Trump blasts states for refusing to hand over voter data

[rooster59]

Trump blasts states for refusing to hand over voter data

 

U.S. President Donald Trump listens as South Korean President Moon Jae-in delivers a statement from the Rose Garden after meetings at the White House in Washington, U.S. June 30, 2017. REUTERS/Jim Bourg

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump lashed out on Saturday at the growing number of states refusing to give voters' names, addresses and sensitive personal information to a commission he created to investigate alleged voter fraud.

 

"Numerous states are refusing to give information to the very distinguished VOTER FRAUD PANEL," he wrote on Twitter. "What are they trying to hide?"

 

More than 20 states, including Virginia, Kentucky, California, New York and Massachusetts, have declined to provide some or all of the information, saying it was unnecessary and violated privacy.

 

"This commission was formed to try to find basis for the lie that President Trump put forward that has no foundation," Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes told Reuters previously in an interview.

 

The Republican president has made unsubstantiated claims that millions of people voted illegally for his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, in last November's election.

 

Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, created in May, sent a letter to 50 states asking them to turn over voter information including names, the last four digits of Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, political affiliations, felony convictions and voting histories.

 

The request from commission Vice Chairman Kris Kobach has caused a backlash from state election officials.

 

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson said in a statement on Friday that while certain voter information is available to the public, the media, and any other person who requests the information, "the information is restricted to name, address and congressional district assignment."

 

Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann had said in a statement that he did not see the letter but would rebuff the commission.

 

"They can go jump in the Gulf of Mexico, and Mississippi is a great state to launch from," he said.

 

Trump won the White House through victory in the Electoral College, which tallies wins in states, but he lost the popular vote to Clinton by some 3 million votes. He has claimed he would have won the popular vote had it not been for voter fraud.

 

Civil rights activists say the commission will encourage voter suppression by justifying new barriers to voting, such as requiring identity cards to vote.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-02

[darksidedog]

Trump is clearly desperate to find some evidence to back up any of his ludicrous claims, like this or Obama bugged me! With absolutely no evidence to back up the claim that there was widespread voter fraud, he wants to waste loads of tax payers money searching, and then has the gall to moan when told certain information is confidential and he just can't have it. When multiple States have told him the same thing, you have to be a complete moron to think they will shift their position, just by sending out a sad and pitiful tweet on the matter. Does he not realise that every time he does it, the whole world just laughs at him even more?

[boomerangutang]

Trump is self-disintegrating day by day, hour by hour.   He's like the wicked witch in the wizard of Oz, who melts when water is thrown on her.   ....except Trump is pouring the acidic toxic water on himself.  

 

Each day he and his people are in office, is another day they have - to further debilitate the USA.  Probably the most insidious proof of that (it's hard to decide which of his actions is worse, because there are so many) ......is keeping Kushner as his right-hand-man in charge of a dozen important portfolios.  In case we forget, it's Kushner who has secret ties with Russian agents, and who wanted to clandestinely by-pass all 17 US intelligence services in order to communicate directly with a sanctioned bank boss who is bosom buddies with Putin. 

[ilostmypassword]

I hope Trump directs some of his ire at Kris Kobach, the vice-chairman, who also refused to fully comply.

[metisdead]

Posts using derogatory nicknames or intentional misspelling of people’s names  will be removed.  If you don’t want your post to be removed, spell people’s names correctly.

[Tracyb]

The level of Donald Trump's ignorant actions is frightening.

[KenKadz]

"What are they trying to hide?"

So much for transparency in government.

[heybruce]

17 minutes ago, KenKadz said:

"What are they trying to hide?"

So much for transparency in government.

Transparency in government means transparency in government operations and debates, it does not mean revealing sensitive personal information about tens of millions of US voters. 

 

Remember, this is the president who can't keep a government secret.  He's pretty good at keeping his personal finances secret, though.

[dutchisaan]

16 minutes ago, KenKadz said:

"What are they trying to hide?"

So much for transparency in government.

There is nothing to hide!!! It's the Donald who is hiding his stuff and who realy lost it completely! But don't worry, I'm sure the WH press secretary, whoever that will be at this moment, will explain it to you with alternate facts. And you can leap this up, use it as real facts.

[Thaidream]

No State is trying to hide anything- it is a State responsibility to monitor all elections not the Federal Government.  Trump wants to look for something that is not there to prove a point of exaggeration.  He may be President but he lost the popular vote and there is no way 3 million more voters who voted for Clinton or others were frauds.  I am more concerned that Russian agents directed a hack of the voting machines and changed the vote totals and that Trump may not actually have won.

Donald Trump is wasting millions on this nonsense and his private travels to Florida while refusing universal healthcare to millions of Americans.

[ilostmypassword]

53 minutes ago, KenKadz said:

"What are they trying to hide?"

So much for transparency in government.

You're confused. This is about governments keeping their promises to keep citizens' personal information pŕivate.

[YetAnother]

6 hours ago, rooster59 said:

such as requiring identity cards to vote.

 

they do not do that now?

[Basil B]

Sleep easy all Americans who did not Vote for Trump...

 

The Attitude Correction Police Thugs ain't going to be calling any time soon.  

[metisdead]

A post containing content from an unapproved site has been removed as well as the replies. 

[heybruce]

38 minutes ago, ELVIS123456 said:

This is a link to an impartial site that provides proof that there is truth in what Trump said about voter fraud.

 

http://www.justfactsdaily.com/substantial-numbers-of-non-citizens-vote-illegally-in-u-s-elections/

 

These paragraphs summarise key facts:

 

These media reports and Trump’s comment are all misleading. There is material evidence of substantial vote fraud, though it does not prove that Trump would have won the popular vote if such fraud were prevented. It only shows that this is a possibility.

 

This evidence is documented in a 2014 paper published by the journal Electoral Studies. Based on survey data and election records, the authors of this paper found that the number of non-citizens who voted illegally in the 2008 election ranged “from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.” Their “best estimate” is that 1.2 million or “6.4% of non-citizens actually voted.”

 

Trump currently trails in the popular vote by about 2.6 million. Hence, in order for his statement to be true, 12.6% of the 21 million non-citizen adults in the U.S. recorded by the Census Bureau would have had to cast added votes for Clinton. This is within the realm of possibility given that the study also found that “roughly one quarter of non-citizens were likely registered to vote” in 2008 and 2010.

 

The States that refuse to handover data, particularly NY and CA, are mainly not doing so because they dont want the Commission to have evidence to enable the next step in the process - the takeover of voting control in National election to come under Federal control. It is as simple as that - and privacy is an excuse not to cooperate.  Some States want to keep control over who they allow to vote because it is political expediency. Trump will probably have to sign another decree taking away State's control of voter fraud it will then be challenged and stopped by a Liberal court, it will then go to SCOTUS - and problem solved.  Democrats will lose millions of votes, as per the 2014 report about the 2008 election, because 88% of non-citizens vote Democrat.  End result - another win to Trump 

I was reading your source and reached a suspect claim early on:

 

"In this 2008 survey of 32,800 respondents, 339 identified themselves as non-citizens, and 38 of these non-citizens checked a box that said “I definitely voted” in the 2008 general election or were recorded in the Catalist database as voting in that election. At face value, this means that 11.2% (38/339) of non-citizens voted in the 2008 election."

 

The study claimed the results were based on a representative survey of 32,800 respondents, but only 339, about 10%, identified themselves as non-citizens.  However extrapolations from the 38 non-citizens who claimed to have voted (11.2% of non-resident respondents, but only about 0.1% of the total survey respondents) were applied to the census estimate of 19.4 million of the US population as voting age non-residents.

 

In summary, they are mixing and matching numbers to give the maximum possible estimate of illegal voting:  1% of the survey respondents claimed to be non-citizens, 10% of this 1% claimed to have voted (a statistically insignificant number), so the study claims this means 11.2% of non-citizens  in the country may have voted.  Sorry, I'm not buying it, or your claim that the source is impartial.

 

If that is too much math for you, I will cut it down to the bare minimum.  The survey claimed to have a representative sampling, but in a country where approximately 10% of residents are non-citizens, only 1% of those sampled were non-citizens.  The survey had a flawed sample.

