Donald Trump running for president

[youngandfree]

Did you even read it? It wasn't the same authors. This study is from the people who own the data that the study you referenced used for their analysis.

It explains how a small error in a large dataset can skew results immensely. You know, statistical analysis methods.

What's shady is your reliance on the "Washington Times" for "news".

If it was that big a story don't you think the Google results would show something besides obviously partisan sites? Dig a little deeper, man.

I know it wasn't the same authors. The Harvard folks are the owners of the data set used in the ODU professor's paper. You even said the Harvard folks own the data and conducted the survey, that was reported on by the ODU professor. My point is, if the Harvard professors KNEW their data set was flawed from the beginning, why didn't they say so when they published their survey? Instead, they claim their data is flawed, after another professor at an esteemed university published the findings and data set from the Harvard survey. Now the Harvard folks have to claim their survey is flawed, to discredit the report on their actual data set.

 

[Misfit28]

I know it wasn't the same authors. The Harvard folks are the owners of the data set used in the ODU professor's paper. You even said the Harvard folks own the data and conducted the survey, that was reported on by the ODU professor. My point is, if the Harvard professors KNEW their data set was flawed from the beginning, why didn't they say so when they published their survey? Instead, they claim their data is flawed, after another professor at an esteemed university published the findings and data set from the Harvard survey. Now the Harvard folks have to claim their survey is flawed, to discredit the report on their actual data set.

The better question would be why didn't the professor who made his claims do a better job of looking at the data in the first place? If he had noticed that there was the possibility of misinterpretation of the data, why didn't he find it?

Perhaps he was biased?

Here's a quote from the study I posted that explains why there was an error to begin with (bold is my emphasis):

"This problem arises because the survey was not designed to sample non-citizens, and the non-citizen category in the citizenship question is included for completeness and to identify those respondents who might be non-citizens. We expect that most of that group are in fact non-citizens (85 of 105), but the very low level of misclassification of citizens, who comprise 97.4 percent of the sample, means that we expect that 19 “non-citizen” respondents (16.5 percent of all reported non-citizens) are citizens who are misclassified. And, those misclassified people can readily account for the observed vote among those who reported that they are non-citizens."

In my opinion, the author of your study should have realized this limitation before making such bold claims.

 

[youngandfree]

The better question would be why didn't the professor who made his claims do a better job of looking at the data in the first place? If he had noticed that there was the possibility of misinterpretation of the data, why didn't he find it?

Perhaps he was biased?

Here's a quote from the study I posted that explains why there was an error to begin with (bold is my emphasis):

"This problem arises because the survey was not designed to sample non-citizens, and the non-citizen category in the citizenship question is included for completeness and to identify those respondents who might be non-citizens. We expect that most of that group are in fact non-citizens (85 of 105), but the very low level of misclassification of citizens, who comprise 97.4 percent of the sample, means that we expect that 19 “non-citizen” respondents (16.5 percent of all reported non-citizens) are citizens who are misclassified. And, those misclassified people can readily account for the observed vote among those who reported that they are non-citizens."

In my opinion, the author of your study should have realized this limitation before making such bold claims.

If the author of the study doesn't publish qualifiers with his data set, how is one to know? Last I checked, reporting on the strict results of the data set isn't a problem. You should be more concerned about Harvard scholars publishing flawed studies.

 

[Misfit28]

If the author of the study doesn't publish qualifiers with his data set, how is one to know? Last I checked, reporting on the strict results of the data set isn't a problem. You should be more concerned about Harvard scholars publishing flawed studies.

The authors of your study admit in their paper that there could be an error related to the non-citizen question. They extrapolated from what they would expect to find, and decided that it was unlikely that respondents either intentionally or inadvertently responded as non-citizens when in fact they were citizens. They didn't mention the possibility that a large data set like this could be easily skewed by minor polling errors.

The paper I linked to discusses and explains how such an error could drastically skew the results.

In the end, both of these papers are reflective of the nature of how science works: The peer-review process. If everything someone publishes is never questioned or debated, then we would never advance science.

The bottom line from my perspective is this: Trump is over-inflating this issue to be bigger than it really is, I suppose to try to mitigate damage to his ego from losing the popular vote by a large margin.

He is claiming things that simply aren't in the data as far as we can tell, and now he is going to spend taxpayer money to investigate something that has been studied to death.

As a self-proclaimed conservative, you should be more concerned with freely spending taxpayer money on things like this and building a wall (which will more than likely NOT be paid for by Mexico, but the American taxpayers).

 

[Misfit28]

On another topic, I am actually somewhat encouraged by Trump's choice of General Mattis as Secretary of Defense. He appears to be much more rational than Trump, and can hopefully prevent us from being entangled in more foreign conflicts.

 

[youngandfree]

The authors of your study admit in their paper that there could be an error related to the non-citizen question. They extrapolated from what they would expect to find, and decided that it was unlikely that respondents either intentionally or inadvertently responded as non-citizens when in fact they were citizens. They didn't mention the possibility that a large data set like this could be easily skewed by minor polling errors.

The paper I linked to discusses and explains how such an error could drastically skew the results.

In the end, both of these papers are reflective of the nature of how science works: The peer-review process. If everything someone publishes is never questioned or debated, then we would never advance science.

The bottom line from my perspective is this: Trump is over-inflating this issue to be bigger than it really is, I suppose to try to mitigate damage to his ego from losing the popular vote by a large margin.

He is claiming things that simply aren't in the data as far as we can tell, and now he is going to spend taxpayer money to investigate something that has been studied to death.

As a self-proclaimed conservative, you should be more concerned with freely spending taxpayer money on things like this and building a wall (which will more than likely NOT be paid for by Mexico, but the American taxpayers).

What about the Michigan recount that got thrown out because number of votes cast were more than registered voters in 60% of all the precincts?

As to the wall, it was mandated and signed by President Bush in 2006 and the money was appropriated back then to do it. Securing our border is hardly a frivolous expense.

 

[ax1]

As to the wall, it was mandated and signed by President Bush in 2006 and the money was appropriated back then to do it. Securing our border is hardly a frivolous expense.

Alot cheaper than giving illegal immigrants health care, welfare, education etc...payed for by our stolen tax dollars while government lets our vets rot in hospital basements and outside of medical facilities where immigrants are cared for and vets are not allowed access to basic care.

This country is so screwed up, I really hope Dump does follow through on some of these issues.

 

[Misfit28]

What about the Michigan recount that got thrown out because number of votes cast were more than registered voters in 60% of all the precincts?

As to the wall, it was mandated and signed by President Bush in 2006 and the money was appropriated back then to do it. Securing our border is hardly a frivolous expense.

I honestly haven't looked into the recounts, as I think they were silly in the first place. I'll look when I get a chance.

The "wall" that Bush proposed (actually a "fence") and funded is totally different than the "wall" Trump is proposing. So far it has only cost 2.4 billion, compared to Trump's 15-20 billion. That's a HUGE difference. You do realize that most illegal immigrants overstayed their visas rather than physically crossed the border, right?

 

[Misfit28]

Alot cheaper than giving illegal immigrants health care, welfare, education etc...payed for by our stolen tax dollars while government lets our vets rot in hospital basements and outside of medical facilities where immigrants are cared for and vets are not allowed access to basic care.

This country is so screwed up, I really hope Dump does follow through on some of these issues.

Where's your proof? You know that illegal immigrants also pay taxes, right?

 

[Aleksandar37]

It's funny you guys make accusations like you do. I never said that Harvard wasn't reputable or unintelligent. I said they are biased toward liberal ideology, and seek to protect illegals on their campus. Which ties in to their desire to discredit their own data.

[video=youtube;LQCU36pkH7c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQCU36pkH7c[/video]

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

According to the CBP annual 2016 report, 408,870 of the 415,000 illegals detained came across the southern border. That number is down some, but over the last 10 years, if there is an average of 375,000 crossing illegally, which is just a very low conservative estimate for example sake, that means at least 37,500,000 additional illegals that crossed our unsecured southern border over that 10 years. We know it's more than that. What's worse than having unaccompanied minors crossing the border, is the state dept flying their parents from central america here. Or if it's an adult, flying that adult's kids from central america here to reunite the family. We should be doing the opposite.

 

[ax1]

Where's your proof? You know that illegal immigrants also pay taxes, right?

Proof of what? Have you been paying attention? I think this is a very insulting statement to the vets although I know you didnt intend to do so.

 

[Misfit28]

Proof of what? Have you been paying attention? I think this is a very insulting statement to the vets although I know you didnt intend to do so.

I was more talking about the immigrants receiving welfare, etc.

It's well established that the VA sucks

 

[ax1]

I was more talking about the immigrants receiving welfare, etc.

It's well established that the VA sucks

Ok got it, Ive known alot of immigrants who came here illegally who are on American social services throughout my life including unemployed and off the book type workers.

 

[Misfit28]

Very relieved to hear that Trump will side with General Mattis on no torture.

 

[Misfit28]

Ok got it, Ive known alot of immigrants who came here illegally who are on American social services throughout my life including unemployed and off the book type workers.

But is it widespread? No offense, but just your limited personal experiences aren't substantial evidence. Not being an ass, it's just true.

I don't expect anyone to take my word for things I argue about based on my personal experiences alone either

 

[ax1]

But is it widespread? No offense, but just your limited personal experiences aren't substantial evidence. Not being an ass, it's just true.

I don't expect anyone to take my word for things I argue about based on my personal experiences alone either

Move to NYC.....pop a baby get taken care of by the American tax payer for life.

My family used me as an anchor baby, they love me but its the truth.

 

[ax1]

Move to NYC.....pop a baby get taken care of by the American tax payer for life.

My family used me as an anchor baby, they love me but its the truth.

By that I mean, your not going to find stats that account for illegal immigrants on social services, because now that you popped a little one official you should be legal here now. This system is so screwed up.

 

[Misfit28]

Move to NYC.....pop a baby get taken care of by the American tax payer for life.

My family used me as an anchor baby, they love me but its the truth.

Invalid Link Removed

It happens, but seems to be on the decline. I'm not denying any of these things occur, I'm just reiterating the fact that Trump seems to blow things out of proportion all the time.

And in the most recent report it is STILL declining:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

But is it widespread? No offense, but just your limited personal experiences aren't substantial evidence. Not being an ass, it's just true.

I don't expect anyone to take my word for things I argue about based on my personal experiences alone either

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Aleksandar37]

But is it widespread? No offense, but just your limited personal experiences aren't substantial evidence. Not being an ass, it's just true.

I don't expect anyone to take my word for things I argue about based on my personal experiences alone either

I think it's widespread, but they're also not all coming from Mexico. I've known plenty from European countries that come and work here illegally.

 

[ax1]

Invalid Link Removed

It happens, but seems to be on the decline. I'm not denying any of these things occur, I'm just reiterating the fact that Trump seems to blow things out of proportion all the time.

And in the most recent report it is STILL declining:

Invalid Link Removed

But its still extremely terrible, 295,000 in 2013 is very screwed up to me. They can have baby's here but when caught need to be sent back home even after birth.

And maybe it declines the last few years, but who is to say it wont escalate in the next few? All these stats have dips and escalations but the fact is we are a country and we need to both enforce our borders and enforce strict immigration laws. Im with Dump on this.

 

[Misfit28]

Invalid Link Removed

Interesting, I'll have to look into this more.

 

[ax1]

I think it's widespread, but they're also not all coming from Mexico. I've known plenty from European countries that come and work here illegally.

My family came from Sicily.

This is absolutely true that its not just Mexico to blame, its a global issue and the American tax payer gets the hit on this.

I want legal immigration, I totally want open borders to a certain extent, but whats been going on is out of control and I truly believe its primarily for political gain.

 

[Misfit28]

This is interesting. It's from the Bush Institute:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[ax1]

Interesting, I'll have to look into this more.

