Keir Starmer Labour Leader

Bert_ said:
That's the point. If the spoilt ballot count is significant enough then that's the message. It would be better to have "None of the above" on the ballot, but if you don't want to vote for any candidate then that's the only way you can express that view. And it doesn't mean writing war and peace on the ballot or drawing a picture. A single line across the paper will do.

You can just not turn up, but they don't announce how many people didn't vote at the count.
Click to expand...

Yes, these figures are poured over during the post ballot analysis... if someone who has voted regularly suddenly stops voting and enough of such individuals do precisely that then the chances are the powers that be will notice.... whether they 'take notice' in terms of making changes, well that's another matter.

Don't forget the purpose of our voting system is to choose a winner from a fixed ballot listing... i.e. someone the public wants... its not about finding out who they don't want.
 
Maticmaker said:
/
What would be the point of that, why deface your own vote? However, as a trusted official you shouldn't be altering anyone's ballot, yours or whoever, hope that your local returning officer and your selection team don't find out. :nono:
Click to expand...

*sigh* please try to understand this before one of us dies, I meant I can can change the surname of my local Tory MP to a rude 4 letter word by making a slight adjustment on the ballot paper and still cast my vote for a non genocidal party of choice. This is totally separate from anything to do with the count and follows on from you saying that defaced ballot papers aren't noted by anyone. They are actually all taken away to a separate table to be scrutinized where usually the local Tory twat will try and tell everyone that the penis drawing in his box is definitely a valid vote (I have actually seen this happen).
 
CassiusClaymore said:
*sigh* please try to understand this before one of us dies, I meant I can can change the surname of my local Tory MP to a rude 4 letter word by making a slight adjustment on the ballot paper and still cast my vote for a non genocidal party of choice. This is totally separate from anything to do with the count and follows on from you saying that defaced ballot papers aren't noted by anyone. They are actually all taken away to a separate table to be scrutinized where usually the local Tory twat will try and tell everyone that the penis drawing in his box is actually a valid vote (I have actually seen this happen).
Click to expand...

Doesn't everyone cast their mark with a willy doodle?
 
TheGame said:
Im not sure slagging off a manifesto you campaigned on yourself in the last election is a smart thing.

Click to expand...


Maybe the poll ratings are going to his head...he needs to remember nobody seems to like or trust him, its just that the alternative has been a 14 year disaster who people dislike more.
 
He does seem to think that the lead in the polls is because of his charismatic personality and plans.

I keep hearing "for working people" - is this all working people, poor and rich? Are people who don't work, for whatever reason, too young, too old, too sick , no jobs, included in his plan.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
*sigh* please try to understand this before one of us dies, I meant I can can change the surname of my local Tory MP to a rude 4 letter word by making a slight adjustment on the ballot paper and still cast my vote for a non genocidal party of choice. This is totally separate from anything to do with the count and follows on from you saying that defaced ballot papers aren't noted by anyone. They are actually all taken away to a separate table to be scrutinized where usually the local Tory twat will try and tell everyone that the penis drawing in his box is definitely a valid vote (I have actually seen this happen).
Click to expand...
I have attended three counts, and am never ceased to be amazed at the lengths some people go to in order to deface a ballot paper.
One I saw we thought meant the voter spent at least an hour in the booth, the whole paper, not just the voting area was covered in tiny crosses, then we realised he had taken a spot the ball stamp and ink pad into the booth!
Other comments I've seen
"Shags his mother"
wanker, twat, wanker, twat alternately in each candidates name box
Extra box added with "None of these Cnuts" and a cross next to it

I think the best one I saw was a paper completely blacked out with marker pen
 
Pogue Mahone said:
By not voting for Labour you're helping the Tories hold on to power. Is that something you're ok with?
Click to expand...
Don't think I can vote for them even taking that into account. I have friends and family impacted by the child credit limit, and the rhetoric on trans rights.

berbatrick said:
. @Frosty
Just a general question, all this talk about safe seats for his friends (and some weird localised results* in the Indian election) got me thinking - how uniform are swings in elections generally? Would a 20% swing from Tory to Labour be expected to mean something like a 10-30% swing in almost all 600 seats? Or could it be driven by more local effects, i.e. 50% swings somewhere and 0 somewhere else.
I guess 3rd party votes complicate this analysis...

