patrick.net

"Maybe that's what online fora end up being about, a 2D representation of partisan politics. People make obviously false assertions, then line up in factions; each side loves its own lies and hates the lies on the other side. The OP hasn't changed the thread title, even though he acknowledged it's false. I typed facts, yet someone Disliked my comment in which I disproved the OP headline. "Dislike facts that prove your side wrong! The Party and its Dear Leader must always be right! Prove your loyalty by lying for the Party!"

No, people disliked your comment because you are picking a nit and ignoring the point of the thread.

And the fact that it's a Fox News statistics means it's wrong. Fox just outright lies.

Also, "might have voted"? They don't even have the balls to say "did vote".

The word might makes the phrase that follows it meaningless. It's code for "this statement is true whether or not the conclusion is right because the statement is really A or NOT A and that's always true". So, it is a true statement that Donald Trump might have raped hundreds of babies while Republicans ravaged each other in a blood orgy.

It's reported elsewhere as well.

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

Obligatory:

zzyzzx says

It's reported elsewhere as well.

Any reputable source, i.e. one that isn't a debunk propaganda site caught repeatedly reporting lies or a front for a right-wing propaganda organization?

Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants. It was an accidental discovery from studying jury records. Juries are selected from people who vote. 3% of people selected Jury duty are not US citizens and are disqualified. Obama won by 1% in 2008. It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected.

"Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants. It was an accidental discovery from studying jury records. Juries are selected from people who vote. 3% of people selected Jury duty are not US citizens and are disqualified. Obama won by 1% in 2008. It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected."

Please cite the study and link it.

And juries are selected from people who register to vote--not from actual voters.

zzyzzx says

Government research has shown that at least 3% of voters are illegal immigrants.

Citation? And don't bother with Wikipropagandapedia.

zzyzzx says

It was the illegal immigrant vote that got him elected.

If Republicans didn't violate the right to vote of tens of millions of American citizens by directly targeting minority voters with anti-drug laws whose sole creation purpose was to purge the voter registration of political opponents, then Obama would have won by 20%.

If your team has prevented tens of millions of American citizens from voting, then you don't get to bitch and moan about the imaginary voting of illegal immigrants. If every American citizen who wanted to vote could vote, then Republicans would never win a national election. If Republicans didn't gerrymander the elections, then they would lose over half their votes in Congress. The amount of election fraud perpetrated by the Republican Party is outlandish and down right treasonous. It undermines the republic.

Oh, and don't even get me started on the outright, deliberate disregard of votes in the 2000 election that completely discredited our republic. That election was decided by a few Republican Party members, not by the electoral vote or the will of the people. So everything you say about illegal immigrants voting would still be utter hypocrisy even if it were true.

zzyzzx says

Government research has shown....

Please do cite and link.

Dan8267 says

tens of millions

Bad math day, apparently.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/issues/felony-disenfranchisement/

joeyjojojunior says

And juries are selected from

multiple databases including voter registration and government ID (e.g. driver's license, non-driver ID). Some jurisdictions allow illegal aliens to get driver's licenses, and most if not all allow resident visa holders to get driver's licenses. It wouldn't surprise me to learn some people show up in response to a jury notice and say they aren't citizens, but that doesn't mean they registered to vote, much less voted.

In any event, if Democrats actually cared about voting rights and making votes count, they would have done something when they had power in 2009-11. Even after that, they could have at least proposed a bipartisan combination
1) free ID for all;
2) require ID to vote;
3) nationwide standards including paper ballots and optical scan to ensure all votes get counted reliably.

They did none of that, and have instead been enacting NPVIC at the state level, subjecting their own states' actual human voters to easily hacked paperless machines in other states. Even with all their talk about Russia allegedly hacking, they've done nothing about NPVIC, which contains no provisions against fraud or hacking or other abuse.

curious2 says

Dan8267 says

tens of millions

Bad math day, apparently.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/issues/felony-disenfranchisement/

6.1 million today easily means tens of millions over half a century.

Dan8267 says

6.1 million

includes all living citizens who cannot vote due to a past felony conviction, including murderers currently incarcerated. Half a century ago, it was around 1 million.

curious2 says

In any event, if Democrats actually cared about voting rights and making votes count, they would have done something when they had power in 2009-11. Even after that, they could have at least proposed a bipartisan combination

As you have been told many times, they didn't really have power for 2 years, but regardless, that is poor logic. There is clearly a limit to how much can get done in Washington over a certain time period, and the amount of things Dems wanted to do was obviously greater than what could be accomplished over the time period. Especially when health care reform was at the top of the list. So, whatever you think of the final product of the health care reform act, it doesn't follow that because they focused on that act, it means they didn't care about anything else.

