Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The sole party of government

651 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 15 16 17 18 19 27 Newer→ Last

  • Alfie, in reply to Gary Young,

    Is RealMe sophisticated enough to identify the actual person logged on and using the computer?

    eg. What would prevent the dominant male in a household taking his wife and kids voting IDs and doing all the voting himself?

    Who's to say that your dominant male isn't already collecting the entire family's EasyVote cards and tripping around a few polling booths with his mates?

    A determined person could theoretically game any electoral system, but unless there was mass-scale fraud which would surely attract public attention, their influence would be statistically insignificant.

    Dunedin • Since May 2014 • 1436 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Alfie,

    I’m sure that a secure protocol could be implemented to guarantee anonymity

    That’s not the security I have the problem with, though. At best, an online voting system mimics the security and privacy around storing of ballot papers, which was my point. But online voting doesn’t mimic the security and privacy of the polling booth, where there’s a controlled guarantee that nobody’s allowed to see how you vote, or any evidence of it, except for you.

    Relying on people to keep their own voting environment secure isn’t the same, because not everyone has that kind of freedom and assertiveness over their peers and others around them.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh,

    If internet voting is supposed to increase turnout by making voting more accessible, then let's review Sofie's comment here. Something tells me that telling people in the situation she describes they can now conveniently cast their vote online won't go down terribly well.

    Also: What Gary Young says about the dominant male of the household and Emma says about abuse.

    Those are also reasons to can postal voting and go back to good old fashioned ballot boxes for local polls.

    And I still think no matter how secure you make it, online voting is too vulnerable to being hacked. NSA/GCSB or China or whoever or all of the above. The system we have works and is pretty damn secure, so stop trying to fix it.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    The problem I had with CGT was simply how it was going to be calculated. Say you inherit a house from your Grandfather, as it is a family asset the family had gained nothing and if that house were sold to buy, say, a larger house then the profit, if any, should be calculated as anything over and above market value taking into account the cost of the larger property adjusted for actual current value. This is the same, if not similar, to the way the Family home is regarded. If, however the inherited home is sold and the beneficiary pockets the proceeds is it regarded as "Profit"? and therefore taxed? I am not sure but I suspect that is the way voters saw it.
    My point comes back to a simple question. Who should benefit from advances gained by our ancestors, our forefathers, our family?.
    I would hold that the advances and improvements of previous society is the property of current society but the image we see is that of an elite exploiting those societal assets for the benefit of the few, not the true owners, society as a whole.
    This is why a Universal wage is required. A great number of job in modern society are non productive admin jobs doing nothing but keeping the outdated Protestant Work Ethic driven society going. A true and fair sharing of a social wealth would allow people to actually enjoy life itself and not just survival and therefore competitive behavior and conflict.
    So do we take a little from the distribution of family wealth? Well that depends where that family accrued that wealth and how.
    Accidentally posted this unfinished so had to sum up rather fast.
    Thoughts?

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Gary Young,

    As Chris points out we also now have to consider the NSA/GCSB.

    I'm not sure I would feel comfortable voting online for a party that had promised to reign in the GCSB knowing that my online activity was being observed and recorded by said GCSB.

    Glenfield • Since Jun 2013 • 39 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    The privacy of the polling booth is essential to a secret ballot, and electoral staff enforce it

    Exactly.

    Also, if the norm for voting is in-person at a polling booth, then it's close to mandatory privacy, which you can't opt out of.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Alfie,

    Who’s to say that your dominant male isn’t already collecting the entire family’s EasyVote cards and tripping around a few polling booths with his mates?

    One of whom is convincingly dressed as his wife, right?

    Your tone makes me assume that for you, abuse is something very abstract, something it's okay to play thought-experiment hypotheticals with. You've just described a far more complicated process, and one that would be observed by multiple people, AND require a conspiracy. That's not, by and large, how domestic abuse happens. Mostly, abusers don't abuse while other people are watching.

    On Saturday, I had a guy moved away from standing over his wife while she voted. This isn't abstract. That woman is real, and your system would disenfranchise her and enable her abuser. But *handwave*, right?

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Alfie,

    Who's to say that your dominant male isn't already collecting the entire family's EasyVote cards and tripping around a few polling booths with his mates?

    Well, if you did that and the polling official or scrutineer (that's one reason they call the names out as you vote) recognised the gender or even age discrepancy, you'd wind up in trouble.