 

I only scanned a few more paragraphs, the report from there seemed geared to justifying Trump's still unverified claim on massive voter fraud.  0.01% of non-residents voting would would have had an insignificant affect on his loss of the popular vote.

 

 

Edited July 2, 2017 by heybruce

[Si Thea01]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

I am more concerned that Russian agents directed a hack of the voting machines and changed the vote totals and that Trump may not actually have won.

That is an absolute falsehood.  Never happened so why post false and misleading information.

[heybruce]

37 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I was reading your source and reached a suspect claim early on:

 

"In this 2008 survey of 32,800 respondents, 339 identified themselves as non-citizens, and 38 of these non-citizens checked a box that said “I definitely voted” in the 2008 general election or were recorded in the Catalist database as voting in that election. At face value, this means that 11.2% (38/339) of non-citizens voted in the 2008 election."

 

The study claimed the results were based on a representative survey of 32,800 respondents, but only 339, about 10%, identified themselves as non-citizens.  However extrapolations from the 38 non-citizens who claimed to have voted (11.2% of non-resident respondents, but only about 0.1% of the total survey respondents) were applied to the census estimate of 19.4 million of the US population as voting age non-residents.

 

In summary, they are mixing and matching numbers to give the maximum possible estimate of illegal voting:  1% of the survey respondents claimed to be non-citizens, 10% of this 1% claimed to have voted (a statistically insignificant number), so the study claims this means 11.2% of non-citizens  in the country may have voted.  Sorry, I'm not buying it, or your claim that the source is impartial.

 

If that is too much math for you, I will cut it down to the bare minimum.  The survey claimed to have a representative sampling, but in a country where approximately 10% of residents are non-citizens, only 1% of those sampled were non-citizens.  The survey results are based on a seriously flawed sample--off by a factor of ten in the population subgroup of interest.

 

I only scanned a few more paragraphs, the report from there seemed geared to justifying Trump's still unverified claim on massive voter fraud.  0.01% of non-residents voting would would have had an insignificant affect on his loss of the popular vote.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2017 by heybruce

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

 

"In this 2008 survey of 32,800 respondents, 339 identified themselves as non-citizens, and 38 of these non-citizens checked a box that said “I definitely voted” in the 2008 general election or were recorded in the Catalist database as voting in that election. At face value, this means that 11.2% (38/339) of non-citizens voted in the 2008 election."

 

The study claimed the results were based on a representative survey of 32,800 respondents, but only 339, about 10%, identified themselves as non-citizens.  However extrapolations from the 38 non-citizens who claimed to have voted (11.2% of non-resident respondents, but only about 0.1% of the total survey respondents) were applied to the census estimate of 19.4 million of the US population as voting age non-residents.

 

In summary, they are mixing and matching numbers to give the maximum possible estimate of illegal voting:  1% of the survey respondents claimed to be non-citizens, 10% of this 1% claimed to have voted (a statistically insignificant number), so the study claims this means 11.2% of non-citizens  in the country may have voted.  Sorry, I'm not buying it, or your claim that the source is impartial.

 

If that is too much math for you, I will cut it down to the bare minimum.  The survey claimed to have a representative sampling, but in a country where approximately 10% of residents are non-citizens, only 1% of those sampled were non-citizens.  The survey had a flawed sample.

 

I only scanned a few more paragraphs, the report from there seemed geared to justifying Trump's still unverified claim on massive voter fraud.  0.01% of non-residents voting would would have had an insignificant affect on his loss of the popular vote.

 

 

Here's alink to a vary lon article from 538 that untangles this story inexcruciating detail. One takeaway is that not even James  Richman contends that the paper in question establishes that there is widespread voter fraud by non-citizens.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-noncitizen-voters/

[Redline]

He wants to use the information for his next campaign.  This information should never be in the hands of political manipulators of any party.

In any case, his commission said it was to check for duplicate names, which have never been a problem, and people working for him have names in multiple states anyway.

