Originally published November 26 2014
Votes from illegal aliens can decide U.S. election outcomes, study says
by J. D. Heyes
(NaturalNews) Prior to the Nov. 4 midterm elections, a number of civil libertarians, conservatives and constitutionalists brought up concerns about voter fraud, though Democrats insist that there is no such thing or, if there is, it is extremely rare.
Only, it's not. In example after example, as Natural News and others have reported, voter fraud is much more rampant than many people know or understand. And ironically, it is those who say it doesn't exist that commit it most often.
Take the issue of illegal immigrants. There is a reason -- a big reason -- why Democrat leaders want President Obama to "legalize" as many of them as possible. Exit polls for more than two decades have shown that, overwhelmingly, first-generation immigrants vote for Democrat candidates.
Now, imagine, if you can, several million immigrants -- illegal and otherwise -- being able to cast ballots in future elections: Could they shift the balance of said elections? Absolutely, says a new study. And that should alarm every American, regardless of political party or persuasion, because the right to vote is about as sacrosanct as it gets in a civil society.
The Washington Post, reporting on an article in the journal Electoral Studies, says it brings "real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections."
Voting is a revered right and should be reserved for citizens only
Continuing, the paper noted:
Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.
So much for voter fraud deniers' claims that it isn't happening. Worse, election outcomes are likely being altered by people who are not even citizens of the United States.
The Post says its data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, or CCES. That study, a project of Harvard University, incorporated a large number of observations to provide researchers with a sufficient non-immigrant sub-population sample from which to draw their conclusions (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010). There were 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 election cycle, the Post said it also tried to match respondents to voter files so analysts could tell if they actually voted or not.
"How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections?" the paper asked. "More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted.
"Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010," the Post noted.
The paper went on to note that, because non-citizens "tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample)," researchers said that participation rate was "large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections."
Illegal alien votes could have swayed some elections for Democrats
For instance, researchers noted that non-citizen votes could have led to Democrats picking up a pivotal 60th vote necessary to overcome filibusters in 2008, which gave the party enough clout to ram through Obamacare, oppressive financial reforms and other Obama priorities.
Consider: Democrat Al Franken of Minnesota won his contest against Republican incumbent Norm Coleman by just 312 votes; ballots "cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin," the Post reported.
"It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama's 2008 victory in North Carolina," said the paper. "Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina's adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin."
See the full Post report on this outrage here.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml