First time voter seeks advice on the process

Clickety Elephant

Hello,

as a first time voter in the upcoming election I just wanted to check something regarding voting at a polling station on election day. On vote.ie it states "after arriving at the polling station and identifying yourself and being identified and marked off the register":-
• you are then handed a ballot paper, which displays the names of the candidates in alphabetical order, their photographs and the political party (if any) to which they belong.
• You then go to the booth and fill in your ballot paper, it is important to write 1 beside the name of your first choice, 2 beside the name of your second choice, 3 beside your third choice and so on as far as you wish to go.

1st Question(s): Is it compulsory to have several choices when voting? Can a voter just vote for one candidate only? Is the vote valid if a voter only votes for one candidate?

2nd Question: Regarding registering to vote. Registration authorities publish 2 versions of the Register - Full and edited register..."the full register can only be used for an electoral or other statutory purpose". What is a statutory purpose that the election register could be used for? Statute / Statutory relates to law? Out of interest any examples?
Thanks in advance.

Agent Smith

Clickety Elephant wrote: »

Hello,

as a first time voter in the upcoming election I just wanted to check something regarding voting at a polling station on election day. On vote.ie it states "after arriving at the polling station and identifying yourself and being identified and marked off the register":-
• you are then handed a ballot paper, which displays the names of the candidates in alphabetical order, their photographs and the political party (if any) to which they belong.
• You then go to the booth and fill in your ballot paper, it is important to write 1 beside the name of your first choice, 2 beside the name of your second choice, 3 beside your third choice and so on as far as you wish to go.

1st Question(s): Is it compulsory to have several choices when voting? Can a voter just vote for one candidate only? Is the vote valid if a voter only votes for one candidate?

2nd Question: Regarding registering to vote. Registration authorities publish 2 versions of the Register - Full and edited register..."the full register can only be used for an electoral or other statutory purpose". What is a statutory purpose that the election register could be used for? Statute / Statutory relates to law? Out of interest any examples?
Thanks in advance.

Wont go into detail on the second point, but on the first point.

When you vote Using PRSTV, You Vote by Preference. You can Just 1 if you like, or you can vote the whole ballot paper, Ranking the candidates in preference.

Many people just vote 1. I've tallied at election counts and a Large number of voters will got usually 1-5/6 and then stop. Doing the whole ballot paper is Less common.

If you just vote 1. and you candidate gets eliminated, thats it, you votes done.

if you vote 1,23, and the candidate you voted 1 gets eliminated, then your vote is transfered over to your number 2 candidate. if they have already been either elected or elimiated then it goes to 3, and so on.

Annasopra

On point 1 you can vote whatever way you want.

If there were 20 candidates or you could vote number 1 or 1 and 2 or 1-3 or 1,2,3,4 etc right down to 1 to 20.

Riskymove

In relation to Q2

One example is that people are called to jury duty using the register

Also Candidates are entitled to mail one leaflet etc. to everyone on the register

jimmycrackcorm

If you only vote for one candidate and it's someone only with an outside chance of getting elected then you're wasting your time going to vote in the first place.


We're fortunate to have the STV here so your choices actually have an effect.

E.g. on my own case I wish to see both a party candidate and an independent get elected and my first and second choices can likely help this happen

Marcos

I'd disagree with you there Jimmy. Registering your vote isn't a waste, even if you voted for someone who you think hasn't a chance of getting elected in this election. Every vote counts. Who knows if enough people decide to vote for their preferred candidate(s) they could actually get elected with transfers. Or they could build up a base to get elected in subsequent elections.


Also, in an electoral system like ours with "catch all" parties* and a Single Transferrable Vote, parties will make note of what votes are going where. If they see enough votes going for minority candidates who are running on a particular platform, they will adjust their policies to hoover up those votes in subsequent elections. Your vote may help push parties policies to match your views.

Also OP, it's your vote, so don't let anyone tell you who to vote for.