    Personation has become quite unusual - I don't recall hearing of a case. Vote harvesting, unfortunately, is definitely a thing.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to David Hood,

    (I've also got the party vote for each electorate at the same time, but haven't had time to do anything with that yet).

    That may prove to be very interesting, that is where I see a possible anomaly.
    This is interesting, from Papakura. Nat party vote 15,705. COLLINS, Judith 14,001. 1704 Papakura National voters don't like Collins.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Robyn Gallagher, in reply to Alfie,

    Who’s to say that your dominant male isn’t already collecting the entire family’s EasyVote cards and tripping around a few polling booths with his mates?

    Dominant Male parks his ute down a side street and walks around the corner to the school hall.
    Dominant Male is uncomfortable in the size 12 skinny jeans and One Direction hoodie and the $2 shop blonde party wig is starting to itch.
    Dominant Male walks into the hall, goes up to a table and slaps down his daughter’s Easy Vote card.
    Dominant Male says: “Yeah, gidday. I’d like to vote. Uh, I mean… Hi. I wanna vote. Yolo?”
    Doris the deputy returning officer looks down at the electoral roll, then looks up at Dominant Male.
    Doris the deputy returning officer laughs until there are tears streaming down her face.

    Raglan • Since Nov 2006 • 1946 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Robyn Gallagher,

    Dominant Male says: "Yeah, gidday. I'd like to vote. Uh, I mean... Hi. I want to vote. Yolo?"
    Doris the deputy returning officer looks down at the electoral roll, then looks up at Dominant Male.
    Doris the deputy returning officer laughs until there are tears streaming down her face.

    "More votes for National" she thinks as she spies the 6 foot three, muscular, Grandmother behind him.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Grevers, in reply to Mike Graham,

    A few thoughts as to why the left didn’t get traction during the last few weeks. To the general newspaper reading voter the perception is:1. Oravida – she was ‘hounded’ for supporting a NZ company2. Dirty Politics – a left wing conspiracy theory. Both sides do it.3. Kim Dotcom – he’s trying to buy his way into politics so he can stay in the country.4. GCSB – look at what has just happened in Australia. I don’t mind being spied on if it means we don’t have beheadings in the street.

    I'm mystified why the left didn't make more of #5 - The Minister of Justice knew of a plan to subvert a significant justice institution but did nothing. That isn't simply unfit to be a minister, but unfit to be an MP, and should lead to criminal charges.

    New Plymouth • Since Jul 2011 • 143 posts Report Reply

  • Alfie, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    Also, if the norm for voting is in-person at a polling booth, then it's close to mandatory privacy, which you can't opt out of.

    That little barcode on your voting form already has your name and address. The entire form is machine readable including which boxes you ticked. While scanning 2m+ forms would take a while, that information could still be extracted by an evil government, if they so wished.

    I can't find any figures on how many kiwis have had their online bank accounts drained by scammers but I've yet to meet anyone who has suffered that fate. I'd look upon the security of online voting in exactly the same way. And of course we'd rely on the integrity of the Electoral Commission with digital votes as we do with our paper-based system.

    I do see online voting as being inevitable one day, even if I appear to be in the minority.

    Dunedin • Since May 2014 • 1436 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Alfie,

    You don't seem particularly interested in reading any of the objections raised. For example, Emma wrote:

    On Saturday, I had a guy moved away from standing over his wife while she voted.

    If we had online voting, that all would've happened at home and nobody would've been able to stop that guy standing over his wife and doing whatever it was he intended to do. Which could've been purely innocent, but quite likely wasn't.

    And maybe you're right about the inevitablity of online voting, but it's something I will fight and I will not give up fighting it because I can only see it as a major step backwards for our democracy and our society.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Homer,

    Online voting is a mindbogglingly terrible idea. Electronic voting in general is a terrible idea, because it's entirely unverifiable. Doing it online only makes it worse.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 85 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Steve Barnes,

    Reap, then pillage…

    Who should benefit from advances gained by our ancestors, our forefathers, our family?.

    You’ve not been paying attention Steve…
    The Nice Mr Key© has told you before, that it’s ‘Mum & Dad investors’ who should benefit, them and other fey rich white people…

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7943 posts Report Reply

  • Katharine Moody, in reply to Alfie,

    Or not.

    Not in anything other than a press release, that is.

    And of course, his dear sweet mum has asked;

    "If you find out anything let me know."

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11312047

    Wellington • Since Sep 2014 • 798 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Meyers,

    I've found that Cunliffe has grown on me during the campaign. Seemed a lot more statesman-like than Key during the debates although I can see why people don't like him.

