I am literally making an argument about people who may have voted illegally and unknowingly. I said as much.

Also, frankly, you just have no experience with large data sets, apparently. I would wager my entire net worth, if it were possible to actually reliably measure non-citizen voting, that less than 100% of non-citizen voters voted for Clinton. I would make that bet simply based on my experience looking at these sorts of data sets.

I think it's a reasonable null hypothesis to expect that, whatever the population of non-citizens who successfully cast a vote looks like, it probably was Clinton leaning. It's incredibly unlikely it's 100%. There's really no way to answer the question reliably though.

FYP
This is doing the toxic dividing by making empty assertions that literally divide right and left.

'trumpland' has targeted a whole diverse coalition, some of which are on a unifying track. People who value forming a more perfect union can't be divided by grifters and supremacists.

I forgot about this, but the 2014 study itself provides some help on this. Despite the methodological problems as far as the measurements of the number of non-citizen voters, it's probably still a reasonable source for partisan affiliation of non-citizens.

They found that 81.8% of non-citizens who claimed to have voted in 2008 reported voting for Obama. It's on p. 5 of the article, which I've posted here.

Not all immigrants work under the table, moron. Learning about the word through secondhand rightwing memes isn't exactly rigorous political science!

wil, you need to learn not to run your ****ing mouth.

Would you consider this an understatement? Like, 60/40 likelihood or?

Of the illegal immigrant hedge fund managers, how many do you think voted for Trump? How many of the illegal immigrant research scientists?

And I think I remember you running your mouth so much you self banned for 2 weeks.

Just saying.

I don't consider it an understatement. It's just a statement. Based on the data in the study, if I had to set an over/under line I'd use like 80%. Obama outperformed Clinton in every demographic, but those voters had more reasons to dislike Trump. Chow meow? Anywhere between 65-90% wouldn't surprise me. I think this whole line is tangential to the point I was actually interested in. :P

Well if the line was 90% I'd take the over.

I'd take 98% myself.

You don't know what a fascist is, you just use it like a trigger word.

Liberals are incomprehensible <snipped objectionable insult> most of the time, it's ok.

Says who, boss?

Yeah, he's called me a fascist a few times. Mind you he could be right.

Trump supporter regrets vote after undocumented husband is deported


Maye she took him at his word (huge mistake form someone as low as trump) that he would only deport bad hombres.

keep marching in lock step with daddy

How embarrassing that unlike you, they can fight through that deficiency to learn how to use image tags

normal people dont care about how people use image tags one way or the other.

Oh no, he's a Brit.

Get your ****ing people in order then, man. Come on.

With DoOrDoNot in the hizzy, somehow managing to outdumb JiffyPop, I'm getting that "nobody puts willy in the corner" vibe again.

In case not everybody has their Well Named-5ive Dictionary handy, "also, frankly" means, "DIE YOU STUPID MOTHER****ER DIE ALREADY".

Don't worry! He's getting rid of the bad hombres too.

I'd probably regret my vote in their situation as well.....duh!!

90% of your insults are related to not being able to use archaic forum technology. Try harder?

Looks like it's prejudice gymnastics time! Shorely, some are nice people?

Love sosa: stop posting. I'll follow up with details in a bit but you are at minimum on timeout

Everyone else: you may not compare ethnic groups to monsters. So don't.