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?
Yes. We need to prevent it next Tuesday!
I would scrutinize the source!
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.
Perfect example of why we need voter ID!
No I'm from Illinois it's called the
Democrats how does it not concern you if its the truth? Because it's a win for you or you just don't care?
Because they believe only the academics who share their political views.
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.
I do not believe it's the truth.
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?
I don't believe it is true.
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.
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.
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).
This is just more illegal immigration hysteria.
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?
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!!"
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
You mean to tell me our horrible voter turn out is propped up by illegals? Shame on you more than I thought American citizens.
Round them up. Utilize them for mine clearing duties around the world.
"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."
...but it was an inappropriate sample to test such hypotheses.
you missed a bit.
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.
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."
There are many examples of studies with questionable methodology and debatable results that were published in peer-reviewed journals.
Yes. and editors know a controversial study is good for sales.
The reason Obama was elected was because many Republican Christians would not vote for Romney because he was a Mormon.
for a second I read that as "because he was a moron" hahaa
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.
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.
I thought it was the dead people that swing the vote for democrats.
Obama is to die for.
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.
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.
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?
So you're saying noncitizens became part of the electoral college?
That doesn't seem plausible
Noncitizens gave Obama enough votes to help him win states that should have gone to McCain.
The article will be published in the December issue of the journal Electoral Studies.