They Have Not Learned to Remain Silent Yet

[bodecea]

I am in earnest. We cannot let this uncertainty stand. I have contacted all my Representatives demanding that they demand a full Congressional investigation on this.

The States are in charge of voting on all levels. NOT the Federal goobermint.

Another victim of America's Public School system

Why don't you want an investigation of our Voting system? The *President does.

What are you afraid of?

 

[Syriusly]

PRESS: The election was hacked.

TRUMP: There was a lot of voter fraud.

PRESS: That’s ridiculous. Where’s your evidence? I demand an investigation!

TRUMP: Okay, we’ll do an investigation: President Donald Trump Vows to Launch ‘Major Investigation’ Into Alleged Voter Fraud.

Trump: 3 to 5 million votes were cast illegally which is why he lost the general election
Press: where is the proof? Are you going to investigate
Trump: Okay- we will do an investigation to try to find evidence for the fraud that I claimed happened- but didn't have evidence for.

 

[Syriusly]

I dount he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

And we all know there was voting fraud, this may be a rug you lefties wished had been left untouched.

And we all know that there is no evidence of the voter fraud that Trump claimed happened.

I welcome an investigation- we have a President whose modus operanda so far is to make a claim- and then suggest an investigation to find evidence to support his claim.

Hell we might find out that voter fraud is why Trump got his electoral votes.

I mean if they find any significant voter fraud at all.

 

[Syriusly]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

 

[jc456]

I doubt he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

dude the recount in Detroit already showed how they do it. do you need me to post those findings again that your side wanted checked out? I believe it was near 800 illegal votes. One fking city. Now going to california, that will be impressive I'm sure. Is that what you all really want is the proof of the statement? It was looked into in both previous presidential races.

 

[jc456]

I dount he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

The manhours to do that sort of investigation is extremely costly. These investigations have been done on a limited basis (in a specific county or area within a state) and such limited evidence of "illegal voting" has been found that the studies were not taken to the end.
Just to prove the bullshit of a vain old man who has no compunction about lying, when his popularity is at stake.
This is one taxpayer who says NO.

voting integrity is the backbone to a republic.

Yes. I'd just like to see SOME INDICATION that such an investigation is necessary.

How would you know before doing an investigation?

they have the huffington post to tell them so. huffington is the new father figure.

 

[jc456]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

but a factually correct asshole.

 

[jc456]

Maybe you and Trump should read this.

Voter fraud? Across U.S., officials find next to none - The Buffalo News

Trump's mega ego is at stake and really nothing else.

dude they found it in Detroit. one fking city ~ 800 votes.

 

[Syriusly]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

but a factually correct asshole.

No- just fact challenged ignorant right wing asshole.

He is your spiritual brother.

 

[jc456]

Trump's fragile ego can't handle he lost the popular vote. And that has led him to make the preposterous claim three million illegals voted.

If Clinton had won the popular vote by six million votes, Trump would be claiming six million illegals voted.

If three million illegals voted, this would have been caught immediately.

by whom? why didn't they catch the ~800 in Detroit?

 

[80zephyr]

I dount he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

When was the last POTUS to admit he was wrong while in office?

And we all know there was voting fraud, this may be a rug you lefties wished had been left untouched.

Actually, this will be fucking great. From now on when you rubes whine about voter fraud, we'll be able to point to this Trump investigation. Thanks Donnie!

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

Abstract
In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections. Although such participation is a violation of election laws in most parts of the United States, enforcement depends principally on disclosure of citizenship status at the time of voter registration. This study examines participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally representative sample that includes non-citizen immigrants. We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.


Mark

That study was deeply flawed.

See here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379415001420

The advent of large sample surveys, such as the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), has opened the possibility of measuring very low frequency events, characteristics, and behaviors in the population. This paper documents how low-level measurement error for survey questions generally agreed to be highly reliable can lead to large prediction errors in large sample surveys, such as the CCES. The example for this analysis is Richman et al. (2014), which presents 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.

