obsie
Non-Aligned
Posts: 862 
|
Post by obsie on Mar 2, 2018 11:50:39 GMT
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,746
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Mar 2, 2018 11:52:13 GMT
In the context of recent weeks, that is a rubbish result for the Lib Dem’s. Although perhaps just that the Tories got their vote out or by post more. In a ward that we hadn't contested since 2012? Anyway, given the very low turnout due to the poor weather, I'd be wary of reading too much into that. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Mar 2, 2018 11:55:14 GMT
For what it's worth that looks an ok result for Labour. |
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,623
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Mar 2, 2018 11:56:47 GMT
In the context of recent weeks, that is a rubbish result for the Lib Dem’s. Although perhaps just that the Tories got their vote out or by post more. In a ward that we hadn't contested since 2012? Anyway, given the very low turnout due to the poor weather, I'd be wary of reading too much into that. I agree that any of yesterday’s results should be treated with a pinch of salt. That ward was created in 2004, and the Lib Dem’s did win it 2004 and 2007 though, so it was winnable, albeit a while ago. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,746
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Mar 2, 2018 12:01:54 GMT
That ward was created in 2004, and the Lib Dem’s did win it 2004 and 2007 though, so it was winnable, albeit a while ago. As Andrew Teale points out in his preview, it has seen massive development in the last 10 years. I drive through it fairly often, and have seen the changes on a monthly basis. DIckens Heath barely existed in 2007, now it's a substantial village in its own right. Don't like it much myself, but hey ho, others do. And of course we should do what work we can anywhere and not write places off on the basis of past history. Otherwise we'd never win wards like Sandhills and Pallion in Sunderland. |
|
|
|
Post by beesknee5 on Mar 2, 2018 12:11:18 GMT
All postal voting was tried in 2004 and deemed a failiure. Postal voting has repeatedly shown that it is more open to fraud than in person voting. Online voting would be even harder to keep secure - we hear time and time again about voting machines in the US being tampered with, the risk of hacking etc. Our system is secure. We can be confident in it. That is what is most important. Times have changed. Fingerprint recognition banking apps and online verification into the government gateway provide solutions just as/if not more secure than relying on the person coming into the polling station being who they say they are. |
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,623
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Mar 2, 2018 12:12:40 GMT
Clackmannanshire turnout is 24.7%
|
|
Roger Harmer
Lib Dem
Councillor for Acocks Green in Birmingham
Posts: 247
|
Post by Roger Harmer on Mar 2, 2018 12:15:27 GMT
All postal voting was tried in 2004 and deemed a failiure. Postal voting has repeatedly shown that it is more open to fraud than in person voting. Online voting would be even harder to keep secure - we hear time and time again about voting machines in the US being tampered with, the risk of hacking etc. Our system is secure. We can be confident in it. That is what is most important. Times have changed. Fingerprint recognition banking apps and online verification into the government gateway provide solutions just as/if not more secure than relying on the person coming into the polling station being who they say they are. My concern is not about the person being who they say they are - that is probably largely solvable. It's about the person being watched by someone else to make sure they vote the "right way". As I said above, stopping this is why the secret ballot was introduced in the first place, and its still an issue now. |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Mar 2, 2018 12:15:40 GMT
Clackmannanshire turnout is 24.7% Very good considering the weather. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Mar 2, 2018 12:18:36 GMT
For what it's worth that looks an ok result for Labour. It's a very good result for Labour. They haven't polled more than 21% before in the ward. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 2, 2018 12:18:46 GMT
All postal voting was tried in 2004 and deemed a failiure. Postal voting has repeatedly shown that it is more open to fraud than in person voting. Online voting would be even harder to keep secure - we hear time and time again about voting machines in the US being tampered with, the risk of hacking etc. Our system is secure. We can be confident in it. That is what is most important. Times have changed. Fingerprint recognition banking apps and online verification into the government gateway provide solutions just as/if not more secure than relying on the person coming into the polling station being who they say they are. At the cost of quite an involved process to set up each individual voter with access. And it still introduces the possibility of man in the middle attacks, directly hacking the server, using software that rigs the vote, and a whole range of other attacks that simply can't happen under our present system. And unlike personation fraud, it's as easy to change all the votes as it is to change just one. Basically, all the stuff that's highlighted in this video: |
|
|
|
Post by mrhell on Mar 2, 2018 12:28:05 GMT
Not too bad. I've seen city centre wards get that in summer, when the sun comes out and all the students go drinking! I once stood in a ward which had 11.9% turnout in May! |
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,623
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Mar 2, 2018 12:28:14 GMT
SNP hold Clackmannanshire North, as per Twitter. Can’t see figures yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Mar 2, 2018 12:29:13 GMT
|
|
Tom
Unionist
Posts: 1,998
|
Post by Tom on Mar 2, 2018 12:46:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Mar 2, 2018 12:54:23 GMT
I use Government Gateway to do my VAT return every quarter. It is an atrociously designed portal and necessitates inputting two lots of ID consisting of random letters and numbers three times. If you want to get voter participation down to single figures then that would be the way to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Mar 2, 2018 12:54:28 GMT
All postal voting was tried in 2004 and deemed a failiure. Postal voting has repeatedly shown that it is more open to fraud than in person voting. Online voting would be even harder to keep secure - we hear time and time again about voting machines in the US being tampered with, the risk of hacking etc. Our system is secure. We can be confident in it. That is what is most important. Times have changed. Fingerprint recognition banking apps and online verification into the government gateway provide solutions just as/if not more secure than relying on the person coming into the polling station being who they say they are. How do you check a fingerprint on a postal vote? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2018 12:57:40 GMT
Damn. Well, doing a life of Brian😉, we didn’t do half bad at 31.7% FP’s with the SNP only on 37%. We’ll get them next time.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 2, 2018 13:04:27 GMT
Times have changed. Fingerprint recognition banking apps and online verification into the government gateway provide solutions just as/if not more secure than relying on the person coming into the polling station being who they say they are. How do you check a fingerprint on a postal vote? Either fingerprint dusting powder or specialist kit in the lab. |
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473
|
Post by peterl on Mar 2, 2018 13:06:21 GMT
Brings a whole new meaning to the verification stage! Bottom line, our system works. If its not broken, don't fix it.
|
|