*the swings on that graph are interesting, the analysis text next to it is falt-out wrong and should be ignored
Click to expand...

Sorry for the delay in responding. Swing can be impacted by tactical voting. In 1997 the swing towards Labour in safe Labour seats was lower than predicted, but the swing in marginals was much higher.

Generally it is a good indicator, especially in England. England has around 560 MPs out of 650, so generally that is easier to forecast and more important for the overall result. Labour will need a good election in Wales and Scotland too, but there you have a proper multi-party battle. In short, if Labour do not hit the 10% swing needed in England on election night, they won't get the majority, .
 
Matt Varnish said:
I have attended three counts, and am never ceased to be amazed at the lengths some people go to in order to deface a ballot paper.
One I saw we thought meant the voter spent at least an hour in the booth, the whole paper, not just the voting area was covered in tiny crosses, then we realised he had taken a spot the ball stamp and ink pad into the booth!
Other comments I've seen
"Shags his mother"
wanker, twat, wanker, twat alternately in each candidates name box
Extra box added with "None of these Cnuts" and a cross next to it

I think the best one I saw was a paper completely blacked out with marker pen
Click to expand...

:lol: Yeah I do like to stop and read when someone has made the effort to write an essay., pausing to read the most offensive bits out loud and then shaking my head in mock condemnation.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
*sigh* please try to understand this before one of us dies, I meant I can can change the surname of my local Tory MP to a rude 4 letter word by making a slight adjustment on the ballot paper and still cast my vote for a non genocidal party of choice. This is totally separate from anything to do with the count and follows on from you saying that defaced ballot papers aren't noted by anyone. They are actually all taken away to a separate table to be scrutinized where usually the local Tory twat will try and tell everyone that the penis drawing in his box is definitely a valid vote (I have actually seen this happen).
Click to expand...

Sorry I cannot read your innermost thoughts, it sounded as if, because of your position, you were attempting to deface the ballot, apologies if I misunderstood what you meant.
As I understand it, defaced ballots are only checked if there is a recount, this is to ensure no legitimate ballots have been put in the spoiled box by error; they are then and counted ( yes it's possible everybody has a good laugh at the 'pictorial' ones) the number of spoiled ballots are then announced at the end, then forgotten.


I cannot understand why anyone would take the trouble to go to a polling station, deface a voting document, (the only legal method available to the individual) knowing it means nothing to anyone only themselves. Voting by ballot in person or by post is undertaken to find out who the public want to represent them, not who they don't, or those who are missing from the ballot, or those who couldn't give a toss, etc.

Maybe those whose ballots are found to be defaced, should receive the equivalent of a 'red card' and be banned from voting in the next official ballot? ;)
 
Maticmaker said:
Sorry I cannot read your innermost thoughts, it sounded as if, because of your position, you were attempting to deface the ballot, apologies if I misunderstood what you meant.
As I understand it, defaced ballots are only checked if there is a recount, this is to ensure no legitimate ballots have been put in the spoiled box by error; they are then and counted ( yes it's possible everybody has a good laugh at the 'pictorial' ones) the number of spoiled ballots are then announced at the end, then forgotten.


I cannot understand why anyone would take the trouble to go to a polling station, deface a voting document, (the only legal method available to the individual) knowing it means nothing to anyone only themselves. Voting by ballot in person or by post is undertaken to find out who the public want to represent them, not who they don't, or those who are missing from the ballot, or those who couldn't give a toss, etc.

Maybe those whose ballots are found to be defaced, should receive the equivalent of a 'red card' and be banned from voting in the next official ballot? ;)
Click to expand...
Spoiled ballots are reported as a count. It doesn’t matter what the method of spoiling was or the content of spoiling it (so you can’t get a specific message across) but spoiling your ballot is a legitimate method of voting and declaring “I cannot vote for any of these politicians/parties” which is different to not voting at all which could be inferred as “I forgot” or “I couldn’t get to the polling station”.

It’s important because the spoiled ballots figures can be compared to previous elections. If there is a big jump in a certain election it can lead to research to discover why people are against the parties and what could change their mind. If it’s a non-trivial number you can be sure that the parties will want to know how they can earn their vote in future.
 
Pexbo said:
Spoiled ballots are reported as a count. It doesn’t matter what the method of spoiling was or the content of spoiling it (so you can’t get a specific message across) but spoiling your ballot is a legitimate method of voting and declaring “I cannot vote for any of these politicians/parties” which is different to not voting at all which could be inferred as “I forgot” or “I couldn’t get to the polling station”.

