The DC Court of Appeals shoves Kansas SecState Kris Kobach’s attempt to fix a nonexistent problem, albeit with some unfortunately disproportionate side effects, back down his democracy-hating throat.
Non-existent problem? No, non-citizens voting actually is a thing.
(From the abstract of cited article, emphasis added in wonder and astonishment)
But lo!
Gosh, sure looks like pretty precise derivations from limited data. Very limited data.
One has to wonder why and how non-citizen voters are so eager to speak such truths to…who, exactly? Who asked non-citizen voters whether or not they voted? What motivated such admissions? Were they bitterly ashamed, and only wanted to confess to some stranger with a clip board? Where did they get lists of non-citizens to ask?
“Hi, there, are you a non-citizen? You are? Good, did you commit voter fraud in 2008? How about 2012? Yes and yes? Thank you, have a nice day…”
And this, of local interest…
Why yes, that is possible. So long as possible is defined as anything that is not impossible. Would anyone like to make a list of all the possible causes of an extremely minor difference in voting?
And this:
Did he, now? In 2008? And how is it that this data remained unremarked for so long? Its not like this data would not have been music to the ears of those eager to hear it? How is it that they didn’t? Would anyone here have expected such shattering news to be ignored by those starving for such manna from Hell?
So, we should ignore that first quote, about the unreliability of data about non-citizen voting, and whole-heartedly embrace the derived lessons from said unreliable data?
Pull the other one, it has bells, pull the middle one, I’ll give you a nickel.
(Your correspondent from the conservative wing of the extreme left is a mathtard, and offers no pretense of expertise in statistical analysis. But if I still have a nickel after offering such generous terms as I have, I’ll put than nickel to bet that this gets ripped into little tiny pieces by people who do have that expertise.)
Shit, how come I didn’t see that? October 24, 2014! Fuck me for stupid!
Anyway, my prediction of sharp critique has already been met.
Choice bits:
Shit, addy! Come on! Whatzamatta you?
Yet the study does prove that citizenship verification is necessary and that the honor system does not work.
Is there ANY kind of voter verification that Democrats support? This really is something that Republicans should wrap around their necks every election season.
Not if the solution disenfranchises more people than it catches in voter fraud. Come on, it is simple math.
It is actually federal law that newly registered voters have to be verified:
It looks like Kansas was going a lot further, requiring a birth certificate. But you do have to provide the last four digits of your SS# when you register, so that can and must be verified, although apparently many states are lax in doing their duty here and we have an administration that is quite uninterested in making sure it gets done.
Why do Republicans hate democracy, adaher?
If 1 billion Chinese vote in the next election, isn’t that democracy?
Here’s a hint: If you have to invent your evidence, you’ve already lost.
Gawdammm …
I already explained why the makers of the study and the article got it wrong. So it is worse than that ElvisL1ves, adaher is not only inventing evidence but also reusing reheated baloney even after it was pointed out to him a few days back in post #10236
Got me wondering. Seems to me that the words “Old Dominion University” are unexpectedly common when reading pseudo-scientific whale dreck.
Did Bricker ever post this “study”? Or even read about it?
Could it be that he did, and thought to himself “No, this is total horseshit, beneath my dignity and I’d never get away with it.”?
Anyway, they make a real cute couple!
Your own cite states that:
Heck it doesn’t matter anymore since California automatically registers everyone who gets a drivers license to vote and allows illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses and doesn’t let the DMV check folks against against immigration databases.
Snopes.
It works if California officials are actually doing the checks. Is there any evidence that they are?
As for the Monkey Cage study, the dispute is about exactly how many non-citizens are voting. The fact many are is undisputed, since states are really lax about checking voter registrations with their databases.
But I do agree that Kobach and many other Republicans are going too far. All they’d have to do to win poiltically and get what they want is to enforce existing law. Check all new registrants against Kansas’ database, if you don’t match you don’t vote. That’s what the law allows and that’s what should be used.
:rolleyes:
It was disputed already, the only thing you show to all here is that you do not know how to read cites.
That would explain a lot though.
It disputed only the numbers. Is it 1% or 6%. Either way, it’s more than enough to justify existing laws designed to prevent that sort of thing.
However, Democrats should feel free to run their 2016 campaign on getting rid of these required checks.
That is nice, you are only making yourself sound worse, I did not point only to that, many other reports showed how unimportant your hobby horse is.
Again, you are only resorting to lies and reheated baloney. In 2014 (that your article is from and worried about) the Republicans gained a lot in congress and there was AFAIK no evidence to support what the article was worrying about. So much for the basis of your article and your stupid talking points.