I did not know lectures started at 7am in the morning.

 

Sorry, but I voted first thing in the morning before I went to work, because I knew my poll station would be a lot more busier (which it was) in the evening after work.

 

But I guess having a lie in is much more important for some students. ;)

Yes, you're right. Why should anyone get to the polls as early as 7am when there's a "15 hour window", as you keep pointing out? And as Suedehead says, the polls are open ALL DAY for a reason.

 

And while I'm responding to your latest pathetic point, why didn't all the oh-so-hard-up parents with starving children and extremely long hours to work go in before work and avoid the inevitable long queues? Why is it up to the students to organise themselves around everyone else?

 

The basic point I'm making here is it's the system that was at fault for not being prepared for a large turn-out, even though this is one of the most hotly-contested elections for quite some time. To keep laying blame at the door of any one group of people is almost as ridiculous as your posts have become and as much of a joke as your reputation on this forum has become.

Yes, you're right. Why should anyone get to the polls as early as 7am when there's a "15 hour window", as you keep pointing out? And as Suedehead says, the polls are open ALL DAY for a reason.

 

And while I'm responding to your latest pathetic point, why didn't all the oh-so-hard-up parents with starving children and extremely long hours to work go in before work and avoid the inevitable long queues? Why is it up to the students to organise themselves around everyone else?

 

The basic point I'm making here is it's the system that was at fault for not being prepared for a large turn-out, even though this is one of the most hotly-contested elections for quite some time. To keep laying blame at the door of any one group of people is almost as ridiculous as your posts have become and as much of a joke as your reputation on this forum has become.

exactly! It is not the students job to organise themselves around working people. Sure most of us don't have week day jobs but studying is a full time job for us. With half the $h!te your spewing out i have to ask, have you been to uni? Because you quite clear don't seem to grasp how it works.

What a joke of a thread.

 

FFS, I voted at 07:11 Hours in the morning, yet later that same evening in my same poll station the queues went up to 40/50 with a 20/25 minute waiting time to vote.

 

Those people had 15 Hours, and the option of Postal Voting. Yet failed to vote = Pathetic. It's like going boo hoo its not fair when you fail to get a ticket for a sell out gig/music festival because you can't be bothered to get on the phone/internet as soon as the lines open..

 

And as for those students who failed to turn up with their Polling cards..... oh for crying out loud. :rolleyes:

 

Pathetic, just pathetic. This thread is a perfect reflection of society today where too many people blame anybody else but themselves for their own mistakes. So no doubt these students will get jobs in the Banking Sector in the City when they graduate. :lol:

No, it isn't like going 'boo hoo it's not fair' at all. The polls were advertised as being open until 10, so why should people turning up at 9 expect to be unable to vote? :wacko:

 

And there was me thinking it was a well known fact that you don't need your polling card to vote in the UK!

Where I voted there were two ladies as I entered the main room. One lady asked my name and address, the other lady just sat there looking bored (I don't actually know what her role was as she didn't seem to be doing anything?).

 

Then there were just four panels in the middle of the room for people to vote. Four!!! Let's say there had been an incredible turnout at my community centre. I'm pretty sure with just one lady taking our details and four panels for voting, there would've been uproar at 22:00pm if loads of people had been stuck around waiting to vote.

 

For future referece, they should consider voting electronically. Saves wasting paper and would probably save a lot of time.

 

Btw, I voted around 18:00pm. :D

Edited May 7, 201015 yr by Hitstastic

And there was me thinking it was a well known fact that you don't need your polling card to vote in the UK!

 

I took mine along just in case but they didn't ask for it or even look at it, just asked my name and address and ticked my name off a list, so I might as well not have bothered. I voted at about 10am, because it was my day off so I figured it would be the quietest time, and indeed I was the only person in the Polling Station at the time, nobody else was even around.

 

Back when I was at uni though, an average day would involve work 6-9.30, uni 10-5 and then work again 5.30-9/10 - yes I did two shifts a day because I had to support myself through uni finanically - so it's quite feasible that I wouldn't have had time to reach the polling station at any point during the day. I certainly never had the pleasure or opportunity to have a lie in - if only! All I'm saying is it's easy to see why people were turning up at 9pm or after to vote, because this was their first opportunity in the day to do so rather than just being awkward. I would only have requested a postal vote if I was damn near certain I wouldn't have been able to reach the polling station in time.

Yes, you're right. Why should anyone get to the polls as early as 7am when there's a "15 hour window", as you keep pointing out? And as Suedehead says, the polls are open ALL DAY for a reason.

 

And while I'm responding to your latest pathetic point, why didn't all the oh-so-hard-up parents with starving children and extremely long hours to work go in before work and avoid the inevitable long queues? Why is it up to the students to organise themselves around everyone else?

 

The basic point I'm making here is it's the system that was at fault for not being prepared for a large turn-out, even though this is one of the most hotly-contested elections for quite some time. To keep laying blame at the door of any one group of people is almost as ridiculous as your posts have become and as much of a joke as your reputation on this forum has become.

 

Really.

 

Yeah, you are right, aren't you.

 

Because the number of people who voted this time went up by a huge margin compared to the last election, and not by just 3.8% (65.1% turnout compared to 61.3% in 2005); and Postal voting has always been widely available since the invention of the Penny Black; and not for more than overseas servicemen, or UK citizens must request in advance reasons of ill-health, employment or planned holiday away from home and to some electors living on small islands where they would need to cross water to reach their polling station since 2001. Hell, Before 1985, holidays were not a sufficient reason, and the employment criterion only allowed some professions.

 

Yet in 1997 the General Election turnout was 71.2%; In 1992 the General Election turnout was 77.4%; 1987 = 75.3%; etc.

 

The 1992 election coped with over 35 million people voting (as opposed to just 29.65 million voting this time), and postal votes only available to a small number of people. It worked then with no recorded problems. Yet in this 21st Century blame culture, where Life Prisoners can get compensation off the Government for having their privileges of watching TV taken away from them (illegally); then obviously it is the Government's fault and not that of the voters, who've had grand parents who frequently had to put up with queueing for hours without complaining about it if they failed to get the voting slip by 10PM on that day. Because those were the rules..

 

 

Where I voted there were two ladies as I entered the main room. One lady asked my name and address, the other lady just sat there looking bored (I don't actually know what her role was as she didn't seem to be doing anything?).

 

Then there were just four panels in the middle of the room for people to vote. Four!!! Let's say there had been an incredible turnout at my community centre. I'm pretty sure with just one lady taking our details and four panels for voting, there would've been uproar at 22:00pm if loads of people had been stuck around waiting to vote.

 

For future referece, they should consider voting electronically. Saves wasting paper and would probably save a lot of time.

 

Btw, I voted around 18:00pm. :D

The biggest problem with electronic voting is the integrity of the process. With a simple ballot paper you know that your preference has been recorded properly and you know that all the parties will have people at the count to make sure it ends up in the same pile. There's the opportunity for a challenge if the vote is close. With electronic voting that doesn't happen. I know they do it elsewhere but a lot of people would be very suspicious. After all, Florida 2000 wasn't exactly a great success was it?

The failings last night had nothing to do with the ‘system’ or students voting. It was simply down to the complacent under resourcing of polling stations in terms of staffing and ballot papers.

Really.

 

Yeah, you are right, aren't you.

 

Because the number of people who voted this time went up by a huge margin compared to the last election, and not by just 3.8% (65.1% turnout compared to 61.3% in 2005); and Postal voting has always been widely available since the invention of the Penny Black; and not for more than overseas servicemen, or UK citizens must request in advance reasons of ill-health, employment or planned holiday away from home and to some electors living on small islands where they would need to cross water to reach their polling station since 2001. Hell, Before 1985, holidays were not a sufficient reason, and the employment criterion only allowed some professions.

 

Yet in 1997 the General Election turnout was 71.2%; In 1992 the General Election turnout was 77.4%; 1987 = 75.3%; etc.

 

The 1992 election coped with over 35 million people voting (as opposed to just 29.65 million voting this time), and postal votes only available to a small number of people. It worked then with no recorded problems. Yet in this 21st Century blame culture, where Life Prisoners can get compensation off the Government for having their privileges of watching TV taken away from them (illegally); then obviously it is the Government's fault and not that of the voters, who've had grand parents who frequently had to put up with queueing for hours without complaining about it if they failed to get the voting slip by 10PM on that day. Because those were the rules..

Have you got any evidence that people were turned away after queuing for hours in 1992? No, because it didn't happen. Do you honestly think that if it had happened on anything like yesterday's scale, not a single person would have gone running to the press? The point about larger numbers of voters in the past was put to various officials last night but they couldn't give an answer. Councils produce lists of the numbers of people voting each hour. If the historic data is available then perhaps they will be able to show that the late rush was much greater than normal.

 

Where I voted there were two ladies as I entered the main room. One lady asked my name and address, the other lady just sat there looking bored (I don't actually know what her role was as she didn't seem to be doing anything?).

 

Then there were just four panels in the middle of the room for people to vote. Four!!! Let's say there had been an incredible turnout at my community centre. I'm pretty sure with just one lady taking our details and four panels for voting, there would've been uproar at 22:00pm if loads of people had been stuck around waiting to vote.

 

For future referece, they should consider voting electronically. Saves wasting paper and would probably save a lot of time.

 

Btw, I voted around 18:00pm. :D

One person crosses your name off the list to show that you've voted and the other tears off a ballot paper. Can you imagine how boring it must be doing that for 15 hours?

The biggest problem with electronic voting is the integrity of the process. With a simple ballot paper you know that your preference has been recorded properly and you know that all the parties will have people at the count to make sure it ends up in the same pile. There's the opportunity for a challenge if the vote is close. With electronic voting that doesn't happen. I know they do it elsewhere but a lot of people would be very suspicious. After all, Florida 2000 wasn't exactly a great success was it?

 

I guess the only answer is to do the voting either over a week, a couple of days; or like some nations do, as a national holiday.

 

But I think in today's 24 Hours celebrity obsessed everybody's fault but mine society we live in, somewhere, somehow whatever system is used it will manage to go wrong, and people will complain about it.

 

Because people/society are not prepared to accept "$h!t happens" like they were in the past.

Yet in 1997 the General Election turnout was 71.2%; In 1992 the General Election turnout was 77.4%; 1987 = 75.3%; etc.

 

The 1992 election coped with over 35 million people voting (as opposed to just 29.65 million voting this time), and postal votes only available to a small number of people. It worked then with no recorded problems. Yet in this 21st Century blame culture, where Life Prisoners can get compensation off the Government for having their privileges of watching TV taken away from them (illegally); then obviously it is the Government's fault and not that of the voters, who've had grand parents who frequently had to put up with queueing for hours without complaining about it if they failed to get the voting slip by 10PM on that day. Because those were the rules..

 

What the hell are you on about? Your points here are arguments that completely CONTRADICT your argument - the fact that there's been higher turnouts in the past and yet none of these problems only makes it MORE of a disgrace that there were problems this time. It's pretty clear that, after the falling turnouts in recent years, local councils got way too complacent and cut down the number of polling stations / staff at the polling stations. But that just isn't good enough. The Electoral Commission and local councils have a duty to make provisions for a 100% turnout.

 

Even though I think most of the blame lies with local councils, I think the Electoral Commission should take some of the blame - the only reason voting can't contiue after 10pm is because people might be influenced by exit polls - so why couldn't the EC have put out a ban on any exit poll information until 11 or 12 and kept the polls open for another hour or two?

I guess the only answer is to do the voting either over a week, a couple of days; or like some nations do, as a national holiday.

 

But I think in today's 24 Hours celebrity obsessed everybody's fault but mine society we live in, somewhere, somehow whatever system is used it will manage to go wrong, and people will complain about it.

 

Because people/society are not prepared to accept "$h!t happens" like they were in the past.

 

There's a far simpler answer: just give all primary-school kids a day off, countless primary school classrooms become polling stations, problem solved.

Really.

 

Yeah, you are right, aren't you.

 

Because the number of people who voted this time went up by a huge margin compared to the last election, and not by just 3.8% (65.1% turnout compared to 61.3% in 2005); and Postal voting has always been widely available since the invention of the Penny Black; and not for more than overseas servicemen, or UK citizens must request in advance reasons of ill-health, employment or planned holiday away from home and to some electors living on small islands where they would need to cross water to reach their polling station since 2001. Hell, Before 1985, holidays were not a sufficient reason, and the employment criterion only allowed some professions.

 

Yet in 1997 the General Election turnout was 71.2%; In 1992 the General Election turnout was 77.4%; 1987 = 75.3%; etc.

 

The 1992 election coped with over 35 million people voting (as opposed to just 29.65 million voting this time), and postal votes only available to a small number of people. It worked then with no recorded problems. Yet in this 21st Century blame culture, where Life Prisoners can get compensation off the Government for having their privileges of watching TV taken away from them (illegally); then obviously it is the Government's fault and not that of the voters, who've had grand parents who frequently had to put up with queueing for hours without complaining about it if they failed to get the voting slip by 10PM on that day. Because those were the rules..

