spoiled votes.

stek

How did over 6,000 spoil their votes? Was it that difficult to put an X in a box?
Wicklow and Tipp N. were so close, the spoiled votes could have swung the results!

Dar

stek wrote: »

How did over 6,000 spoil their votes? Was it that difficult to put an X in a box?
Wicklow and Tipp N. were so close, the spoiled votes could have swung the results!

You're assuming they spoiled them by accident.

force eleven

Dar wrote: »

You're assuming they spoiled them by accident.

Didnt one voter leave an A4 letter with their vote in Clare, protesting about the downgrading of Shannon Airport? If the vote paper itself wasnt marked apart from an X in either box I don't think that counts as a spoiled vote.

Most people just spoiled their votes through protest most likely, and a small amount maybe they marked the wrong box and then crossed/marked it out and marked the correct one, thats a spoiled vote.

Dave!

What a great protest

I'm sure the vote counters will pass on the message to the politicians........

Randomness

stek wrote: »

How did over 6,000 spoil their votes? Was it that difficult to put an X in a box?
Wicklow and Tipp N. were so close, the spoiled votes could have swung the results!

Well the last time I checked the result was calculated by the number of people who voted no versus the number of people who voted yes, not on a constituency basis therefore there fact that 4 votes separated Wiclow is meaningless.

Also 6000 votes are irrevelant when the difference between the sides was over 100,000.

In my opinion people are fully intitled to spoil there vote intentionally, at least they got up off their bums and went to the polling station, unlike the 1.5 million plus who couldn't be bothered....

kittenkiller

My brother and I went down to vote together, he voted one way and I voted the other.
Coming out we wondered why we bothered if we were only going to cancel each other out.
I think I'll write a wee limerick on my ballot paper next time.

IRLConor

From what I heard loads of the spoiled votes had "1" in one box and "2" in the other. :rolleyes:

Sometimes votes are spoiled because people are thick, not because they're trying to register a protest.

SkepticOne

IRLConor wrote: »

From what I heard loads of the spoiled votes had "1" in one box and "2" in the other. :rolleyes:

It would be interesting to do a count of these votes. How many put a 1 in the Yes box versus a 1 in the No.

TelePaul

IRLConor wrote: »

From what I heard loads of the spoiled votes had "1" in one box and "2" in the other. :rolleyes:

Sometimes votes are spoiled because people are thick, not because they're trying to register a protest.

From what I hear, alot of spoiled votes had both boxes ticked and included an anatomically correct drawing of the male genitals or something equally pointless.

skearon

stek wrote: »

How did over 6,000 spoil their votes? Was it that difficult to put an X in a box?
Wicklow and Tipp N. were so close, the spoiled votes could have swung the results!

Correct, in Wicklow 194 more No than Yes and 206 spoilt votes

I was assisting in the Tally there are there was a mixture of reasons, some where just blank, others had Xs for both yes and no, and quite a number were not stamped.

Dave!

Stamped? Is that the dots that are perferated in it before you're handed the paper?

Also, if the box is ticked rather than X'd, do ye still count it?

PrivateEye

Friend of mine spoiled his vote.

I tried to convince him to vote No, he was leaning to Yes for a while.
In the end he X'd the page, stating he didn't know enough to go either way- and this way he'd still showed up anyway.

6,000 people showing up and not going either way is an effective way of showing the government you feel enough info wasn't provided.

I know plenty of couples were one voted Yes and the other No, still important though for turnout.

A low turnout is an excuse to make us vote again remember :pac:

It would be interesting to do a count of these votes. How many put a 1 in the Yes box versus a 1 in the No.

Seeing as there was a 100,000+ gap between the Níls and the Tás, clutching at straws comes to mind....

Dave!

PrivateEye wrote: »

6,000 people showing up and not going either way is an effective way of showing the government you feel enough info wasn't provided.

Or it's an effective way of showing the government that they need to provide more information on how to cast a legal vote...

skearon

Dave! wrote: »

Stamped? Is that the dots that are perferated in it before you're handed the paper?

Also, if the box is ticked rather than X'd, do ye still count it?

Correct, no perferated holes

A X, tick or whatever, as long as your voting preference can be clearly understood the vote counts

Gone West

stek wrote: »

How did over 6,000 spoil their votes? Was it that difficult to put an X in a box?
Wicklow and Tipp N. were so close, the spoiled votes could have swung the results!

In fairness, 50.01% vs 49.99% was freakishly close

Also, spoiling your vote is not always an unconscious thing, it can be used as a political protest or as a none of the above option in yes or no referenda.

Spoiling your vote is the Atari Jaguar option in a referendum.

IRLConor

Dave! wrote: »

Or it's an effective way of showing the government that they need to provide more information on how to cast a legal vote...

Or it's an effective way of showing the government that they need to improve the education system in general since the instructions are written clearly in both Irish and English on the ballot paper.

I fully understand the motivation for spoiling your vote deliberately but I can't understand how someone could be 18 years old or more and not understand how to answer a yes/no question when given clear instructions how to.

gcgirl

Posted via Mobile Deviceyou'd be surprised by how many adults cannot read !

spurious

Very few adults cannot read at all, but a ballot paper that presents two boxes could easily be filled in with a tick in one and an X in the other. This may well be counted as a spoiled vote as there is an argument for the vote being for both.

X being the culturally accepted 'negative' might also confuse things.

iPoker

Randomness wrote: »

Well the last time I checked the result was calculated by the number of people who voted no versus the number of people who voted yes, not on a constituency basis therefore there fact that 4 votes separated Wiclow is meaningless.

Also 6000 votes are irrevelant when the difference between the sides was over 100,000.

In my opinion people are fully intitled to spoil there vote intentionally, at least they got up off their bums and went to the polling station, unlike the 1.5 million plus who couldn't be bothered....

we have a RIGHT to vote...not an obligation. our constitution provides therefore that we have a RIGHT to not vote equally. This was confirmed by the courts on concluding that the right to associate inferred the right not to associate!!

don't criticise people who don't vote. If i choose not to vote, it doesn't impact you negatively. if actually strengthens your vote. Moreover, in this particular case, if someone did not understand the referendum, it is preferrable they don't vote, rather than cast an uninformed vote.

Randomness

iPoker wrote: »

we have a RIGHT to vote...not an obligation. our constitution provides therefore that we have a RIGHT to not vote equally. This was confirmed by the courts on concluding that the right to associate inferred the right not to associate!!

don't criticise people who don't vote. If i choose not to vote, it doesn't impact you negatively. if actually strengthens your vote. Moreover, in this particular case, if someone did not understand the referendum, it is preferrable they don't vote, rather than cast an uninformed vote.

Of course you have the right...oh hang on RIGHT to vote or not to vote, I'm not arguing that. Each individual can make up their own mind what to do.

People do not vote for millions of reasons, some as simple as being away on holidays, others as complex as political disillusionment. However I can't understand why someone wouldn't vote when the option is there to spoil your vote. In doing so you are participating as a citizen in the events of your country by saying "hang on a minute, I neither agree or disagree, or I have no opinion and I am expressing this by spoiling my vote".

Of course there are many others reasons people may not want to vote one way or other but I definitely think they should mark the ballot.

I also disagree that if someone chooses not to vote they are strengthening my vote, well in the Lisbon example anyway. The approx. 1.5 millions people who didn't vote in fact weaken my vote when viewed by Europe. Why should they halt retifications etc. when half of the people allowed to vote in Ireland to decide the immediate fate of the E.U didn't even vote?

iPoker

Randomness wrote: »

Of course you have the right...oh hang on RIGHT to vote or not to vote, I'm not arguing that. Each individual can make up their own mind what to do.

You were!

Randomness wrote: »

People do not vote for millions of reasons, some as simple as being away on holidays, others as complex as political disillusionment. However I can't understand why someone wouldn't vote when the option is there to spoil your vote. In doing so you are participating as a citizen in the events of your country by saying "hang on a minute, I neither agree or disagree, or I have no opinion and I am expressing this by spoiling my vote".

so a spoil vote is acceptable to you, but not no vote at all? that's lunacy! spoil votes are not taken as view on anything! you're not participating as a citizen in spoiling a vote. how do you distinguish the 6,000 spoiled votes between "hang on a minute, i neither agree or disagree", or "i have no opinion", or a genuine mistake, or a retard, or whatever. Moreover, what is the level of attention the quantum of spoiled votes receives as opposed to the turnout. none!

Randomness wrote: »

Of course there are many others reasons people may not want to vote one way or other but I definitely think they should mark the ballot.

You haven't given a valid reason why? save for this thread, the level of attention the level of spoiled votes get is approaching nil.

Randomness wrote: »

I also disagree that if someone chooses not to vote they are strengthening my vote, well in the Lisbon example anyway. The approx. 1.5 millions people who didn't vote in fact weaken my vote when viewed by Europe. Why should they halt retifications etc. when half of the people allowed to vote in Ireland to decide the immediate fate of the E.U didn't even vote?

your vote = 1
eligible votes = 3,000,000

your vote relative to total eligible votes = 1/3,000,000

your vote= 1
actual votes = 1,500,000

your vote relative to total actual votes = 1/1,500,000

I'm not a math professor, but, appears to be simple maths. you're vote assumes a greater weighting!

Randomness

Your really not getting me......

Just say everyone voted on Thursday,
Yes meant - I agree
No meant - I disagree
Spoiled meant - I don't know, don't understand etc (of course your going to get stupid people who can't put Xs in boxes in that category)

I think if this happened FAR, FAR more people would have spoiled than voted No.

EamonnKeane

Dave! wrote: »

Or it's an effective way of showing the government that they need to provide more information on how to cast a legal vote...

Yes that whole "IF YOU APPROVE, mark an X in the box marked YES... IF YOU DO NOT APPROVE, mark an X in the box marked NO" ... omg srsly wtf duz dat evn m3an?

FionnMatthew

Randomness wrote: »

In my opinion people are fully intitled to spoil there vote intentionally, at least they got up off their bums and went to the polling station, unlike the 1.5 million plus who couldn't be bothered....

You're assuming that the every one of the 1.5 million non-voters did so out of laziness, and not out of principled abstainance. A bit of temperance please.

turgon

How about a "I dont know/equally favour yes and no" option on the ballot papers. I think they should, would cut out some of those people voting out of ignorance.