Originally Posted by B. W.
Which one is it? Do "they" not report it, or do "they" report it badly?
What are you talking about? Where did that happen?
see the day
Re: Voter Fraud
Which one is it? Do "they" not report it, or do "they" report it badly?
What are you talking about? Where did that happen?
Primicerius
Re: Voter Fraud
The questions you asked are a positive indication that you haven't taken the time to read the links posted in this thread.
Meanwhile, Trump's tweet about voter fraud and delaying the elections has the Dems going into hysterics. It's just too funny. The man knows how too trigger left-wingers.
The proof here is the fact that the left-wingers on this forum were so outraged they couldn't even manage to post in the correct thread about it, which is this one.
Indefinitely Banned
Re: Voter Fraud
What are your thoughts on the entire congressional republican leadership crushing it as an option? Or the prominent republicans calling for him to be removed from office as a result? More hysterics? Too Funny.
see the day
Re: Voter Fraud
Yep, that's me all right, tis I Mr Trigger-Happy. You caught me yet again.
I read the thread and even clicked on those little, blue, underlined words for you. So I guess I get to repeat my questions now.
Does mainstream media not report what Judicial Watch claims, or do they report on it to poorly criticize it? Those are contradictory statements, you know. I want to know which one you think it is.
Where were there boxes of fraudulent ballots and postal workers disposing truckloads of ballots from Republican districts? What election did that happen in? I read a link to a news story about a postal worker switching party identification for five voters in West Virginia, but that doesn't quite seem like what you're talking about at all.
Maybe you could direct my attention in the right direction?
Last edited by Aexodus; August 02, 2020 at 05:59 AM. Reason: Post restored
Re: Voter Fraud
It's not that difficult to "dig up" voter fraud. As for the Republican, IF he is guilty then he should be punished.
I see you Gaidin ask B.W. about values vs sides, what is your response? As for Coughdrop addict I will ask the same thing, though his writings already seem to show his opinion. Will both of you condemn both voter fraud and election fraud? I certainly do.
Yet time after time and even by your own sources it’s the Democrats who have been shown to be the more prolific in fraud and incompetence. So here is more election and voter fraud, because obviously only the Repubs cheat:
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/demo...chair-mdcaniel
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/202...-bruce-hendry/Weeks before the election, live ballots are piling up at apartment complexes. Others are found in the trash. The Review-Journal reported one postal worker has already found thousands of ballots that are “no good,” just “sitting in crates with no additional safeguards.” Jenny Trobiani, who has worked for the U.S. Postal Service for over three decades, said the ballots were for residents who “had all moved or died.” She even received one in the mail for her deceased mother.Dozens of ballots are being found pinned to community bulletin boards. “From Friday to Monday, I could have voted 20 times,” said one resident of an apartment complex in Las Vegas. “That’s what’s so concerning about all this.”
Who is to stop a Democrat “field registrar” from picking them up, signing them and dropping them off? That sounds outrageous. But it is what Democrat groups are seeking in their lawsuit.
Despite no help from the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office, the Minnesota Voters Alliance painstakingly confirmed that 1,000 felons illegally voted in the 2008 senatorial election that Al Franken, a Democrat, won by 312 votes.We get 487,000 non-existent Minnesota voters.This calculation doesn’t count people in prison or on parole who can’t vote, illegal aliens who vote, or court ordered incompetents who can’t legally vote.
These categories are small but important in close elections like the election that elected Al Franken senator by a few hundred votes.https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...n-voter-fraud/Absentee Ballots There are expected to be nearly one million absentee ballots cast in the 2020 elections. And, because of an illegal tule created by Steve Simon, Minnesota’s Secretary of State, all of the absentee ballot board members doing the accepting and rejecting of ballot envelopes are hand picked by the appointing authority and not taken from the lists submitted by the major political parties as the law requires. Thus, there is no party balance oversight of the absentee ballot process.
Notice these guys are Democrats?Late last week, New Jersey’s Attorney General Gurbir Grewal announced election fraud charges against Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson (D), Councilman-elect Alex Mendez (D), Shelim Khalique, and Abu Razyen.
https://www.redstate.com/brandon_mor...-then-and-now/The charges come as Paterson’s all mail-in ballot election was allegedly rife with fraud. Grewal confirmed that almost 20 percent of the mail-in votes cast were thrown out by the Board of Elections.
