Claims of election fraud resonate with growing audience
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally in Miami.
VIENNA >> Outraged claims of voting fraud are no longer only a regular part of elections in unsteady, young democracies — they’re increasingly being made in established democratic countries by populist politicians who question the fairness of the voting process — and with it the validity of representation by and for the people.
At the final debate of the U.S. presidential election, Donald Trump refused to commit to honor the result of the Nov. 8 vote. But he’s not the only example of a politician casting doubt on the fairness of the democratic system in countries where it is the norm.
Austria’s right-wing Freedom Party had the results of presidential elections this year overturned after its candidate was narrowly defeated; fear that ballots marked in pencil in Britain could be tampered with forced that country’s electoral commission to issue a statement reminding voters they could use a pen if they preferred; and former Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi has yet to concede defeat in a 2006 vote that he claims was flawed.
Populists in Europe argue that the cards are stacked against them by the whole process, a message that appears to be gaining support.
“A wide segment of people is questioning democratic institutions across Europe and the U.S.,” said Brian Klaas of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Politicians in young democracies are predictably most prone to cry fraud. Opposition parties in the formerly communist Yugoslav republics of Montenegro and Macedonia have questioned the validity of national elections in the past year, and Poland’s right-wing Law and Justice party, now in power nationally, challenged the results of local elections it lost two years ago.
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
But populist parties in some of Europe’s established democracies are also increasingly flashing the fraud card, hoping to gain by spreading distrust of the establishment, even at the cost of turmoil.
Comments from Trump supporter Roger Stone in August indicate a common trans-Atlantic playbook.
“I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly,” Stone said in a podcast discussion with conservative provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. “If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.”
There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the United States. In one study, a Loyola Law School professor found 31 instances involving allegations of voter impersonation out of 1 billion votes cast in U.S. elections between 2000 and 2014.
Nevertheless, the claims appear to be leaving their mark in the U.S. An Associated Press-GfK poll in October found that among Trump supporters, only 35 percent say they will most likely accept the results as legitimate if Hillary Clinton wins. That’s only about half as many as among Clinton backers.
Conspiracy theories reflecting distrust of the U.S. government are not new. A poll in 2013, half a century after John F. Kennedy’s assassination, found 60 percent of American respondents disbelieve official findings that a lone gunman was the only person responsible for killing the U.S. president.
But the internet has made it easier to find information — or disinformation — for any number of beliefs, including mistrust of democracy.
“There is more false information easily available and more information is channeled toward us that is primed and selected based on our past (internet) activities,” said political scientist Nicholas Cheeseman of Oxford University. “So you are likely trapped into a set of images or conversations that reflect or reinforce your beliefs.”
The message that democratically elected governments are not serving the will of the masses also erodes support for that sort of governance.
“These people … claim that the elites have sold them out,” said Cheeseman, invoking the success of the Nazi mantra that post-World War I Germany lost territory to France through betrayal by its own and international governments.
“Populists,” he said, “make a lot out of picking an enemy and presenting themselves as the rescuers.”
They also exploit mistakes that occur even with the best of intentions.
In Austria, experts say the faulty practices noted by the Freedom Party probably existed also in previous votes and would not have changed the results.
But the nation’s highest court ordered a rerun. The judges had little choice: the party had warned of possible election fraud even before the vote, so ruling the election valid would have given it a permanent opportunity to cry foul.
With the rescheduled election too close to call, the party has accomplished its goal of giving its candidate, Norbert Hofer, a renewed chance to win on Dec. 4.
And although the court found no case of willful wrongdoing, some Freedom Party officials continue to claim otherwise — as do some voters.
“All the polls showed Hofer ahead” before the vote, said Hofer supporter Josef Hladek. “Don’t tell me there wasn’t any funny business going on.”
Willful wrongdoing is rare — but suspected cases are seized upon. As it surges in popularity, Germany’s populist AfD party has cited false ballot counts in one voting district during last year’s municipal elections in the city of Bremen to cast the legitimacy of all future votes into question.
Party head Joerg Meuthen said it shows that “not even elections are guaranteed by the rule of law.” Prominent party member Enrico Komning said intentional cheating in Bremen “is difficult to prove, but the bitter aftertaste remains.”
Members of France’s anti-immigrant National Front also have claimed to be election victims, even though they themselves await trial over suspected illegal campaign financing and fraud during the 2012 legislative and presidential elections.
82 responses to “Claims of election fraud resonate with growing audience”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Robby Mook, HilLIARy’s campaign chairman claims he didn’t know who James O’Keefe the man who admitted to planting mentally unstable people at Trump rallies to incite violence. Later it was repoted that Mook and O’Keefe have a long and close friendship. This and many other things were revealed recently. Hawaii, how can you vote for corruption by voting for HilLIARy?
It is no wonder so many fear a rigged election.
Our so called “news” media have admitted to being in the tank for Shrillary, having abandoned even a modicum of objectivity.
As if that were not enough, just look at the non stop efforts of the Democrat Party to insure voter fraud by idiotically claiming that voter ID is a racist plot – – that and their work to obliterate or borders so legions of illegal aliens can pout in and vote Democrat.
So YES there is every reason to believe the Dems will work with gust to insure a rigged election and why? Because they know they will LOSE and honest election.
And what so called news media admitted to being in the tank for sweet Hillary? Not a fan of the main stream media but I missed that article. Can you post it?
All but Fox News but CNN is slowly coming around. It is so obvious that even a sixth grader can see it.
Then it shouldn’t be hard to post something showing this? Face it this is just an imaginary fear to stimulate racists. Enjoy.
Of course they don’t admit it up front – that is a ridiculous assumption when they can collude behind the scenes as if to appear neutral.
Boots, you apparently do not follow the news other than what is published in the Star-Advertiser. If you did, you might have read some of the many emails hacked from Hillary’s campaign manager that clearly show the collusion between the media and the campaign to defeat Bernie Sanders and Trump.
What is wrong with putting the mentally unstable among other mentally unstable people? Sounds like this is just common sense. The Donald himself is obviously mentally unstable.
So that was you at the Trump rally.
Yes it was. As a kid, I enjoyed 50th state wrestling. lol
cool story, bro. any comments about the actual article?
Early Voting Deadline is tomorrow! Find your polling sites for time and location! Get there early and Vote,then and only then can we all, “Make America Great Again”
The biggest fraud is illegal aliens with issued driver’s licenses, voting. If anyone believes that illegals don’t ever vote, you’re living in a cave.
Having a drivers license doesn’t give non-citizens the right to vote, whether they are legal or illegal residents of the U.S.
Cajabird is RIGHT!Some states ARE allowing this type of ID as acceptable to vote…. C’mon BS thought you were on it! Get out of the “Cave”.
Name a state that allows anyone with a driver’s license to vote.
In states where photo ID is required, a driver’s license is one form of ID that verifies your identity as being a person on the roll of registered voters.
Again, and please read this slowly: A driver’s license only allows you to vote if it proves that you are a registered voter. No one is a registered voter simply because they have a driver’s license.
In California, if an applicant opts into the registration process, obtaining a drivers license starts the voter registration process, and the DMV forwards the applicant’s info to the Secretary of State, but (and this is the part that Fox News deceptively leaves out) that process is completed only when the holder of a new driver’s license subsequently provides all of the normal proof of citizenship, which was not part of the driver’s license application, to the office of the Secretary of State.
In an exhaustive study of over one billion votes cast since 2000, only 31 cases of ID fraud have been documented and most of those would not have been prevented by voter ID laws.
But they are not using it as a means to become registered to vote. No matter what form of ID you have, you cannot vote if you are not registered.
Reading is fundamental!
Wrong again Klas3, Lawyer?
MoiLee – I’m not wrong. In no state does a driver’s license provide the affirmation required to allow one to register to vote. You can lie about this as you lie about so many other things if you want. Your statement is simply false on its face.
There is no way for a state to pass a law that lowers the eligibility requirements for voting in a Federal election. It just can’t happen. If you don’t understand that, you need to sign up for an eighth grade civics. class.
You know what has a greater chance of occurring: you getting bit by a shark, getting hit by lightning, making it to the NBA OR even wining the national powerball lottery. As has been documented, in over a decade, of over a billion voters, about 30 convicted cases. Do the math.
So as to the cricket crew, it’s about the same odds of you making it through community college.
Love your evidence that illegal aliens vote. Oh, that is right you didn’t post any evidence. Just an imaginary fear.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/08/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrongly-says-noncitizens-can-vote-whe/
Read it slowly. Think about it. What you’ll learn is that the willingness to lie and produce a fabricated paper trial will allow an illegal to vote. Even polifact’s own cautiously worded denial of Trump’s assertion actually supports his very claim. Do I think illegal voters will overwhelm the process? Of course not. Will a few cases of fraud all be exposed? Probably. Will they all? Probably not. But the numbers of either will be statistically insignificant.
From your article: In states with same-day voter registration, people don’t just walk in and vote. They have to provide the same level of identification as when registering in advance. Experts told us there is no additional risk of noncitizens casting ballots in states with same-day voter registration, nor is there any evidence that this occurs.
We rate Trump’s statement False.
Like I said, read the entire article. I really don’t expect someone as devoid of partiality as yourself to admit in writing any acknowledgment of the report’s clearly outlined capability to vote fraudulently, but it’s there. From a purely objective perspective, another glaringly missing attribute from your repertoire, it then becomes obvious that Trump’s assertion was not totally incorrect, just meaningfully insignificant.
But then again, as evidenced daily by the endless salvos of drivel heaved back and forth, little value is placed on demonstrating critical reading skills.
Well hawaiikone, please forgive me. I am just a poor country boy living on social security. lol
Shame you can’t point out exactly where it says illegals vote. But I understand.
“For someone to vote fraudulently using same-day registration, they would have to lie about their eligibility in the presence of poll workers and others, and they would create a paper trail by filling out the paperwork. These factors serve as deterrents, in addition to the potentially severe penalties a fraudulent voter could face, like deportation if the person was in the country illegally.”
bootie, you, like a lot of uninformed Maddow worshippers, refuse to budge from a well exercised position of superficial assumptions.
Mr. Trump is spreading this evil rumor to explain why he’s losing. If he or any of his team thought there was a shred of a chance that he would win, do you think he’d fabricate this ridiculous fraud? He knows that his supporters are poorly educated, low information simpletons who won’t realize this is all a lie.
Trump is a psychotic.
History shows it’s always been Dems who don’t accept election results. That’s just a fact, but this time we’ve learned just how corrupt the Dems are. From registering illegals, to fraudulently submitting petitions the Democrats have proven they can no longer be trusted. From, Debbie Wasserman to Donna Brazil, the Dems are corrupt through and through.
History shows there’s only one candidate who complains about election fraud BEFORE the election. And the degree of “rigging” varies depending on how he’s doing in the polls.
Hopefully the margin of defeat is so huuuuge that even this guy will have to accept the reality of losing.
That is because history shows that republicans try to steal elections. Now the republicans are allied with that great advocate of Freedom, Putin. Way to go Republicans.
Mr Trump is rewriting history and beating both parties. The tide has turned and HiLIARy is not feeling well. A healthy Mr Trump is doing great. Even RINO Ryan has joined the crowd. No one wants a female felon to be president. “Make America Great Again”
Yes Sarge, you can’t have a female as president. The Donald is likely to be the convicted felon. lol Say did you receive your degree from Trump University?
Bet Trump won’t claim voter fraud if he wins.
Trump has alerted America to the very real danger of a rigged election because it is beyond argument that Democrats will lose an honest election.
The only way Shrillary can reach the magic 270 is massive voter fraud and rigged voting machines – – and she knows it.
She will do her best to follow the examples of “Senator” Al Franken and Al Capone.
What baloney. System may be rigged but it is generally republicans who try to rig it. Voter ID laws are designed to prevent minorities from voting. It is a shame that republicans do not believe in fair and honest elections. Cutting back on early voting is another approach republicans take. Just shows that republicans hate freedom.
The only one trying to manipulate voting is trump’s campaign. In an October 27 interview with bloomberg businessweek, a senior trump campaign official said, “we have three major voter suppression operations underway.” This was due to their realization that they could only win by shrinking clinton’s support base because of their inability to grow their base. This could explain the recent effort to convince clinton supporters that they could “vote” by text messages rather than going to the polls.
Thanks for the reference to the October 27 interview, which I just read.
The “voter suppression” to which you refer was not suppression in the sense of blocking people from voting.
It was the publicizing of 3 big negative qualities of Hillary Clinton.
The idea was to suppress voter enthusiasm for Clinton.
The three negative qualities were:
i) Her support for the TransPacific partnership
ii) The women who say they were assaulted by Bill and harassed or threatened by Hillary
iii) Her 1996 suggestion that some African males are “super-predators”
You’re lying of course, because like Mr. Trump, you simply cannot accept the fact that he is going to lose. He also lost the Senate, so thanks to him for that.
Mrs. Clinton appears to already have a clear pathway to 272 electoral votes.
Great we have the 5 amigo’s chirping their liberal nonsense again!
Boots, Ike, Klas3, BS , “One Dollar”Keko. Hey? where’s the “Beach Boy” Keaukaha?
I know you guys are extremely Nervous and scared,because Donald will pull it off and become our next POTUS! Donald Trump has already won the popular votes, Hands Down! & His number are climbing on the Electoral votes,with some of the Red states flipping to become Blue States.Thanks to the FBI “Reopening” the case! Thanks Director James Comey!
get ready to join hands Gang!
Again! I would pay Big Money to see the looks on your faces on November 9th!
lol, actually I am not nervous at all. But be careful what you wish for. Do you really want the stock market to plunge 50% and Unemployment to double? This is what will happen if the Donald becomes president as he is little more than a witch doctor on steroids. When will you phony conservatives learn that you cannot be fiscally responsible if you cut revenue and increase wasteful government spending? Wake up already!
Finally do you really want the president of the United States to be the stooge of Putin?
No we don’t want the lying crooked female felon.
What are you talking about boots? “Wasteful spending” happens only under the Democrats… Look at the National Debt. Wake-up!
Where is your proof that Trump is a “Stooge” ?
If Donald wants to Normalize relations with the Russians,is that a Stooge”? To me this would be a Good thing! we never had this since Reagan! Yeah we all know how how The Democrats has improved that relation ,right ?They haven’t! Yet,they are quick to blame the Russians for the Hacks,when they (Hillary) get caught in the cookie jar. How do you intend to improve any type of relation with the Russians ,with that kind of diplomacy??…..yeah,who’s the Stooge?lastly, I’m glad your focused concerns with the Stock market and “Wall Street” since they and you are the biggest donors to the Clinton Campaign…Good luck with that! Hey didn’t you say you’re going to move to Australia or was it New Zealand? Great you’ll be in good company with George Stephanopolous and Hollywood…….why Australia?why not Mexico if you really want to prove a point.
Off Grid: FBI find emails on Huma Abedin,s Husband Antony Weiner laptop,related to the State department ,during the tenure of …….Secretary Hillary Clinton”…..this lady is going down!
lol, MoiLee, wasteful spending generally happens under republicans and will definitely happen under the Donald. What do you think a 50 ft wall along the southern border is? What a waste.
As for Russia I am not against friendlier relations with Russia. But I sure don’t want Russia controlling our president. While I don’t view Putin as the Devil, I will accept the fact that our intelligence has determined that he is trying to influence our election. The Donald could have avoided a lot of this if he had just released his tax returns but I guess it wouldn’t be good if he showed as a major liability owing the Bank of Russia a billion dollars. Wonder what else it would show?
At least as your ridiculous comment relates to me, you are lying again.
I’m not the least bit nervous. You can harbor whatever delusions you choose. Mrs. Clinton is going to win. Get used to that fact.
Pay attention! Check it out yourself, don’t just look at the ABC liberal polls,look at the Bigger Picture. Do your research,it will set you free! I would pay Money to see the Looks on your face,on the morning of Nov,9th.
Did you know,IF and I say IF Hillary wins? Bill Clinton will have to register in the State of Washington’s Sexual Predator data base .
MoiLee – You see, comments like this show the depth of your remarkable ignorance.
The State of Washington? That’s where you think the White House is? Did you get through third grade?
MoiLee, what bigger picture are you talking about? Why are you so in favor of the destruction of the United States? This is what will happen under a President Trump when the stock market falls below 5000, unemployment rises to 30%, and global warming destroys our agriculture. Wake up. One cannot feed their families using weapon systems.
Can’t help asking but why would Bill Clinton have to register in the state of Washington as a sexual predator? It is the Donald who believes in grabbing women’s privates.
Moi, you are like every coward I have ever meet…..they usually have two equal qualities: they are patently ignorant and they got the hearts of chickens. You have a double serving of both.
…that’s it? is that all you have? Cute!Haaaaa!I love Libs!
…wait, wait! At least I’m not saying this. “I wanna Take Donald Trump behind the Gym and beat him up”……Now who said this…. Play the jeopardy song. Too late! Uncle Joe Biden, Vice President of the US. Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa
In this case, populist = ignorant.
It is about time for a paradigm change.
with electronic voting, the software or hardware could be manipulated and preset. a lot of the electronic voting machines are manufactured by george soros, the hungarian born billionaire who said he would spend all of his money to see ilLIARy elected. you can draw your own conclusions
All right!, Hillary to WIN.
Then eliminate electronic voting. In Washington state, you’re mailed a paper ballot you then mail back. Everyone I know there has voted already.
I don’t doubt that machines “could” be manipulated, but can you provide proof from a verifiable source of Soros’ involvement. I think mean his *companies* manufacture the machines, not that Soros manufactures them himself (which is how your sentence reads).
As I’ve mentioned before, don’t make up stuff that’s so easy to check. Make up stuff that’s difficult to check. Two clicks takes one to the Snopes entry about this particular rumor. (Now claiming that Hillary or Donald are the spawn of space aliens might be a little more difficult to verify. Try that one.)
Who is fact checking Snopes? Just askin
Today in the Washington Post: “Analysts said Russia does not seem to be able to alter the election, but Moscow’s hackers might try to sow doubts about its legitimacy as part of its months-long campaign to rattle the mechanisms of American democracy.” So, once again, Trump appears to be Putin’s puppet.
More Russian fraud in support of Trump: “WASHINGTON, Nov 3 (Reuters) – “The FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies are examining faked documents aimed at discrediting the Hillary Clinton campaign as part of a broader investigation into what U.S. officials believe has been an attempt by Russia to disrupt the presidential election, people with knowledge of the matter said.
“U.S. Senator Tom Carper, a Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security Committee, has referred one of the documents to the FBI for investigation on the grounds that his name and stationery were forged to appear authentic, some of the sources who had knowledge of that discussion said.”
Donald Trump is citing unsubstantiated urban myths and a contested academic study to paint a false narrative about rampant voter fraud in the U.S. and the likelihood of a “rigged” election.
Trump claimed “people that have died 10 years ago are still voting,” citing a report that found 1.8 million deceased people remain on voter registration rolls. But the report did not find evidence of wrongdoing, and numerous studies have found such voter fraud is virtually nonexistent.
Trump claimed there is a massive problem with “illegal immigrants [who] are voting,” citing research by Old Dominion professors who say noncitizen voters may have benefited Democrats in 2008. But a Harvard professor who manages the data used in the Old Dominion study said the data was misused and the study’s conclusions are wrong.
Finally, Trump broadly claimed that “voter fraud is very, very common,” and he has called for poll watchers to look for people impersonating voters or voting numerous times. However, numerous academic studies and government inquiries have found in-person voter fraud to be rare. Very very rare…
For weeks, Trump has been warning about rigged elections. He urged his supporters in Ambridge, Pennsylvania, on Oct. 10 to monitor polls and “watch other communities, because we don’t want this election stolen from us.”
In a speech in Wisconsin on Oct. 17, Trump provided some detail and purported evidence to back up his claims about the prevalence of voter fraud, particularly by noncitizens and people casting ballots on behalf of deceased voters. But we found that his evidence is lacking.
Dead People
One of Trump’s principle claims of voter fraud is that “dead people” are voting in large numbers.
“People that have died 10 years ago are still voting,” Trump said in his Wisconsin speech.
Later, Trump cited a Pew Charitable Trust report as evidence of “dead people” voting in large numbers. But that’s not what the report says.
“The following information comes straight from Pew Research, quote, ‘Approximately 24 million people — one out of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or significantly inaccurate.’ One in eight,” Trump said. “More than 1.8 million deceased individuals, right now, are listed as voters.’ Oh, that’s wonderful.”
“Well, if they’re gonna vote for me, we’ll think about it, right?” Trump joked. “But I have a feeling they’re not gonna vote for me. Of the 1.8 million, 1.8 million is voting for someone else.”
Trump accurately quoted from the report, “Inaccurate, Costly and Inefficient: Evidence That America’s Voter Registration System Needs and Upgrade.” But the report did not allege the 1.8 million deceased people actually voted. Rather, Pew said that it is evidence of the need to upgrade voter registration systems.
In fact, researchers say voter fraud involving ballots cast on behalf of deceased voters is rare.
“This issue of dead people voting is just not substantiated,” said Lorraine Minnite, a professor at Rutgers University and author of “The Myth of Voter Fraud.”
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 encouraged states to improve the accuracy of their registration lists and to audit their election results. As a result, Minnite told us in a phone interview, a number of states compared their voter lists to the Social Security Death Index, and in some cases they turned up hundreds or even thousands of apparent instances of “dead people” voting.
But with a bit of digging, almost all of those turned out to be due to clerical errors or as a result of people who legally voted via absentee ballots or the early voting process but later died before Election Day, Minnite said.
For example, in 2012 South Carolina’s attorney general notified the U.S. Department of Justice of potential voter fraud after finding 953 ballots cast in the 2010 election by voters listed as deceased, in some cases as long as six years. The finding ran in the Augusta Chronicle at the time in an Associated Press story under a headline, “South Carolina attorney general informs Justice Department of voter fraud.”
But a subsequent review by the State Election Commission found no evidence of fraud and that mostly the cases were clerical errors. Yes, clerical errors…
In a letter to the attorney general, the executive director of the State Election Commission wrote that it only had the resources to investigate 207 cases from the most recent 2010 election. Of those cases, it found 106 cases were the result of clerical errors by poll managers; 56 cases were the result of bad data matching, meaning that the person in question was not actually dead; 32 cases were “voter participation errors,” including stray marks on lists erroneously indicting they had voted; three cases were absentee ballots issued to registered voters who cast ballots and later died before Election Day; and 10 cases contained “insufficient information in the record to make a determination.”
Cases of people actually voting fraudulently on behalf of deceased people are rare — though isolated examples have occurred, Minnite said.
“There are a handful of known cases in which documentation shows that votes have been cast in the names of voters who have died before the vote was submitted,” wrote Justin Levitt in a 2007 report, “The Truth About Voter Fraud,” for the Brennan Center for Justice. “It is far more common, however, to see unfounded allegations of epidemic voting from beyond the grave.”
Much of the misinformation about “dead people voting” is due to “flawed matches from one place (death records) to another (voter rolls),” Levitt found. Levitt explored five reports of widespread fraud regarding “dead voters” and found all of them were unfounded or greatly exaggerated.
Noncitizens
The second leg of Trump’s allegation of widespread voter fraud rests on “illegal immigrants voting,” another practice that experts told us is fairly rare.
In Wisconsin, Trump cited a 2014 Washington Post article titled “Could non-citizens decide the November election?” It was a piece penned by Old Dominion University professors Jesse Richman and David Earnest about research the two later published in the journal Electoral Studies. It turns out to be a disputed and very controversial study.
Trump. Oct. 17: Then there’s the issue of illegal immigrants voting. The following comes from a 2014 report from the Washington Post. This article was entitled, “Could non-citizens decide the November election?” Here’s some excerpts. “More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote.” Oh, isn’t that wonderful.
“Because non-citizens tend to favor Democrats,” — to put it mildly — “Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 sample …” You don’t read about this, right? They don’t tell you about this. “…we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories is various close elections.” OK? All right? “Non-citizen votes could have given Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform … and other Obama administration priorities.” Now, it continues, “It is possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina.”
Trump accurately quotes from the blog post. But the authors’ results are contested by a number of academics, including those who administer and manage the data on which it is based.
The study relied on data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, which is administered by YouGov/Polimetrix and managed by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Richman and Earnest estimated the number of noncitizens who voted nationwide based on those in the survey who self-identified as noncitizens who voted.
“Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010,” Richman and Earnest wrote in the Post.
In a blistering rebuke of that study, the managers of the database on which the article by Richman and Earnest was based wrote in Electoral Studies that “measurement errors” in the survey led to a “biased estimate of the rate at which non-citizens voted in recent elections. The results, we show, are completely accounted for by very low frequency measurement error; further, the likely percent of non-citizen voters in recent US elections is 0.”
Is Zero, zilch, nada, …..
