advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is an interesting chart. It shows how often people in each age cohort have been on the winning side in British elections and referendums. E.g. if you were born in 1961, you were in the 35-44 age bracket for the 1997 election and since that cohort vote for LAB (by 20 points) and the election result was also LAB (by 13 points) the chart shows you as winning that election. So, broadly, baby boomers have only ever known electoral joy but for younger people it's been miserable.

fcihkfbuyhy61.png


https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/n9xmvl/how_often_have_age_cohorts_been_on_the/
 
Thorn said:
I will not carry id now or in the future, no matter what the legislation therefor. I accept I need a driving license, and will happily produce it at a police station if asked. I accept I need a passport to enter the country, and will carry that when I go abroad.
If it becomes a requirement for voting, I will turn up to a polling station without any I'd, and if refused my right to vote I'll make a fuss. If enough of us do that then perhaps the press will take notice and there will be a groundswell to repeal the undemocratic and fascist legislation.
Click to expand...
You're such a rebel Alan.
Since when has showing a form of ID been such a big deal for anyone?
I see some of the poorest people around in the course of parts of my work and they never seem to have a problem showing me photo ID on request, as per MoJ rules.
Or is it because they are happy to do so because it may be worth their while financially, whereas voting has no such financial advantage?
More pseudo-outrage by the Labour Party on behalf of the 'poor people'?
 
I've lived in countries where carrying ID was mandatory and didn't find that an issue. Given I need to produce photo id to receive a booze delivery from Amazon it wouldn't particularly bother me to have to provide photo-id when voting.
 
matthewr said:
This is an interesting chart. It shows how often people in each age cohort have been on the winning side in British elections and referendums. E.g. if you were born in 1961, you were in the 35-44 age bracket for the 1997 election and since that cohort vote for LAB (by 20 points) and the election result was also LAB (by 13 points) the chart shows you as winning that election. So, broadly, baby boomers have only ever known electoral joy but for younger people it's been miserable.

fcihkfbuyhy61.png


https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/n9xmvl/how_often_have_age_cohorts_been_on_the/
Click to expand...
Yup. Unsustainable, though God knows what it will take to break the pattern, and when.
 
matthewr said:
This is an interesting chart. It shows how often people in each age cohort have been on the winning side in British elections and referendums. E.g. if you were born in 1961, you were in the 35-44 age bracket for the 1997 election and since that cohort vote for LAB (by 20 points) and the election result was also LAB (by 13 points) the chart shows you as winning that election. So, broadly, baby boomers have only ever known electoral joy but for younger people it's been miserable.



https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/n9xmvl/how_often_have_age_cohorts_been_on_the/
Click to expand...

I've only been on the 'winning side' 3 times in my life. That's worse than all for but the nippiest of nippers
 
matthewr said:
This is an interesting chart. It shows how often people in each age cohort have been on the winning side in British elections and referendums. E.g. if you were born in 1961, you were in the 35-44 age bracket for the 1997 election and since that cohort vote for LAB (by 20 points) and the election result was also LAB (by 13 points) the chart shows you as winning that election. So, broadly, baby boomers have only ever known electoral joy but for younger people it's been miserable.

fcihkfbuyhy61.png


https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/n9xmvl/how_often_have_age_cohorts_been_on_the/
Click to expand...
Are young people not getting their way because they don't vote in sufficient numbers, or is there some other cause?
 
It is best to carry some ID. It is not legal to drive in the States without your driving licence with you.
If you are injured or struck down by a heart attack or something your family can be informed.
Being anti ID seems like some rabid libertarian philosophy.
 
doctorf said:
You're such a rebel Alan.
Since when has showing a form of ID been such a big deal for anyone?
I see some of the poorest people around in the course of parts of my work and they never seem to have a problem showing me photo ID on request, as per MoJ rules.
Or is it because they are happy to do so because it may be worth their while financially, whereas voting has no such financial advantage?
More pseudo-outrage by the Labour Party on behalf of the 'poor people'?
Click to expand...
I believe it was Blair who started threatening us with id cards. I got indignant then. Civis Britannicus sum, and I ain't going to show a card to live and vote here.
 
SteveG said:
I've lived in countries where carrying ID was mandatory and didn't find that an issue. Given I need to produce photo id to receive a booze delivery from Amazon it wouldn't particularly bother me to have to provide photo-id when voting.
Click to expand...

Comparing the right to vote with getting a booze delivery from Amazon is plain daft.

The Government will need to make 100% sure that getting the necessary ID is free and very straightforward for people without passports and driving licenses.

Unfortunately, we know they are evil incompetents and I bet it will be anything but. It will be a Kafkaesque nightmare run by Serco. You will need a passport or driving license to obtain your voting ID. For those without, there will be telephone helplines costing £50 per minute that will be unable to help and will refer you to another department ad infinitum.
 
doctorf said:
You're such a rebel Alan.
Since when has showing a form of ID been such a big deal for anyone?
I see some of the poorest people around in the course of parts of my work and they never seem to have a problem showing me photo ID on request, as per MoJ rules.
Or is it because they are happy to do so because it may be worth their while financially, whereas voting has no such financial advantage?
More pseudo-outrage by the Labour Party on behalf of the 'poor people'?
Click to expand...
Why should anyone have to buy the right to vote?

Why do you think voting has no potential financial advantage?

You Tories would love to deny the franchise for those you don't approve of - the poor, the sick, people who don't vote Tory.
 
I don’t see the problem with carrying ID, seems to be the preserve of those who have nothing else to worry about. ID scheme as proposed under Labour would probably have solved some issues we have today.
 
Cav said:
Why should anyone have to buy the right to vote?

Why do you think voting has no potential financial advantage?

You Tories would love to deny the franchise for those you don't approve of - the poor, the sick, people who don't vote Tory.
Click to expand...
Oh the poor and the sick.
Only socialists care about them.
They know exactly how to give them what they think they want and need, whilst those evil tories are just in it for themselves.
Well perhaps the poor and the sick don’t agree with you. Or are the electorate in Hartlepool just plain poor, sick and stupid?
 
doctorf said:
Numbers?
Or just a hunch?
Click to expand...

You think that not having driven or been on holiday abroad is rare? I have done work with Help the Aged and it is not unusual. Issues with voter fraud are much, much rarer as in a non-issue. Anyone really seriously concerned about voter fraud wouldn't be sitting on enquiries into foreign interference.

It's a non too subtle attempt to follow the GOP into voter suppression. These will by and large be folk who don't vote Tory and it should be opposed.

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/upgrading-our-democracy/voter-id/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top