Please note, the 742 criminal convictions are just that, convictions. It doesn't include the 81 dead people who voted, 953 dead people in SC, 765 who voted in multiple places, etc. etc.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion...mocratic-partyAs Carlson explains, ballot harvesting allows for activists to turn ballots in by the hundreds of thousands. As he continues he points out that many of these ballots were odd, including a lot of absentee ballots and ballots registered to locations like dog parks.The end result? Orange County went from red to blue despite being a Republican stronghold.
“People said the demographics had changed. No, the plan had changed,” said Carlson.
Three weeks prior to the election, investigative journalist James O'Keefe's Project Veritas released two videos of an undercover sting in which high-level Democrat operatives bragged about running a nationwide voter fraud operation financed by the DNC and the Clinton campaign:
- "We've been busing in people [illegal voters] for 50 years and we're not going to stop now."
- "[We know] this is illegal."
- "I think backward from how they would prosecute us, and then try to build out a method to avoid [getting caught]."
- "We implement the plan across every Republican-held state."
- "[Our operation] causes massive changes in state legislatures and Congress."
- "Hillary knows what's going on."
This time I purposely left off the Ican from the Repub party, not to offend people but just because it doesn't really matter-Ican.As reported by The New York Post, Manhattan Board of Elections commissioner Alan Shulkin was caught on a Project Veritas undercover video slamming Mayor Bill de Blasio's municipal ID program as contributing to "all kinds of fraud," including voter fraud. Here's more of what Commissioner Shulkin had to say:
- "I think there's a lot of voter fraud."
- "There's thousands of absentee ballots and I don't know where they came from."
- "In some neighborhoods they bus people around to vote, they take them from poll to poll."
- "De Blasio's municipal IDs can be used for anything, including voting."
- "The city doesn't vet people who get ID cards to see who they really are."
- "Anybody can go in there and say I am John Smith and I want an ID card."
So was Commissioner Shulkin praised by fellow Democrats for exposing voter fraud? Not a chance. A month after his comments were made public, he was told by party officials to hit the road.
Indefinitely Banned
Re: Voter Fraud
Is there voter fraud? Yes. Is it significant? No. Is the Russian election tampering significant? Moreso than voter fraud but probably not that much. Statistical significance matters. Mail in ballots are not going to change the election by fraud. What they will do is increase turnout in areas where voter suppression (usually by the right) has been successful and important to Republican election victories for some time.
Re: Voter Fraud
It made a difference in Orange County CA, and it may have given Al Franken a victory. But more over what do you consider significant? For me at least I consider these numbers to be significant:
https://www.justfactsdaily.com/false...of-vote-fraud/
In accord with scientific research methods, Just Facts fully accounts for the sampling error in its study, and this is why the results span a wide range of 594,000 to 5.7 million illegal voters.In 2013, the Social Security Administration found that 700,000 illegal immigrants were using Social Security numbers with fraudulent birth certificates and 1.8 million had cards that did not match their names.Democrat-led states are stonewalling the commission, and a leader of this resistance is Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe.
He has vetoed a string of bills designed to weed out illegal voters. His appointees also broached the idea of making optional the citizenship question on voter registration forms but abandoned the idea amid strong opposition from Republicans.
Meanwhile, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative grass-roots group dedicated to eliminating voter fraud, released a report in May that found at least 5,500 noncitizens were registered to vote in Virginia this decade and at least 1,852 had voted and had cast more than 7,000 votes.
The foundation said the numbers are likely just part of a bigger figure because the 5,500 likely disclosed their noncitizenship status when acquiring driver’s licenses.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation said Mr. McAuliffe’s administration repeatedly has blocked its access to records, forcing the group to file lawsuits.What tampering and what proof?
But they have:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/...il-in-ballots/
https://www.sun-sentinel.com/opinion...lga-story.html“Dozens of contests were overturned there by the state courts,” said Adams, who was involved in the case as a Justice Department civil rights lawyer at the time.