*Parties who seek to attract votes from across the political spectrum so pretend to be everything to everyone. Hello FF/FG especially :P

Fr_Dougal

Riskymove wrote: »

In relation to Q2

One example is that people are called to jury duty using the register

Also Candidates are entitled to mail one leaflet etc. to everyone on the register

An Post also use the register(illegally under GDPR law) to chase up for TV Licenses.

Zubeneschamali

Marcos wrote: »

Registering your vote isn't a waste, even if you voted for someone who you think hasn't a chance of getting elected in this election.

It is not a complete waste, but it is a waste compared to my vote. I can vote for the same no-hoper, and then, if they are eliminated as expected, your #1 only vote goes in the bin, while mine is transferred to help choose which of the remaining candidates gets elected.

Even if you hate them all, you probably hate some of them more than others, so vote all the way down and put the ones you hate most at the bottom (or leave the very last one off if you prefer).

This way, the only way your vote does not end up counting is if it ends up with the very last candidate eliminated.

The Rooster

It is a potentially partially wasted vote to leave it at 1 or 2 and go home.
You're basically saying that if my first and second preference weren't running I wouldn't have voted at all.

I would recommend trying to fill up at least a top 6. There should always be someone you like a little bit more (or dislike a little bit less!) than the rest.

If there are 20 people running in my constituency I personally get an infantile kick out of giving my least favoured candidate the number 20!

I tend to start with 1-2-3, then go 20-19-18, then keep going till I meet in the middle and they're all filled in. Important to make sure you have counted the total number of candidates beforehand

efanton

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It is not a complete waste, but it is a waste compared to my vote. I can vote for the same no-hoper, and then, if they are eliminated as expected, your #1 only vote goes in the bin, while mine is transferred to help choose which of the remaining candidates gets elected.

Even if you hate them all, you probably hate some of them more than others, so vote all the way down and put the ones you hate most at the bottom (or leave the very last one off if you prefer).

This way, the only way your vote does not end up counting is if it ends up with the very last candidate eliminated.

The counter point to this comment is that if you do choose to vote 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc for as many options as there are on your ballot paper then its possible that you would in some way end up supporting a candidate that you would never want elected.

At the end of the day its your choice, yes its possible that your vote will not count if you only use your first preference, or maybe a 1,2,3, but is it more important to you to see your vote count or more import that you vote will only go to those you deem worthy of a vote?




Vote no. 1 for the candidate that you would prefer to be elected.

Use your subsequent choices for those that you would see as a reasonable alternative if your first preference is not elected.
If there are candidates that you simply would not wish to be elected under any circumstances then simply do not put a number beside them.

Or as in the previous comment, use all your options knowing that your vote might contribute to a candidate you might wish was never elected, but knowing that your vote was actually guaranteed to actually count for something.

remember that there are a number of seats to be filled in each constituency.
If you only vote 1,2,3 then you might have absolutely no say whatsoever on the fourth seat if there was four seats up for election.

Claw Hammer

efanton wrote: »

if you do choose to vote 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc for as many options as there are on your ballot paper then its possible that you would in some way end up supporting a candidate that you would never want elected.

That is a misunderstanding. There is no negative voting. Your later preferences will only come into play when your higher ones are already elected or eliminated. By voting for the all candidates you might have some influence over which of the candidates you don't want to be elected actually get elected.
You might prefer that if it is a choice between two candidates that you hate, that one of them is elected rather than the other.
Leaving white space makes it more likely that a candidate you like less than another will be elected.
All of your preferred candidates will be out of the way anyway by that time so you are down to damage limitation.

efanton

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That is a misunderstanding. There is no negative voting. Your later preferences will only come into play when your higher ones are already elected or eliminated. By voting for the all candidates you might have some influence over which of the candidates you don't want to be elected actually get elected.
You might prefer that if it is a choice between two candidates that you hate, that one of them is elected rather than the other.
Leaving white space makes it more likely that a candidate you like less than another will be elected.
All of your preferred candidates will be out of the way anyway by that time so you are down to damage limitation.

thats a fair comment,

although what you say doesnt guarantee you will not in some way support a candidate you deem not worthy of a vote
Surely not even giving a preference to those you would not wish to be elected under an circumstances would be a safer option.

