Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes

[TSA]

A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

As many as 5.7 million noncitizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House.

The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration.

Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote.

Just Facts’ conclusions confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: those who say it happens a lot and those who say the problem nonexistent.

In one camp, there are groundbreaking studies by professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia who attempted to compile scientifically derived illegal voting numbers using the Harvard data, called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

On the other side are the professors who conducted the study and contended that “zero” noncitizens of about 18 million adults in the U.S. voted. The liberal mainstream media adopted this position and proclaimed the Old Dominion work was “debunked.”

The ODU professors, who stand by their work in the face of attacks from the left, concluded that in 2008 as few as 38,000 and as many as 2.8 million noncitizens voted.

Mr. Agresti’s analysis of the same polling data settled on much higher numbers. He estimated that as many as 7.9 million noncitizens were illegally registered that year and 594,000 to 5.7 million voted.

These numbers are more in line with the unverified estimates given by President Trump, who said the number of ballots cast by noncitizens was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

Last month, the president signed an executive order setting up a commission to try to find on-the-ground truth in illegal voting. Headed by Vice President Mike Pence, the panel also will look at outdated voter lists across the nation with names of dead people and multiple registrants.

For 2012, Just Facts said, 3.2 million to 5.6 million noncitizens were registered to vote and 1.2 million to 3.6 million of them voted.

Mr. Agresti lays out his reasoning in a series of complicated calculations, which he compares to U.S. Census Bureau figures for noncitizen residents. Polls show noncitizens vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

“The details are technical, but the figure I calculated is based on a more conservative margin of sampling error and a methodology that I consider to be more accurate,” Mr. Agresti told The Washington Times.

He believes the Harvard/YouGov researchers based their “zero” claim on two flawed assumptions. First, they assumed that people who said they voted and identified a candidate did not vote unless their names showed up in a database.

“This is illogical, because such databases are unlikely to verify voters who use fraudulent identities, and millions of noncitizens use them,” Mr. Agresti said.

He cites government audits that show large numbers of noncitizens use false IDs and Social Security numbers in order to function in the U.S., which could include voting.

Second, Harvard assumed that respondent citizens sometimes misidentified themselves as noncitizens but also concluded that noncitizens never misidentified themselves as citizens, Mr. Agresti said.

“This is irrational, because illegal immigrants often claim they are citizens in order to conceal the fact that they are in the U.S. illegally,” he said.

Some of the polled noncitizens denied they were registered to vote when publicly available databases show that they were, he said.

This conclusion, he said, is backed by the Harvard/YouGov study’s findings of consumer and vote data matches for 90 percent of participants but only 41 percent of noncitizen respondents.

As to why his numbers are higher than the besieged ODU professors’ study, Mr. Agresti said: “I calculated the margin of sampling error in a more cautious way to ensure greater confidence in the results, and I used a slightly different methodology that I think is more accurate.”

There is hard evidence outside of polling that noncitizens do vote. Conservative activists have conducted limited investigations in Maryland and Virginia that found thousands of aliens were registered.

These inquiries, such as comparing noncitizen jury pool rejections to voter rolls, captured just a snapshot. But conservatives say they show there is a much broader problem that a comprehensive probe by the Pence commission could uncover.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, which fights voter fraud, released one of its most comprehensive reports last month.

Its investigation found that Virginia removed more than 5,500 noncitizens from voter lists, including 1,852 people who had cast more than 7,000 ballots. The people volunteered their status, most likely when acquiring driver’s licenses. The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more illegal voters on Virginia’s rolls who have never admitted to being noncitizens.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-illegal-vote-number-higher-than-estimat/

[Thread]

No surprise to ANYBODY. That's why they tried to hard to stop this. We knew, they knew, Trump knew.

Keep the pressure on, daddy!!!

[Pavlov]

Add another pizza to pile.

[boutons_deux]

:lol TSA eating every piece shit the rightwinghate machine dumps on him

[Adam Lambert]

Just Facts

:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin

[TSA]

I see the forum liberals are bringing out their best smilie rebuttals

[Pavlov]

I see TSA has hurt rebutt. "Study" rebuttal in itself. W spend much time and money look for fraud. TSA will never say what happen there.

[Reck]

Wow, reaching much?

This goes right with the myth that Big Foot really exist.

[TSA]

Wow, reaching much?

This goes right with the myth that Big Foot really exist.

And what study do you base your claim on? This article is third party looking at the Old Dominion study.

[Reck]

No surprise to ANYBODY. That's why they tried to hard to stop this. We knew, they knew, Trump knew.

Keep the pressure on, daddy!!!

If that was true, Trump wouldn't be where he's at right now, guaranteed.

He was thoroughly rejected by the elite..you know the people who would have control of counting them ballots.

Democracy saved Donald and you know it.

Also the fact that Hillary not only failed to not carry a 3 realibly blue states, she didn't even win one red one. That should tell you all you need to know about voter fraud.

[Kim Jong-il]

think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians

oh

[TSA]

If tahtw as true, Trump wouldn't be where he's at right now, guaranteed.

He was thoroughly rejected by the elite..you know the people who would have control of counting them ballots.

Democracy saved Donald and you know it.

Also the fact that Hillary not only failed to not carry a 3 realibly blue states, she didn't even win one red one. That should tell you all you need to know about voter fraud.

Your reply clearly shows you have not even read the study in question.

[rjv]

Wow, reaching much?

This goes right with the myth that Big Foot really exist. i think he's on that list of illegal voters.

[Reck]

And what study do you base your claim on? This article is third party looking at the Old Dominion study.

If you go finding what you want to find..you'll find it. You know this being the internet and all.

I didn't read all of that article but I read enough to know you should take this with a grain....a spoonful of salt. How many times do they need to say "just facts" to get their point across? Article is self defeating when you have to repeat something so many times over.

I'm not saying there isn't voter fraud and that it doesn't happen at all, but at this level? Fuck no.

You cant fake or hide this amount of illegal voting. It would take a massive and cohesive operation involving all 50 states to engage in illegal activity to pull it off. And even then, there is no way you can keep it quiet.

[Reck]

Your reply clearly shows you have not even read the study in question.

Part of it.

And an organization made up of conservatives and liberatarians isn't really independent. They even self described as such which already shows biased.

[rjv]

Part of it.

And an organization made up of conservatives and liberatarians isn't really independent. They even self described as such which already shows biased. i'll admit i stopped reading once i got to "independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians"

[Pavlov]

Next study say 10 million!

[boutons_deux]

in-person voter fraud claims will duel greater voter suppression of legit suppression

the oligarchy is solidifying its bloodless takeover, and it's unstoppable

[Adam Lambert]

i'll admit i stopped reading once i got to "independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians"

you should have stopped at "thread started by tsa"

[Thread]

in-person voter fraud claims will duel greater voter suppression of legit suppression

the oligarchy is solidifying its bloodless takeover, and it's unstoppable

Interesting, bouts,,,explain please. I ain't fuckin' around. I want to hear it.

[clambake]

they dried the fuckin' floor with those ballots

[TSA]

If you go finding what you want to find..you'll find it. You know this being the internet and all.

I didn't read all of that article but I read enough to know you should take this with a grain....a spoonful of salt. How many times do they need to say "just facts" to get their point across? Article is self defeating when you have to repeat something so many times over.

I'm not saying there isn't voter fraud and that it doesn't happen at all, but at this level? Fuck no.

You cant fake or hide this amount of illegal voting. It would take a massive and cohesive operation involving all 50 states to engage in illegal activity to pull it off. And even then, there is no way you can keep it quiet.

Just Facts is the name of the organization :lol

[ducks]

Take those illegal votes Trump wins the popular vote

[spurraider21]

Take those illegal votes Trump wins the popular vote
all the illegals voted for trump

they loved his taco bowl picture

hillary got robbed by illegal voters

[DMX7]

Washington Times. :lol

[pgardn]

caca...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

From the bio of the leader of Just Facts:


He is also the author of Rational Conclusions, a rigorously documented and acclaimed book evidencing factual support for the Bible across a broad array of academic disciplines.

[Adam Lambert]

From the bio of the leader of Just Facts:

:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin
:rollin

[spurraider21]

definitely has no axe to bring politically tbh

[TSA]

i'll admit i stopped reading once i got to "independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians"

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts/

[Quadzilla99]

Conservative study confirms conservative beliefs. More at 11..

[spurraider21]

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts/
so they're center right.

they have wapo and nyt as center left, but they're partisan biased fake news...

also something wrong with that site, they have fox as Right but i'm pretty sure they're fair and balance. they report, i decide.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

so they're center right.

they have wapo and nyt as center left, but they're partisan biased fake news...

also something wrong with that site, they have fox as Right but i'm pretty sure they're fair and balance. they report, i decide.

Once again dipshit did not even read his link:


In conclusion, while it is true that all the facts listed on JF are validated or peer-reviewed in some way, JF do not attempt to report a balanced view of the totality of information, they do not include information that disagrees with their preferred conclusions, and they present facts (especially time series) selectively in such a way that those very facts seem to support the opposite of what the full data really support

[boutons_deux]

criminalization, demonizing of non-citizens while preparing the ground for Kobach and red/slave states disenfranchise Ms of legit voters.

[boutons_deux]

Without identification, poor people stay in the shadows—and Republicans want it that way (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/19/1673183/-Without-identification-poor-people-stay-in-the-shadows-and-Republicans-want-it-that-way)

As of 2006, according to New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice,

up to 11 percent of U.S. adults had no government-provided photo ID.

Since then, federal requirements for IDs have grown tougher, contributing to a loop that can help keep people trapped in poverty.

For poor Americans, IDs are a lifeline — a key to unlocking services and opportunities, from housing to jobs to education. And in states with strict voter ID laws, the lack of an ID can hinder voting.

“This is a huge issue for people who are homeless and poor in general,” says Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty.

“Without an ID, basically you don’t exist.”

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/6/19/1673183/-Without-identification-poor-people-stay-in-the-shadows-and-Republicans-want-it-that-way?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos %29

[rjv]

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-facts/ are you referring to the #2 listed site on this piece? http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/phony-baloney-the-9-fakest-fake-news-checkers/

[RandomGuy]

Hows the investigation coming into these illegal votes TSA?

:lmao

[TSA]

so they're center right.

they have wapo and nyt as center left, but they're partisan biased fake news...

also something wrong with that site, they have fox as Right but i'm pretty sure they're fair and balance. they report, i decide.

I linked that to show the organization's factual reporting is shown as high.

And since pussy ass FuzzyLumpkins is too cowardly to debate me in person and would rather chirp up hidden behind the ignore feature please quote this for me.


Once again dipshit did not even read his link:

In conclusion, while it is true that all the facts listed on JF are validated or peer-reviewed in some way, JF do not attempt to report a balanced view of the totality of information, they do not include information that disagrees with their preferred conclusions, and they present facts (especially time series) selectively in such a way that those very facts seem to support the opposite of what the full data really support


Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote.

Just Facts’ conclusions confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: those who say it happens a lot and those who say the problem nonexistent.

In one camp, there are groundbreaking studies by professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia who attempted to compile scientifically derived illegal voting numbers using the Harvard data, called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.



On the other side are the professors who conducted the study and contended that “zero” noncitizens of about 18 million adults in the U.S. voted. The liberal mainstream media adopted this position and proclaimed the Old Dominion work was “debunked.”

[boutons_deux]

Hows the investigation coming into these illegal votes TSA?

:lmao

Kobach's Krew hasn't really gotten started, yet. The voter suppression will be UnPresidented

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/kris-kobach-king-voter-suppression-will-lead-trumps-sham-voter-fraud-commission-be

[TSA]

Hows the investigation coming into these illegal votes TSA?

:lmao

The investigation into these illegal votes has at least produced some results which makes it more successful than the investigation into Trump/Russia collusion :lmao

1 > 0 :lmao

[RandomGuy]

The investigation into these illegal votes has at least produced some results which makes it more successful than the investigation into Trump/Russia collusion :lmao

1 > 0 :lmao

It really gets under your skin that the Republican party picked the dumbest, crookedest motherfucker they could find and then elected him president, doesn't it?

