283,162 voters enrolled for ACT election

John Moulis said :

where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

The thinking could be along the lines of:
1) pro-rail voters will vote ALP/Greens
2) anti-rail voters may vote Lib
3) but anti-rail voters may vote “other”
4) “others” have Buckley’s under Hare-Clark, so make these “other” anti-rail voters keep numbering until they hit Libs

This strategy might make sense under the Lib’s anti-rail platform and the pro-rail platform of ALP/Greens and on the assumption swinging voters opposed to rail may not automatically drop early preferences on the Libs and that pro-railers would ensure preferences (if not first and second) went to ALP/Greens.

John Moulis said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

And before someone corrects me the correct term for a vote that has come to the end of numbering is exhausted not extinguished.

At the Melrose High booth I was told by the officer to only number five squares. On the ballot paper itself it said the same thing. So could someone please explain those mysterious black and white signs along Athllon Drive saying to number every square? What were they all about and who was behind them? They seemed to be placed by the Libs or else a Lib front because another sign in the same black and white format said to put Labor and the Greens last. So who put them up and where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

The polling officer should have told you to number at least 5 squares rather than only 5 squares, although a 1 in one square was still a formal vote. I saw those black and white signs but I’m not sure who put them up. They were authorised but I didn’t recognise the name and I’ve forgotten it now.

John Moulis said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

And before someone corrects me the correct term for a vote that has come to the end of numbering is exhausted not extinguished.

At the Melrose High booth I was told by the officer to only number five squares. On the ballot paper itself it said the same thing. So could someone please explain those mysterious black and white signs along Athllon Drive saying to number every square? What were they all about and who was behind them? They seemed to be placed by the Libs or else a Lib front because another sign in the same black and white format said to put Labor and the Greens last. So who put them up and where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

The instructions I read was to number a minimum of five boxes; after that it was up to you to number as many as you wanted to. Your choice. I stopped at eight, as I had forgotten my reading glasses and was struggling to read the paper. I received two instruction booklets before the election; one in my letter box and the other with the CT. Didn’t you get an instruction booklet too? Plus, the information was available elsewhere.
http://www.elections.act.gov.au/elections_and_voting/formality_of_ballot_papers

John Moulis said :

At the Melrose High booth I was told by the officer to only number five squares. On the ballot paper itself it said the same thing. So could someone please explain those mysterious black and white signs along Athllon Drive saying to number every square? What were they all about and who was behind them? They seemed to be placed by the Libs or else a Lib front because another sign in the same black and white format said to put Labor and the Greens last. So who put them up and where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

The ballot paper said to number at LEAST 5 boxes, well the Yerrabi one did.

John Moulis said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

And before someone corrects me the correct term for a vote that has come to the end of numbering is exhausted not extinguished.

At the Melrose High booth I was told by the officer to only number five squares. On the ballot paper itself it said the same thing. So could someone please explain those mysterious black and white signs along Athllon Drive saying to number every square? What were they all about and who was behind them? They seemed to be placed by the Libs or else a Lib front because another sign in the same black and white format said to put Labor and the Greens last. So who put them up and where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

Probably placed there by Medicare.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

And before someone corrects me the correct term for a vote that has come to the end of numbering is exhausted not extinguished.

At the Melrose High booth I was told by the officer to only number five squares. On the ballot paper itself it said the same thing. So could someone please explain those mysterious black and white signs along Athllon Drive saying to number every square? What were they all about and who was behind them? They seemed to be placed by the Libs or else a Lib front because another sign in the same black and white format said to put Labor and the Greens last. So who put them up and where did they get the impression that numbering every square would somehow favour the Libs?

Something a bit weird here.

The number of electors enrolled increase by 27,000 odd in the last 4 years but the chief minister tells us the Territory population is increasing by 5,000 a year which is 20,000 for the same period and a lot of these would be under 18.
So, where did the extra 7,000 eligible voters come from?

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Wouldn’t postal votes still be coming in?
Hopefully they fine the 10%

They know how many postal ballots they sent out which is all that is required for that voter to have been marked as votes. Though not sure if they are included in the 90% turnout stat.

dungfungus said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

And before someone corrects me the correct term for a vote that has come to the end of numbering is exhausted not extinguished.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

I am not “wrong” – I simply said there had been suggestions (signs by the side of the roads to be exact) that every ballot paper had to be numbered to the end.
You have confirmed that is not the case, thanks.

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Suggest you go to the act elections website and look sat the stats they have on the votes including informals.

And you are wrong about votes not being number to the end being declared informal. The way it works is votes are counted until you stop numbering. After that the vote is counted as extinguished not informal. Again the detailed stats for each electorate shows the number of extinsguished votes at each stage of the count.

dungfungus said :

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Wouldn’t postal votes still be coming in?
Hopefully they fine the 10%

I understand that postal votes are requested well before the election so the would be included within the 90%.

Regarding the fining of the ones that made no attempt to vote, I thinkthis isn’t pursued much these days; you know, it’s a “victim-less crime” or something like that.

I knew a guy who used to serve the summonses on the non-voters – he said there were thousands of them in Canberra.

Does anyone know if residents at AMC are allowed to vote?

gooterz said :

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Wouldn’t postal votes still be coming in?
Hopefully they fine the 10%

I understand that postal votes are requested well before the election so the would be included within the 90%.

dungfungus said :

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Wouldn’t postal votes still be coming in?
Hopefully they fine the 10%

The electoral commissioner has now stated that 10% of electors did not vote – he thinks that is a good result – but we still don’t know how many of the 90% that did turn up voted informal nor do we know how many of the votes were declared informal.

There is some suggestion that any vote that wasn’t numbered to the end is an informal vote.

Anyone know how many informal votes?

30% pre polled.