Spoiled Votes??

timmywex

what exactely is a spoiled vote(like,i know its a vote that ca't be taken into account, but what has to be on it)?? are they strict on it??

daymobrew

I'd love to see the returning officer release a few of the spoiled ballot papers as an educational exercise for voters, especially if the spoiling was probably unintentional.

MarkR

I was wondering about that. Maybe repeated numbers, or additions to the choices (Mr Tayto for example!)

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

seamus

Afaik it's more-or-less a vote that's uncountable. This would include;

1. Blank voting cards (i.e. cards with no number on them, including stuff with scribbles or other text written on them)
2. Cards where more than one box was "ticked" instead of numbered
3. Cards where the numbers are illegible

In the case of number 2, as best I know, a single ticked box will count as a first preference vote for a candidate.
In the case of number 3, I'm not sure who rules that the card is illegible, or what happens if, say the 1-5 preferences are perfectly readable, but you can't tell the difference between 6 and 8.

dulpit

Am i right in saying that some people intentionally go into a voting booth to spoil their vote... (Anarchists or the like?)

Taken from
http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/LocalGovernment/Voting/FileDownLoad,1882,en.pdf

joxerdaly

A vote is spoiled if the entire number is not inside the box. Some people put an X beside who they want to vote for. My Father was at count and he saw a lot of votes with all number one's on them. No excuse for wasting a vote. Some of the more intentual spoiled vote's are by people who just write "F*** all of you" accross the ballot card. Could you be bothered going the whole way to vote to do that? personally I'm glad these idots vote doesn't count...........

mukki

what about if you put a number in the wrong box by mistake, can you get a new page, or do you just scribble it out and start again

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

daveirl

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Thats under "want of official mark" isn't it?

timmywex

mukki wrote:

what about if you put a number in the wrong box by mistake, can you get a new page, or do you just scribble it out and start again

yeh, you can bring it back up and get a new one i think

monkeyfudge

The the intentional spoiled vote serve their purpose.

It's almost like an abstention. It shows an individual is willing to take part in the democratic process but have no interest in any of the choices they have been offered.

E-voting didn't take spoiling your vote into consideration.

delta_bravo

I was at the count in the RDS and i saw one vote that I was wondering whether or not it was spoiled. This is what is looked like:

Candidate #1: 3
Candidate #2: 1
Candidate #3: X
Candidate #4: 2
Candidate #5: X
Candidate #6: X
Candidate #7: X
Candidate #8: X

Obviously they didnt want to transfer votes after the 3rd pref but i presume the vote was not counted at all?

Evieweavy

A vote is spoiled if the entire number is not inside the box

I think they are a bit more lenient than that I was doing the tally on Friday and they were calling anything with a clear preference unspoiled basically if you had a number one and 2 number 2s you'd get your first preference but you wouldn't get transferred etc. There were people writing the words one and two I am not sure about that but you would think that would be a clear preference. And yes people did go all the way to their polling booth to draw a line through the card or just to fold the card in half with no preferences cast what a shower of wasters with too much time on thier hands. All of the agents from each candidate went up at the end to agree in what was spoiled and unspoiled and if they could get agreement from the agents they seemed to use that I'm not completely sure what the exact criteria is though.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

gonk

daymobrew wrote:

I'd love to see the returning officer release a few of the spoiled ballot papers as an educational exercise for voters, especially if the spoiling was probably unintentional.

This is a very good point. Much was made of the capacity of electronic voting to eliminate voter error and unintentionally spoiled ballots. This was one of the main arguments advanced in its favour.

A fortune was wasted on voting machines and continues to be spent on storing them, yet to my knowledge not a cent has ever been spent on educating voters on how to complete a paper ballot correctly and avoid spoiling it, which would have been a much more cost-effective approach.

Evieweavy

Why are people so upset with people who choose to spoil their votes. I've often thought about doing it.

Why bother going in at all? I had my first introduction, at the count last week, as to why each persons vote and preference counts I think everybody should be encouraged to go to their local count centre so you can see democracy in action and just how above board and open to scrutiny the whole counting process is. Everybodies vote counts what is the point wasting it.

monkeyfudge

Evieweavy wrote:

Why bother going in at all? I had my first introduction, at the count last week, as to why each persons vote and preference counts I think everybody should be encouraged to go to their local count centre so you can see democracy in action and just how above board and open to scrutiny the whole counting process is. Everybodies vote counts what is the point wasting it.

As I said it shows that the person is interested in the democratic system, but when the all the choices are atrocious they'd rather not give any of them a vote.

PH01

delta_bravo wrote:

I was at the count in the RDS and i saw one vote that I was wondering whether or not it was spoiled. This is what is looked like:

Candidate #1: 3
Candidate #2: 1
Candidate #3: X
Candidate #4: 2
Candidate #5: X
Candidate #6: X
Candidate #7: X
Candidate #8: X

Obviously they didnt want to transfer votes after the 3rd pref but i presume the vote was not counted at all?

I would have assumed that the above example was counted, was it?
As '1' would have priority over 'x'?

wow sierra

delta_bravo wrote:

I was at the count in the RDS and i saw one vote that I was wondering whether or not it was spoiled. This is what is looked like:

Candidate #1: 3
Candidate #2: 1
Candidate #3: X
Candidate #4: 2
Candidate #5: X
Candidate #6: X
Candidate #7: X
Candidate #8: X

Obviously they didnt want to transfer votes after the 3rd pref but i presume the vote was not counted at all?

That vote would be counted. The returning officer will take the attitude it the intent is clear it is allowed.

You should avoid doing this to your ballot paper though as when it comes to close contests and recounts you will have legal teams there from the opposing candidates trying to get votes excluded for technical errors.

Ive seen them trying to argue that "NO 1" means "not no one" as opposed to being what it is - a vote for the candidate it is beside. They can also try to object to votes where the number is written over with another number even if it is clear what the new number is. You shouldnt put a ring around the number or a line under it. The returning officer will always argue to include disputed votes where the intent is clear, but the legal teams will fight them all.

The official rule is if there is anything other than a clear 1, 2 ,3 etc in the box opposite the candidate it can't be counted. Anything else is looking for trouble. If you make a mistake you can get another ballot paper. Also make sure it is stamped - if it isnt it cant be counted and there are always some of them.

aequinoctium

is it not a democratic right to spoil one's vote?

that right will be taken away with the introduction of e-voting!

delta_bravo

aequinoctium wrote:

is it not a democratic right to spoil one's vote?

that right will be taken away with the introduction of e-voting!

Just dont vote then

SeanW

But AFAIK it is a specific right to cast a spoiled vote. Personally, I would never spoil a vote, but then again my political views tend to be against something bad rather than for something good, so my view is always to support whoever is worth a chance/is good/is the least worst.

But some would view even this as pointless if none of the choices appeal to the voter or the voter has decided none of the candidates deserve a vote. "Just don't vote" isn't an answer, because your vote is your say. And your view may just be "the whole thing is a joke." Under manual voting, you have the right to draw in an extra box for "Michael Collins" or "Mr. Tayto," leave the whole thing blank, put a line down the page or whatever, under e-voting you don't.

Ok, so I personally think that's just a complete waste of time, but to the small minority who don't, that right should be respected.

miju

spoiling a vote is the exact same thing as TD's do when they abstain from certain matters.

it clearly shows your taking part in the political process but have no preference. in the case of the TDs there all lazy , lol

simu

Is it a right? Where is this stated if it is so? I'm dubious... after all, the point of an election is to elect someone, not guage the electorate's level of dissatisfaction with the democratic process/the candidates/whatever.

daymobrew

aequinoctium wrote:

is it not a democratic right to spoil one's vote?

that right will be taken away with the introduction of e-voting!

For e-voting, how about Lotto-like forms? This would provide a paper trail to allow for manual recounts. There could be a "Spoil" box.

When this ballot paper is completed it could be scanned for accuracy, with the person given a chance of fixing the error. The nature of the error would not be seen by the polling station worker.

gonk

delta_bravo wrote:

Just dont vote then

The right to cast one's vote in secret implies an equal right to abstain secretly. You might not want, for example, your family members to know you had abstained. This is a scenario which is easy to imagine in, say, the referenda on abortion. Deliberate spoiling of votes allows this.

The proposed e-voting system removed this possibility and this was one of the criticisms the Commission on Electronic Voting had of it.

The Muppet

delta_bravo wrote:

Just dont vote then

There is a difference between not voting and spoiling a vote.

If you don't vore you are stating that you have no interest in the democratic process. By intentionally spoiling your vote you are stating that you are willing to vote but not for any of the candidates on the ballot paper.

Judes

The only opinion I have on people who choose not vote, or purposely spoil a vote is that they have NO say in what happens in this country. So if you know of people who do this and then start mouthing off about things that displease them in this country - just tell them to shut up - that they forfeited the right to be heard! So we have no intention of listening to them.

For centuries people have fought and died for the right to vote. How any citizen can stick their fingers up at this right - it just astounds me.

Zaph

Judes wrote:

The only opinion I have on people who choose not vote, or purposely spoil a vote is that they have NO say in what happens in this country. So if you know of people who do this and then start mouthing off about things that displease them in this country - just tell them to shut up - that they forfeited the right to be heard! So we have no intention of listening to them.

For centuries people have fought and died for the right to vote. How any citizen can stick their fingers up at this right - it just astounds me.

There is a significant difference between not voting and deliberately spoiling your vote. The former implies a laziness to get involved (although some people may not have voted for genuine reasons, out of the country on business that day, for instance) in the democratic process and that you really couldn't be arsed voting. In this case I agree with you, these people had their chance to do something about the country, they didn't, so therefore I choose not to listen to their whining about stuff the government has done that they don't agree with.

On the other hand, I have once deliberately spoiled my vote, in the 1997 presidential election. The candidates that year were Mary McAleese, Mary Banotti, Adi Roche, Dana Rosemary Scallon and Derek Nally, none of whom I wished to be elected for various reasons so I wrote "None of the above" on my ballot paper. I could just as easily have stayed at home, but it was important to me to turn out and register my opinion, and I certainly wasn't sticking my two fingers up at the right to do this (although I was sticking them up at the candidates). Admittedly I'd be less likely to do something like this in a general or local council election as I could vote for a party even if I didn't like the particular candidate.