President Hillary Rodham Clinton

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

So up to 5 million illegals voted in 2008, and it probably had no effect in 2016 when Trump was running on a platform of shipping their freeloading asses back to the third world.

Right..

Oh, and didn't states like California make it even easier for these people to vote since 2008?


Get out of here. Get out. You fucking loon.

At least wait until Trump's commission on illegal voting reaches those conclusions before you start rollin' them eyes or they will be stuck like that before October boss.

[Speaker to Animals]

LOL

You guys are really dead-set on killing yourselves, politically.

The democrats could easily snatch the vote integrity issue from the GOP. But they won't.

Stupid is as stupid does..

[SuburbanFarmer]

After all, recent studies indicate that between 0 and 5 billion people believe that the earth is flat.

[Okeefenokee]

JustFacts.com, an independent think tank, did some serious number crunching on immigration to the U.S. and said this about the 2008 election:

Based on:

the number of non-citizens in this poll,[1002] the margin of sampling error for their self-declared voting is ± 5 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1003] [1004] [1005]
the number of non-citizens in this poll who were in the database,[1006] the margin of sampling error for their undeclared voting is ± 8 percentage points with at least 95% confidence.[1007] [1008] [1009]
these study results and Census Bureau population estimates, 594,000 to 5.7 million non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 election.[1010] [1011]

http://www.dailywire.com/news/17769/tru ... oseph-curl


Sorry, did CNN not tell you about this?


That was just the 2008 election. Would less illegal immigrants vote in the 2016 election in which one of the candidates explicitly vowed to deport their criminal asses back to wherever they came from?

LMFAO Not much difference there.. just a zero or two.

less than one order of magnitude, due largely to it being self-reported.

[SuburbanFarmer]

http://www.dailywire.com/news/17769/tru ... oseph-curl


Sorry, did CNN not tell you about this?


That was just the 2008 election. Would less illegal immigrants vote in the 2016 election in which one of the candidates explicitly vowed to deport their criminal asses back to wherever they came from?

LMFAO Not much difference there.. just a zero or two.

less than one order of magnitude, due largely to it being self-reported.

Tfw someone minimizes an order of magnitude in polling data

IMG_1766.PNG

[Okeefenokee]

it's a self reported poll. they accounted for the inherent lack of accuracy therein.

even at the very lowest end, if nothing changed since then, hilary lost the popular vote. that's why you're rejecting it.

[SuburbanFarmer]

it's a self reported poll. they accounted for the inherent lack of accuracy therein.

even at the very lowest end, if nothing changed since then, hilary lost the popular vote. that's why you're rejecting it.

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.

[Speaker to Animals]

LMFAO

Did they vote Trump for a free bus ticket back to Tabasco?

[Okeefenokee]

it's a self reported poll. they accounted for the inherent lack of accuracy therein.

even at the very lowest end, if nothing changed since then, hilary lost the popular vote. that's why you're rejecting it.

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.

[SuburbanFarmer]

it's a self reported poll. they accounted for the inherent lack of accuracy therein.

even at the very lowest end, if nothing changed since then, hilary lost the popular vote. that's why you're rejecting it.

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'.