It’s important because the spoiled ballots figures can be compared to previous elections. If there is a big jump in a certain election it can lead to research to discover why people are against the parties and what could change their mind. If it’s a non-trivial number you can be sure that the parties will want to know how they can earn their vote in future.
Click to expand...

I do understand the point you are making but in my opinion defacing the ballot is a rejection of the 'one person one vote' equality. Personally I think it would make more sense to submit to the voter registration authority, the notification that in your area you are denied the opportunity to vote for a candidate of your choice.
If significant numbers of people did this then legitimate changes could be made.

However our current voting system is classified via a political party affiliation and only works if the party you favour puts up a candidate in your area, or any candidate (without political affiliation) stands as an independent.
Perhaps this is where the complaint of non representation should be aimed, at the parties themselves. I am almost sure that if you found the party of your choice had no candidate in your area and was notified by you, they would advise you how a vote (for someone else) and how this might assist them. I very much doubt they would advise defacing the ballot.
 
Maticmaker said:
I do understand the point you are making but in my opinion defacing the ballot is a rejection of the 'one person one vote' equality. Personally I think it would make more sense to submit to the voter registration authority, the notification that in your area you are denied the opportunity to vote for a candidate of your choice.
If significant numbers of people did this then legitimate changes could be made.

However our current voting system is classified via a political party affiliation and only works if the party you favour puts up a candidate in your area, or any candidate (without political affiliation) stands as an independent.
Perhaps this is where the complaint of non representation should be aimed, at the parties themselves. I am almost sure that if you found the party of your choice had no candidate in your area and was notified by you, they would advise you how a vote (for someone else) and how this might assist them. I very much doubt they would advise defacing the ballot.
Click to expand...

You say you understand but you are missing the point entirely.

If you are someone that cannot feasibly vote for any of the options you have two choices. Either don’t vote which as I mentioned can be inferred as anything from “forgot” to “couldn’t get to the polls” or you make the effort to go to the polls and spoil your ballot which is recognised as “I would have voted but none of the candidates represent me”.

It’s that simple. For you personally, that might not be a choice you would make or agree with but it’s a legitimate option which people do believe is the right choice for them and it’s recognised as such and reported on as such.
 
Maticmaker said:
Sorry I cannot read your innermost thoughts, it sounded as if, because of your position, you were attempting to deface the ballot, apologies if I misunderstood what you meant.
As I understand it, defaced ballots are only checked if there is a recount, this is to ensure no legitimate ballots have been put in the spoiled box by error; they are then and counted ( yes it's possible everybody has a good laugh at the 'pictorial' ones) the number of spoiled ballots are then announced at the end, then forgotten.


I cannot understand why anyone would take the trouble to go to a polling station, deface a voting document, (the only legal method available to the individual) knowing it means nothing to anyone only themselves. Voting by ballot in person or by post is undertaken to find out who the public want to represent them, not who they don't, or those who are missing from the ballot, or those who couldn't give a toss, etc.

Maybe those whose ballots are found to be defaced, should receive the equivalent of a 'red card' and be banned from voting in the next official ballot? ;)
Click to expand...
Modus Operandi
1 Ballot boxes are taken to the count sealed.
2 The electoral officer checks the number on the boxes, against the numbers of those issued.
3 The boxes are opened and emptied , a supervisor checks the box is empty.
4 An initial count is made to ensure the number of ballot papers in the box equals the number issued in the polling station
5 If this is correct they are then sorted and bundled into lots of ten per candidate.
6 Any spoiled papers are put in a separate pile, Spoiled is a mark anywhere on the paper outside the boxes for the candidates
7 Another pile is formed where the mark is dubious, goes across two boxes etc (like a tick instead of an "X")
8 Papers are then sorted into piles per candidate, and checked again.
9 The supervisor counts the papers for each candidate and records the totals.
10 Dubious papers are shown to the candidates who literally have a punch up over who the voter intended the mark for, at the same time "spoiled" papers are shown to the candidates.
If a recount is needed the whole process from stage 4 starts again.

I witnessed one area go to four recounts, in the end the result was accepted, the difference was one vote between two candidates.
So when people say "My vote never counts" it really can.
 
Pexbo said:
You say you understand but you are missing the point entirely.