In 2004, the Alabama Supreme Court overturned the results of a mayor’s race in Guntersville after finding that absentee ballots were cast without proper identification and should have been discarded.
In the 2003 mayor’s race in East Chicago, Indiana, challenger George Pabey defeated eight-term incumbent Robert Patrick on Election Day, but lost by 278 votes after about 2,000 absentee ballots poured in.
The lady above was seeing how easy it was to vote with a sem-fictitious person.One proposed solution is moving everyone to voting by mail, but President Trump isn’t a fan. “A lot of people cheat with mail-in voting,” he said last week.
He’s got a point. I’ve done it myself.
If guilty Harris should not be allowed to run again and should get penalized in other ways. And there are many elections that were overturned or had to be done again due to fraud.Last year, a political operative working for North Carolina Republican congressional candidate Mark Harris was charged with fraud for directing a group of people to fill out as many as 1,000 absentee ballot requests on behalf of voters — most of whom were unaware the ballots were being requested.
Furthermore the implications could go beyond the local and affect the national:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...s_143033.html#!
To illustrate the risk, Churchwell notes that in 2016 Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by garnering over 2.8 million more votes than Donald Trump. But nearly 6 million unaccounted mail-in ballots were never counted in 2016, more than twice her margin in the popular vote. The potential to affect elections by chasing down unused mail-in ballots and make sure they get counted – using methods that may or may not be legal – is great.
“There are two big problems with vote by mail,” Adams said. “Number one, are the sort of things we discovered in the Justice Department when I was there — of people voting the ballot for other people through undue influence. That’s the first one. The second one — the voter rolls are a mess.”If this is the voter ID myth:
https://www.insidesources.com/the-my...r-suppression/
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/...ppression-mythNot to mention that Michigan Democrats set a new turnout record in the state’s primary: 1.6 million votes, nearly 380,000 more than four years ago. If there was voter suppression as Rep. Ocasio-Cortez claims, it failed. Miserably.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/02/...h-to-liberals/It just so happens that two weeks ago the Census Bureau released a report on voter turnout in 2018, which climbed 11 percentage points from the last midterm election, in 2014, and surpassed 50% for the first time since 1982. Moreover, the increased turnout was largely driven by the same minority voters Democrats claim are being disenfranchised. Black turnout grew around 27%, and Hispanic turnout increased about 50%. An analysis of the census data published by the Pew Research Center found that “all major racial and ethnic groups saw historic jumps in voter turnout” last year.None of this comes as news to anyone who pays attention to sober facts instead of inflammatory rhetoric. The black voter turnout rate for the most part has grown steadily since the 1990s. This has occurred notwithstanding an increase in state voter-ID requirements over the same period. In 2012 blacks voted at higher rates than whites nationwide, including in Georgia, which was one of the first states in the country to implement a photo-ID requirement for voting. Ms. Abrams claims that Republicans have been hard at work trying to disenfranchise black voters, but the reality is that black voter registration is outpacing white registration in the Peach State.
https://www.redstate.com/jeffc/2020/...voter-id-laws/It’s a false narrative belied by the facts, such as the relatively high levels of turnout in a non-presidential year in 2018 in many states, including in Georgia, or the numerous studies that have concluded that voter ID laws are a commonsense reform that does not keep voters out of the voting booth.
One of those studies, released by the National Bureau of Economic Research in 2019, examined 10 years’ worth of turnout data from across the country and concluded that voter ID laws have “no negative effect on registration or turnout overall or for any specific group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation.”
Researchers also found that voter ID laws “do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites.” Well, it looks like the left’s whole “voter suppression” idea has gone out the window. Of course, most people were never buying this argument in the first place. It’s probably the reason why the majority of Americans favor voter ID laws. But it wasn’t just the left’s race-baiting claims that were debunked.
This article also goes on to say:
The study also revealed that requiring voters to show ID at the polls does not effectively curtail voter fraud. After the researchers investigated documented cases of voter fraud in states with voter ID measures, they found that these laws do not prevent certain people from defrauding the electoral system.
If this is not what you were referring to, please let me know.
Last edited by Frostwulf; August 10, 2020 at 02:37 AM.
Indefinitely Banned
Re: Voter Fraud
If this is true why have Republicans for decades and to this day supported vote by mail? Are you saying Republicans support voter fraud? Also, why do the vast majority of experts from all political persuasions think voter fraud at the national level in the US is insignificant?
Primicerius
Re: Voter Fraud
Hilarious. You're not even aware that you just admitted you don't know the difference between absentee ballots and ballot harvesting.
see the day
Re: Voter Fraud
You haven't actually answered my questions yet.
Does the mainstream media not report what Judicial Watch claims, or do they poorly criticize it?
In what election or district were there "boxes of fraudulent ballots and postal workers disposing truckloads of ballots from Republican districts"?
This particular Just Facts report used a controversially simplistic approach to get these results. That should be clear when the high estimate is ten times the low estimate.
That study drew from an internet poll on whether people asked were citizens and whether they voted in the 2008 election. Of the 32,800 people asked, 339 reported to be noncitizens, 38 of which said that they voted (only five had Catalyst records of being voters). Just Facts then saw that about 10% of noncitizens claimed to have voted, added some margins of error, and applied to the entirety of the noncitizen population in the U.S. The margins of error meant that they apparently estimated somewhere between 3% and 30% of U.S. noncitizens illegally voted in the 2008 election.
The problem I have with this is that their analysis does not seem to account for the fact that statistically unlikely events can occur over many trials. In this case, that someone accidentally checked the wrong box. If this happened just 0.1% of the time, an average of 33 people accidentally described themselves as noncitizens when they meant to say they were citizens. Since only five people were proven to have voted despite reporting as non-citizens, there is a real possibility that they actually were citizens but made a mistake in the survey, something that Just Facts intentionally neglected to account for. I find their report to be over-simplistic because of this oversight, which is to the point of being misleading. To me, this is more of a cautionary tale on the dangers of reporting on a survey with N = 5.
That article itself states that “there is no evidence that the millions of missing ballots were used fraudulently”. The author seems to consider a missing ballot as a mail-in ballot that is sent to a voter that is not found in election results. That is unusual definition but then the article tries to tie this to the president’s claims that he won the popular vote and that Hillary Clinton had millions of illegal votes for her. Apparently, six million mail-in ballots were never counted in the 2016 election. The implication is that the ballots were received but uncounted, calling into question the validity of election. Why Trump would call the validity of the 2016 election into question is a bit odd to me, seeing how he won it regardless of these alleged illegal votes for Clinton, but I suppose he really wants the popular vote for some reason.
But the important thing here is that the article does not actually distinguish between ballots received yet uncounted and ballots never received at all. There is also the unproven assumption that the Democratic party is the only one benefiting from voting by mail, which isn’t the case. It is simply misleading to ignore the obvious: the ballots went missing when people didn’t send their ballots in. Millions of eligible voters do not vote every election, so why should vote by mail be excluded? Several states have a majority of votes done by mail, so 28 million people choosing not to vote between 2012 and 2018 is not completely surprising to me. If the article were consistent on mail-in voters and in-person voters, it would also have to say that millions of votes went missing because eligible voters were never seen at the voting booth every election day.
Indefinitely Banned
Re: Voter Fraud
Ballot harvesting. The thing were Bill Gates implants us with microchips. The difference between mail in ballots being sent to all registered voters vs giving all registered voters the right to a mail in ballot is only a threat to people who want the vote suppressed as much as possible. Lets not pretend.
Since pacifism tore the meh sourced mehness apart quite well I reflect on this; there will never a perfect system and striving for one is noble but silly if it deters you from the upsides of democracy, the emoting here seems mostly to be whining with no real proposed solution which leads me to believe like Trump the goal is to find a way to justify said voter suppression. I err on the side of letting people vote.
Illegal immigrants aren't a large portion of registered voters, ballots aren't getting sent to every address in the US and however you see it having a election with the in person voting systems the US has this fall while covid rapes us would be idiotic, criminal and in case only politics matters to you undemocratic.
Re: Voter Fraud
There is a difference between absentee ballots and mail in ballots, though pravda (cnn, abc, new york time, etc.) fail to recognize this. Oregon is the oldest to have mail in ballots which started in 1998, the other 4 started in 2005, 2013(2states) and 2019. So one state that has had it for “decades” the others not so much. The reason no one complains about the absentee ballots is that they are vetted better then regular mail in ballots.