johnmcdnl

efanton wrote: »

thats a fair comment,

although what you say doesnt guarantee you will not in some way support a candidate you deem not worthy of a vote
Surely not even giving a preference to those you would not wish to be elected under an circumstances would be a safer option

If there are 20 candidates, and you really don't want Mr Smith to be elected, then you should vote for all other candidates from 1-19, then give Mr Smith a 20 (you don't have to give him a 20 because if it comes to that then the count is over automatically). (I'm open to be corrected on that one though if there's a scenario that the last candidate on the ballot may benefit from transfers that they wouldn't get if the voters didn't give them a #20)

If you don't want Mr Smith or Ms Reilly elected, well unfortunately there's a possible scenario where it comes down to a race between Mr Smith and Ms Reilly and now you have to do damage limitation and choose the lesser of 2 evils. Regardless of your opinion that neither deserve a vote, 1 of them shall be elected. If you continue voting right the way through the ballot, your vote could help choose 1 over the other. If you don't then the rest of the electorate will do the choosing for you.

Zubeneschamali

johnmcdnl wrote: »

(I'm open to be corrected on that one though if there's a scenario that the last candidate on the ballot may benefit from transfers that they wouldn't get if the voters didn't give them a #20)

There is indeed an extremely unlikely case where your very last place vote could help elect your least favourite candidate.

Suppose it is down to the last seat in the constituency and there are just two candidates left, Bjork and Hitler, and after counting the votes it is a tie, 50 votes each.

To break the tie, they look at the next selection on each ballot. The ballots for Hitler show no next preference, they are blank. All the ballots for Bjork show no next preference except one - yours shows Hitler because you voted all the way to the bottom.

Hitler wins and it is your fault.

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There is indeed an extremely unlikely case where your very last place vote could help elect your least favourite candidate.


Suppose it is down to the last seat in the constituency and there are just two candidates left, Bjork and Hitler, and after counting the votes it is a tie, 50 votes each.


To break the tie, they look at the next selection on each ballot. The ballots for Hitler show no next preference, they are blank. All the ballots for Bjork show no next preference except one - yours shows Hitler because you voted all the way to the bottom.


Hitler wins and it is your fault.

that is not my understanding of how it works. the next preference on the ballot only comes in to play when a candidate is elected. so in your example it would be the next preferences of the candidate eliminated in the previous round that would be counted.

osarusan

The Rooster wrote: »

If there are 20 people running in my constituency I personally get an infantile kick out of giving my least favoured candidate the number 20!

Same here, I go right down to the bottom, just to put a particular verminous creature at the bottom.



I've wondered if it is better to stop at that point, and leave their box blank, instead of putting in the last number. I mean, if i put them down as my 20th choice, the vote could technically be used for them, whereas if I put in the rest as 1-19, and leave them blank, it can't be used for them in any way.

Zubeneschamali

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is not my understanding of how it works. the next preference on the ballot only comes in to play when a candidate is elected. so in your example it would be the next preferences of the candidate eliminated in the previous round that would be counted.

No, I am supposing that after they distribute all the votes from the previous round, the result is a tie. There are no more candidates to eliminate - so how to break the tie?

They look at the next preferences if any.

Extremely unlikely to happen in the real world.

ectoraige

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There is indeed an extremely unlikely case where your very last place vote could help elect your least favourite candidate.

Suppose it is down to the last seat in the constituency and there are just two candidates left, Bjork and Hitler, and after counting the votes it is a tie, 50 votes each.

To break the tie, they look at the next selection on each ballot. The ballots for Hitler show no next preference, they are blank. All the ballots for Bjork show no next preference except one - yours shows Hitler because you voted all the way to the bottom.

Hitler wins and it is your fault.

But that would only happen if you ranked Hitler above Björk. If you put Hitler last then de facto Björk must be higher and she would get the preference.

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, I am supposing that after they distribute all the votes from the previous round, the result is a tie. There are no more candidates to eliminate - so how to break the tie?

They look at the next preferences if any.

Extremely unlikely to happen in the real world.

