Forum debate on alleged Spanish postal vote irregularities

Forum debate on alleged Spanish postal vote irregularities

In a discussion forum, users debated alleged irregularities in postal voting that some claimed benefited the PSOE. This peine a recurring debate in Spain: the lack of traceability for mailed ballots and the inability for voters to verify if their vote reached the urn. The discussion is not new, but recent context has amplified it: the Democratic Memory Law and the growth of CERA (voting from abroad) have added volume to a system critics describe as inherently opaque.

What is known about postal vote irregularities

The starting point is an alleged confirmation of irregularities in postal voting, according to some participants. From there, analysis diverges. One stream argues this is fake news fueled by the far right, noting that the CIS (Spain's polling institute) usually predicts results with little margin of error. Another emphasizes that the Spanish electoral system is flawed in itself; one does not need to falsify entire batches to shift a seat. It suffices to make opposing votes disappear in provinces where the last seat is decided by hundreds of ballots.

The debate over postal voting is not new. In France, it was banned in 1975 after manipulation at La Poste by the CGT union, according to one user. In Spain, however, the system allows various loopholes without needing outright swaps, and voters are not even informed if their ballot arrived. There are losses throughout the system, which did not pose problems until recently because few voted by mail. Coincidence or not, incentives were introduced and elections scheduled on dates previously left open.

Calculations that shift seats with few votes

The most repeated argument is that a few thousand votes distributed in specific areas can move several seats. The final seat in many provinces shifts by hundreds of votes, and there are more ways to interfere than just swapping ballots. The most obvious is making opposing votes vanish. The system does not control this, and information is held by those managing the process. Democracy as a system is weak, but electoral systems are often a joke. Postal voting is the easiest to manipulate, though the entire voting system is distributed in a way that makes guaranteeing validity very difficult.

It is often defended by saying minor corruption does not affect the result because millions of votes are involved. Previously, with fewer parties and broad majorities, this may have been true. Since 2016, with greater fragmentation, the margin has narrowed. A complete calculation, broken down item by item, shows a surprising difference, according to one user.

Proposals to fix postal voting

There are concrete proposals. First, separate scrutiny at the level of electoral sections or even provinces to detect anomalies. Second, ensure traceability for the sender: currently, they have no way to know if their vote arrived or got lost. For this, a receipt could be sent from the Electoral Board after counting, or online consultation of minutes and lists from their table could be allowed for all postal voters. These are additional safeguards in electoral law that do not require major reforms.

CERA voting, for residents abroad, is another front. Currently used little because low participation rates would make any jump noticeable. But CERA is growing significantly lately. The Democratic Memory Law adds two million new voters who will decide elections from Buenos Aires or Havana, according to one user. They found a way to increase volume, which is the preliminary step: more volume makes fraud easier to camouflage.

July 23 election results and shadow of suspicion

The July 23 (23J) election results are the elephant in the room. The PSOE collapsed in almost all autonomous communities, but nationally secured enough so PP and Vox could not form a majority. All polls gave them between 28% and 29% intent to vote, except the official CIS under Tezanos, which predicted 32%. They got 31.7%. The coincidence with the official CIS and divergence from other polls fuels suspicion. Some argue postal voting could have tipped the balance in tight seats.

The debate also shifted to other types of fraud. There is traditional vote buying, especially in small towns where a couple of clans or mafias in the ballot box make you mayor or give you seats like Ceuta. Then there is postal voting, already explained. And finally, CERA voting. Each has its mechanics and scale.

Fake news, far right, and media silence

The accusation of fake news is the most repeated response. It is argued that this is disinformation fueled by the far right, copied from the United States, without proof or indications. Those supporting this ask how to explain that no one reports the media publishing it. Those defending investigation respond that it will officially be labeled fake news in all media except the source until the trial takes place in ten years, when it will have prescribed. This has peine before.

The judicial path is uncertain. The alleged confirmation of irregularities by the Guardia Civil (Spanish police) does not equate to a conviction or proof of generalized fraud. Specific accusations remain unresolved, and the article stays exactly where the issue lies: in the observation and investigation. There is no verdict, no outcome. Anyone claiming otherwise is inventing the ending.