And here: Methodological challenges affect study of non-citizens’ voting

And here: What can we learn about the electoral behavior of non-citizens from a survey designed to learn about citizens?

And here: Are non-citizens following American election laws?

I have been on forums a long time. Anyone who doesn't like a study cites just how "deeply flawed" it is. I already checked into the author, and they seem to be credible. I find it amazing that as a nation, while we rely on science to guide us, just how "deeply flawed" all these studies seem to be. The author admits there isn't much data, and more needs to be collected.

I guess the crux of the argument is that Trump(or some of us) are not nuts for bringing up the possibility of illegals voting.

Logic tells me that it is a virtual certainty that some numbers of illegals did vote, just based on human nature.

Mark

 

[jc456]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

but a factually correct asshole.

No- just fact challenged ignorant right wing asshole.

He is your spiritual brother.

maybe, but my mother always told me sticks and stones will break by bones but words will never hurt me. so, you want to call me an asshole I couldn't care less. The facts are the facts and rubbing facts into pukes like you is fun.

 

[80zephyr]

I dount he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

The manhours to do that sort of investigation is extremely costly. These investigations have been done on a limited basis (in a specific county or area within a state) and such limited evidence of "illegal voting" has been found that the studies were not taken to the end.
Just to prove the bullshit of a vain old man who has no compunction about lying, when his popularity is at stake.
This is one taxpayer who says NO.

voting integrity is the backbone to a republic.

Yes. I'd just like to see SOME INDICATION that such an investigation is necessary.

When voting is basically held by the "honor system", how would you know its necessary? Checking records AFTER a vote would be the only way to check, I would think.

Mark

 

[Syriusly]

Maybe you and Trump should read this.

Voter fraud? Across U.S., officials find next to none - The Buffalo News

Trump's mega ego is at stake and really nothing else.

dude they found it in Detroit. one fking city ~ 800 votes.

No- they didn't.

FACT CHECK: More Votes Than Voters in Detroit

 

[g5000]

I dount he'll concede anything when he's proven wrong

When was the last POTUS to admit he was wrong while in office?

And we all know there was voting fraud, this may be a rug you lefties wished had been left untouched.

Actually, this will be fucking great. From now on when you rubes whine about voter fraud, we'll be able to point to this Trump investigation. Thanks Donnie!

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

Abstract
In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections. Although such participation is a violation of election laws in most parts of the United States, enforcement depends principally on disclosure of citizenship status at the time of voter registration. This study examines participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally representative sample that includes non-citizen immigrants. We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.


Mark

That study was deeply flawed.

See here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379415001420

The advent of large sample surveys, such as the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), has opened the possibility of measuring very low frequency events, characteristics, and behaviors in the population. This paper documents how low-level measurement error for survey questions generally agreed to be highly reliable can lead to large prediction errors in large sample surveys, such as the CCES. The example for this analysis is Richman et al. (2014), which presents 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.

And here: Methodological challenges affect study of non-citizens’ voting

And here: What can we learn about the electoral behavior of non-citizens from a survey designed to learn about citizens?

And here: Are non-citizens following American election laws?

I have been on forums a long time. Anyone who doesn't like a study cites just how "deeply flawed" it is. I already checked into the author, and they seem to be credible. I find it amazing that as a nation, while we rely on science to guide us, just how "deeply flawed" all these studies seem to be. The author admits there isn't much data, and more needs to be collected.

I guess the crux of the argument is that Trump(or some of us) are not nuts for bringing up the possibility of illegals voting.

Logic tells me that it is a virtual certainty that some numbers of illegals did vote, just based on human nature.

Mark

I provided FOUR links which explain how the study was flawed. READ THEM, willfully blind monkey.

Speaking of logic, you seem to be lacking it. There is no way three million illegals could have voted and gone completely undetected as Trump and his Chumps are claiming.

 

[Syriusly]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

but a factually correct asshole.

No- just fact challenged ignorant right wing asshole.

He is your spiritual brother.

maybe, but my mother always told me bricks and bones will break by bones but words will never hurt me. so, you want to call me an asshole I couldn't care less. The facts are the facts and rubbing facts into pukes like you is fun.

