Show of HandsShow of Hands

Arkansas123 October 29th, 2014 5:54pm

A forthcoming study finds that many noncitizens participated in the 2008 elections, thus increasing the number of electoral votes for Barack Obama and increasing the number of Democrats elected to Congress. Does this concern you?

14 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
10/30/14 3:36 am

Yes. We need to prevent it next Tuesday!

Reply
HappyLez No Worries... Be Happy
10/29/14 11:05 pm

"Forthcoming"
I would scrutinize the source!

pietsch Another Adoring Fan
10/29/14 9:28 pm

Even though it favored democrats, BOTH parties need to be concerned. We are accepting of election fraud now as long as it goes our way? Hope you'll like sharia law when it's someday our law, voted in by non-citizens intent on destroying our nation.

Reply
dogsaver new Jersey
10/29/14 8:47 pm

Perfect example of why we need voter ID!

Reply
jvc1133 61535
10/29/14 8:32 pm

No I'm from Illinois it's called the
"Chicago Effect"

jab87
10/29/14 8:11 pm

Democrats how does it not concern you if its the truth? Because it's a win for you or you just don't care?

Reply
Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 8:17 pm

Because they believe only the academics who share their political views.

brenstal Florida
10/29/14 8:34 pm

It would concern me if it's true, but I don't believe that the study is accurate, so I'll be concerned if later studies verify this.

jab87
11/02/14 5:14 am

You don't believe it's true or you choose to not believe its true because it hurts liberal existence and their ability to breed stupidity?

profligatesoul
10/29/14 8:09 pm

Lets just say screw it all and on the next presidential election send a ballot to everyone in the world postage paid with instructs to mail by 10/01 then on 11/30 all ballots received will be counted and blammo our next american president is picked.

profligatesoul
10/29/14 8:11 pm

Never mind, let's do like american idol but air the show worldwide and flash a number to text to vote open for the following 24 hours.

Zod Above Pugetropolis
10/29/14 8:09 pm

Too soon to tell. Maybe I should wait until the forthcoming study has actually cone forth to decide. From the abstract there's a guess (non-citizens vote in significant numbers), and pure speculation (how their imaginary votes are distributed).

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
10/29/14 7:57 pm

This is just more illegal immigration hysteria.

persuader
10/29/14 10:01 pm

Are you sure? Are you suggesting that there has never been a fraudulent vote cast?...by non-citizens?...the dead?...fictitious characters?...voting more than once?Is it possible for more votes to be cast in an area than there are registered voters?

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
10/29/14 10:31 pm

Do I think it happens? Yes. Do I believe it's possible? Yes. Do I think it's a problem of such epic proportion that we "run the Danger of Losing Our Country to Invaders OH MY GOD!! ACT NOW!!"

No.

persuader
10/29/14 7:44 pm

Why is it that Dems oppose voter ID? The affect is to facilitate those who otherwise cannot legitimately vote, ie. Non-citizens, the dead, & others who vote fast & often. To allow this to occur is treasonous. Uphold the constitution, friends.

Reply
brenstal Florida
10/29/14 6:56 pm

I think this study is interesting and need further research. It depended on self-reporting, and I don't think they were able to really verify the information they were getting. I don't think Obama got elected with illegal votes; he won by a lot.

brenstal Florida
10/29/14 6:57 pm

When I registered to vote, I had to give my SSN and I know they checked it because they originally rejected me. I had to call them and straighten it out. Maybe the SSN should be required?

brenstal Florida
10/29/14 7:01 pm

Wait, I just found out that this is based on internet surveys done by YouGov. I've done YouGov surveys, and it is not scientifically rigorous. I think it goes by a point system, and some people probably don't read the questions.

brenstal Florida
10/29/14 7:06 pm

Like, internet surveys can be handy, but I think they're a lot less accurate than in person surveys. It's also very self-selective. I really don't trust these results, and I would prefer more rigorous methodology.

ThomasK
10/29/14 6:32 pm

I didn't see any real proof, and I certainly didn't see any proof that non-citizens swayed any significant elections, or that there's any indication what percentage of non-citizens voted Democrat.

Reply
Injectable Mojave Mo Problems
10/29/14 6:26 pm

You mean to tell me our horrible voter turn out is propped up by illegals? Shame on you more than I thought American citizens.

Reply
lip massholevania
10/29/14 6:22 pm

Round them up. Utilize them for mine clearing duties around the world.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 5:56 pm

"My quick analysis does not at all disprove Richman et al's conclusion that a large enough number of non-citizens are voting in elections to tip the balance for Democrats in very close races."

eLucidate writing
10/29/14 6:41 pm

...but it was an inappropriate sample to test such hypotheses.

you missed a bit.

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
10/29/14 8:01 pm

It's called selective information gathering elucidate. Hysterical fear mongers use it to generate support for positions that would otherwise be dismissed for the ludicrous claptrap that they are.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 8:16 pm

You can question the methodology and call for further research, but I would hardly criticize a study in a peer-reviewed academic journal as "hysterical" and "ludicrous."

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
10/30/14 5:52 am

There are many examples of studies with questionable methodology and debatable results that were published in peer-reviewed journals.

eLucidate writing
10/30/14 6:15 am

Yes. and editors know a controversial study is good for sales.

GlockMan1 Alabama
10/29/14 11:55 am

The reason Obama was elected was because many Republican Christians would not vote for Romney because he was a Mormon.

Reply
missmorganmarie ...
10/29/14 11:58 am

for a second I read that as "because he was a moron" hahaa

Rotavele Alabama
10/29/14 5:59 pm

I read it as Muslim. I spend too much time in right winged polls :/.

Also it's sad that people are so judge mental they literally let their vote go based on people's religion. That's disgusting.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 6:20 pm

I disagree. Voters should cast their ballots based on candidates' views. For many voters, a candidate's views in matters of religion are important.

It's no different from placing value on any other issues: fiscal views, foreign policy views, etc.

TheCameron UCF
10/29/14 11:12 am

I thought it was the dead people that swing the vote for democrats.

Reply
Rotavele Alabama
10/29/14 5:59 pm

Obama is to die for.

TomM
10/29/14 11:10 am

Do you have access to read the full article. Does it say anything specific about how they got the data and that conclusion. I cannot read much here.

Reply
Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 11:17 am

The full article comes out in December; only the abstract is available right now. The social scientists got their data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Survey.

projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces/home

musiman28 Cotton country
10/29/14 10:59 am

Oh come on. You know voter I'd laws are racist and there's no voter fraud. Isn't that the normal Liberal line whenever you mention it?

Reply
Statek Im from the Internet
10/29/14 10:55 am

So you're saying noncitizens became part of the electoral college?
That doesn't seem plausible

Reply
Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 10:57 am

Noncitizens gave Obama enough votes to help him win states that should have gone to McCain.

Arkansas123 Neoconservative
10/29/14 10:55 am

The article will be published in the December issue of the journal Electoral Studies.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973