I got it from here, found it doing a little googling of course and didnt dig deep into their background but it is what it is.
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Misfit28]

My family came from Sicily.

This is absolutely true that its not just Mexico to blame, its a global issue and the American tax payer gets the hit on this.

I want legal immigration, I totally want open borders to a certain extent, but whats been going on is out of control and I truly believe its primarily for political gain.

I agree that legal immigration is the preferred route. I don't want totally closed borders, just a way for people to come here legally to contribute to our society. I see Trump as trying to stop all immigration period. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Misfit28]

I got it from here, found it doing a little googling of course and didnt dig deep into their background but it is what it is.
Invalid Link Removed

Yeah, I don't like that site. It is very anti-immigration. Connected to John Tanton. He's a white nationalist (aka alt-right).

He's also a eugenics proponent, it's interesting that you go to that site given your hatred of Margaret Sanger.

 

[ax1]

Yeah, I don't like that site. It is very anti-immigration. Connected to John Tanton. He's a white nationalist (aka alt-right).

I would say whats more important are the validation and sources of those stats.

 

[Misfit28]

I would say whats more important are the validation and sources of those stats.

The devil is in the details. How that site interprets those stats is important as well. I'm trying to find the original source.

 

[Aleksandar37]

I would say whats more important are the validation and sources of those stats.

Agreed. There is a lot of really bad interpretations and straight up lies being published online these days, but I also don't like accusations of fake news or so and so is a racist so those numbers can't possibly be correct. In any case, it's always best to follow the numbers back to the actual study and just go from the source.

 

[Jiigzz]

Invalid Link Removed

According to the CBP annual 2016 report, 408,870 of the 415,000 illegals detained came across the southern border. That number is down some, but over the last 10 years, if there is an average of 375,000 crossing illegally, which is just a very low conservative estimate for example sake, that means at least 37,500,000 additional illegals that crossed our unsecured southern border over that 10 years. We know it's more than that. What's worse than having unaccompanied minors crossing the border, is the state dept flying their parents from central america here. Or if it's an adult, flying that adult's kids from central america here to reunite the family. We should be doing the opposite.

10% of your population is illegal?

Crazy

 

[youngandfree]

10% of your population is illegal?

No that's 10% of our population that illegally crossed the southern border. As misfit pointed out earlier thousands of illegals came on visas and never left when the visa expired.

 

[Jiigzz]

No that's 10% of our population that illegal crossed the southern border. As misfit pointed out earlier thousands of illegals came on visas and never left when the visa expired.

Oh right. Yeah, that's a problem everywhere. We have that issue as well

 

[youngandfree]

I agree that legal immigration is the preferred route. I don't want totally closed borders, just a way for people to come here legally to contribute to our society. I see Trump as trying to stop all immigration period. Maybe I'm wrong.

What has Trump done or said to make you think he wants to end all immigration period?

 

[justhere4comm]

What has Trump done or said to make you think he wants to end all immigration period?

Where has he been clear at all on this?
An intelligent man would be perfectly clear in his language.

This man is just spitballing to see what will stick. If it doesn't then he reverses course. People have resigned and threatened to do so because of his volatile childlike persona.

This is no leader.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Where has he been clear at all on this?
An intelligent man would be perfectly clear in his language.

This man is just spitballing to see what will stick. If it doesn't then he reverses course. People have resigned and threatened to do so because of his volatile childlike persona.

This is no leader.

Politicians are often intentionally unclear, or at least leave some level of ambiguity in their statements, especially until they have a finalized/drafted plan/bill/law/etc ready.

 

[justhere4comm]

His statements aren't vague they are vile and aggressive yet including incomplete and barely coherent.

 

[youngandfree]

Where has he been clear at all on this?
An intelligent man would be perfectly clear in his language.

This man is just spitballing to see what will stick. If it doesn't then he reverses course. People have resigned and threatened to do so because of his volatile childlike persona.

This is no leader.

Considering he has only said anything about ILLEGALS and people coming from countries with isis sympahizers, I haven't seen any ambiguity.