If you are someone that cannot feasibly vote for any of the options you have two choices. Either don’t vote which as I mentioned can be inferred as anything from “forgot” to “couldn’t get to the polls” or you make the effort to go to the polls and spoil your ballot which is recognised as “I would have voted but none of the candidates represent me”.

It’s that simple. For you personally, that might not be a choice you would make or agree with but it’s a legitimate option which people do believe is the right choice for them and it’s recognised as such and reported on as such.
Click to expand...

With respect it is you who are missing the point entirely, by insisting that defacing a public ballot is somehow recognised/ legitimate?
By who? for what? Certainly not the authorities otherwise they would make provision for 'none of the above' on the ballot.

It is however how many people take out their frustration at not having someone to vote for in their area, it's not recognised by anybody, except those who convince themselves they are making a protest, some even convince themselves its a legitimate form of protest... it is not.

One person one vote undertaken in private is a fundamental (hard won) freedom in our nation, a nation that has no written constitution and that is forever at the mercy of precedence, in its lawmaking and judicial revues. You mess with and undermine it's real legitimate requirements at your peril. You may convince yourself of some higher cause, but its not 'God given'.
 
Maticmaker said:
With respect it is you who are missing the point entirely, by insisting that defacing a public ballot is somehow recognised/ legitimate?
By who? for what? Certainly not the authorities otherwise they would make provision for 'none of the above' on the ballot.
Click to expand...
It has long been acceptable practice to spoil a ballot if cannot vote for what the ballot contains. Part of the reason they count spoiled ballots, including the overarching propaganda reason of "people do not know how to cast a ballot", which is sometimes true, too.
 
Maticmaker said:
One person one vote undertaken in private is a fundamental (hard won) freedom in our nation, a nation that has no written constitution and that is forever at the mercy of precedence, in its lawmaking and judicial revues. You mess with and undermine it's real legitimate requirements at your peril. You may convince yourself of some higher cause, but its not 'God given'.
Click to expand...

This is ever so slightly dramatic, given what you're actually talking about. This isn't the March on Rome.
 
Maticmaker said:
With respect it is you who are missing the point entirely, by insisting that defacing a public ballot is somehow recognised/ legitimate?
By who? for what? Certainly not the authorities otherwise they would make provision for 'none of the above' on the ballot.

It is however how many people take out their frustration at not having someone to vote for in their area, it's not recognised by anybody, except those who convince themselves they are making a protest, some even convince themselves its a legitimate form of protest... it is not.

One person one vote undertaken in private is a fundamental (hard won) freedom in our nation, a nation that has no written constitution and that is forever at the mercy of precedence, in its lawmaking and judicial revues. You mess with and undermine it's real legitimate requirements at your peril. You may convince yourself of some higher cause, but its not 'God given'.
Click to expand...
https://votingcounts.org.uk/spoilt-ballot
 
The issue facing the voters is, "Which of these two wealthy individuals will you choose?" Both candidates are backed by major parties that represent the interests and ideas of the rich. Voters essentially choosing between two wealthy individuals to implement the agendas of two wealthy groups.
 
neverdie said:
It has long been acceptable practice to spoil a ballot if cannot vote for what the ballot contains. Part of the reason they count spoiled ballots, including the overarching propaganda reason of "people do not know how to cast a ballot", which is sometimes true, too.
Click to expand...

Only to those who spoil the ballot, it is not sanctioned by any party or public authority, nor I suspect by the millions who cast their votes in all seriousness. I do accept it's maybe a get out for many, including candidates grubbing about for votes in a tight ballot, but it's still not an official means of exercising your vote.
 
Pexbo said:
In 5 or 10 years time when the Labour government has run its course and the Tories have got their shit together, Wes Streeting will be one of the first MPs to defect over to them when it’s clear an election is going to be called.
Click to expand...
Nah he'll have a cushy, lucrative job lined up with one of the private healthcare companies that are going to benefit from his policies.
 
Maticmaker said:
Only to those who spoil the ballot, it is not sanctioned by any party or public authority, nor I suspect by the millions who cast their votes in all seriousness. I do accept it's maybe a get out for many, including candidates grubbing about for votes in a tight ballot, but it's still not an official means of exercising your vote.
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to be official. If you take a view whereby no political party's agenda is representative of your vote, then you may well spoil that vote in protest. Being that it is a protest, why would it be "official"? It is a statement against "office" as such.
 
neverdie said:
It doesn't need to be official. If you take a view whereby no political party's agenda is representative of your vote, then you may well spoil that vote in protest. Being that it is a protest, why would it be "official"? It is a statement against "office" as such.
Click to expand...

