. Richard, well, quite. Ragnarok springs to mind.

    Mr. Barnesian, it would be seen as the rekindling of enlightenment and wisdom.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    another_richard said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    At the very least it hardly seems an issue of priority.
    It is a solution desperately seeking a problem.

    ......................................................................

    David Gauke on Marr BBC2 - A Cabinet member desperately seeking someone else to blame .... again.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    We have no idea of how big a problem it is, because personation is almost impossible to detect when there is no requirement for ID.

    What makes the U.K. so special? Are France, Spain, Mexico, India and Canada oppressive states for requiring that voters demonstrate their eligibility?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 81,149
    JackW said:

    another_richard said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    At the very least it hardly seems an issue of priority.
    It is a solution desperately seeking a problem....
    Which, if they were as they describe themselves, hardly a conservative approach.

  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Jonathan, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Indeed, one might argue they're closely linked in the blue case.

    Corbyn, however, is a good campaigner, but an absolutely horrendous politician.

    But we never heard anything about him being a good campaigner until he got results. Maybe he'll turn out to be a good politician too. And on the whole campaigning is an activity requiring the same skills and judgements as other things that need to get done. So common sense suggests Corbyn might be pretty good.

    Cameron was a pretty good campaigner and did a pretty good job of being PM. May was a bad campaigner and is cringe inducingly bad in her current job.

    So if you ignore the partisans, the prejudiced and the politically slanted papers, any decent minded person would conclude that Corbyn was the best choice and would now be doing a better job. British fair play.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    RoyalBlue said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    We have no idea of how big a problem it is, because personation is almost impossible to detect when there is no requirement for ID.

    What makes the U.K. so special? Are France, Spain, Mexico, India and Canada oppressive states for requiring that voters demonstrate their eligibility?
    Personation is easy to detect when the real voter pitches up at the polling station.

    But that is not the reason for these measures.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 81,149
    Another EU trade deal...
    https://www.politico.eu/article/mexicos-eu-trade-deal-lands-a-punch-on-trump/
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,907
    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    How do you manage in Hungary? When I came to Spain I could do nothing without an NIE and then residencia as is the norm in most countries.
    When in Rome.

    I feel entitled to take a stand on British laws.
    A rare point of agreement. I’ve had compulsory ID cards in a number of countries over the years, but it’s still a source of pride that Britain doesn’t have a requirement for such papers.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,885
    another_richard said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Jonathan said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    Campaign. From. Hell.

    Bad product.
    Product that should never have been put on the market without far, far more testing.
    OGH should rent out this site for political ideas testing.

    It should be remembered that Osborne's freezing of the student debt repayment threshold was a self-harming booby-trap waiting to be activated.
    To be fair, when people here have money a stake on bets, that testing is pretty much immediate and forensic.

    A leaked draft of the 2017 Tory Manifesto would have elicited "WTF????????????" in about four seconds.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,308
    Morning all :)

    Always enjoyable to see the authoritarian Right showing its true colours on things like ID cards. It all went so well back in the Michael Howard period - remember when the poor old Shadow HS had to stand up in the Commons and argue for a policy he didn't support ? Whatever happened to him ?

    If that had been a Labour Shadow Home Secretary how'd we have all laughed or claimed she was mentally ill or something similar.

    This all goes back to a time when identity cards were seen as the preserve of the authoritarian State and irrespective of how security these days has evolved, the notion of carrying another card to prove who you are and where you live (one presumably you will have to pay for, £300 was it last time, to add to all the other cards showing who you are and where you live) has been comprehensively ridiculed.

    There is no perfect solution to ensuring the democratic process is conducted fairly and freely. We do the best we can - does fraud happen ? Regrettably, yes, the use of postal and proxy votes provide the potential for fraud and perhaps they have been too widely available but as an example, my father is in a nursing home and too frail to go to the polling station. Should he and the other residents in his home be disenfranchised ? What about the resident who cannot move or write any longer but can still express a view ?

    In a democracy we ought to be encouraging and providing the opportunity for as much participation as possible and not trying to restrict voting out of fear or out of motivated political self-interest. We should be doing more to preserve individual privacy in the democratic process by recognising the society we are and the notion of attending the local Church Hall on a Thursday between 7am and 10pm may not be the only way of doing things.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Sandpit said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    felix said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, impersonation will be under-represented because it requires the impersonator to pick someone who votes (and we don't have 100% turnout).

