How precisely?but it would stop alot of crime
How precisely?but it would stop alot of crime
ellal, what evidence do you have that the fraud problem is negligible? It's one person, one person. Whatever can be done to eradicate students voting twice, or husbands voting on behalf of their wives should be welcomed by any democrat.
I recognise certain quarters of the political spectrum (and the press that represents it) may 'suffer' disproportionately and those same quarters are the most vocal about allowing such fraud to continue. Ultimately, all quarters suffer if electoral fraud is permitted to continue - Mugabe would not have agreed though.
Nozzle
No you won't tell us later, because you haven't got a clue what you are gassing on about!I’m going out now watch the football. Tell you later
No you won't tell us later, because you haven't got a clue what you are gassing on about!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43245969
"While 337 allegations of electoral fraud were made across the UK, the majority - 207 cases - resulted in no further action and a further 82 were "locally resolved".
Based on the data recorded by police forces, there is currently no evidence of any large-scale cases of proven electoral fraud relating to the polls held during 2017," the Electoral Commission analysis says.
Only one person was convicted over 2017 'double voting' claims"
So what is your definition of 'negligible', nozzle?
PS. The UK 'electorate' was 45,766,000 as of 2016 - you do the maths!
You really do have a problem with facts don't you!What is a local resolution? These statistics indicate those that are reported, how does this reporting come about, who decide
I've done the maths - of 'only' 337 allegations of possible 1000's, 62% of them had merit. Some of them attracted only "local resolution" - whatever that actually means. Granted 62% is probably not as high as say, motoring convictions from speed camera evidence, but it's not bad. Though I think what you're attempting to suggest as that as 'only' 130 cases of 45mil resulted in any kind of action, then it's permissible to let the problem grow until it's epidemic and only THEN do something about it.
Nozzle
No change to your normal drivel then...I will. It’ll be fun as I’ll be ****ed as well
No change to your normal drivel then...
How precisely?
[QUOTE="ellal, post: 4139276, member: 9402"What exactly do you mean by the 'certain/same quarters' you mention?
Put up or shut up time!
In a period of time all these gangsters with hordes of cash would become exposed trying to get rid of their cash. How would they do it. ?
Bod
Get an offshore account?
But thanks for reminding us what is already happening amongst the gangsters in Westminster and beyond
You (like notch) have no intention of addressing the answers to the questions that you pose...Would they not need to get that cash into an offshore account? Would it not raise a little red flag??