• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases

What this all boils down to is Trump sour grapes because he lost the popular vote.
 
Renae said:
Imagine what a serious indepth investigation of voter fraud would reveal...
Click to expand...

We already had one actually, the last time right wingers started lying about it. Funny. In 5 year study under the Bush Administration, they found 120 potential cases and there were 86 convictions:

"
Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year. Most of those charged have been Democrats, voting records show. Many of those charged by the Justice Department appear to have mistakenly filled out registration forms or misunderstood eligibility rules, a review of court records and interviews with prosecutors and defense lawyers show."

In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - The New York Times

And another chunk had nothing to do with Presidential elections: "A handful of convictions involved people who voted twice. More than 30 were linked to small vote-buying schemes in which candidates generally in sheriff’s or judge’s races paid voters for their support."

People should save this link because we will no doubt see many more threads like this created at Trump's command, over the next year.










Let me guess: "blah blah blah,fingers in my ears not reading your proof."

Yes?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Such a drag that's only a bumpersticker-level site.

Too bad they didn't include links to the study so concerned folks could judge its usefulness.
Maybe the site owners feel that the site users aren't interested in anything further than bumpersticker-level info.

ah well.
Click to expand...

Here is an article straight from the think tank. Go nuts.

Substantial Numbers of Non-Citizens Vote Illegally in U.S. Elections - Just Facts

I especially like this quote:

Just Facts said:
[FONT=&quot]Using other data from the survey, the authors refined their high and low estimates to produce a “best guess” that 6.4% or 1.2 million non-citizens cast votes in 2008. The survey also showed that 81.8% of non-citizen voters reported that they voted for Obama.
Click to expand...
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Gimmesometruth said:
Debunked:

Trump’s Claims About Illegal Votes Are Nonsense. I Debunked the Study He Cites as ‘Evidence.’ - POLITICO Magazine
Click to expand...

Actually the article that you cite is debunked in the article that I posted. Read it.

But since you won't, I'll spell out the big issue for you. The non-citizens are ignored in the Politico article unless they are verified by a voting database. But of course most of them won't be identified, because most of them are using a false identity. So they grossly underestimate the amount of vote fraud.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Well, I'll give you credit for trying.
And you also get points for getting closer to the study.

That page does provide a link to a paywall version of the actual study.
So there's that.

I'm sure it's totally awesome.
Click to expand...

Just read it. It explains the study and the methodology. If you find a problem, you can discuss it here.
 
phattonez said:
Actually the article that you cite is debunked in the article that I posted. Read it.

But since you won't, I'll spell out the big issue for you. The non-citizens are ignored in the Politico article unless they are verified by a voting database. But of course most of them won't be identified, because most of them are using a false identity. So they grossly underestimate the amount of vote fraud.
Click to expand...
Um, that claim doesn't even pass the smell test since if "they" are using a "false identity", ie stolen id, there would be millions of double votes....which would show up immediately.

They don't.

Further, this latest round of "millions" of "illegal votes" is being headed by Kansas's Kris Kobach, who while AG could only find 9 "illegal votes" in Kansas, none were by "non-citizens", nearly all were white GOP'ers who live outside of Kansas part time. Thats 9 out of 1.7 million registered voters.
 
phattonez said:
Just read it. It explains the study and the methodology. If you find a problem, you can discuss it here.
Click to expand...
Hurr durr, you can't read it if it is behind a paywall.

Good grief.
 
phattonez said:
Here is an article straight from the think tank. Go nuts.
Substantial Numbers of Non-Citizens Vote Illegally in U.S. Elections - Just Facts
]
Click to expand...

I especially like this quote:

"They called the website "Just Facts Daily"! Only an idiot would fail to accept everything they say, despite contrary evidence that has already been presented, which evidence was produced by people who had an interest to prove voter fraud (Bush admin)! Anyone called just facts must quite obviously present just facts." - Mr. Person

:lamo










No need to reply.

:peace
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Um, that claim doesn't even pass the smell test since if "they" are using a "false identity", ie stolen id, there would be millions of double votes....which would show up immediately.

They don't.
Click to expand...

You can use the false identity of people who have died, people who have moved, etc. The current system has no way to pick that up.

Further, this latest round of "millions" of "illegal votes" is being headed by Kansas's Kris Kobach, who while AG could only find 9 "illegal votes" in Kansas, none were by "non-citizens", nearly all were white GOP'ers who live outside of Kansas part time. Thats 9 out of 1.7 million registered voters.
Click to expand...

Question: how many voters were purged from Kansas rolls after a law was passed requiring proof of citizenship?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Hurr durr, you can't read it if it is behind a paywall.