Behave yourself... The ballot has to be completed via its official format, otherwise lets all write our own ballot paper and enter whoever we want, I choose Superman!!! :lol:
 
Spoiling your ballot seems much more a case of engaging with the democratic process than just not turning up to vote. If you want to spend a couple of minutes writing a message or doodling then that's fine as well as long as you aren't holding up a huge queue at the polling station or expecting more of a response than a few laughs at the polling station.
 
Maticmaker said:
Behave yourself... The ballot has to be completed via its official format, otherwise lets all write our own ballot paper and enter whoever we want, I choose Superman!!! :lol:
Click to expand...
Spoiling the ballot, as is perfectly understandable, is a protest against the ballot. As someone else said, at least these people which politically spoil the ballot are open to using, and do use, the hard won vote. They just don't use it as you like it (another hard won freedom).
 
Matt Varnish said:
Modus Operandi
1 Ballot boxes are taken to the count sealed.
2 The electoral officer checks the number on the boxes, against the numbers of those issued.
3 The boxes are opened and emptied , a supervisor checks the box is empty.
4 An initial count is made to ensure the number of ballot papers in the box equals the number issued in the polling station
5 If this is correct they are then sorted and bundled into lots of ten per candidate.
6 Any spoiled papers are put in a separate pile, Spoiled is a mark anywhere on the paper outside the boxes for the candidates
7 Another pile is formed where the mark is dubious, goes across two boxes etc (like a tick instead of an "X")
8 Papers are then sorted into piles per candidate, and checked again.
9 The supervisor counts the papers for each candidate and records the totals.
10 Dubious papers are shown to the candidates who literally have a punch up over who the voter intended the mark for, at the same time "spoiled" papers are shown to the candidates.
If a recount is needed the whole process from stage 4 starts again.

I witnessed one area go to four recounts, in the end the result was accepted, the difference was one vote between two candidates.
So when people say "My vote never counts" it really can.
Click to expand...

I have ran a number of counts for elections. The process is dependent on the authority and how you do it. We used to let the Count Supervisor make the first call over doubtful ballot papers then raise it further if they could not. We use to use bundles of 25 and there is also the verification process for postal votes. With regard to stage 10, this has only ever been a quick run through unless there is actually a doubt over whether a vote is clear for one candidate. If someone has written an obscene message, it is clearly not a valid vote so it is quickly shown and moved to the next one. Also with regard to recounts, these can also include bundle checks not necessarily a full recount and if there is a full recount, this would be after stage 4 which is verification not start verification again.
 
DanH said:
Spoiling your ballot seems much more a case of engaging with the democratic process than just not turning up to vote. If you want to spend a couple of minutes writing a message or doodling then that's fine as well as long as you aren't holding up a huge queue at the polling station or expecting more of a response than a few laughs at the polling station.
Click to expand...

These messages are barely seen, as soon as its clear the vote is not for a candidate, it is spoiled vote and is put in that pile. The message is not given any consideration. I understand people wanting to write messages but in my opinion, its a pointless exercise.
 
Oh no! A politician running for office has said something to distance himself from his very unpopular predecessor! Unbelievable!
 
nickm said:
Oh no! A politician running for office has said something to distance himself from his very unpopular predecessor! Unbelievable!
Click to expand...
He’s ridiculing a manifesto he was involved in the creating of and campaigned on. You can pretend it’s as simple as you make out but the reality is that it’s both disingenuous and preposterous
 
Pexbo said:
He’s ridiculing a manifesto he was involved in the creating of and campaigned on. You can pretend it’s as simple as you make out but the reality is that it’s both disingenuous and preposterous
Click to expand...

I'm just not seeing it as a very big deal, sorry. I mean, Thatcher repudiated the Heath government she was a cabinet member of, by word and deed once she was PM.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
I'm just not seeing it as a very big deal, sorry.
Click to expand...
I’m sure a lot of people won’t. That’s theirs and your prerogative. But for a lot of people, myself included, it’s just more proof that he’s a two faced, smarmy prick of a politician that cannot be trusted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.