[TSA]

It really gets under your skin that the Republican party picked the dumbest, crookedest motherfucker they could find and then elected him president, doesn't it?
You've been on a downward spiral since the election you needn't worry about what gets under my skin.

It really gets under you skin that the Democratic party picked a dumber, crookeder bitch that lost to Trump, doesn't it?

[Pavlov]

Democratic party*ding*

[RandomGuy]

You've been on a downward spiral since the election you needn't worry about what gets under my skin.

It really gets under you skin that the Democratic party picked a dumber, crookeder bitch that lost to Trump, doesn't it?

:lol

So predictable. I said to myself before opening the thread that your response would be to say something negative about me, and then something about Hillary.

Fuckin' a, I'm was right on all three accounts.

I know it bugs the shit out of you, because you can't admit it. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch that way.

I can say:

Hillary was a horrible candidate and more than a bit crooked, but you are constitutionally unable to really say how fucking stupid, crooked and incompetent Trump is.

That is how I will always be better than you, and I know that also bugs the shit out of you, because you love to mention how much I am "melting down" since the election. You get to feel better about yourself, even though you know on some level how dishonest you are being.

Your turn. Tell me something bad about me, avoid saying anything bad about Trump, and don't admit you can be wrong. Pavlov will ready his bell.

[TSA]

:lol

So predictable. I said to myself before opening the thread that your response would be to say something negative about me, and then something about Hillary.

Fuckin' a, I'm was right on all three accounts.

I know it bugs the shit out of you, because you can't admit it. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch that way.

I can say:

Hillary was a horrible candidate and more than a bit crooked, but you are constitutionally unable to really say how fucking stupid, crooked and incompetent Trump is.

That is how I will always be better than you, and I know that also bugs the shit out of you, because you love to mention how much I am "melting down" since the election. You get to feel better about yourself, even though you know on some level how dishonest you are being.

Your turn. Tell me something bad about me, avoid saying anything bad about Trump, and don't admit you can be wrong. Pavlov will ready his bell.

You're wound up again and not thinking clearly. You were right on one account, out of two, not three. You were correct I'd say something about Hillary, but I said nothing negative about you. Pointing our your meltdown isn't negative, it just is what it is.

Nothing that is said on a message board bugs the shit out of me, judging by your reactions here you honestly can not say the same for yourself.

I can say:

Trump was a horrible candidate and I didn't vote for him.

Now...I am better than you, because not only am I being honest but I'm not acting like a little bitch and melting down. I was the same poster before Trump won, and I am the same poster now. You on the other hand..... :lol

[Pavlov]

I said nothing negative about you...little bitch....:fishing

[FuzzyLumpkins]

TSA is retarded. He claims that there is no evidence of collusion with Russia yet Kushner, Flynn, and Manafort at the very least had relations including payments and loans that they lied about.

As far as we know there are no direct ties to Trump but that is besides the point and doesn't mean nothing will/has been found of that the obstruction case doesn't have teeth.

[TSA]

TSA is retarded. He claims that there is no evidence of collusion with Russia yet Kushner, Flynn, and Manafort at the very least had relations including payments and loans that they lied about.

As far as we know there are no direct ties to Trump but that is besides the point and doesn't mean nothing will/has been found of that the obstruction case doesn't have teeth.

:lol little bitch hiding behind the ignore feature

[RandomGuy]

you are constitutionally unable to really say how fucking stupid, crooked and incompetent Trump is.


I can say:

Trump was a horrible candidate

"horrible candidate" smh

I rest my case.

Trump is an idiot.

Trump is measurably more crooked than any Democrat, even Hillary.

Trump has weaponized lying, actively denying reality.

He is dangerous.

Yet you won't admit any of that, even though you didn't vote for him, as if he somehow deserves some sort of loyalty.

He doesn't, and he is dragging your ass down with him.

[TSA]

"horrible candidate" smh

I rest my case.

Trump is an idiot.

Trump is measurably more crooked than any Democrat, even Hillary.

Trump has weaponized lying, actively denying reality.

He is dangerous.

Yet you won't admit any of that, even though you didn't vote for him, as if he somehow deserves some sort of loyalty.

He doesn't, and he is dragging your ass down with him.

You should really take a break from posting here. Trump broke you.

[RandomGuy]

TSA is retarded. He claims that there is no evidence of collusion with Russia yet Kushner, Flynn, and Manafort at the very least had relations including payments and loans that they lied about.

As far as we know there are no direct ties to Trump but that is besides the point and doesn't mean nothing will/has been found of that the obstruction case doesn't have teeth.

It is kind of shocking.

There is no evidence in TSA's mind, but a number of people around Trump lied under oath about meeting high-ranking Russian officials and taking Russian money, either directly or indirectly.

Trump criticizes everyone, allies, enemies, former employees thrown under the bus, etc, including shockingly irresponsible assaults on the judiciary, free speech, and anything else that limits his power, with the sole exception of: Russia.

This pattern is a fact. Yet this is something that he can't bring himself to even admit.

That is not a hallmark of an honest dealer.

[RandomGuy]

You should really take a break from posting here. Trump broke you.


you are constitutionally unable to really say how fucking stupid, crooked and incompetent Trump is.

[RandomGuy]

Once again dipshit did not even read his link:


In conclusion, while it is true that all the facts listed on JF are validated or peer-reviewed in some way, JF do not attempt to report a balanced view of the totality of information, they do not include information that disagrees with their preferred conclusions, and they present facts (especially time series) selectively in such a way that those very facts seem to support the opposite of what the full data really support

That is pretty much most of the shit he reads.

It has juuust enough of a vaneer of credibility to seem worth taking at its face value, and he stops there. No critical thinking or analysis, no evaluating of sources.

Ask him a tough question about his material, and he shifts topics.

[Spurminator]

I read the study myself and I'd actually put potential illegal votes cast at between 16 and 90,000,000, based on my own reasoning from a series of complicated calculations that I stand by in the face of attacks from the left.

[RandomGuy]

I read the study myself and I'd actually put potential illegal votes cast at between 16 and 90,000,000, based on my own reasoning from a series of complicated calculations that I stand by in the face of attacks from the left.

I calculated the margin of sampling error in a more cautious way to ensure greater confidence in the results, and I used a slightly different methodology that I think is more accurate.

I came up with the number: pudding.

[TSA]

I read the study myself and I'd actually put potential illegal votes cast at between 16 and 90,000,000, based on my own reasoning from a series of complicated calculations that I stand by in the face of attacks from the left.

Well done. More accurate than the Harvard report.

[Pavlov]

I calculate error much cautiously with greatest big time confidence in results. My methodology super secret but perfect.

I came up number 65,853,516 illegal votes.

No one get more accurate.

[TSA]

I calculated the margin of sampling error in a more cautious way to ensure greater confidence in the results, and I used a slightly different methodology that I think is more accurate.

I came up with the number: RUSSIA.

should have gone with

[Joseph Kony]

TSA when washington post writes article he doesnt like: ":cry fake news :cry"
TSA when washington post writes article in line with viewpoint: "just facts!"

:lmao :lmao :lmao

[TSA]

TSA when washington post writes article he doesnt like: ":cry fake news :cry"
TSA when washington post writes article in line with viewpoint: "just facts!"

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Do you feel stupid when I tell you it was the Washington Times and not the Washington Post?

[Joseph Kony]

Do you feel stupid when I tell you it was the Washington Times and not the Washington Post?
:lmao :lmao

:cry its washington times not washington post, definitely not fake news! :cry

god you're a faggot

[Pavlov]

Do you feel stupid when I tell you it was the Washington Times and not the Washington Post?This distinction not help you.https://5j2014msconneally.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/moonies-wedding_24_2495630b.jpg

[TSA]

:lmao :lmao

:cry its washington times not washington post, definitely not fake news! :cry

god you're a faggot

learn to read

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I read the study myself and I'd actually put potential illegal votes cast at between 16 and 90,000,000, based on my own reasoning from a series of complicated calculations that I stand by in the face of attacks from the left.

:lol well played sir.