[vaultdweller0013]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Here's alink to a vary lon article from 538 that untangles this story inexcruciating detail. One takeaway is that not even James  Richman contends that the paper in question establishes that there is widespread voter fraud by non-citizens.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-noncitizen-voters/

 

 

There was a survey. It asked people about their voting history as well as their citizenship or legal/illegal immigrant status. A surprisingly high number of people filled in the survey to say they were non-citizens AND voted. However, this is almost certainly due to citizens incorrectly filling in that they are non-citizens. Because voting is common among citizens, a lot of the citizens who mistakenly filled in non-citizen also said they voted. Because the number of non-citizens in the survey is small relative to the number of citizens, even a small misclassification of citizens as non-citizens can skew the results for non-citizens.

 

And yes, there is a significant amount of people who mark the wrong answers in these sort of surveys, as odd as it may seem.

 

A further point is that if the paper was correct, it should have been easy to find examples by going through the actual voter rolls and voting histories of people. But guess what, whenever this has been done, they've never found anything more than a handful of cases.

Edited July 2, 2017 by vaultdweller0013
Misread quoted post

[fish monger]

5 hours ago, YetAnother said:

they do not do that now?

I have mine...Has my address, DOB and party affiliation. It's required. So where the hell they come up with this new idea is beyond me and a joke...!

[fish monger]

Don't know what the problem is....Voter registration information is common knowledge and open to the public. Just pulled up my home town list a month ago to find someone's address...It gives party affiliation AND how many times you voted and which year...! Seems the only problem here is Trump.....As usual.

[charmonman]

I really wish this president would stop obsessing over perceived insults to his own fragile ego and start doing his bloody job. He might find that if he did so, his press coverage might improve. 

 

He thinks he's a tough guy, but as the video he tweeted today proves, he punches like a little girl.

[Grubster]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

0.01% of non-residents voting would would have had an insignificant affect on his loss of the popular vote.

Not to mention many of them may have voted for him.

[funandsuninbangkok]

9 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

You're confused. This is about governments keeping their promises to keep citizens' personal information pŕivate.

Wrong

 

most states voter registration is public information

 

http://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voter-registration/voter-information-as-a-public-record/

[funandsuninbangkok]

Democrats try to muddy the waters by claiming no voter fraud because they only count votes against voter rolls i.e. People trying to vote more than once. The real problem is illegal immigrants voting. But most Democrats support illegals voting. 

 

Good of story about it

 

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-is-right-millions-of-illegals-probably-did-vote-in-2016/

 

 

Edited July 2, 2017 by funandsuninbangkok

[Jingthing]

10 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Wrong

 

most states voter registration is public information

 

http://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voter-registration/voter-information-as-a-public-record/

Social security numbers? I think not, dude. 

[funandsuninbangkok]

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Social security numbers? I think not, dude. 

Last four digits only dude

 

what you hiding?

[heybruce]

49 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Wrong

 

most states voter registration is public information

 

http://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voter-registration/voter-information-as-a-public-record/

 

40 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Social security numbers? I think not, dude. 

 

16 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Last four digits only dude

 

what you hiding?

From your source:

 

" Other information such as your name, address, date of birth, party affiliation, and when you voted is public information."

 

That is more information than should be revealed, and enough to let someone get started on identity theft.  Include the last four of the social security number, which is all a lot of banks, credit agencies, and the VA often ask for, and a crook is off and running.

 

BTW, Trump wants of the above, including the last four.

[vaultdweller0013]

40 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Democrats try to muddy the waters by claiming no voter fraud because they only count votes against voter rolls i.e. People trying to vote more than once. The real problem is illegal immigrants voting. But most Democrats support illegals voting. 

 

Good of story about it

 

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-is-right-millions-of-illegals-probably-did-vote-in-2016/

 

 

Ultimately, it comes back to the single debunked paper that I explained above. Learn about that. Learn about how the paper messed up the statistical analysis. Learn about how every attempt to find wide spread vote fraud has failed, with at best a handful of cases in each election.

 

But, of coarse, that wouldn't fit into your narrative about how it all the illegals fault, so you won't bother to improve yourself and your knowledge on the subject.