The only 'facts' you know are the crap fed to you by Michael Savage and WND.

 

[80zephyr]

Maybe you and Trump should read this.

Voter fraud? Across U.S., officials find next to none - The Buffalo News

Trump's mega ego is at stake and really nothing else.

Who would be reporting this voter fraud? How would they know?

Mark

 

[g5000]

Trump's fragile ego can't handle he lost the popular vote. And that has led him to make the preposterous claim three million illegals voted.

If Clinton had won the popular vote by six million votes, Trump would be claiming six million illegals voted.

If three million illegals voted, this would have been caught immediately.

by whom? why didn't they catch the ~800 in Detroit?

How do you know there were ~800 illegal votes cast in Detroit if they went undetected?

D'oh!

By the way, what was detected was voting machines miscounted ballots. That does not necessarily mean there were illegal votes cast. It probably means the machines are defective and/or the operators of those machines were poorly trained, which frequently turns out to be the case.

 

[jc456]

dimocrap scum
They're scum. Just that fucking simple.t

And you are an asshole.

but a factually correct asshole.

No- just fact challenged ignorant right wing asshole.

He is your spiritual brother.

maybe, but my mother always told me bricks and bones will break by bones but words will never hurt me. so, you want to call me an asshole I couldn't care less. The facts are the facts and rubbing facts into pukes like you is fun.

The only 'facts' you know are the crap fed to you by Michael Savage and WND.

dude I research and form my own opinion. I don't need the likes of mike savage or anyone. I do enjoy listening to the hacks from the left on Tucker Carlson nightly though. What a bunch of fked up people. None of them can even back their own opinions. They deny they wrote them when he has their words in front of him. It's hilarious. I like it when cheats are caught. Now, as for facts, facts are quite difficult to come by. There are variances of the way things work. Let's debate some. you and me. What ya say. An honest debate, no name calling. can you do it?

 

[80zephyr]

When was the last POTUS to admit he was wrong while in office?

And we all know there was voting fraud, this may be a rug you lefties wished had been left untouched.

Actually, this will be fucking great. From now on when you rubes whine about voter fraud, we'll be able to point to this Trump investigation. Thanks Donnie!

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

Abstract
In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections. Although such participation is a violation of election laws in most parts of the United States, enforcement depends principally on disclosure of citizenship status at the time of voter registration. This study examines participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally representative sample that includes non-citizen immigrants. We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.


Mark

That study was deeply flawed.

See here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379415001420

The advent of large sample surveys, such as the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), has opened the possibility of measuring very low frequency events, characteristics, and behaviors in the population. This paper documents how low-level measurement error for survey questions generally agreed to be highly reliable can lead to large prediction errors in large sample surveys, such as the CCES. The example for this analysis is Richman et al. (2014), which presents 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.

And here: Methodological challenges affect study of non-citizens’ voting

And here: What can we learn about the electoral behavior of non-citizens from a survey designed to learn about citizens?

And here: Are non-citizens following American election laws?

I have been on forums a long time. Anyone who doesn't like a study cites just how "deeply flawed" it is. I already checked into the author, and they seem to be credible. I find it amazing that as a nation, while we rely on science to guide us, just how "deeply flawed" all these studies seem to be. The author admits there isn't much data, and more needs to be collected.

I guess the crux of the argument is that Trump(or some of us) are not nuts for bringing up the possibility of illegals voting.

Logic tells me that it is a virtual certainty that some numbers of illegals did vote, just based on human nature.

Mark

I provided FOUR links which explain how the study was flawed. READ THEM, willfully blind monkey.

Speaking of logic, you seem to be lacking it. There is no way three million illegals could have voted and gone completely undetected.

I read enough of them to know that if a person wanted to, they could commission a study to show how flawed the studies that showed the flaws were.

When studies collide, we are left with our own sense of self to determine the truth. I submit that illegals did vote. As to the number, I think we would find out after an investigation.

Mark