Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 1
The usual logic is that illegals don't vote because it's illegal for them to vote in federal elections.
Think about that statement, and the cognitive dissonance buried in it. For those who don't get it...they already broke a host of laws to get here in the first place. What's one more?
Anyways, the next line is that they don't get registered to vote Because Reasons. But is even that accurate? Turns out...no:
https://apnews.com/article/oregon-dmv-noncitizens-...PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon officials acknowledged Friday that the state mistakenly registered more than 300 non-citizens as voters since 2021 in what they described as a “data entry issue” that happened when people applied for driver’s licenses.How many other "data entry issues" are out there?
No. of Recommendations: 16
Think about that statement, and the cognitive dissonance buried in it. For those who don't get it...they already broke a host of laws to get here in the first place. What's one more?
It's pretty obvious. There is absolutely no risk/reward ratio involved.
The benefits to entering the United States are enormous, especially for people that fleeing persecution in their home countries. It can basically save their lives. Many (most) of those folks don't break a "host" of laws, but usually just illegal entry - which is not a crime, and typically only carries a penalty of expulsion if you're caught and busted. Very high reward, very low risk.
Contrast that with voting. There's almost no benefit to voting in a federal election. Nearly all federal elections involve such large electorates that the odds of a single vote changing the outcome are exceedingly small; and even in the insanely unlikely event that happened, there's usually no material benefit to any individual voter. Even the smallest congressional districts have hundreds of thousands of registered voters.
On the other hand, the risk is exceedingly high - in order to actually vote in the way that conservatives fear (illegally registering and then voting that illegal registration), you have to leave an easily discoverable paper trail. In any election that's close enough for your vote to matter, it's close enough that a lot of very interested and dedicated partisans are going to be poring over the registration and voting databases. Which is how people who do get caught voting illegally (almost always U.S. citizens doing something like voting twice or voting someone else's ballot) get caught.
Because of the interconnection between drivers license registration (motor voter) and voter registration, it's not entirely surprising that a small number of people ended up being mistakenly included in the registration rolls for voting. It would be child's play to see if any of them actually voted, so it looks like none of them did. Which makes sense - it doesn't sound like any of the individuals did anything to try to get on the voter rolls.
No. of Recommendations: 8
Dope1: Think about that statement, and the cognitive dissonance buried in it. For those who don't get it...they already broke a host of laws to get here in the first place. What's one more?
As usual, your logic is flawed. Many of the individuals you call "illegals" are here legally, awaiting their day in an immigration courtroom. More importantly though, according to your link of those 306 non-citizens who were registered to vote because of a data entry error, just two voted in elections since 2021.
Now I'm going to bet you that I can find more than two republicans, American citizens, who illegally cast more than one vote in the last presidential election or cast a vote for DonOld Trump for a dead relative.
Oh, I did.
Here's three in Florida: Jay Ketcik, Joan Halstead and John Rider. And in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, Bruce Bartman was arraigned after admitting to authorities that he had registered his dead mother to vote in the 2020 presidential election for DonOld Trump.
No. of Recommendations: 10
For those who don't get it...they already broke a host of laws to get here in the first place. What's one more?
Because there’s no virtually profit and great risk in voting illegally, but just being here can change your life for the better. It’s the same reason you don’t go back to the store if the cashier gives you an extra 3˘ (theft), but you don’t rob the store using a gun (also theft). You’re pretending the offenses are equal, and of course they’re nothing alike.
state mistakenly registered more than 300 non-citizens as voters since 2021
Not quite the same as “they voted”, but still it was a mistake and should be corrected.
PS: Oregon has 3,100,000 registered drivers, and the license lasts for 8 years. That means there are 387,500 registrations or re-registrations per year. Or, in percentage terms, 0.000774 error rate. Not perfect, but probably better than Boeing or your local heart surgeon.
No. of Recommendations: 1
As usual, your logic
No, that's your "logic". Logic that goes that the penalty for voting illegally is actually some kind of deterrent to somebody who's already risked life and limb to enter the US illegally and live here illegally.
liberals eat cats.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Because there’s no virtually profit and great risk in voting illega
LOL. You have this precisely backwards. There's lot of upside to electing more democrats - who eat cats - for the purpose of sticking people in office who In This House We Believe No Human Being Is Illegal.
Plenty of upside. Lots of bennies to gain.
And as for voting illegally - you people all claim it never happens, so who ever really looks for it? Only Republicans do, and guys like you shout them down for even wanting to secure elections.
liberals eat cats.
No. of Recommendations: 14
Many of the individuals you call "illegals" are here legally, awaiting their day in an immigration courtroom.-----------------------------
Apparently, there's a thing now where bored, retired billionaires have decided to launch their own platforms on YouTube to explain stuff going on in the world to the rest of us. Maybe they miss PowerPoint presentations. Who knows.