Do they? i must admit i've never heard of a vote where the last two candidates were tied.

Zubeneschamali

ectoraige wrote: »

But that would only happen if you ranked Hitler above Björk. If you put Hitler last then de facto Björk must be higher and she would get the preference.

No, I'll show the steps. There are 3 seats.

I vote:

1) Jesus 2) Buddha 3) Hitler 4) Blank

You vote

1) Jesus 2) Buddha 3) Bjork 4) Hitler

Everyone else votes 1) Jesus 2) Buddha 3) Blank 4) Blank

Jesus and Buddha ere elected, and there are no transfers except your vote and mine.

Result of the count after Buddha is elected:

Bjork 1 vote (yours), Hitler 1 vote (mine).

It's a tie, and there are no more candidates to eliminate, no more surplus votes to distribute. To break the tie, they look at the NEXT preference on the votes still in play:

Hitler wins the tie break, because you voted all the way to the bottom and I didn't.

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

There is indeed an extremely unlikely case where your very last place vote could help elect your least favourite candidate.

Suppose it is down to the last seat in the constituency and there are just two candidates left, Bjork and Hitler, and after counting the votes it is a tie, 50 votes each.

To break the tie, they look at the next selection on each ballot. The ballots for Hitler show no next preference, they are blank. All the ballots for Bjork show no next preference except one - yours shows Hitler because you voted all the way to the bottom.

Hitler wins and it is your fault.

That is wrong. If you have Hitler as your last preference it means that Bjork has one of your higher preferences. Bjork being still in the race will have your vote or your vote will be with an elected candidate. If Bjork and Hitler are tied at the end through a distribution of votes from another candidate the Presiding officer will have a casting vote. the next preferences in the votes in front of Bjork or any other candidate already elected or eliminated will not be looked at.

Claw Hammer

osarusan wrote: »

Same here, I go right down to the bottom, just to put a particular verminous creature at the bottom.



I've wondered if it is better to stop at that point, and leave their box blank, instead of putting in the last number. I mean, if i put them down as my 20th choice, the vote could technically be used for them, whereas if I put in the rest as 1-19, and leave them blank, it can't be used for them in any way.

Your vote can't be used for them as your vote will always be with a higher preference or an already elected candidate.

Zubeneschamali

I think this is the actual legal language on breaking ties in the Electotral Act of 1992

If, when a candidate has to be excluded under this section, two or more candidates have each the same number of votes and are lowest, regard shall be had to the number of original votes credited to each of those candidates, and the candidate with the lowest number of original votes shall be excluded and where the numbers of the original votes are equal, regard shall be had to the total numbers of votes credited to those candidates at the first count at which they had an unequal number of votes and the candidate with the lowest number of votes at that count shall be excluded and, where the numbers of votes credited to those candidates were equal at all counts, the returning officer shall determine by lot which shall be excluded.


So first they go through the counts 1st, 2nd, 3rd to see if they can break the tie, but that doesn't work in this example, as both got zero in each count and then 1 each in the same count. Does the language mandate that they look at the last preference.... maybe, maybe not. It certainly seems to suggest that a coin-toss is the absolutely last resort. I have been told by folks who work counts that looking at the last preference is how they were told a tie would be split before tossing a coin.

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, I am supposing that after they distribute all the votes from the previous round, the result is a tie. There are no more candidates to eliminate - so how to break the tie?

They look at the next preferences if any.

Extremely unlikely to happen in the real world.

No they don't. The presiding officer has a casting vote. The tie break will not involve looking at all next preferences of the remaining candidates. The system used in Ireland is PR-STV, i.e Single transferable vote. A vote cannot be used simultaneously for two candidates which is what you are suggesting.

Zubeneschamali

Claw Hammer wrote: »

If Bjork and Hitler are tied at the end through a distribution of votes from another candidate the Presiding officer will have a casting vote.

That is right out, see the legal text above.

The returning officer will toss a coin if it is a tie and no more votes are available.