I think that post pretty much speaks for itself without me having to dissect it.

Btw, has anyone heard about Manchester City Council, who literally said words to the effect of "it's not an issue, because only a handful of people missed out on their vote".

 

:mellow:

I guess the only answer is to do the voting either over a week, a couple of days; or like some nations do, as a national holiday.

 

But I think in today's 24 Hours celebrity obsessed everybody's fault but mine society we live in, somewhere, somehow whatever system is used it will manage to go wrong, and people will complain about it.

 

Because people/society are not prepared to accept "$h!t happens" like they were in the past.

Weekend voting would be even better. That way schools can be used as polling stations without having to close loads of schools. It should also be possible to close the polls earlier.

I wouldn't blame this on the people turning up 'late' to vote, I'd put it down to the polling stations not being prepared enough to deal with it, it is the responsiblity of the Local Authorities to ensure that everybody who shows up between 7am and 10pm get to vote and it seems harsh blaming students for this problem :o.

 

 

Hopefully next time all these problems'll've been ironed out - but really is should never have happened :P.

One person crosses your name off the list to show that you've voted and the other tears off a ballot paper. Can you imagine how boring it must be doing that for 15 hours?

 

Not for me. :lol:

 

One lady asked my name and address. Then wrote my name onto her list along with the code number (assuming this was printed on my polling card which I took with me). Then the same lady tore off my two ballot slips. The other lady honestly just sat there and did bugger all.

 

Yes, I'd be bored senseless if I had sit there 15 hours repeating the same two lines to everybody who comes to vote. :lol:

Edited May 7, 201015 yr by Hitstastic

What a joke of a thread.

 

FFS, I voted at 07:11 Hours in the morning, yet later that same evening in my same poll station the queues went up to 40/50 with a 20/25 minute waiting time to vote.

 

Those people had 15 Hours, and the option of Postal Voting. Yet failed to vote = Pathetic. It's like going boo hoo its not fair when you fail to get a ticket for a sell out gig/music festival because you can't be bothered to get on the phone/internet as soon as the lines open..

 

Gig tickets are of a limited supply, hence the need to phone early. As far as I was aware voting priveleges AREN'T on a strictly first-come-first limited basis, so your comparison is utter nonsense.

 

 

Sorry, but I voted first thing in the morning before I went to work, because I knew my poll station would be a lot more busier (which it was) in the evening after work.

 

If you knew that, you would also assume the authorities would also know that, and would have made resources available to cope with that peak time.

What a joke of a thread.

 

FFS, I voted at 07:11 Hours in the morning, yet later that same evening in my same poll station the queues went up to 40/50 with a 20/25 minute waiting time to vote.

 

Those people had 15 Hours, and the option of Postal Voting. Yet failed to vote = Pathetic. It's like going boo hoo its not fair when you fail to get a ticket for a sell out gig/music festival because you can't be bothered to get on the phone/internet as soon as the lines open..

 

And as for those students who failed to turn up with their Polling cards..... oh for crying out loud. :rolleyes:

 

Pathetic, just pathetic. This thread is a perfect reflection of society today where too many people blame anybody else but themselves for their own mistakes. So no doubt these students will get jobs in the Banking Sector in the City when they graduate. :lol:

 

im in broad agreement with richard on this, especially the emboldend part.

 

Yes, you're right. Why should anyone get to the polls as early as 7am when there's a "15 hour window", as you keep pointing out? And as Suedehead says, the polls are open ALL DAY for a reason.

 

And while I'm responding to your latest pathetic point, why didn't all the oh-so-hard-up parents with starving children and extremely long hours to work go in before work and avoid the inevitable long queues? Why is it up to the students to organise themselves around everyone else?

 

The basic point I'm making here is it's the system that was at fault for not being prepared for a large turn-out, even though this is one of the most hotly-contested elections for quite some time. To keep laying blame at the door of any one group of people is almost as ridiculous as your posts have become and as much of a joke as your reputation on this forum has become.

 

please refrain from personal attacks in this thread, your last line is way out of line m8. i often disagree with richard but respects his views as he always supports them with thought.

 

 

 

Weekend voting would be even better. That way schools can be used as polling stations without having to close loads of schools. It should also be possible to close the polls earlier.

 

good idea....