Democrats and FakeNews like to point to NY/Justin Levitt study to pretend that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2022-04-17 |
Democrats FakeNews spin yarns and pretends that there is no evidence of widespread election fraud, and complaints are trumped-up conspiracies by the evil racist republicans that want to suppress the vote. Their absence of evidence is based on:
- (A) A few fake “investigations” that Democrats did to prove that not all the cross-state or dead-people name collisions that auditors find are nefarious, thus we should ignore all incidents of it.
- That's dumb. So because of one false rape conviction we should ignore all accusations? Of course not every name collision is going to be fraud/crime, but many are. And we care about the ones that are.
- (B) A liberal NYU/Justin Levitt study or reasoning (or links to articles that refer to it) shows that there are few convictions (he found shows only "31 instances” of convictions between 2000-2014), thus there are no crimes being committed.
- First, the guy way undercounted and was unable to find thousands of examples that others have. But pretending his point is valid, "Why aren’t there many convictions?" Because there’s poor monitoring and no voter ID to catch frauds in the act in the first place. How can you prove someone isn’t who they say they are (and convict them), if you don’t check their ID’s? They assume a lack of convictions proves a lack of a problem. It actually proves how bad the problem is.
- (C) They argue that even when you find evidence, it doesn't matter, since there are not enough examples to swing national elections.
- See item (B), we find tips of icebergs and know the problems hint at far bigger issues. If you don't have vote integrity, then you don't have a functioning democracy. The perception of corruption disenfranchises more voters than suppression has, and allows more/easier corruption in the future. So even if it wasn't material (it is), it matters if people believe it's material, and enough do that it's worth addressing.
By the left's reasoning, since most jaywalkers aren't convicted, nobody jaywalks? Of course, anyone with a brief understanding of the topic would laugh out loud at their shoddy reasoning.
Conclusion[edit | edit source]
Any study with the “methodology” of only looking at convictions, should be openly laughed at and mocked. Especially when they undercount compared to much better studies. No credible academic, institution, publisher, or journalist can defend the holes in reasoning required. Fortunately for WaPo or NYU, their readers and alums don’t care.
But the bigger issue is why should America have the worst elections in the world for quality control? Seriously. Every other nation has rejected all the things Democrats want for our election because of the fraud. Just the fact that they want to keep lowering our quality controls is evidence that they are bad actors. If the theives guild wrote a law that all doors in the town should be unlocked because robbery convictions are low, would you trust them? Well, something like 86% of theives vote Democrat.
🔗 More
| |
🔗 Links
- 2007 Justin Levitt (Brennan Center for Justice) :
- WaPo regurgitating stuff that bad study as fact
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/10/13/the-disconnect-between-voter-id-laws-and-voter-fraud/
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/03/one-reason-to-doubt-the-presidential-election-will-be-rigged-its-a-lot-harder-than-it-seems/
- Politifact goes full retard: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/18/cory-booker/lightning-strikes-more-common-person-voter-fraud-s/
- Democrat Activist “information” site that tries to minimize the risk by conflating convictions with incidents, or distract with total votes cast, instead of key elections swung by a few questionable votes:
- Just to make sure you realize how reputable the proponents of the "no fraud here" theory are, he's HuffPo's Voter Fraud specialist, explaining how he likes to commit Voter Fraud (while writing that it's not a problem on HuffPo):
- This is the same party that has many people getting caught committing the crimes they actually deny exist:
- There are people dumb enough to tweet or FB that they voted multiple times — now whether they did or not, it undermines voter confidence and turn out if they think others are doing this:
- https://twitter.com/marchpanes/statuses/265846006988566529
- There were many others, but the links/accounts were stale
- Lorraine C. Minnite did "meticulous research" in her "Myth of Voter Fraud" book, and didn't find any of the evidence presented in this article, and concludes since she couldn't find it, that there's no problem. It is very popular with those that don't want to know facts.
- There’s also things like this on the other side, claiming 3M illegal aliens voted. Of course I don’t leap to assume everything by infowars or voterfraud site is automatically true (or false). I suspect this means they found 3M name-collisions with illegals, and the actual number is more in line with other studies and 200K. But still, if I’m linking the far left anti-stuff, then a far right pro-voterfraud is equally valid.
Tags: VoterID and Voter Fraud
