5 ms·

Wait, so an outlet which is openly at odds with the current administration performed an investigation into claims made by the current administration, found the

Wait, so an outlet which is openly at odds with the current administration performed an investigation into claims made by the current administration, found the claims to be false, and we're just going to take the conclusion at face value? Nevermind the fact that this was conducted by journalists (i.e. non specialists who have a propensity for misreporting technical information). Conspiracy theory...what a convenient dismissal of a potentially genuine problem. All of our institutions are rife with abuse but we're supposed to believe voter fraud doesn't exist because WAPO says it doesn't and, more importantly, because Trump said it does... Edit: and they apparently looked at 3 states. Unqualified journalists should stay away from statistics or "fact checking" - at this point they are actively harming society with their piss poor, agenda driven "analyses".

tzs 6y ago
> Edit: and they apparently looked at 3 states. Unqualified journalists should stay away from statistics or "fact checking" - at this point they are actively harming society with their piss poor, agenda driven "analyses" Those are the 3 biggest states of the 5 that use primarily vote by mail. They contain ~80% of the vote by mail population.
- mtgp1000 6y ago
  >The figure reflects cases referred to law enforcement agencies in five elections held in Colorado, Oregon and Washington, where all voters proactively receive ballots in the mail for every election. Oh I see, well, clearly, if officials aren't reporting on it then it's not happening. Wapo and blue check marks make it official. This logic isn't sound but people are happy to swallow hole anything anti-trump. Edit: not to mention Colorado, Washington, and Oregon probably don't harbor anywhere near the same number of illegal immigrants as do states like California and Texas where this would be more of a concern. In fact this whole debate is framed illegitimately. States like California automatically register voters when they receive IDs, they allow noncitizens of any legal status to obtain IDs, and we're supposed to pretend this isn't an avenue for illegal voting? Who's going to report these votes if they ostensibly conform to the California rules? But don't worry, Wapo and Huffpo will run their "analyses" and everything will come back squeaky clean. We all need to hold all of our sources accountable and examine them critically, even when they tell us what we want to hear.
  - triceratops 6y ago
    > States like California automatically register voters when they receive IDs, they allow noncitizens of any legal status to obtain IDs, and we're supposed to pretend this isn't an avenue for illegal voting? Citation required. The California DMV's own website utterly contradicts what you say: "The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is permitted to issue a driver license (DL) or identification card (ID) to an applicant who submits satisfactory proof that the applicant’s presence in the United States (U.S.) is authorized under federal law...DMV will not let you start a DL/ID card application unless you present your social security number (SSN) and your valid BD (birthdate)/LP (legal presence) document...DMV will mail your photo DL/ID card after all tests and requirements have been met and USCIS has verified your legal presence status. "[1] On a personal level, I know friends who suddenly couldn't drive because their visa expired, even though they were still in legal status while they awaited renewal. Because their license was set to expire the same day as the visa/I94. That's how hard-assed they are about it. (Btw, that's an additional non-citizen "tax" - having to renew your driver's license every 2-3 years, instead of 5 years like a citizen or permanent resident). So definitely people without legal status can't register to vote this way. How many people with legal status do you think are going to try doing this? Like they went to all this trouble to come to the US legally, and now they'll commit a crime that has very little payoff for them personally and very high risk if they're caught? Remember these are people with a legal presence: they have jobs, USCIS knows where they live, they've been fingerprinted when applying for a visa, they're in the system. Are there FB/WhatsApp groups of non-citizens in legal status coordinating this stuff? Has anyone been arrested for this? Surely if it's going on for so long and at such a scale someone should have been caught right? Where are your sources? 1. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/educational-materials/fast-facts/limited-term-for-legal-presence-ffdl-32/ https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/ed...
    - mtgp1000 6y ago
      From Snopes, which generously labels this as "mixture" (because it is also dominated by partisan ideologues) >Some 605,000 undocumented immigrants who live in California were granted driver’s licenses in 2015...took effect on January 2, 2015...(DMV) expects a total of about 1.4 million people will get their license under the law by late 2017. And here's the fun part >That announcement renewed interest in another California law, the “New Motor Voter Act,” which was passed in October 2015. The combination of these two acts, one allowing undocumented residents to obtain driver’s licenses, the other automatically registering citizens to vote when obtaining driver’s licenses, sparked fears (which have been periodically resurrected for more than a decade) that California was allowing undocumented residents to vote. Oh, but don't worry, because as you also indirectly point out: >The law requires that applicants under the Motor Voter Act attest that they meet all voter registration requirements, but critics maintain that the law “lacks the necessary safeguards to keep noncitizens off the voter rolls.” Which is a winded way of saying these illegal immigrants are bound by their honor to opt out of voter registration and/or not go out and use their IDs [and default registration] to vote. So despite the downvotes, I'm not the one who has fallen victim to propaganda here. And the same incentive responsible for this kind of blatantly incorrect citogenesis gives cause to people to risk illegally voting against a man who has been painted by this same media as a literal far right white supremacist. And what risk is there, when media and fact check outlets create citations which allow politicians to claim that this isn't a problem, while potentially benefiting from it? Also I don't appreciate that you've conflated legal and illegal immigration, though in both cases there is clearly potential for abuse. Under Cuomo a similar motor voter law was passed by the way. The Wapo "study" is intentionally myopic. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-motor-voter-act/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-motor-voter-act...
ipnon 6y ago
What makes the study invalid in your view aside from being published by the Washington Post?
- mtgp1000 6y ago
  First off, this isn't a "study", the vast majority of journalists are non-technical people with limited understanding of statistics or science. Second, they looked at 3 states out of 50. Yes I understand that's where the majority of mail in voting happens currently. That's about to change. Third, they ignored states with larger populations of illegal immigrants. Fourth, they ignored opt out motor voter laws which, combined with laws which give illegals drivers licenses (in at least 2 states currently) and automatically register them to vote unless they opt out. Long story short, wapo found what it wanted find, consumers read what they wanted to read.
  - ipnon 6y ago
    I wanted to investigate this idea that states with larger populations of illegal immigrants would be more prone to voter fraud. I searched for "how many illegal immigrants voted in 2016." I can't find results suggesting widespread voter fraud anywhere in the United States. The Heritage Foundation discovered about 9,000 duplicate votes throughout the country.[0] ICE indicted 19 foreign nationals for voting illegally in 2016.[1] [0] https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-r... [1] https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/19-foreign-nationals-indicted-illegally-voting-2016-elections https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/19-foreign-nationals-indic...

