Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Increase of 50,000 on Supplementary Register

Options
  • 23-02-2011 4:32pm
    #1
    ednwireland
    Registered Users Posts: 14,314 ✭✭✭✭


    is this a lot compared to previous elections i wonder

    sounds like a lot
    Increase of 50,000 on Supplementary Register

    There has been an increase of about 50,000 people on the Supplementary Electoral Register.

    It is understood that preliminary figures show an increase across the country.

    The register was published on 1 February last and came into effect on February 15.

    While some of the 50,000 may have been added to the Register before 1 February, officials believe the vast majority registered to vote since that date.

    Early indications are that about 6,400 were added to the register in Dublin City, 2,900 in Dun Laoghaire, 1,800 in Fingal and 1,700 in South Dublin.

    In 2008 around 18,000 people were added to the register, although this was outside of an election period.

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



Comments

  • Options
    #2
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    I think that is up on previous numbers for some reason, but does anyone know if there's any truth to the idea that people who are on the register, and do not vote, their vote goes to the incumbent? is this true?


  • Options
    #3
    heyjude
    Registered Users Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭heyjude


    david75 wrote: »
    does anyone know if there's any truth to the idea that people who are on the register, and do not vote, their vote goes to the incumbent? is this true?

    No truth to it at all. If you don't vote, nobody gets your vote.


  • Options
    #4
    Aishae
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭Aishae


    seems like it might be mainly people turning 21 and including people that turned 21 a few years ago and they never thought to register. as the whole thing is very much all around us at the moment - normally registering wouldnt be on peoples mind when they turn 21 (although i remember doing so a week after i turned 21 - id say thats minority)


  • Options
    #5
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Is it not 18 that's the legal voting age here?


  • Options
    #6
    Aishae
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭Aishae


    Is it not 18 that's the legal voting age here?
    could be - im having a old fart moment so i cant be sure!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    david75 wrote: »
    I think that is up on previous numbers for some reason, but does anyone know if there's any truth to the idea that people who are on the register, and do not vote, their vote goes to the incumbent? is this true?
    Lol, no. Only valid votes cast are counted.

    I think you may be getting somewhat confused by the idea that if you do not vote, then you are effectively voting for the winner. That is, if there are two parties, Party A and Party B, if you do not vote then you are effectively saying, "I don't care who wins". If Party A wins, then you have effectively voted for Party A because if you preferred Party B, you weakened their chances of winning by not voting.
    david75 wrote: »
    Is it not 18 that's the legal voting age here?
    Yep, 'tis.

    50,000 extra names on the register would be hard to say whether it's a big deal. It only represents 1.6% of the 2007 electorate. Enough to make a slight difference, not enough to swing a whole election.


  • Options
    #8
    Aishae
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭Aishae


    seamus wrote: »
    50,000 extra names on the register would be hard to say whether it's a big deal. It only represents 1.6% of the 2007 electorate. Enough to make a slight difference, not enough to swing a whole election.

    mind you - could help make a diff' if they all turned up and voted - with a very low spoil count


  • Options
    #9
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    I would consider that number quite low given the supposed voter anger out there. I suppose it is an upturn that its a higher number than before.


  • Options
    #10
    heyjude
    Registered Users Posts: 1,030 ✭✭✭heyjude


    It is a bit strange to see so many names added to the supplemetary register when house sales are very low(so less people moving to new addresses) and with 100,000 mainly young people having emigrated in the last two years(many of whom might have become first time voters had they not been forced to emigrate).


  • Options
    #11
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,282 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    david75 wrote: »
    I think that is up on previous numbers for some reason, but does anyone know if there's any truth to the idea that people who are on the register, and do not vote, their vote goes to the incumbent? is this true?
    This couldn't work in constituencies where there are multiple incumbents. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Pal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,115 ✭✭✭Pal


    the authorities were very well orgnised this election. so many times in the past there were numerous stories about people being left out. if you didn't get on the register then you really have no one to blame.


Advertisement