Could Non-citizen Votes Decide The Election?

Posted by khalling 9 years, 5 months ago to Politics
26 comments | Share | Flag

New research says probably. However, most reported voting with an ID anyway. Most likely, there are polling place workers who are partnering in this illegal practice. That 's my opinion, not the research.
SOURCE URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 10
    Posted by richrobinson 9 years, 5 months ago
    My concern is the total combined fraud. If the article is correct in the number of non citizens that vote and that it could tip a close election what happens when other types of fraud occur. We have all heard stories of dead people voting. The most recent incident out of Illinois where Republican votes became Democrat votes. I always vote but I am starting to understand the frustration of those who don't. It's not just the low quality of candidates we have to choose from. It is all these stories of fraud and manipulation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 5 months ago
      it's really bad in Colorado now. The voting is by MAIL. what happened is me, myself and I are voting for me, even if I'm not a citizen, or alive or even ...me
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Temlakos 9 years, 5 months ago
        Not only that, but James O'Keefe recently visited Colorado. He found no shortage of foolish people willing to avow--not merely admit, but avow--they cheated by fishing unused ballots out of the trash, and voting them.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by richrobinson 9 years, 5 months ago
        Pennsylvania is a blue state. I am guessing both sides cheat but I am reminded of the story told about the 1960 election. When Kennedy beat Nixon by such a slim margin his team suggested contesting the election. Nixon asked what would their argument be "they cheated better than we did? Let it go."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by edweaver 9 years, 5 months ago
          I agree that it is possible that both sides cheat but I do believe the right to be people where honor still matters and I do not believe that to be true on the left. If that is the case then I believe there is much less cheating on the right. Maybe I am wrong.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 5 months ago
    the Democrats' southern border strategy is already
    coming true -- we don't have to wait for the new
    illegal youngsters to grow up!!! -- j

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by macdbham 9 years, 5 months ago
    Several points here.
    1. The myth of a right to vote guaranteed by the U.S. constitution must be crushed.
    2. Voter fraud IS rampant as evidenced by the recent convictions for vote fraud and the NC ballot fiasco along with Chicago machines changing R to D on votes by a "programming error".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 5 months ago
    That's really surprising. I think we should make it harder in general to vote. That self-styled "plutocrat" guy wouldn't be a plutocrat if it weren't for votes swayed by ads. I suspect (not researched at all) that voters swayed by ads would also be likely not to vote if it were more difficult.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 5 months ago
      I would be perfectly happy if they brought back an across the board poll tax.

      1. Would fund better services for an election. Updated readers, more staff, etc.

      2 make it very expensive to "buy" votes.

      3 will keep the no information voters away

      4 effectively requires good id at the polls to pay the tax and receive your ballot
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 9 years, 5 months ago
        your idea got alot of support in the gulch. I would argue
        1. The romans had a poll tax and it didn't keep them from a welfare state
        2. some of the largest proponents of a welfare state (socialism) were the wealthy in England. without psycho-analyzing them, it appears at least in part that they want a static society, because they are already at the top. They want to remain on the top.

        It's interesting to think procedurally, but ultimately, the intellectual battle can not be successfully fought with procedure laws.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 5 months ago
          True. Ultimately, it all comes down to self-interest and conflicts therein, does it not? The problems in government arise when those in power can grant to themselves more power - either in pay or in the continuance in getting elected. Either one is a harbinger of a government straying from its purpose. We see it today in our federal government in several ways - from the lobbying profession, to their exemptions from insider trading laws to their deliberate vote pandering through pork projects and welfare programs.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 5 months ago
          I agree, it would not solve all the problems with our current election process.

          It would clean it up somewhat, at least insofar as ID and buying votes goes. And half a loaf is better than nothing to me.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo