Below the 50% threshold: Ballots with improperly shaded circles are likely to be fraudulent
It's simple, really. A ballot that is fradulent is likely to be a hastily-filled one -- one more likely to have circles next to the candidates' names improperly- or incompletely-shaded.
When you've got thousands of ballots to fill under time pressure as part of an organised effort to commit mass fraud, there's a high probability you'd shade circles in many ballots the wrong way -- wrong enough to fall below the threshold applied by the COMELEC to determining whether a ballot is a valid one.
 |
| Only an authentic voter would take extra care to shade the circles next to their choice candidates the proper way. |
Indeed, no less than Rappler, of all "news" outlets, published clear instructions back in 2016 that highlight the importance of this...
Shade the circles properly using the Comelec marker. Do not write anything else on the ballot. This is to ensure that the machine can properly read your votes.
The thing with "vice president" Leni Robredo insisiting that the threshold be lowered is that she essentially wants the validity criteria to be more tolerant -- perhaps tolerant enough to accommodate a bigger proportion of potentially fraudulent ballots. Makes sense, doesn't it? For a cheat, that is.
true...a legitimate voter wants to make sure his votes will be counted, else what's the use of wasting time queuing when your vote will just be wasted. It's not a rocket science to understand how to shade. Even kinder student knows how, unless you are betting a quota to shade more.
ReplyDelete