GrumpyCatFace wrote:
I'm rejecting it because it barely qualifies as 'clickbait-quality' journalism. No statistician with a brain is going to bother posting a 10:1 margin of error - I don't even know how many deviations that would be on a bell curve lmao
Also, you're assuming that 500,000 plus "illegals" voted uniformly for Hillary. And, as I've said all along, I show ID every time I vote, so I have no idea where or how this would be happening.
el paso. no id check whatsoever.
and you can't read well. it was a 5% margin on one point and an 8% margin on the other. self reported studies are done all the time as they are cheaper and faster than more stringent methods, and they compensate for the lack of accuracy by allowing larger margins than other methods. everyone knows they aren't the most accurate, especially when you're asking people to admit to breaking the law. the margin is completely reasonable given the known shortcomings of self reporting.
where you would have a better argument is if there was a self reported study that asserted a narrow and certain result.
Well then we can agree that this nonsensical number is not worth freaking out about then.
About El Paso though, what's to stop anyone from going in 5 times and voting all over the place? Sounds like a broken system in the first place, not 'a problem with illegals'.
but but but, I thought the there was nothing wrong with the voting system.
and no, the numbers gathered from asking people to admit to it are probably around the mark. 95% accuracy that it's somewhere between a half million and five and half million. Scientists use a similar method to determine things like the Fermi window. 95% percent accuracy that we are somewhere within a window of opportunity spanning millions of years. It looks less useless when you factor in that that window exists on a span of billions of years.
.5 to 5.5 million looks more precise when you realize the spectrum stretches from zero to two hundred million.
A window five million voters wide out of two hundred million eligible voters makes up two and half percent. That's not a shotgun spread.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Well then we can agree that this nonsensical number is not worth freaking out about then.
No, we can't. I and others have already stated that even at the lowest point this is an issue.
I'm in favor of ID for voting, and have been from the start. But that's not the same thing as a mass expulsion of illegals and building multi-trillion dollar walls that won't work.
Even when I voted in Florida, I had to be looked up on a checklist of eligible voters for the precinct. It wasn't just a line straight to the polling booth.
So then, the question becomes - has anyone on the forum ever voted without their name and info being recorded, or looked up on a list? Are there just voting booths standing unguarded for anyone to walk up?
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Well then we can agree that this nonsensical number is not worth freaking out about then.
No, we can't. I and others have already stated that even at the lowest point this is an issue.
I'm in favor of ID for voting, and have been from the start. But that's not the same thing as a mass expulsion of illegals and building multi-trillion dollar walls that won't work.
Even when I voted in Florida, I had to be looked up on a checklist of eligible voters for the precinct. It wasn't just a line straight to the polling booth.
So then, the question becomes - has anyone on the forum ever voted without their name and info being recorded, or looked up on a list? Are there just voting booths standing unguarded for anyone to walk up?
It doesn't matter if no one checks the id to verify the name you give.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
PartyOf5 wrote:
No, we can't. I and others have already stated that even at the lowest point this is an issue.
I'm in favor of ID for voting, and have been from the start. But that's not the same thing as a mass expulsion of illegals and building multi-trillion dollar walls that won't work.
Even when I voted in Florida, I had to be looked up on a checklist of eligible voters for the precinct. It wasn't just a line straight to the polling booth.
So then, the question becomes - has anyone on the forum ever voted without their name and info being recorded, or looked up on a list? Are there just voting booths standing unguarded for anyone to walk up?
It doesn't matter if no one checks the id to verify the name you give.
However it does prevent double-voting, and requires that a scammer has someone else's name and address AND knows that they won't vote.
Easy enough for a few people, but not large-scale fraud, and certainly not worth the risk for illegals to do on their own.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:
I'm in favor of ID for voting, and have been from the start. But that's not the same thing as a mass expulsion of illegals and building multi-trillion dollar walls that won't work.
Even when I voted in Florida, I had to be looked up on a checklist of eligible voters for the precinct. It wasn't just a line straight to the polling booth.
So then, the question becomes - has anyone on the forum ever voted without their name and info being recorded, or looked up on a list? Are there just voting booths standing unguarded for anyone to walk up?
My mother was still on the voter registration list after she had passed away. At that time you didn't need an ID. Anyone could have walked in, said they were her, and voted.
