Jacob Reed-Mogg admits that voter ID was an attempt at gerrymandering by the tories!

Oreo

Do you need voter ID in your country Fleurpepper ?
Does it benefit one political party over another? Of course it doesn’t. All countries will eventually do the same, require ID.

Totally irrelevant to this post Oreo.

I vote in the UK, by post, no ID required.

Grantanow

So it was true after all. Died in the wool Tory MP and ex-Minister says Tories introduced voter ID to give themselves an advantage in elections. Given the negligible personation offenses it was always obvious and now we have it from the horse's mouth. Disgraceful. It reminds me of the Tory gerrymandering in Westminster several years ago which the then District Auditor condemned. The Tories cannot be trusted.

He said no such thing. And I’m sure you think it doesn’t require much interpretation because it’s what you want to believe he said. I have been trained to analyse words without bias and that’s what I have done, despite my dislike of JRM - which by your standards would have me agreeing with the headline, but I don’t.

Do you need voter ID in your country Fleurpepper ?
Does it benefit one political party over another? Of course it doesn’t. All countries will eventually do the same, require ID.

oh dear 'It’s the interpretation, English isn’t a language for the fainthearted'

no interpretation required. And I am not fainthearted ;) nor do I have problems with English.

Doesn't require much interpretation in my view!

Opal

Oh well, if the BBC reported it, then it must be true

Most other media are also reporting this. Their problem is that, apparently, it also stopped a lot of Tories from voting lol.

My area was in the pilot scheme, which just meant many people applied for postal votes.

Not sure what it achieves.🙄

Casdon

The damage is done now. He said the words, for all to watch on repeat, and interpret as they wish.

He’s a bit of an idiot at times, an eccentric who would be a liability to any party.
Yeah, you’re right as many people will interpret his words in the worst way possible without thinking about it.

Oreo

Fleurpepper
It’s the interpretation, English isn’t a language for the fainthearted. He didn’t say that the voter ID issue was an attempt to alter voting in favour of Conservatives, which in any case would have not worked, as many elderly people vote Labour.Asking for voter ID isn’t gerrymandering btw.
He is saying that it made it harder for Conservatives to vote as (in his opinion) they were more likely to vote that way.What it did was make it harder for anyone to vote for any political party but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea, just something new which will improve with time.Only the local elections so loads of time for anyone who really wants to vote to make sure they can for a general election.
When you think how many countries demand voter ID in Europe, it can’t be done just to benefit one particular party.

It’s another attempt at a snipe at the government, which has backfired directly on him. However, he supported the introduction of voter id when he was in the government.

So it was true after all. Died in the wool Tory MP and ex-Minister says Tories introduced voter ID to give themselves an advantage in elections. Given the negligible personation offenses it was always obvious and now we have it from the horse's mouth. Disgraceful. It reminds me of the Tory gerrymandering in Westminster several years ago which the then District Auditor condemned. The Tories cannot be trusted.

Fleurpepper
It’s the interpretation, English isn’t a language for the fainthearted. He didn’t say that the voter ID issue was an attempt to alter voting in favour of Conservatives, which in any case would have not worked, as many elderly people vote Labour.Asking for voter ID isn’t gerrymandering btw.
He is saying that it made it harder for Conservatives to vote as (in his opinion) they were more likely to vote that way.What it did was make it harder for anyone to vote for any political party but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea, just something new which will improve with time.Only the local elections so loads of time for anyone who really wants to vote to make sure they can for a general election.
When you think how many countries demand voter ID in Europe, it can’t be done just to benefit one particular party.

The damage is done now. He said the words, for all to watch on repeat, and interpret as they wish.

My post above has no biased headline- it stands on its own, and is abundantly clear.

Thanks Oreo. I can’t stand JRM either but whoever said the words, they need to be considered and analysed in isolation and without the bias of the headline.

Oreo

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not concerned about that wwm. As a lawyer I can see the difficulty in interpreting his words as an admission of gerrymandering. If this were the subject of court action, which of course it won’t be, his defence would be that he was comparing the outcome of gerrymandering with the unintended outcome of the ID requirement. We view this in different ways so there’s absolutely no point in arguing about it.

