On Trial: There is Evidence to Back (At Least Some of) Trump’s Illegal Voting Claims

So there you have it voter fraud deniers a very credible study one that meets the standard so to be used in a court of law as evidence says over one million non citizens voted

 

Ayuh,.... Voter fraud is rampant up here in the Kingdom of Cuomo,....

Even in the tiny shiphole town I live in, there was a progressive that voted Twice, 'n caught,...
Yet nothin's been done 'bout it,.....

 

Yeah, this all looks like it is based on the flawed internet questionnaire that was completely debunked later. It is based entirely on whether or not someone clicked a checkbox at the end of the survey saying that they were a non-citizen. Anyone with a UX background can see what's wrong with that sort of "methodology." When the survey participants were interviewed later, it turned out that no one could find any non-citizens that had actually voted.

 

You've got about 2.3 Million more to go.

Hang in there.

I'm sure alternative facts will crop up somewhere, on some blog.

 

Two years in a row, clickin the wrong legal status... yup. A million or so folks unaware that they are indeed citizens. Thats the ticket...

Can you show me that that is the basis of this?

 

People click the wrong box all of the time. I literally deal with it every day at work.The thing is that the researchers when back to verify and didn't find any evidence that any illegal immigrants had actually voted.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-trump-wrongly-says-14-percent-noncitizens-a/

Harvard (the source of the original data) says that the data does not support the claims being made.

 

Another bit rebutting the very study mentioned:
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/10/trumps-bogus-voter-fraud-claims/

 

best you go back and read the standards this study has reached


The best study on the subject — a study that meets the Daubert standards for admissible evidence in a jury trial in a legal courtroom — provides substantial evidence that non-citizen voting alone likely reached over a million in this election. (*)A trio of well-regarded scholars used scientifically approved methods to study the question of non-citizen voting in federal elections. The result of their study published in one of the best-regarded peer-review political science journals, Electoral Studies


Daubert Standard

Standard used by a trial judge to make a preliminary assessment of whether an expert’s scientific testimony is based on reasoning or methodology that is scientifically valid and can properly be applied to the facts at issue. Under this standard, the factors that may be considered in determining whether the methodology is valid are*)(1) whether the theory or technique in question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential error rate; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Daubert standard is the test currently used in the federal courts and some state courts. (*)In the federal courts, it replaced the Frye standard. (*)


now please provide the source that claims this study is faulty and if the source meets the same standard as this study

 

That could never happen that someone would click or check such a box incorrectly.

Oh wait, I accidently did the same thing not 2 weeks ago when renewing my license, because in my haste I read the small text at the end of the renewal form "Are you a US citizen". I checked yes. What is actually said was "Are you a non-US citizen". The nice woman at the counter caught it and we had a chuckle and changed it.

 

aww the discredit Politifacts the site that called "If you like your plan you can keep your plan" true then a year later called it the lie of the year. like they are creditable

- - - Updated - - -

The best study on the subject — a study that meets the Daubert standards for admissible evidence in a jury trial in a legal courtroom — provides substantial evidence that non-citizen voting alone likely reached over a million in this election. (*)A trio of well-regarded scholars used scientifically approved methods to study the question of non-citizen voting in federal elections. The result of their study published in one of the best-regarded peer-review political science journals, Electoral Studies


Daubert Standard

Standard used by a trial judge to make a preliminary assessment of whether an expert’s scientific testimony is based on reasoning or methodology that is scientifically valid and can properly be applied to the facts at issue. Under this standard, the factors that may be considered in determining whether the methodology is valid are*)(1) whether the theory or technique in question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential error rate; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Daubert standard is the test currently used in the federal courts and some state courts. (*)In the federal courts, it replaced the Frye standard. (*)



what standard did Factcheck.org meet? was it peer reviewed?

 

The authors of the Harvard research that this entire thing is based on disagree. Contrary to conspiracy theories, checkboxes are indeed fallible interactions that don't always accurately convey user intent. Ask literally anyone who works in UX. Hell, ask literally anyone if they have checked a box without reading it thoroughly.

 

Correcting mistakes is typically a good thing. You do realize that every reputable publication has had to publish a retraction at some point in time, right? Regardless, attacking this source doesn't change the facts it contains.

 

this study is about VOTING not registering to vote
and even if it based on registering to vote all scientific study especially ones that are peer reviewed and meet the Daubert Standard calculates human error in their studies and from memory the average human rate of error like checking a box is about .06%

 

I'm not vouching for the veracity, it provides multiple sources critiquing the study you cite, you may read them yourself and make your own fully informed judgment.

Also, I am the last one to criticize a source, since I acknowledge that past bias and error does not immediately make the current information wrong, nor does peer-review make something right.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/

 

The people who actually collected the data said that their method here was flawed and they later confirmed it was flawed by double-checking with the survey participants.

.06%? Every time I run a user research study (typically 6 people), I have at least one person check a box without reading it thoroughly. This is a common problem.

 

And how many of these "illegal" voters voted for Trump?

 

Trump knows there is voter fraud. Steve Bannon, who was caught being registered to vote in two states, told him there was.



Steve Bannon Is Registered to Vote in Two States (Update: So Is Tiffany Trump)

How embarrassing.

When can we expect Steve Bannon to resign? What's that? His name doesn't sound "brown" enough to pursue legal action?

Watch as Trump Chumps backpedal on the importance of it in this case.

 

" We think"

Great evidence.. Come on man... Nice race baiting btw.

 

TrumpCo needs to be careful. Most voter fraud occurs via absentee ballots. A process dominated by Republicans across the country.

 

Here's the rub. Trump claims millions of illegals voted. The left claims illegal voting only happens on a small scale and is of little consequence.

So I'm forced to ask the people against voter ID laws, "how many illegal votes are acceptable?"

What is the magical arbitrary number?

 

The only 3 instances of voter fraud in the election were from trump supporters.

 

Citation....

 

I checked a couple pages of wrong boxes on a form from work recently, and nearly threw away my health & life insurance.

 

We actually have an election problem that's worse than voter fraud.

The next time you're flipping through the TV dial and stumble upon professional wrestling........stop for a moment and watch the crowd. Then remind yourself, "they get to vote".

Bush, Obama, Trump..............it's the only way it all makes sense.

 

funny how when Jill Stein was spending 2 million dollars to try and prove voter Fraud not only the left but Hillary herself got on board.

Hypocrisy disqualifies you from all that follows.
Liberals have lost their way and seek and destroy is the tactic of the day, and it too will grow tired, just like their million woman march, just like the Black Lives Matter, just like occupy wall street.
All a waste of energy, and frankly comical.