“Their finding is entirely due to measurement error,” one of the authors, Stephen Ansolabehere of Harvard and the principal investigator of CCES, wrote to us in an email. “Measurement errors happen. People accidentally check the wrong box in surveys. The rate of such errors in the CCES is very small, but such errors do happen. And when they do happen on a question such as citizenship, researchers can easily draw the wrong inference about voting behaviors. Richman and Earnest extrapolate from a handful of wrongfully classified cases (of non-citizens).”
Voter fraud is done by republicans when they pass laws to restrict early voting or to eliminate voting booths in democratic districts. There is a law suit going through right now about republicans throwing people off voting lists. Republicans are just scum.
Ike, I wish you would reference where you copy your stuff from.
This one appears to be from October 19, 2016, Factcheck.org
Not everyone appears to respect this website, such as matchdoctor.com, writing:
“That is exactly what Web sites like factcheck.org are. They are biased, politically motivated propaganda Web sites, manned and funded by biased political organizations who set up the sites for the sole purpose of deviously “backing up” the political arguments of those who hold the same views that they do. It’s kind of like you have a friend who is in on your lie, and you use him to back up your story and don’t tell anyone else he is your friend.”
And I wish you would not awkwardly end sentences in prepositions.
Tight race. Seems like Trump making some head way three days out from election day.
Mr. Trump has already shown that there is a ceiling above which he cannot rise. He has no path to a win in the electoral college.
The HRC ceiling is falling even though Trump’s ceiling may remain the same. Result of the black voters not as caring to vote this time around. Hang on to your bloomers, it’ll be close.
I didn’t mention the overall national popular vote. I referenced the electoral college vote. Even if folks don’t turn out in the expected numbers, Mrs. Clinton appears to already have 272 electoral votes.
“Wrong Again” Klas3! Pure fiction and assumptions.
Dare To check out the polls for Colorado, Nevada,Michigan,New Hampshire and Pennslyvania? Don’t blow a blood vessel haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
MoiLee – And in walks the genius who thinks the White House is located in the “State of Washington.”
You expect to win debates against me? Please.
Since so many of Trump’s supporters on here repeated this lie, I’m happy to present the facts:
Fox News anchor Bret Baier apologized Friday for reporting that federal investigators had determined that Hillary Clinton’s private email server had been hacked and that an investigation would lead to an indictment of Clinton after the election.
In fact, Baier said, after checking with his sources, there is no evidence at this time for either statement.
Her is one for legal minds like Klastri’s to ponder. President Obama, Michelle Obama and Vice President Biden are spending a lot of time campaigning for Hillary. There is nothing illegal about this assuming the cost of such travel is paid by Democratic National Committee as required by current rules. However, there is a related issued that seems to be overlooked by everyone. Federal Law (Titles 10, 2, and 18, United States Code), Department of Defense (DOD) Directives, and specific military regulations strictly prohibit active duty military participation in partisan political activities. Since the Obamas and the VP travel by military aircraft, it seems to me the military crews are indeed participating in partisan political activities in violation of Federal Law, DOD Directives and military regulations. What say you, Klastri, other than “You lie?”
I don’t have to ponder anything. What I say is that you don’t know what you’re talking about. The military crews do not participate in any partisan political activity. They transport the President or other persons, in keeping with their military transport mission.
You might consider speaking with an attorney before wasting your time like this.
I content that transporting the Obamas and the VP to partisan political events is participation.
Make that “contend.”
OK. The logical response is: So what?
So what? You must believe that it is ok to violate laws, directives and regulations to achieve political objectives. I don’t.
Ronin006 – What I meant was who cares what you contend? It’s a matter of settled law that you are not going to affect or change. You don’t understand the facts, so coming to the wrong conclusion is essentially guaranteed.
Klastri, if someone drives a bank robber to a bank and remains in the vehicle while the bank is being robbed, is that not participation in the robbery?
That question has nothing whatever to do with the question you first raised, but I’ll answer it anyway. The driver of a car in that case is a participant only if the laws of the state say that. If that inclusion is not in the statute, then no.
You obviously can’t understand this. I have given up on trying to educate you, and I don’t give up easily. There is no offense. It doesn’t matter what you believe.
Klastri, since you claim to know it all, please cite one state where the law excludes drivers from participation in the robbery.