I think you’re right tbh.
Don’t bother about posters saying things like ‘you’re outvoted’
Or ‘you’re funny’ cos things that strangers on forums say are never things to worry about.😉
It wasn’t gerrymandering as MaizieD has pointed out in any case.I have no time for JRM but he was pointing out that doing anything to change the way that we vote can have a bad effect on voting numbers.Which this first time it did and was bound to.Many older voters vote Labour like my Mum, and it was only me reminding her to take ID that she did.Anything new takes time to register, especially for seniors.It wasn’t lack of Conservative voters that caused Labour to do well in local elections and JRM must know that.

How can his own words be 'misinterpreted' as saying just that ...
honestly?

"Parties that try and gerrymander end up finding that their clever scheme comes back to bite them, as dare I say we found by insisting on voter ID for elections.

"We found the people who didn't have ID were elderly and they by and large voted Conservative, so we made it hard for our own voters and we upset a system that worked perfectly well.'

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not concerned about that wwm. As a lawyer I can see the difficulty in interpreting his words as an admission of gerrymandering. If this were the subject of court action, which of course it won’t be, his defence would be that he was comparing the outcome of gerrymandering with the unintended outcome of the ID requirement. We view this in different ways so there’s absolutely no point in arguing about it.

I think you’re right tbh.
Don’t bother about posters saying things like ‘you’re outvoted’
Or ‘you’re funny’ cos things that strangers on forums say are never things to worry about.😉
It wasn’t gerrymandering as MaizieD has pointed out in any case.I have no time for JRM but he was pointing out that doing anything to change the way that we vote can have a bad effect on voting numbers.Which this first time it did and was bound to.Many older voters vote Labour like my Mum, and it was only me reminding her to take ID that she did.Anything new takes time to register, especially for seniors.It wasn’t lack of Conservative voters that caused Labour to do well in local elections and JRM must know that.

Opal

Oh well, if the BBC reported it, then it must be true

I can if you wish quote every other media outlet that is reporting it. The list is very long indeed .

Actually it would be easier to say who isn’t reporting it

Oh well, if the BBC reported it, then it must be true

Extending the franchise is the opposite to voter suppression!

Whitewavemark2

Well the bbc reported that Mogg considered it to be gerrymandering.

We were saying as such on here.

Well the BBC would wouldn't it. I'd rather listen to JRM delivering it himself. As for gerrymandering, Labour thinking about giving EU citizens, and 16 year old the vote, now that is trying to manipulate the boundaries. No reciprocation fromEU either. No citizenship, no vote.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not concerned about that wwm. As a lawyer I can see the difficulty in interpreting his words as an admission of gerrymandering. If this were the subject of court action, which of course it won’t be, his defence would be that he was comparing the outcome of gerrymandering with the unintended outcome of the ID requirement. We view this in different ways so there’s absolutely no point in arguing about it.

I mean, it seems VERY clear to me, but I am not a clever lawyer ;)

"Parties that try and gerrymander end up finding that their clever scheme comes back to bite them, as dare I say we found by insisting on voter ID for elections.

"We found the people who didn't have ID were elderly and they by and large voted Conservative, so we made it hard for our own voters and we upset a system that worked perfectly well.'

Boom boom!

Own goal of the month for sure. 🥅 ⚽️

Voter suppression

From Bye-Line Times

One in seven people were put off from voting due to England’s strict new voter ID rules in May’s local elections, polling suggests.

Fifteen per cent of those with elections in their area say they were unable to vote or were put off from voting due to the requirement to show photo ID at the polling station – a policy rolled out for the first time earlier this month – according to the new Omnisis polling for Byline Times.

There are 41 million potential voters in English local elections. Assuming a 2019 turnout of 33%, it equates to roughly two million would-be voters being put off or having difficulties with photo ID on May 4th. Coincidentally, two million is the official figure for the number of electors lacking photo ID in Britain.

The numbers put off or unable to vote rises to one in five (22%) among would-be Conservative voters – in an unexpected backlash for the party that introduced the policy.

we don't need a lawyer to see straight through him, I am afraid.

What a burden being a lawyer is😄😄😄