    There's also concern about postal voting, and about people voting in two places.

    Why's it fine to ask for ID if you buy a shandy, but unacceptable if it's to vote?

    Fine - so you can double those numbers of 44 cases, and you get 88. It's absolutely trivial.
    By contrast - 3.5m people in the UK don't have a valid ID.

    It's an obvious attempt at voter suppression.


    Nope - people should get a valid ID. It's the norm in most countries and those opposed to it have something to hide.
    If anyone gives me an ID card that I can be called upon to present at any time I shall burn it.
    How do you manage in Hungary? When I came to Spain I could do nothing without an NIE and then residencia as is the norm in most countries.
    When in Rome.

    I feel entitled to take a stand on British laws.
    A rare point of agreement. I’ve had compulsory ID cards in a number of countries over the years, but it’s still a source of pride that Britain doesn’t have a requirement for such papers.
    I agree. But it is the reason all the migrants select the UK as their destination within the EU, and why Denmark is their second choice. Introducing them would be expensive and humiliating, but it would have been cheaper than Brexit.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,381
    edited April 2018
    Recidivist said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Jonathan, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Indeed, one might argue they're closely linked in the blue case.

    Corbyn, however, is a good campaigner, but an absolutely horrendous politician.

    But we never heard anything about him being a good campaigner until he got results. Maybe he'll turn out to be a good politician too. And on the whole campaigning is an activity requiring the same skills and judgements as other things that need to get done. So common sense suggests Corbyn might be pretty good.

    Cameron was a pretty good campaigner and did a pretty good job of being PM. May was a bad campaigner and is cringe inducingly bad in her current job.

    So if you ignore the partisans, the prejudiced and the politically slanted papers, any decent minded person would conclude that Corbyn was the best choice and would now be doing a better job. British fair play.
    Not sure I would agree with that. May is proving to be much, much better at her job of being PM than she was a campaigner. She is approaching the giddy heights of adequate.

    Corbyn, in contrast, is very poor at the day job. He seems incapable of organising a team, thinking on his feet in Parliament, avoiding causing unnecessary grief inside his party and to have a totally tin ear to the public mood on foreign affairs but he undoubtedly had a very good, if slightly fantastical, campaign motivating his supporters, bringing in the supporters of other parties and putting himself about in a way that May just didn't.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,907
    TGOHF said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.
    All but the sick and homebound should need to apply for a postal vote for each election, after its called. I’d also have an early vote ballot box the weekend before the election in each constituency, which would reduce the number of postal ballots still further.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    OldKingCole said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Surely the Windrush problem demonstrates a use for ID cards. If the WG’s had had, at the age of 16, to get a valid ID card, then the problems would have been sorted out much closer to the time they originated.

    Incidentally, when I, born in 1938, reached the age of 18 I had to apply for a National Service ID card (of some sort, cant recall the exact details) which had to be produced to an ‘official” ..... policemen that sort of thing. That went on for another 5 years or so.
    How did the WG’s who got to 18 during that period ...... there muast have been some .....manage?
    My takeaway was that assuming everyone in the population has all the papers you think they ought to have is a big mistake. Making policy decisions based on that assumption leads to disaster for particular individuals.

    But yes, you could take the opposite message. We could start a plan of giving free photo IDs to the estimated 3.5m who don't currently have one to help them vote. Somehow I don't think the conservatives are thinking along those lines.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Mr. Recidivist, are you taking the piss?

    The Windrush fiasco hit the headlines around the same time as the anti-Semitism in Labour scandal. The Government, for all its flaws, is working to resolve the former. What's Corbyn done about the latter?

    Then we've got foreign affairs. The UK, US, Canada, France, etc etc etc all agree Russia is overwhelmingly likely to be to blame for the poisoning of an ex-Russian spy on UK soil. Corbyn stands with almost no-one in disagreeing. On Question Time, his Shadow Foreign Secretary (Thornberry) preferred the Russian to the UN explanation for the OPCW not being in Douma[sp], that is to say the Russian claim it was UN red tape rather than the reality that the team was being prevented entry by the Russians/Syrians who control the ground.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    RoyalBlue said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.

    They have their privacy to hide - a cherished right that over powerful government wants to strip away. Voter fraud is so infinitesimal that one may only wonder whether the Conservatives are intent on replicating the GOP playbook on voter suppression.

    Voters also have perfectly legitimate reasons for absence from in person voting. It is not the governments duty to make voter turnout lower, unless one again the Tories are intent on voter suppression.
    We have no idea of how big a problem it is, because personation is almost impossible to detect when there is no requirement for ID.

    What makes the U.K. so special? Are France, Spain, Mexico, India and Canada oppressive states for requiring that voters demonstrate their eligibility?
    If you have to ask what makes the UK "so special" then I fear there is little hope for you.

    Our nation is not a carbon copy of any other state. We have evolved our traditions, rights and responsibilities down the ages, much of it bought by the blood of our forebears.

    You ask about the scale of the "problem". Are Returning Officers clawing at the Home Office door because John Smith of 34 Acacia Avenue voted twice ? Are our police forces burdened with cases of rampant voter fraud. What of the courts and the jails - are they teetering on the brink of collapse because John Smith and his like are undermining our democracy.

    When the government wants more control of our lives our default position should be NO .. unless the bastards are able to conclusively prove their case. On voter ID they have failed totally.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,308
    More good news for those in favour of the nanny State this morning:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43853678

    Hunt is clearly positioning himself as the new leader of those Tories who believe there's no problem which the Government or legislation can't get involved with or solve - what do you call them, "one nation" no, a better term might be socialists so Hunt is the leader of the socialist Conservatives.

    No one under 50 uses Facebook so that's irrelevant.- the problem with Google is their vast information storage which will need global action to resolve (though I suspect several Governments would find the information Google has collected on their citizens very useful) so we're back to trying to "control" Pinterest, Snapchat, WhatsApp and a legion of other social media formats.

    Good luck with that - Hunt knows it won't work but he's trying to impress the social (as distinct from socialist) Conservatives by showing how concerned he is.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,384
    If compulsory ID cards gave the right to vote, rather than having to be on the electoral register, then the Tories' disenfranchisement efforts would blow up in their faces.

    Therefore this will never happen. Citizens who change address frequently will still be kept out of the polling station.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,961


    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/987976024943153152
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,799
    Recidivist said:



    But we never heard anything about him being a good campaigner until he got results.

    There was talk of how he wasn't being sent anywhere close to marginal because his visits and speeches were a net negative. Personally I think he's a reasonable speaker and campaigner - but he's hardly electrifying. If he was - I think we would have heard of him before 2015.

    I think what caused the huge upsurge for Labour over the campaign was voters liked their policy offer.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,381
    Sandpit said:

    TGOHF said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. rkrkrk, and yet works fine in Northern Ireland (you also ignored the double-voting problem, and that's without considering postal voting). I have no problem with time being taken to iron out weak spots, but the idea we should wait until voter fraud is endemic before attempting to reduce it is plain daft.

    Anyone whose interest was in reducing voter fraud would look at postal voting and probably proxy voting also.
    That the govt is not doing that - but instead is going for a problem which doesn't exist demonstrates what they are really doing.
    Anyone who is against voter ID has something to hide .

    Ban all postal voting too - lazy barstewards.
    All but the sick and homebound should need to apply for a postal vote for each election, after its called. I’d also have an early vote ballot box the weekend before the election in each constituency, which would reduce the number of postal ballots still further.
    I have only used a postal vote once, when work meant I had to be in Edinburgh overnight on election day, but I really don't see the problem with it. Is there any actual evidence of people going around nursing homes, etc farming the votes? Or of patriarchs requiring sight of their family completing the forms in front of them?

    I do agree that allowing early voting, as some American States do, would be a good idea. Voting needs carrots, not sticks.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    stodge said:

    More good news for those in favour of the nanny State this morning:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43853678

    Hunt is clearly positioning himself as the new leader of those Tories who believe there's no problem which the Government or legislation can't get involved with or solve - what do you call them, "one nation" no, a better term might be socialists so Hunt is the leader of the socialist Conservatives.

    No one under 50 uses Facebook so that's irrelevant.- the problem with Google is their vast information storage which will need global action to resolve (though I suspect several Governments would find the information Google has collected on their citizens very useful) so we're back to trying to "control" Pinterest, Snapchat, WhatsApp and a legion of other social media formats.

    Good luck with that - Hunt knows it won't work but he's trying to impress the social (as distinct from socialist) Conservatives by showing how concerned he is.

    I'm surprised that comes under the remit of the Department of Health.

    Or is Hunt merely meddling and posturing ?
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025