Plus the state dept people didn't run and hide because they are terrified of trump.

 

[thebigt]

Where has he been clear at all on this?
An intelligent man would be perfectly clear in his language.

This man is just spitballing to see what will stick. If it doesn't then he reverses course. People have resigned and threatened to do so because of his volatile childlike persona.

This is no leader.

YOU ARE NOT BEING KIND AND THOUGHTFUL.....just saying!!!!

 

[thebigt]

I am really having a hard time accepting how vile and crude the anti-trump 'protesters' have become!!!

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

Clearly as usual, every time an administration changes, heads of departments tender resignations, and it's up the new administration to accept them or not.

 

[Aleksandar37]

I am really having a hard time accepting how vile and crude the anti-trump 'protesters' have become!!!

Do you require a safe space?

 

[thebigt]

Do you require a safe space?

lol...fortunately I live in one, aint no nasty assed anti-trumpers protesting where I live!!!

 

[justhere4comm]

Invalid Link Removed​

 

[thebigt]

Invalid Link Removed​

like I said vile and crude.

 

[ax1]

Where has he been clear at all on this?
An intelligent man would be perfectly clear in his language.

This man is just spitballing to see what will stick. If it doesn't then he reverses course. People have resigned and threatened to do so because of his volatile childlike persona.

This is no leader.

Yes he has said over and over again he wants to end illegal immigration and wants people to simply come here legally like its supposed to be.

This cant be any clearer, and is repeated consistently since the beginning.

 

[ax1]

Flashback: President Obama Encourages Illegal Immigrants to Vote [VIDEO]

Obama: "When you vote, you are a citizen yourself..."



President Obama endorsed the notion of illegal aliens casting votes in the 2016 US presidential election, in a shocking clip analyzed by Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.

“…of the millenials, dreamers, undocumented citizens – and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country – are fearful of voting,” an interviewer told the president. “So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?”

“Not true,” Obama reassured. “And the reason is first of all when you vote you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential.”


Cavuto was beside himself in disbelief.

“I can’t believe I heard what I heard. The president isn’t even questioning whether the person who is an illegal is voting, outside of reminding people that if you’re a citizen you vote – but it’s very clear that the question that was being asked was about illegals voting and afraid that they might be reported to border security.

“You’re illegal. You cannot vote. And the President of the United States is saying, ‘Don’t worry, no one will be spying on you, or catching you.’

“When maybe whether you’re for the president, against the president, whether you’re pro-immigration reform, anti-immigration reform – you are ignoring the fact that you’ve been questioned about illegal voting, which you can’t do. Why? Because you’re not a citizen of this country!”

 

[Misfit28]

Flashback: President Obama Encourages Illegal Immigrants to Vote [VIDEO]

Obama: "When you vote, you are a citizen yourself..."



President Obama endorsed the notion of illegal aliens casting votes in the 2016 US presidential election, in a shocking clip analyzed by Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.

“…of the millenials, dreamers, undocumented citizens – and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country – are fearful of voting,” an interviewer told the president. “So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?”

“Not true,” Obama reassured. “And the reason is first of all when you vote you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential.”


Cavuto was beside himself in disbelief.

“I can’t believe I heard what I heard. The president isn’t even questioning whether the person who is an illegal is voting, outside of reminding people that if you’re a citizen you vote – but it’s very clear that the question that was being asked was about illegals voting and afraid that they might be reported to border security.

“You’re illegal. You cannot vote. And the President of the United States is saying, ‘Don’t worry, no one will be spying on you, or catching you.’

“When maybe whether you’re for the president, against the president, whether you’re pro-immigration reform, anti-immigration reform – you are ignoring the fact that you’ve been questioned about illegal voting, which you can’t do. Why? Because you’re not a citizen of this country!”

C'mon man. That was debunked LONG ago, the video was selectively edited. Don't fall for this nonsense.

 

[Misfit28]

Invalid Link Removed

Clearly as usual, every time an administration changes, heads of departments tender resignations, and it's up the new administration to accept them or not.

This is true.