Posted on 06/24/2016 2:35:45 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
One thing that really impressed me about the Brexit vote yesterday was how the votes were announced. First the total number of votes were announced and then the results of that total. IOW, it was a done deal. No subsequent finding of mystery votes in a box hidden away in some warehouse.
Should the USA adopt a similar system? Somehow I think there is very little vote fraud in the British system compared to ours.
Paper ballots, FTW..
The Democrat Party thrives on vote fraud.
It will only act to makes things worse.
I own a software company. No way should any voting be electric.
Paper ballots.
Oh and execute anyone convicted of vote fraud. Problem solved.
Electronic
The US should adopt the same voting system that the Israeli’s use; I was told that the ballots are hand marked, then placed in double sealed envelopes and counted three time by three different groups of people and then the tallies compared from each count. No electronic voting or electronic vote counting machines of any kind, it’s all done by hand, in person and voter ID is REQUIRED.
PUBLICALLY execute ANYONE convicted of purposeful voting fraud
There will still be the back room of the union hall with the faithful premarking wads of ballots to be "found" as soon as they know how many they need to steal the election. And the clerical "error" in the count. And the "accidental" delay in the overseas military vote.
I read the last day or two not only paper ballots, but you must show ID, name is checked off, and the are counted by volunteers with people watching. Sounds MUCH better.
An interesting thought - of course, the entire UK is only 57% of the size of California, though it does have nearly twice the population. I think the closeness of the entire nation and the vast amounts of urban area contribute quite a bit to reporting results quickly.
Vs, say, the United States which is 40 times the size and 5 time zones; more if you count our outlying territories.
That’s how the US used to do it I believe
It doesn’t pertain to this election, but I do like where under the parliamentary system, the Prime Minister calls an election and it’s within a specified time period, it eliminates this endless election cycle we have in the US.
Pour on sone honey and stake him down to a fire ant mound.
The first stage in the counting process in the UK is called ‘verification’. Where every ballot is counted and compared to the number of ballots issued at the polling station. Any major discrepancy leads to an investigation as to why ballots are missing, or how they have miraculously appeared. It’s very rare for a discrepancy to be found.
The verification number is announced publically - so now everybody knows there are - for example - 323,763 ballots being counted in a particular area.
And only after this, do they start actually counting and allocating the ballots to see who people voted for.
And the final count has to match that total number - if you watched the count, you would have seen that in addition to the In and Out numbers, they also had to say how many blank ballots there were, how many had been discounted because a voter could be identified (they’d violated the secret ballot rule), how many people had voted for both options.
The point is the system really doesn’t allow for extra ballots to be ‘found’ in the way you describe. If there were 10,000 more votes at the final tally than there were at verification, it would be obvious.
Except in Northern Ireland, you don’t have to show ID yet (the other parts of the UK are moving in that direction but it hasn’t happened yet) - but yes, only paper ballots, and they are counted by officially neutral volunteers with scrutineers from all sides watching the count.
Ballot papers also bear numbers which can be matched to an individual voter in a case where fraud is suspected. This is controversial as technically it weakens the idea of a secret ballot, but it’s very rare (and there are very strict rules) for a comparison to be made. In fact, it has never happened at a Parliamentary election, although it has happened a couple of times in council elections when people won by very small margins (there was a case in a council election in the 1970s when an eligible voter was only able to cast a provisional ballot because they told her she had already voted - her name had been crossed off - and then one of the candidates in that election won by only one vote. The voter raised the issue, and they used the numbers to identify the vote in question and discovered an ineligible voter with the same name had voted earlier in the election which was why her name was crossed off (this wasn’t strictly speaking fraud - the earlier voter had asked if her name was on the list and somebody didn’t check both name and address and told her it was, so she thought she had a right to vote). The invalid vote was removed from the count and the valid provisional vote was substituted - and in this case because the valid vote was for the other candidate, the election result did change).
The democrats can announce the results before the election.
Thank you for the correction and explanation.
1. No more advanced voting my mail. Make Election Day on the first Tuesday in November a Federal holiday for Presidential and Congressional election years so there's no excuse not to vote because you're at work.
2. All voters must show Real ID compliant identification as proof of citizenship in order to vote.
3. Military personnel overseas will vote a few days before Election Day and their ballots sealed.
4. Ballots must be mark-sense paper ballots using permanent ink where it's both easily readable by machine and hand counts.
Make it so!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.