Good grief.
Click to expand...

Was that article behind a paywall? Sorry, I didn't get any warning of that. Still, I explained the criticism of the Politico take, why don't you respond to that?
 
Mr Person said:
I especially like this quote:

"They called the website "Just Facts Daily"! Only an idiot would fail to accept everything they say, despite contrary evidence that has already been presented, which evidence was produced by people who had an interest to prove voter fraud (Bush admin)! Anyone called just facts must quite obviously present just facts." - Mr. Person

:lamo

No need to reply.

:peace
Click to expand...

Alarming, huh? Is the illegal vote numbers gotten over a 1000 as claimed in the OP? That's a real game changer in Mule Shoe, Texas

Someone post that Dallas reported 17 dead people registered. That's scary. :shock: Made my heart rate irregular.

We are in serious trouble. I mean there's what - 140 million or so voters?

The percentage of illegal votes found so far - I don't want to bother to post the actual percentage number. But we know it's microscopic.

But what I didn't see was (and it's possible someone posted the numbers) - who got the most illegal votes, Trump or Clinton? With Trumps humongous ego, I'm surprised he hasn't claimed getting the most illegal votes.
 
phattonez said:
You can use the false identity of people who have died, people who have moved, etc. The current system has no way to pick that up.
Click to expand...
Um, that is a theory, speculation, a "could be", not factual proof of "millions illegally voting".



Question: how many voters were purged from Kansas rolls after a law was passed requiring proof of citizenship?
Click to expand...
Now you are changing the argument to "registration fraud"...while side-stepping the point that the architect of the Orangatan's commission could not find any significant levels of irregularities in his own state using his own states' data in his own software.
 
phattonez said:
Was that article behind a paywall? Sorry, I didn't get any warning of that.
Click to expand...
Warning? I see that your understanding of webpages is as poor as your understanding of statistics.

Still, I explained the criticism of the Politico take, why don't you respond to that?
Click to expand...
OK, the authors of the study you are citing, that is behind a paywall, have already acknowledged that the data set used was very small and that they did not understand how it would cause large errors when extrapolated to the general population.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-noncitizen-voters/

"Just Facts" took the data and ran with it. It is always a bad idea to build a case on weak data.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
I think the word that missing is "risk"

You run a "risk" of disenfranchising many more lawful voters than you prevent fraud voters.
You'd like to err on the side of possibly disenfranchising lawful voters to prevent a handful of fraud voters.
Other folks think we should err the other way—risk a handful of fraud vote to prevent disenfranchising lawful voters.
We will never have perfection.
There's only a question of which sorts of error we'd like to make.

You'd rather make the error of taking lawful votes from American citizens.
Others'd rather make the error of allowing a handful of fraud votes.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

So there is never any evidence that a voter was turned away from the polls trying to vote who was properly registered and qualified to vote?

If not, you've fallen victim to another conspiracy theory.
 
code1211 said:
So there is never any evidence that a voter was turned away from the polls trying to vote who was properly registered and qualified to vote?
Click to expand...
I don't think I said that there was no evidence that a qualified voter was never turned away.
Did you mean to use that many negatives?

Further, I used the word 'risk' more than once.

:shrug:
 
Simon W. Moon said:
I don't think I said that there was no evidence that a qualified voter was never turned away.
Did you mean to use that many negatives?

Further, I used the word 'risk' more than once.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Unless you can demonstrate that a risk exists, then what is the basis to believe that a risk exists?

If no qualified and properly registered voter has ever been turned away, the risk is only imaginary.
 
Chomsky said:
Last I read, their was nothing in the Constitution claiming the federal government should be running our elections or collecting our voting data, much less that the Trump org should be building a national voter database!

And let's not forget: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The People run the elections, not the government! :doh

This is a grab by the Trump org, under the guise of "government". And it's big government, at that. Does anyone trust Donnie Boy with their personal data? I don't trust him at all, much less trust him with my data!
Click to expand...

A national voter registry makes as much sense as a national gun registry.
 
JANFU said:
I think you may be referring to gerrymandering, dilution of votes based upon party, drawing district lines to ensure a majority win by those drawing the lines with a minority of votes.
Check the reelection rates for house members over the past 40 years, it would make Russians green with envy.
Click to expand...

It probably would if they really had anything to do with voter fraud here on the scale that people are trying to fake.
 
rocket88 said:
Of course not. Everybody knows there's no cheating on the right. That's why it's a miracle ordained by God that Trump won in a landslide when the Electoral College only exists to stop Republicans from winning!
Click to expand...

Make sure not to tell Obama that, save that his head might implode from the strain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom