Scrutable

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:16 pm The Byline Times is asking questions about the existence of up to 115 Reform candidates, as they appear to have no online presence, those checked did not turn up for hustings or the count, and their campaign websites contain no personal material.

A reddit thread about this seems to have noticed that many candidates have their address as South Derbyshire, including candidates in London and Manchester. At least one candidate in for an English seat lives in Gibraltar.

Even if they are all real people, the number of paper candidates should really call into question anything talking about the Reform vote share - it seems that a large number of their votes are for virtually non-existent candidates who would never campaign for more in those constituencies.

lpm wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:25 pm A candidate must presumably provide evidence they are 18 and a citizen.

There must be some ID check. Would be hilarious if you need ID to vote but not to stand.

Stranger Mouse wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:27 pm

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:16 pm The Byline Times is asking questions about the existence of up to 115 Reform candidates, as they appear to have no online presence, those checked did not turn up for hustings or the count, and their campaign websites contain no personal material.

A reddit thread about this seems to have noticed that many candidates have their address as South Derbyshire, including candidates in London and Manchester. At least one candidate in for an English seat lives in Gibraltar.

Even if they are all real people, the number of paper candidates should really call into question anything talking about the Reform vote share - it seems that a large number of their votes are for virtually non-existent candidates who would never campaign for more in those constituencies.

Couldn’t this be potentially fraud? Their Short Money funding is based partially on total vote share so it could be a nice little earner.

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:31 pm

lpm wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:25 pm A candidate must presumably provide evidence they are 18 and a citizen.

There must be some ID check. Would be hilarious if you need ID to vote but not to stand.

Being on the electoral register somewhere would suffice for the first. The number of candidates from certain places raises the possibility of corruption or hacking in certain localities in getting them on the electoral register there.

After that, I doubt the guy from Gibraltar flew to the constituency to show ID in person.

lpm wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:25 pm A candidate must presumably provide evidence they are 18 and a citizen.

There must be some ID check. Would be hilarious if you need ID to vote but not to stand.

TimW wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 7:06 pm It's not Farage's fault.

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:33 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:27 pm Couldn’t this be potentially fraud? Their Short Money funding is based partially on total vote share so it could be a nice little earner.

It'd involve fraudulent candidacy declarations and nominations, so definitely extremely serious fraud.

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:47 pm

dyqik wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:31 pm

lpm wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 6:25 pm A candidate must presumably provide evidence they are 18 and a citizen.

There must be some ID check. Would be hilarious if you need ID to vote but not to stand.

Being on the electoral register somewhere would suffice for the first. The number of candidates from certain places raises the possibility of corruption or hacking in certain localities in getting them on the electoral register there.

After that, I doubt the guy from Gibraltar flew to the constituency to show ID in person.

Another fraud option is that they are real people on the electoral register, but didn't know they were standing.

But them being paper candidates used to drive up the vote share is the more likely option. What that does for short money, I don't know.

lpm wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 11:51 am Basic maths:

Reform got 4 million votes. If 0.015% of voters are so enthusiastic they are prepared to be a candidate then Reform have all the constituencies covered.

1% of Reform candidates were disavowed for being racists or betrayed Farage. How many candidates can be expected to be so incompetent or lazy they didn't show up to anything? Another 1%? 5%? If you dig hard it is not unexpected you'll find non entities who did nothing.

What percentage of social media users have photo shopped their cover photo? How many are comically bad that you giggle over them?

This conspiracy theory is fundamentally far fetched.

lpm wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 11:58 am I've just checked the video and in my constituency the Green candidate failed to show up for the 4 a.m. declaration.

Nor did she attend hustings or have a social media presence.

This byline times "investigation" relies on none of us having any context or prior knowledge of how common it is.

dyqik wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 12:35 pm
The Byline Times article gives stats on the social media percentages for Reform candidates vs averages and other parties.

Stranger Mouse wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 7:58 pm There’s a ceiling on Short Money because they didn’t get 6 MPs. If not for that 4 million votes would turn into quite a bit of cash at around £40 for every 200 votes

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... s/sn01663/

lpm wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 12:56 pm

dyqik wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 12:35 pm
The Byline Times article gives stats on the social media percentages for Reform candidates vs averages and other parties.

But does not give the ranges, which is what matters instead of the averages.

It would be interesting to analyse paper candidates for LD and Green to get context.

Reform's "membership" is now 65,000 I.e. 100 per constituency. Their next task is to turn those enthusiasts into actual local teams, campaigning locally instead of relying on Farage. I doubt they'll achieve it, the LDs still struggle in much of the country.

Gfamily wrote: Mon Jul 08, 2024 1:10 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: Sat Jul 06, 2024 7:58 pm There’s a ceiling on Short Money because they didn’t get 6 MPs. If not for that 4 million votes would turn into quite a bit of cash at around £40 for every 200 votes

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... s/sn01663/

Worth their while paying a Tory £200k to defect, given that it would potentially unlock £800k in Short Money (I don't know whether the money only applies to votes and elected members in a GE)