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think this is the actual legal language on breaking ties in the Electotral Act of 1992

If, when a candidate has to be excluded under this section, two or more candidates have each the same number of votes and are lowest, regard shall be had to the number of original votes credited to each of those candidates, and the candidate with the lowest number of original votes shall be excluded and where the numbers of the original votes are equal, regard shall be had to the total numbers of votes credited to those candidates at the first count at which they had an unequal number of votes and the candidate with the lowest number of votes at that count shall be excluded and, where the numbers of votes credited to those candidates were equal at all counts, the returning officer shall determine by lot which shall be excluded.


So first they go through the counts 1st, 2nd, 3rd to see if they can break the tie, but that doesn't work in this example, as both got zero in each count and then 1 each in the same count. Does the language mandate that they look at the last preference.... maybe, maybe not. It certainly seems to suggest that a coin-toss is the absolutely last resort. I have been told by folks who work counts that looking at the last preference is how they were told a tie would be split before tossing a coin.

my reading of that is when it comes down to the last two candidates they do not look at the next preferences for those candidates. the returning officer basically tosses a coin. The words "shall determine by lot" are quite clear.

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That is right out, see the legal text above.

The returning officer will toss a coin if it is a tie and no more votes are available.

What that is saying is that it is the higher candidate on the first count who will be preferred and so on if the first count votes are equal, any subsequent count.
There is no question at any stage of a vote for one candidate who is continuing having his later preferences examined to break a tie.
Voting the whole way down cannot result in the last preference being used to elected someone in preference to another.

ohnonotgmail

Claw Hammer wrote: »

What that is saying is that it is the higher candidate on the first count who will be preferred and so on if the first count votes are equal, any subsequent count.
There is no question at any stage of a vote for one candidate who is continuing having his later preferences examined to break a tie.
Voting the whole way down cannot result in the last preference being used to elected someone in preference to another.

that is certainly true. it is also true that the returning officer does not have a casting vote.

Zubeneschamali

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is certainly true.

I have been told otherwise by people who heard it from an actual returning officer at an actual count.

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have been told otherwise by people who heard it from an actual returning officer at an actual count.

possibly if both candidates consented to it as a form of drawing lots but i cant see why they would. A full recount would be more likely

The Rooster

osarusan wrote: »

Same here, I go right down to the bottom, just to put a particular verminous creature at the bottom.



I've wondered if it is better to stop at that point, and leave their box blank, instead of putting in the last number. I mean, if i put them down as my 20th choice, the vote could technically be used for them, whereas if I put in the rest as 1-19, and leave them blank, it can't be used for them in any way.

I think when they or their team are doing their tallying, seeing a blank opposite their name would be common enough. Seeing the number 20 would draw their attention

Ah, they could probably give a hoot, but it's a bit of fun!

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I have been told otherwise by people who heard it from an actual returning officer at an actual count.

It is not allowed by law.
When has there been a situation where two candidates got the same first preference vote and the same number of transfers on each subsequent count and were then faced with one or other being eliminated?
If the returning officer attempted to do it by reference to the candidates existing votes the losing candidate would challenge it in the courts. there is a very clear procedure to be followed and vague stories about people who were at counts and saw something done is just poppycock.

Zubeneschamali

Claw Hammer wrote: »

When has there been a situation where two candidates got the same first preference vote and the same number of transfers on each subsequent count and were then faced with one or other being eliminated?

I don't believe it has ever happened in a Dáil election, it is vanishingly unlikely with any large number of votes.

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't believe it has ever happened in a Dáil election, it is vanishingly unlikely with any large number of votes.

If it has never happened, how were you told something by people who saw it happening?

Zubeneschamali

Claw Hammer wrote: »

If it has never happened, how were you told something by people who saw it happening?

I din't say they saw it happen, I said a returning officer told them at a count that that was how you would split a tie.

If it happened.

Which it never did and probably never will.

Claw Hammer

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I din't say they saw it happen, I said a returning officer told them at a count that that was how you would split a tie.

If it happened.

Which it never did and probably never will.

If a returning officer said that, the candidates would object pretty quickly. It is no basis in law. It is most unlikely any returning officer ever said it. You were obviously being spoofed.