No, they support the vetted absentee ballots. But its not just Republicans:
https://nypost.com/2020/05/27/jerry-...fraud-in-2004/
Even Jerry Nadler says so!“I just, as a very experienced practical politician from New York, feel constrained to observe that in my experience in New York, paper ballots are extremely susceptible to fraud,” the veteran House Democrat said. “And at least with the old clunky voting machines that we have in New York, the deliberate fraud is way down compared to paper.”
That may be, but is that a reason not to address the possibilities of more things popping up? Here is an instance:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wha...lot-harvesting
This is just one county, do you think this is the only county that this happened? What if this happens in 10 counties, or 100, even 1000? Why not fix these things before they do get worse? Again no one complains about the absentee ballots, why not stay with that route? More importantly, if this fraud is happening on a local level, what is to prevent it from going on to a national level?The move apparently led to results. In 2018, despite holding substantial leads on Election Day, many Republican candidates in California saw their advantages shrink, and then disappear, as late-arriving Democratic votes were counted in the weeks following the election. Many observers pointed to the Democrats' use of ballot harvesting as a key to their success in the elections.
“Anecdotally, there was a lot of evidence that ballot harvesting was going on,” Neal Kelley, the registrar for voters in Southern California’s Orange County, told Fox News at the time.
In Orange County -- once seen as a Republican stronghold in the state -- every House seat went to a Democrat after an unprecedented “250,000” vote-by-mail drop-offs were counted, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
“People were carrying in stacks of 100 and 200 of them. We had had multiple people calling to ask if these people were allowed to do this,” Kelley said.
Orange County Republican Chairman Fred Whitaker said the ballot harvesting “directly caused the switch from being ahead on election night to losing two weeks later.”
This in not the case:
Just Facts goes on to slam Snopes, PolitiFact, and the Huffington Post. Read pg. 152 of the report.Snopes declares that the 2014 study by the Old Dominion scholars provides “material evidence for five (not even six!) non-citizen votes” in 2008. In truth, the study provides material evidence for 38 non-citizen votes, including 27 respondents who said “I definitely voted” and 16 respondents shown by voting records to have voted. The overlap between these groups is five people, which leaves 38 votes (27 + 16 – 5).
The article doesn’t try to tie in that Trump won the popular vote or that Hillary had illegal votes for her. I address what the article is about down below.
The point of the article is the potential for fraud, it doesn’t matter for both Republicans and Democrats commit fraud. This is what the article said:
It may not have mattered in the Trump vs. Clinton election, but the potential to affect others could certainly be there. Why not try to fix these problems instead of just ignoring them or saying they don’t matter? 6 million votes could change the next election! From the article:To illustrate the risk, Churchwell notes that in 2016 Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by garnering over 2.8 million more votes than Donald Trump. But nearly 6 million unaccounted mail-in ballots were never counted in 2016, more than twice her margin in the popular vote. The potential to affect elections by chasing down unused mail-in ballots and make sure they get counted – using methods that may or may not be legal – is great.
I don’t mind mail in ballots, as long as it can be done much better then it has.There’s little doubt that as the number of mail-in ballots increases, so does fraud. A 2012 report in The New York Times noted that voter fraud involving mail-in ballots “is vastly more prevalent than the in-person voting fraud that has attracted far more attention, election administrators say. In Florida, absentee-ballot scandals seem to arrive like clockwork around election time.” According to a Wall Street Journal report on voter exploitation in Hispanic communities in Texas, mail-in ballots have “spawned a mini-industry of consultants who get out the absentee vote, sometimes using questionable techniques.” Poor, elderly, and minority communities are most likely to be preyed upon by so-called ballot “brokers.”
Concerns about fraud in mail-in ballots were serious enough that a 2008 report produced by the CalTech/MIT Voting Technology Project recommended that states “restrict or abolish on-demand absentee voting in favor of in-person early voting.”
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/04/...il-in-ballots/
If it can change local elections, what is stopping the same thing from happening nationally?Voter fraud is too nominal to make a difference in any given election, goes one popular line of argument. But tell that to voters in parts of Florida, Missouri, New York, and North Carolina in recent years.Districts in these four states saw election outcomes overturned after absentee voter fraud came to light.
Last edited by Frostwulf; August 15, 2020 at 05:46 AM.
Comes Rei Militaris
Re: Voter Fraud
For the voter there literally isn't. We request them. We get them in the mail. We mark them up. We follow other instructions(signature, etc). We mail them back.
Some states that do full mail voting, as opposed to in person voting, have no in person voting sites. Oregon mails all ballots to all registered voters automatically. Voter registration and bi-yearly registration check for election/primary functions as 'request'. Oregon does still have absentee ballots for, say, college students attending out of state. You request them. You get them in the mail. You mark them up. You follow other instructions(signature, etc). You mail them back. No excuse is required; just like, say, my state Maryland. Some states like New York require what they consider a legitimate excuse for an absentee ballot. Say, my university is 100 miles away or 5 states away. Or, maybe I'm medically handicapped and can't get to the voting place. Something. Absentee ballot is yours. Other states, Oregon and Maryland, do not require an excuse, just a request. Oregon obviously needs a request that is not your registered address, because the ballot they send you is for the district you are registered to.
There's maybe 7 states right now that do mail-in ballots. Nevada is the newest. And the Trump campaign can't stop them. States write the rules for their elections. But about 3/4 of the citizens don't want to stand in line with Covid flying around. So, hello absentee ballot requests. Works the same. We request them. We get them in the mail. We mark them up. We follow other instructions(signature, etc). We mail them back.
Last edited by Gaidin; August 16, 2020 at 12:20 PM.
One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
Re: Voter Fraud
Again I have no issue with absentee ballots, and neither does Trump. Here is the difference (again pravda ignores this):
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/06/...l-mail-voting/
Most localities that have all-mail voting also have some in-person voting mechanism in place, according to Ballotpedia. Absentee voting is prone to fraud, election experts say, but has more safeguards than all-mail voting.
“The main difference is [in] voting by absentee ballot, a voter has to request a ballot in most cases and fill out a form and sign to authenticate the request,” Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission who is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.
States vary in how election officials verify whether the person applying for an absentee ballot is really the registered voter he says he is.
For example, in 17 states, election officials compare an applicant’s information against the voter registration database, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In 19 states, officials verify the signature.
“With all-mail [voting], they just send out a ballot and without certainty it’s going to a live voter,” von Spakovsky said. “The problem with all-mail voting is that ballots are mailed to every registered voter. We know voter registration rolls are in bad shape all across the country, with multiple duplications and sending out ballots to people that don’t live there.”I'm glad about the states writing the rules, it's the way it should be. I don't see an issue with making sure the elections are more secure, and yes at the expense of some convenience.
see the day
Re: Voter Fraud
Oh, well, if they slammed the critics who pointed out basic statistical analysis, then by all means, I retract.
But seriously, I'm not sure which page 152 you're referring to. The original article seems to be behind a journal paywall or something, so I couldn't read it. Let me re-explain, because I can't tell if your source addressed my argument or not.
"Material evidence" means that either the person said yes on an internet poll, or data was found on them on Catalyst. I'm not familiar with Catalyst's inner workings, or how good it is at what it does, but it seems to combine voter data and other personal information into a single, searchable database.
38 people said they voted and said they were non-citizens on an internet poll.
16 people who said they were non-citizens were found on Catalyst.
5 people who said they voted and were non-citizens on an internet were found on Catalyst.
It isn't clear to me that being on Catalyst means that you voted, or that saying you voted means you voted. Even both aren't really a certainty. Even if it was, the results of this study can be completely called into question if a fraction of a percent of people misclicked whether they were citizens or non-citizens. The reason why non-citizens selecting that they are citizens is not considered is because it is far outweighed by the citizens who select that are non-citizens due to sheer number of citizens to noncitizens. About 300 non-citizens can be expected to not make any 1-in-1000 mistakes, while 30,000 citizens can be expected to make 30 1-in-a-1000 mistakes.
And if you are going to argue that non-citizens are more likely to be deceptive in this survey, then why would you trust the validity of the reported results in the first place?