One of those billionaires opting for this retirement hobby is Steve Ballmer who launched a platform called USAFacts. I saw this video the other day that does a great job showing the breakdown of all the categorizations of immigrants in the country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt91pxCd0qA&t=310sBeginning at 5:10 in the video, a breakdown is provided for the category of "Unauthorized Immigrant". The key point in that summary, though Ballmer doesn't actualy say it, is the term "unauthorized" for the category isn't intentionally misleading but it lends itself to being used to mislead people by over-generalizing the sub-categories within.
The average American hearing the term "unauthorized" will likely leap to the conclusion that some judicial process has already analyzed the circumstances of each person in the "unauthorized" bucket and deemed them NOT AUTHORIZED. That's not how the term is actually being used. It is literally ONLY being used to identify a group that is not YET explicitly AUTHORIZED. There's a difference.
Here are the sub-categories of the "unauthorized" bucket:
* entered the country undetected
* entered the country then later asked for asylum
* those who overstayed an approved visa * requested asylum at a port of entry
* entered under humanitarian agreement
* those granted temporary protected statusIt can be argued the categories in
bold involve those breaking the law who merit removal by not honoring the conditions of entry or the conditions of a prior visa requiring them to leave.
It is absolute fact that the categories in
italics are not "illegal" immigrants who need to be removed. If you arrive and seek asylum at a port of entry, US laws conforming with United Nations treaties require such parties to be given a hearing to make a decision on their eligibility to remain under various terms. The fact that said review can take several YEARS because Congress refuses to increase funding to provide the resources to operate those courts isn't the fault of the asylum seeker. Those entering America under specific humanitarian agreements regarding conflict zones etc. ARE here "legally", they just don't have a path to citizenship nor even a long term guaranteed right to remain in the country. Ditto for those matching specific protected statuses for religious, ethnic or other social factors of persecution elsewhere.
Words matter. "Unauthorized" doesn't one hundred percent equate to "illegal" or "undesirable." It is only an umbrella term for a sub-set of individuals not in some other bucket with an established path to citizenship.
WTH
No. of Recommendations: 6
How many other "data entry issues" are out there?
Data error of 300 x 50 states+DC = 15,300 mistakes across America. De minimus. I've actually been surprised at what they can catch, so i think we are doing pretty d@mn good.
How does it feel to whine about something that doesn't matter?
No. of Recommendations: 14
There's lot of upside to electing more democrats - who eat cats - for the purpose of sticking people in office who In This House We Believe No Human Being Is Illegal.Again, even if there's upside to electing more Democrats, there's virtually no upside to voting illegally if you're here unlawfully. Nearly all
federal elections are decided by enough votes that it's almost no chance that any single person's vote will matter. At all. So unlike the endeavor of relocating to the U.S. - which confers
enormous personal benefits on the person who does it - voting in a federal election provides virtually no benefit to the person.
And as for voting illegally - you people all claim it never happens, so who ever really looks for it? Only Republicans do, and guys like you shout them down for even wanting to secure elections.Everybody.
All the time. Almost all campaigns in contested elections will end up poring over everything to see if there's any potential problems with the election. People
look for election fraud violations of campaign laws. Our entire system of elections is set up so that the candidates and campaigns can lodge these types of disputes - like the justice system, it's an adversarial system. The system is set up so that the balloting and canvassing processes are closely observed, the voter rolls (both registration and the list of people who actually voted) are publicly available and open for inspection, etc. Which is why election fraud and campaign violations come up.
What people
don't find is any material voting by people who have crossed the border unlawfully. They find people that vote ballots that aren't theirs, that "harvest" ballots in a way that violates laws, people who vote outside of where they're registered, people who vote twice, etc. Here in Miami we had our own notable example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Miami_mayoral_e...What they
don't ever find is evidence that large enough numbers of folks who are here unlawfully are voting.
If this was happening on a scale large enough to matter, it would have been found. Even
if only Republicans were looking, they would have found it. The process isn't perfect, but it is transparent
enough that it would be easy to find.
No. of Recommendations: 14
And as for voting illegally - you people all claim it never happens, so who ever really looks for it?
No we don't claim this. We have always claimed that it's so small, so teeny, that it isn't outcome determinative. And we've told you this multiple times, and shown you data almost every time, and you never discuss the data but you come back over and over and over and over again making the same claim.
No. of Recommendations: 5
And as for voting illegally - you people all claim it never happens, so who ever really looks for it? Only Republicans do, and guys like you shout them down for even wanting to secure elections.
Oh, bullshit! The slightest bit of effort on your part would have shown that it has been looked for...a lot. And guess what...seems more Republicans get caught cheating.
No. of Recommendations: 6
Texas just went through a purging of the voter rolls. Of the 17.9 MILLION registered voters, they found about 6,000 non-citizens registered. I don't have the reference at hand, but I understand of that number only about 1,500 voted. Reasonable people should be able to agree that 1,500 of 17.9 MILLION is of no meaningful consequence.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Reasonable people
There's your problem. Those deep in the MAGA cult are no longer reasonable people.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 2
And yet, it’s not the non-zero number your running mates stamp their feet about.
Carry on. And kindly find another narrative, ‘cause the one the left pushes is clearly false.