tzs 6y ago

> Edit: and they apparently looked at 3 states. Unqualified journalists should stay away from statistics or "fact checking" - at this point they are actively harming society with their piss poor, agenda driven "analyses" Those are the 3 biggest states of the 5 that use primarily vote by mail. They contain ~80% of the vote by mail population.

mtgp1000 6y ago
>The figure reflects cases referred to law enforcement agencies in five elections held in Colorado, Oregon and Washington, where all voters proactively receive ballots in the mail for every election. Oh I see, well, clearly, if officials aren't reporting on it then it's not happening. Wapo and blue check marks make it official. This logic isn't sound but people are happy to swallow hole anything anti-trump. Edit: not to mention Colorado, Washington, and Oregon probably don't harbor anywhere near the same number of illegal immigrants as do states like California and Texas where this would be more of a concern. In fact this whole debate is framed illegitimately. States like California automatically register voters when they receive IDs, they allow noncitizens of any legal status to obtain IDs, and we're supposed to pretend this isn't an avenue for illegal voting? Who's going to report these votes if they ostensibly conform to the California rules? But don't worry, Wapo and Huffpo will run their "analyses" and everything will come back squeaky clean. We all need to hold all of our sources accountable and examine them critically, even when they tell us what we want to hear.
- triceratops 6y ago
  > States like California automatically register voters when they receive IDs, they allow noncitizens of any legal status to obtain IDs, and we're supposed to pretend this isn't an avenue for illegal voting? Citation required. The California DMV's own website utterly contradicts what you say: "The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is permitted to issue a driver license (DL) or identification card (ID) to an applicant who submits satisfactory proof that the applicant’s presence in the United States (U.S.) is authorized under federal law...DMV will not let you start a DL/ID card application unless you present your social security number (SSN) and your valid BD (birthdate)/LP (legal presence) document...DMV will mail your photo DL/ID card after all tests and requirements have been met and USCIS has verified your legal presence status. "[1] On a personal level, I know friends who suddenly couldn't drive because their visa expired, even though they were still in legal status while they awaited renewal. Because their license was set to expire the same day as the visa/I94. That's how hard-assed they are about it. (Btw, that's an additional non-citizen "tax" - having to renew your driver's license every 2-3 years, instead of 5 years like a citizen or permanent resident). So definitely people without legal status can't register to vote this way. How many people with legal status do you think are going to try doing this? Like they went to all this trouble to come to the US legally, and now they'll commit a crime that has very little payoff for them personally and very high risk if they're caught? Remember these are people with a legal presence: they have jobs, USCIS knows where they live, they've been fingerprinted when applying for a visa, they're in the system. Are there FB/WhatsApp groups of non-citizens in legal status coordinating this stuff? Has anyone been arrested for this? Surely if it's going on for so long and at such a scale someone should have been caught right? Where are your sources? 1. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/educational-materials/fast-facts/limited-term-for-legal-presence-ffdl-32/ https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/driver-education-and-safety/ed...
  - mtgp1000 6y ago
    From Snopes, which generously labels this as "mixture" (because it is also dominated by partisan ideologues) >Some 605,000 undocumented immigrants who live in California were granted driver’s licenses in 2015...took effect on January 2, 2015...(DMV) expects a total of about 1.4 million people will get their license under the law by late 2017. And here's the fun part >That announcement renewed interest in another California law, the “New Motor Voter Act,” which was passed in October 2015. The combination of these two acts, one allowing undocumented residents to obtain driver’s licenses, the other automatically registering citizens to vote when obtaining driver’s licenses, sparked fears (which have been periodically resurrected for more than a decade) that California was allowing undocumented residents to vote. Oh, but don't worry, because as you also indirectly point out: >The law requires that applicants under the Motor Voter Act attest that they meet all voter registration requirements, but critics maintain that the law “lacks the necessary safeguards to keep noncitizens off the voter rolls.” Which is a winded way of saying these illegal immigrants are bound by their honor to opt out of voter registration and/or not go out and use their IDs [and default registration] to vote. So despite the downvotes, I'm not the one who has fallen victim to propaganda here. And the same incentive responsible for this kind of blatantly incorrect citogenesis gives cause to people to risk illegally voting against a man who has been painted by this same media as a literal far right white supremacist. And what risk is there, when media and fact check outlets create citations which allow politicians to claim that this isn't a problem, while potentially benefiting from it? Also I don't appreciate that you've conflated legal and illegal immigration, though in both cases there is clearly potential for abuse. Under Cuomo a similar motor voter law was passed by the way. The Wapo "study" is intentionally myopic. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-motor-voter-act/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-motor-voter-act...

ipnon 6y ago

What makes the study invalid in your view aside from being published by the Washington Post?

mtgp1000 6y ago
First off, this isn't a "study", the vast majority of journalists are non-technical people with limited understanding of statistics or science. Second, they looked at 3 states out of 50. Yes I understand that's where the majority of mail in voting happens currently. That's about to change. Third, they ignored states with larger populations of illegal immigrants. Fourth, they ignored opt out motor voter laws which, combined with laws which give illegals drivers licenses (in at least 2 states currently) and automatically register them to vote unless they opt out. Long story short, wapo found what it wanted find, consumers read what they wanted to read.
- ipnon 6y ago
  I wanted to investigate this idea that states with larger populations of illegal immigrants would be more prone to voter fraud. I searched for "how many illegal immigrants voted in 2016." I can't find results suggesting widespread voter fraud anywhere in the United States. The Heritage Foundation discovered about 9,000 duplicate votes throughout the country.[0] ICE indicted 19 foreign nationals for voting illegally in 2016.[1] [0] https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/new-r... [1] https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/19-foreign-nationals-indicted-illegally-voting-2016-elections https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/19-foreign-nationals-indic...