    I think the left were always going to struggle to win this election with the economy going strongly. A government won't often lose an election in the midst of an economic boom (even if I think it might end any day now).

    The CGT and increase in the top rate of tax just weren't going to work with the current electorate either. The apparent "steady and stable management" of the economy by National had brought the economy back into surplus and it was not made obvious why the taxes need to go up. John Key's line of "5 new taxes" was a killer.

    I expect over the next term in government, the economy is going to go south, and public services are going to be eroded by budget cuts. Then it will be obvious why taxes need to go up but we're not there yet.

    Also, I think Dirty Politics was a big deal in the election but National still got through it for two reasons.

    Firstly, Judith Collins was pretty heavily implicated and was cut loose. Polling showed that she needed to go and she was duly removed as a minister. Everyone else in the National Party was only really tainted by association. There was no hard evidence of anything else it was all hearsay. An email from John Key would've done it but emails from Judith Collins and Cam Slater weren't enough. I still think the Goff OIA thing looks pretty dodgy but nothing was proven sufficiently to really taint Key.

    Also, if a voter decided to abandon the National Party because of Dirty Politics, where else were they going to go? They weren't going to come to Labour. I expect that a good part of the bump in NZ First and the Conservatives might have come because of Dirty Politics.

    I certainly struggled with that thought myself. Labour tried to compete with National by taking a jump to the left with the Greens (although many here might disagree with that). That leaves a gaping hole to the left of National.... and many people want the stability of the status quo rather than "5 new taxes".

    Wellington • Since May 2014 • 56 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Johnny Alpha...
    But there are the odd ambitious 'Dominant Males' about who can work the angles on a scam, who'd be smart enough to check the variables.

    people are strange...

    Just because it seems unlikely, foolhardy, unwieldy and doomed - doesn't mean someone isn't trying it on, or even getting away with it...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7943 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Grevers, in reply to mark taslov,

    What’s your take on why they lost it Steve, or why they didn’t win? Currently 5,566 people have signed this petition declaring they think the election was rigged.

    Given our robust system for accounting for and securing votes, I think the result of a rigged election would be quite different:
    It's somewhat inaccurate to compare figures since the 2011 data is final and 2014 is still missing special votes, but National has a few thousand more votes than last time, while Labour has shed 100,000.

    I can't see any way in which you could 'lose' votes for the opposition under our system - only that you could give some people extra forged easyvote cards (gambling on who you don't think will vote?) to increase the numbers for the winning party. And if you did this on a large enough scale, you'd end up with a high turnout not a low one.

    New Plymouth • Since Jul 2011 • 143 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Tze Ming Mok,

    Tze Ming Mok, A day ago

    Web Twitter

    I was surprised to be deprived even of the schadenfreude of National being forced to deal with Winston.

    I feel your pain - it is my regret that we don't see Key attempt to swallow that rat whole, alive and kicking.

    Winston moderating the Nats was the best outcome "we" could expect.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    it’s ‘Mum & Dad investors’

    There used to be a lot more of them before the GFC. GFC, so similar to JFK, phonically enough and I don't mean John Fitzgerald...

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Alfie,

    That little barcode on your voting form already has your name and address.

    Sure, because we knew exactly when and where you were going to come in, and exactly which ballot paper you were going to use, and pre-printed it that way.It's eerie.

    Your ballot paper has a number, under the black sticker. That number matches the stub, which has your page and line number written on it by your issuing officer - in biro. With that ballot paper, and the stub, and a copy of the electoral roll, you could find out who cast a particular vote. You'd have to find the ballot paper you wanted first, of course, and then separately find the pad with the stub, and then corrupt the Electoral Commission...

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Michael Meyers,

    I've found that Cunliffe has grown on me during the campaign. Seemed a lot more statesman-like than Key

    Just think how much Shearer would have grown on you by now.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Meyers, in reply to Emma Hart,

    Your ballot paper has a number, under the black sticker. That number matches the stub, which has your page and line number written on it by your issuing officer – in biro.

    I had seen the number under the black sticker but hadn't looked at the stub before I was handed the ballot paper. There was discussion in my household about what would happen if I were to vote twice. Obviously it would be caught but I wondered how they would find the appropriate ballot paper if that were the case.

    It did also make me wonder how secret the secret ballot really is, although it would take a lot of work to match all the ballot paper with all voters. Lots of black stickers to peel off.

    Wellington • Since May 2014 • 56 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 15 16 17 18 19 27 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.