The article's low end and high end estimate Just Facts made is still an order of magnitude apart. The error bar is plain nuts. The original authors of the survey never suggested that the congressional map or Electoral College changed due to non-citizens voting. It's a poor analysis by Just Facts as a cheap political weapon, that's all.
It doesn't explicitly say it, but it sure uses the imagery. It's because the author was being coy. It was misleading to describe a mail-in ballot that was never filled out and submitted as gone missing. Gone missing makes it sound like it was purposefully lost. And of course there was no evidence of foul play, he says, but all those "missing ballots" could vindicate Trump's coveted popular vote. It's fine if you don't read the subtext that I did, but the point is that the article never really addresses that the ballots were probably just sent to people who decided not to vote, because that would take the wind out of the sails of the concerns it claims to raise. Instead, the article decided to sound much more dramatic about the mystery of what's happening to the ballots.
Whenever there is a particularly close election, the votes are held up to extra rigorous scrutiny to ensure they were correctly counted and correctly submitted by voters. A number of ballots are routinely rejected, and voter fraud is somewhat routinely caught as some people here have posted. But the thing is they were caught. We know when it happens.
This recounting allows us to estimate the frequency of improper or even illegal voting. We simply don't see the numbers in these close elections to indicate that there are millions of illegal votes nationwide, or that a serious percentage of illegal votes are ever mundane. If the margin of victory is a lot greater than our estimated bad votes, it doesn't substantially change much that a few slipped through.
Re: Voter Fraud
Would seem like a rather straightforward solution for states that are supposedly concerned about covid spreading if people go to the polls, if no one has problems with absentee ballots, just use the absentee ballot process.
Comes Rei Militaris
Re: Voter Fraud
And yet, we’ll kneecap the postal service?
One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
Primicerius
Re: Voter Fraud
More of that "rare" voter fraud forces a judge to order a re-vote in a New Jersey election. Mail in voting was what facilitated it:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...ew_jersey.html
Now just imagine this on a nationwide scale...absolute chaos.
Capo
Re: Voter Fraud
absolute chaos you say? Take a look around, that is exactly what democrats want.
Re: Voter Fraud
The article points out the fallacies of the critics:Oh, well, if they slammed the critics who pointed out basic statistical analysis, then by all means, I retract.
https://www.justfactsdaily.com/false...of-vote-fraud/
Also, Snopes, PolitiFact, and the Huffington Post repeatedly warn that Just Facts’ study is based on an “extrapolation.” In reality, the study is based on a straightforward application of survey data—and these same organizations along with every major media outlet routinely cite similar figures without calling them “extrapolations.”After misrepresenting several aspects of this issue, Snopes criticizes the Washington Times for reporting that Just Facts’ study involves “a series of complicated calculations,” which is a “surefire way to make it sound like something carries authority without actually understanding any aspect of the topic.” Snopes continues:Outside of the fact that these calculations are found in the 1,010th footnote of the JustFacts.com report, the calculations (shown below) don’t involve much more complicated mathematics than multiplication, subtraction, and addition (no division, thankfully).The remark about the 1,010th footnote is baffling, because it proves nothing except that the research contains a lot of documentation. Incidentally, this research covers broad aspects of immigration, not just illegal voting by non-citizens.
Claims that the calculations appear in a single footnote and don’t involve much more than “multiplication, subtraction, and addition” are false. The calculations appear in multiple footnotes and also involve division and square roots. More importantly, it is not the math that is complex but the conceptual framework for the calculations, including everything discussed above and more.Yet:
However, Snopes invents its own definition of material evidence, which is limited only to the overlap group. This is at odds with the actual definition of material evidence, which is “evidence that is likely to affect the determination of a matter or issue” (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, 1996).
For that matter why trust any survey that goes against what you want to believe?
Using textbook scientific procedures, Just Facts’ study of survey data and voting records finds that 594,000 to 5.7 million non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election. These results are subject to uncertainties that Just Facts candidly enumerates.Attempts to refute this study by Snopes, PolitiFact, and the Huffington Post are littered with sophomoric inconsistencies, irrationalities, and outright falsehoods. And unless these organizations are misreporting what UMass Amherst professor Brian Schaffner says, he is using them to spread misinformation that happens to align with his political donations.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
