Postal vote 05/05/05 vs. Voting machines Haloween 2004 - the limits

Voting machines, Haloween 2004: We know that one line of code is enough to correct a 90-10 result into a 10-90.

Postal vote, 05/05/05: what are the limits, in face of the current amount of postal vote in the UK, to correct the results? Do you know of any studies previously released, quantifying it?

I'd like to see someone do a bit of research into the company that manufactures, installs and maintains the ballot-counting machines for the UK election.
But, I guess, it doesn't really bloody-well matter anyway, one of the House of Windsor's gimps is gonna win, irregardless.
Anyone who has confidence in 'unbiased western democratic process' is deluded.

[edit on 5-5-2005 by nrky]

------
True democracy: Postal Vote For All!

society.guardian.co.uk...

------
UK - No checks, no questions asked: that's how easy it is to obtain 11 postal ballots
It was frighteningly easy. Within five days I was able to obtain postal ballot papers enabling me to vote 11 times in the general election - and in county council elections on the same day. No checks, no questions asked.
I could, if I chose to, vote this week for candidates in areas ranging from London to York and from East Sussex to CornwallOf course, I will not do that. The point of The Telegraph's investigation was not to steal votes, but to expose how flaws in the postal ballot system mean that the general election is, despite repeated warnings and subsequent reassurances, still wide open to vote-rigging.
Obtaining the ballot papers was simple.The first step was to download and print out application forms for postal votes from the website of the Electoral Commission.
Then they were filled in with names and addresses taken from the electoral roll and a request for the ballot papers be sent to a second address, in south-west London.
The forms were completed with a forged signature and sent to electoral registration offices at the local council in the voters' constituencies.
Within days I received letters confirming that a postal vote had been granted. The ballot papers containing the lists of election candidates arrived over the next few days. Officials made no attempt to contact people at either address on the application form.
Our investigation shows how easy it would be to carry out postal fraud on a larger scale involving hundreds or even thousands of voting forms sent to many different but bogus addresses - and tip the balance in favour of one candidate over a legitimate winner, especially in marginal seats.
Daily Telegraph ^ | May 1, 2005

----

marginal seats, LOL...

Postal vote fraud is nothing but smoke to make people forget that any effective fraud is always based on how the votes are counted.



Implementing electronic voting in the UK

ed. link width

[edit on 5-5-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

But as registered voters boycott elections in always higher numbers, in the reign of terror staged as "democracy", in the lack of internet vote, POSTAL VOTE finally finds its KEY role.
As the best explanation to cover-up the discrepancy between the amount of people that you see at the ballots and the participation rates announced.

Nrky

What are you talking about "Ballot Counting Machines in the UK"???

All ballots in the UK are counted manually by humans not machines.

Time to take off the Tinfoil hats dude.

Cheers

BHR

After criminal investigations in Bradford and Blackburn and other towns and cities, and a trial of fraudsters in Birmingham-

www.timesonline.co.uk...

and

www.spokesmanbooks.com...

With so much awareness now, these scams will be more difficult in the furure, but they will be used as a reason for electronic voting systems no doubt

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
What are you talking about "Ballot Counting Machines in the UK"???
All ballots in the UK are counted manually by humans not machines.

Elections the NATO way: exit poll suggest Reg Keys won 56%, yet Blair won 58.9% in final count.
Notice how again allegations of postal vote fraud is used to cover-up the key mechanism of fraud:
British Prime Minister is set to lose his seat in the Parliament to a slain British soldier's father, according exit polls that showed an easy win for the anti-war challenger.
The PressEsc exit poll of voters who have cast their ballots gave 56% of the vote to Reg Keys, the independent candidate representing the organisation Military Families Against War.
Tony Blair only managed to garner 22% of the vote with the remaining split between the other candidates, most of whom supported Reg Keys candidacy.
But there are growing fears that the official results in Sedgefield may not reflect the people's wishes following the vote-rigging scandal that broke out in the constituency.

A police investigation into more than 600 complaints of postal vote fraud was dropped on order from the "top", one Durham Constabulary whistleblower alleged.
05 May 2005
unspun.mithuro.com...

MattMarriot,

As someone with intimate knowledge of the UK electoral system (not a Labour Party Member) I think you will find that Exit Polls are next to useless on a constituency by constituency basis.

I was involved in the verification and the actual counts in my local area last night as well as leafletting and exit polling around the area.

What people say as they leave a polling station does not accurately represent the actual voting pattern.

I am aware that there is some concerns over postal ballots but a lot of it is the same as UFO sightings. One person makes a claim and suddenly everyone and their granny has been seeing them.

I do not doubt that some fraud is taking place but in places like Sedgefield 600 votes are a fart in a hurricane.

Cheers

BHR

p.s. As for your "source" it is the worst kind of tripe internet reporting. Look at the other stories on the front page e.g. Boy discovers Atlantis with Personal Computer.


[edit on 6-5-2005 by BillHicksRules]

I do not doubt that some fraud is taking place but in places like Sedgefield 600 votes are a fart in a hurricane.

BillHicksRules, I wrote the same above: postal vote is NOT an efficient technique to fraud, nothing compared with electronic voting and electronic vote counting.

It is a mean, just like the act staged in Florida (Gore vs. Bush) in 2000 to make sheople swallow that electronic voting has to be introduced to "end" fraud...

In the UK elections postal fraud is also used to cover-up the extremely low turnout.