It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump argument bolstered: Clinton received 800,000 votes from noncitizens, study finds

page: 3
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How is non citizens voting a right or left issue?




posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: eXia7

Left acknowledges voter fraud occurs, but it's racist to suppose an undocumented immigrant could be guilty of it.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

You said the same thing about criticism of your precious polls too, I'm sure. the left has zero credibility at this point. So, enjoy listening to yourselves talk.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:14 AM
link   
If you guys had someone in YOUR house illegally it would be a big deal to you but when it's off in some sanctuary city it's ok for them to be here.

The fact that Democrats use these illegal people as a rallying cry and willingly accept the votes it garners makes them all traitors in my eyes.

If you can't uphold the law you don't deserve to be in any position that requires you to do so.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I live in Pennsylvania. As some of you may recall we had some issues with some voting machines. pittsburgh.cbslocal.com...

I personally witnessed one of these "problems" when I was asked by a poll worker to verify that she corrected the machine to reflect the vote that the woman on the machine next to me wanted cast. When a Republican straight party ticket vote was cast the machine would change the vote from Trump to Clinton. If it wasn't caught when the voter verified their ballot, it would cast the vote for Clinton. This "problem" was explained away as a "calibration error". Yeah! Right! If it was a true "calibration error" there should have been some straight Democrat party ticket votes cast for Trump. That didn't happen. Trust me we would have heard if it did. The media was waiting to pounce on something like that.

Now, how many times did this "problem" happen? How many times was it not caught and in how many places did this happen?

Let's not forget what happened when they tried to recount Detroit.
www.detroitnews.com...

How about Nevada? www.newsmaxtv.vegas...

It adds up. I'd be real careful about saying that Clinton won the popular vote.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

America seems to like all or nothing.
We've had to show ID to vote in Canada for decades. Probably since there was voting. Multiple types of ID are allowed. As long as there's a picture, on something. 2 or 3 types combined even. An address, a picture, nothing special.

The US really does like to make many things very hard for people, on purpose (like closing needed places).



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
If you guys had someone in YOUR house illegally it would be a big deal to you but when it's off in some sanctuary city it's ok for them to be here.

The fact that Democrats use these illegal people as a rallying cry and willingly accept the votes it garners makes them all traitors in my eyes.

If you can't uphold the law you don't deserve to be in any position that requires you to do so.

Best post yet.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:23 AM
link   
The thing is... Trump speaks out and says things that other "politicians" refuse to publicly acknowledge.
Illegals voting is most likely public knowledge among those with inside information.
Trump actually admits it, and others who know freak about about undermining the election process.
Well, illegals voting undermine the election, and something needs to be done about it.
We finally have a President who backs the people instead of the establishment.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

The left relies on the votes of non-citizens.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: eXia7

Why would perfectly good Americans believe in a paper owned by a cult (literally owned by a cult)?



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:33 AM
link   
California is the number 1 high jacked by libtards state there is. I am sure they are trying to leave the US because they are really worried about being investigated for voter fraud. Everyone hates Pelosi, Boxer, and Brown in N. California, we need to check to see if they were really elected.

Northern California's new motto, "If its Brown, flush it down".



edit on 27-1-2017 by misskat1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

*Sigh*

Another story easily discredited by approximately 25 seconds of googling.

About Jessie Richman's Research Paper.



Among their complaints: The survey on which the research was based was an internet survey meant to include only citizens. In other words, any noncitizens who took the survey were included due to an error anyway,


The guy who WROTE THE PAPER doesn't even believe it supports Trumps claims.



That was Richman’s research, all right. The problem, says Richman, who identifies as a political moderate, is that the Trump administration’s interpretation of his report is totally off. “Trump and others have been misreading our research and exaggerating our results to make claims we don’t think our research supports,” Richman says. “I’m not sure why they continue to do it, but there’s not much I can do about that aside from set the record straight.”


But I'm sure no one cares.
edit on 27-1-2017 by MrSensible because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Simple question:
WHY wouldn't EVERY American citizen want to know if people that are not allowed to vote in their election (illegal immigrant, dead, fake, multiples, double-registered)...voted in their election?

Don't ALL U.S. citizens want an accurate vote?
edit on 27-1-2017 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:52 AM
link   
The left was all behind Jill Stein saying she wanted an accurate count in a bunch of states.
Why wouldn't the Left want a NATIONWIDE accurate count?



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I would hope so. Every illegal vote nulls one of ours.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: IAMTAT

I would hope so. Every illegal vote nulls one of ours.


Not to mention that every single vote by a Mexican citizen is a piece of evidence of a foreign country attempting to influence the U.S. Presidential election.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Russians built the tunnels though. Haven't you heard?



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Much more direct way of throwing an election that possible hacks from someone possibly in Russia of an email that shined a light on a crooked candidate.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Have they counted all the dead people that voted for hillary yet ?



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: buster2010

So the study of 800,000 is not proving that illegals voted?


Have you read the study? Have you read the rebuttals? Are you prepared to stand behind the study? No, no and no?

I have actually read the original study, the rebuttals and Richman's response to the rebuttals. That's why I was surprised that the Washington Times seemed to reporting on a new study with new conclusions — I hadn't come across it. And guess what? That's because there is no new study. This is deceptive reporting by the Washington Times. In fact, I just tracked down the source of this quote:


Mr. Richman calculated that Mrs. Clinton would have collected 81 percent of noncitizen votes.

“Is it plausible that non-citizen votes added to Clinton’s margin? Yes,” Mr. Richman wrote. “Is it plausible that non-citizen votes account for the entire nation-wide popular vote margin held by Clinton? Not at all.”


I think you'll find that if you read it yourself, the Times propaganda GREATLY mischaracterizes Richman's own position on his study and how it should be treated. A study that was as I said, heavily criticized.

Here you go.


January 24, 2017.

Although Press Secretary Sean Spicer claimed today that millions voted illegally in the November 2016 election, on November 28, 2016 I published the following statement indicating that our analysis does not support his claim. Since then, no new data, facts or analyses have emerged that require us to revisit or change the findings of the 2014 study to which Mr. Spicer refers. We stand by our findings.

If the assumptions stated above concerning non-citizen turnout are correct, could non-citizen turnout account for Clinton’s popular vote margin? There is no way it could have. 6.4 percent turnout among the roughly 20.3 million non-citizen adults in the US would add only 834,318 votes to Clinton’s popular vote margin. This is little more than a third of the total margin.

Is it plausible that non-citizen votes added to Clinton’s margin. Yes. Is it plausible that non-citizen votes account for the entire nation-wide popular vote margin held by Clinton? Not at all.



December 1st Update Like so much on this issue, this posting has taken on something of a life of its own, and I want to emphasize and clarify some points that seem to be generating confusion as echo chambers pick this up and re-post it.



1. This post is not intended to make a specific claim on my part concerning how many non-citizens voted in 2016. It has a much narrower aim. My goal was to show that an extrapolation from my coauthored work on the 2008 election to the 2016 electiondid not support the arguments some seemed to be making that the entire popular vote margin for Clinton was due to illegal votes by non-citizens.
(his bold)


2. There are a number of reasons why one should be cautious about extrapolating from the 2008 CCES data to 2016.

a. Many things can and have changed over the course of eight years. For example, a number of states have made efforts to use matching of records to remove non-citizen registrants from voter rolls. For example, on this blog I have recently highlighted data from Virginia and North Carolina concerning such matching efforts. These non-citizens are no longer on voter rolls. There are other states that have been even more aggressive about the issue of attempting to verify that registered voters are citizens. Furthermore, although the evidence from our 2014 paper suggests that it is only partially effective, many states have moved to adopt tighter identification requirements.

b. The 2008 estimate is inherently uncertain. It depends upon a number of assumptions including assumptions about the validity of the survey data. Our critics have made a variety of arguments and I encourage readers to evaluate those arguments along with our responses to them.


This Washington Times article is garbage. It also deceptively reports on the statement by Obama. I addressed this in a post here.

Also from this garbage from WT, the bit is false:


The WikiLeaks dump of Clinton campaign manger John Podesta’s emails contained one message on directing immigrants to vote


Read the email yourself, it's in the WL Podesta archive, email id 17088. It's a thread about getting out the millenial vote (Subject: Millennials Poll) and discussion about how the voter registration system needs modernization. Here's one of the emails from the chain:


In some of the millennial groups we did recently, we had several participants who said they haven’t used stamps or put anything in a mailbox for years.

Agree with Teddy that universal online reg is good place to start. Very few concerns on that, but many more concerns about online voting across the electorate.


and from another in the chain:


I do think we should explore ways to Co-opt GOP's argument for photo ID which has enormous appeal. Even among some Dem voters. We should think of high tech solutions ( ie everyone is issued a voter card with a chip when they turn 18) that embrace som form of universal citizen I'd linked to automatic registration.


Nowhere in that chain of emails is there anything about non-citizen voting. AT ALL. Nothing. Not one single word. This is garbage.
edit on 2017-1-27 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join