Postal Votes are they a good idea or not?

Question

The UK have spent several years testing out postal votes for local and general elections. The evidence is they have increased voter participation, but there is a negative perception that fraud is likely to happen.

What are your views on postal votes?

Answer 1

I use postal votes, but you don't have to post it in the post box. You can take your filled in envelope to any participating ballot box outlet and post it straight in.

Answer 2

There is that negative perception because fraud actually has happened on several occasions. I think postal votes are a very bad idea and they should only be used for people who cannot physically get out of the house because of a genuine disability, of which there are very few.

I also think it's a bad idea that people who know absolutely nothing about policies should be allowed to vote. In last year's general election my nan voted Labour for the sole reason that she "always has". She has Alzheimer's and doesn't even know what planet she's on half the time. I, on the other hand, couldn't vote because I was still 17 at the time, but I knew all the main parties' policies inside out.

I strongly disagree that voting should be compulsory. If people want to opt out of their democratic rights they should be allowed to do so, especially as we have a first past the post system where their chosen party may not have a candidate in their constituency.

Answer 3

The concept of postal voting is a good one, and can be of benefit to those living in remote locations and who may find it difficult to get to a polling station. And also for those who are disadvantaged by not having transport and for the elderly and sick. My husband like many other spouses male or female, and other potentail voters who work away from home have found this the only they can vote.

You so rightly pointed out that there is a negative perception that fraud is likely to happen. But this does mean that it is beyond the realms of possibility, so in the likely event of this happening government should take the necessary preventative measure now and not leave it until polling days are upon us again.

On the whole I think postal votes are a positive step forward. And that everyone who eligible to vote should be given the opportunity to do so, as I think that it is every ones duty to vote to avoid the egocentrics getting into government (mentioning no names).

I hope this has addressed your question to your satisfaction.

Answer 4

I think it makes fraud easier and it means that the voting process can potentially loose it's anonymity. If there was a bullying head of a household they could take everybodies postal vote and fill it out for them. This can't happen in the traditional ballot-box system

Answer 5

Postal voting, while superficially attractive to politicians who think we are all too bone idle to get off our backsides to go to a polling station, is wide open to fiddling, intimidation and fraud. It will mark the final disconnection between politicians and the electorate. That, after all, is the principal reason why people do not go out to vote.

Answer 6

Terrible idea. People should get off their idle backsides and get out and vote when they are lucky enough to have a choice. When we all live in a Moslem Caliphate we won't have that chance!
Show some commitment - use your democratic vote, bought with the scarifice of millions during two world wars.
This means you!

Answer 7

If it get people to voe in local elections it would be a great idea. General elections may be more difficult to administer, for fear of fraud and spoiled papers.

Answer 8

As far as possible voting should be done by going to the booth.

Answer 9

i don't think they are a very good idea as it makes manipulating the votes far easier. i agree that voting should be made compulsory though, as yes, it definately affects us all.

Answer 10

they're a good idea for people who can't get to the polling stations due to disabilities etc