And a bipartisan combination? I don't think you're really this naïve.

joeyjojojunior says

As you have been told many times, they didn't really have power for 2 years....

LOL - I have indeed been told that many times, by delusional Democrats. That doesn't make it true, nor even plausible.

I guess in your mind, Republicans don't really have power now, so they can blame Democrats.

curious2 says

LOL - I have indeed been told that many times, by delusional Democrats, but that doesn't make it true, nor even plausible.

I guess in your world, Republicans don't really have power now, so they can blame Democrats.

No, I live in the real world.

joeyjojojunior says

No, I live in the real world.

Then please tell me how Democrats didn't have power in 2009-11, but Republicans do have power now.

curious2 says

Dan8267 says

6.1 million

includes all living citizens who cannot vote due to a past felony conviction, including murderers currently incarcerated.

The source says the 6.1 million figure is just for today and that's only for one kind of suppression, but in any case I'm not far off for a rough estimate. After all, I wasn't citing a statistic but giving the big picture as an order of magnitude and I'm not Google. But I will concede to overestimating the figure a bit. I was in the ballpark unlike the statistics that the conservative right makes up.

In any case, my point stands. Even with the very lowest estimate of six million votes suppressed, it demonstrates that the voter suppression by the Republican Party far outweighs any illegal votes by illegal immigrants. You just can't equate the two.

Dan8267 says

six million votes suppressed, it demonstrates that the voter suppression by the Republican Party

Only Republicans want to incarcerate murderers? And a Republican snuck into the WH and signed Clinton's drug laws while Clinton was busy with Monica?

curious2 says

Only Republicans want to incarcerate murderers? And a Republican snuck into the WH and signed Clinton's drug laws while Clinton was busy with Monica?

The War on Drugs was designed to suppress the vote.

Report: Aide says Nixon's war on drugs targeted blacks, hippies

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people," former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman told Harper's writer Dan Baum for the April cover story published Tuesday.

"You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

Nixon's Drug War, An Excuse To Lock Up Blacks And Protesters, Continues

The Drug War is the New Jim Crow

I could go on and on.

If you are trying to make the point that Democrats, including the Clintons, are also partly responsible for the travesty of justice call the war on drugs, then yes, that's true. But let's not pretend that Republican politicians didn't create, expand, and protect the war on drugs for the express purpose of suppressing votes.

And no one is saying that we shouldn't lock up murders, but I will say that everyone, even those serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole should have the right to vote. Ultimately, if all people do not have a right, then it is not a right, but a privilege, by definition. Voting should be a right, not a privilege. Our country should be founded on rights, not privileges.

You, of course, are free to disagree with this as it is a matter of principle, not objective reality. However, can you really make the case that the U.S. is the bastion of liberty and democracy if voting is a privilege?

Dan8267 says

can you really make the case

I would never make that case regardless of the vote, which NPVIC might render moot anyway. I lose patience with obvious falsehoods and blaming only ever the "other" party. And I'm still waiting on an answer from JJJr:

curious2 says

joeyjojojunior says

No, I live in the real world.

Then please tell me how Democrats didn't have power in 2009-11, but Republicans do have power now.

curious2 says

. I lose patience with obvious falsehoods and blaming only ever the "other" party.

I despise both parties. They are both corrupt. And I'll gladly blame them both.

However, it is disingenuous to state that both parties are equally to blame. One is a hell of a lot scarier than the other.

Dan8267 says

One is a hell of a lot scarier than the other.

Whichever one is in power, currently the Republicans. However, according to JJJr, they aren't really in power, because Democrats weren't really in power 2009-11. The Democrats' 2016 campaign promises (illegally shooting down Russian planes and killing Russians who are legally present in Syria) didn't reassure me at all.

Usually, I have higher hopes for Democrats, but they're clearly lost at the moment due to a surfeit of JJJr partisans who refuse to take responsiblity for their own policies, borrow&spend as badly as Republicans, and don't even attempt any sort of accountability. They're still going through the five stages of grieving the 2016 result, stuck at denial and anger ('we didn't lose, Russians stole it from us by telling everyone what we were actually saying among ourselves, Russia Russia Russia').

"Usually, I have higher hopes for Democrats, but they're clearly lost at the moment due to a surfeit of JJJr partisans who refuse to take responsiblity for their own policies, borrow&spend as badly as Republicans, and don't even attempt any sort of accountability. They're still going through the five stages of grieving the 2016 result, stuck at denial and anger ('we didn't lose, Russians stole it from us by telling everyone what we were actually saying among ourselves, Russia Russia Russia')."

I have no such high hopes for you and no desire to go down this rabbit hole again with you as I know how it will end after a bunch of back and forth about the filibuster rule and snarky comments from you. Probably a few more lies thrown in there as well.

Please continue to make hilarious jokes about how Dems are terrorist lovers--that is clearly helping to elevate the political discussion. Much better than trying to discover how a foreign government influenced our elections.

In reality, what the Dems should be learning is the extreme damage they face because they lost so many state legislatures. They need to start from the bottom and start winning local and state races. The gerrymandering really is killing them.

Dan8267 says

Free to all persons including the homeless and prisoners.

Homeless people get it in India...what's the rationale for prisoners?

https://www.google.com/amp/m.timesofindia.com/city/aurangabad/homeless-to-get-aadhaar-can-open-bank-a/cs/amp_articleshow/58368473.cms

MMR says

Homeless people get it in India...what's the rationale for prisoners?

1. There is no downside to having a secure national ID for prisoners. They need to be identified at least as much as non-prisoners and the main purpose of a secure national ID is to serve the interests of the state, not the individual.
2. If access to anything is predicated on identity, then prisoners should have the same national ID.
3. Most prisoners get released from prison. Having the national ID before being released would be important for many reasons including reintegrating prisoners into society.
4. Prisoners who are U.S. citizens of adult age absolutely should be allowed to vote. To say otherwise is to state unequivocally that voting should not be a right. Now you are free to hold such a belief, but you have an ethical obligation to be honest about it if you do. Historically, making voting a privilege has only resulted in bad things.

joeyjojojunior says

Probably a few more lies thrown in there as well.

The only one lying in this thread is you. Democrats had power from 2009-11, despite your denial. They did what they did, and were voted out of power. They could have done much better, but chose not to.

joeyjojojunior says

Dems are terrorist lovers....

Your words, not mine. Democrats insist on empowering and spreading a doctrine that commands believers to kill disbelievers, and strike terror into the enemies of Allah. I see what people say and do, but you can tell me how you feel about it: evidently you love it.

joeyjojojunior says

trying to discover how a foreign government influenced our elections.

That happened in plain sight. Hillary Clinton would never have got nominated without the help of her Saudi clients. Hillary's War in Libya and Syria would never have happened without her Saudi clients. Her campaign manager John Podesta hosted a fundraiser with his brother Tony Podesta, who is a registered foreign agent for Saudi Arabia.

If you're worried about foreign governments secretly hacking American elections, then demand Democrats repeal the NPVIC, or at least amend it to guard against hacking. Those paperless, proprietary machines are easily hacked, and leave no audit trail. Democrats pretend to care about counting every voter, but when they have power, they only make the situation worse.

zzyzzx says

The difference is that no one is trying to prevent citizens of legal age from doing any of the activities on the left. Now is Republicans passed a voter ID law that made it damn difficult, and in many cases impossible, to get the ID necessary to purchase beer or go see NASCAR, I bet there would be a lot of red necks grabbing their shotguns and heading down to the state capital.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/virginia-man-sent-jail-registering-dead-individuals-vote-dems-2016/
Virginia Man Sent to Jail for Registering Dead Individuals to Vote for Democrats in 2016

zzyzzx says

Virginia Man Sent to Jail for Registering Dead Individuals to Vote for Democrats in 2016

Congratulations, you found one kid not even out of school committing voter registration fraud. How many fraudulent votes were cast? Zero.

You know what's a bigger number than zero? 6.1 million. That's the lower-bound of living American citizens the GOP purged from the voting register for purely political reasons. So I'll give you a reduction of zero Democrat votes for an increase of 5.9 million Democrat votes and 0.2 million Republican votes. That will even things up.

Better yet, let's make voting compulsory for citizens over 18 and available at work. Then the GOP won't win any elections.

By the way, the Virginia man was sent to fail for 4 months. By that standard, the entire GOP from 2000 should be sentenced to 400 years in prison for the voter fraud they committed in that election.