Trump vindication? New study shows MILLIONS of “non-citizens” have been voting in U.S. elections
06/23/2017 / By JD Heyes / Comments
Trump vindication? New study shows MILLIONS of “non-citizens” have been voting in U.S. elections

After Donald J. Trump handily defeated Hillary Clinton in November, her shell-shocked campaign, along with the entire Democratic Left, could only grasp at one fact to soothe their bruised, over-inflated egos: Their candidate, at least, won the popular vote.

Well, she did, no question about it. But even that is tainted, given that her majority came entirely from one state: California (more on that in a moment).

But Trump, not willing to concede a single point regarding his historic win, quickly made a counter-claim that sent the Left into apoplectic fits: He said he would have also won the popular vote, along with the electoral majority, were it not for millions of non-citizens and illegal aliens casting ballots.

The Washington Post huffed:

Days after being sworn in, President Trump insisted to congressional leaders invited to a reception at the White House that he would have won the popular vote had it not been for millions of illegal votes, according to people familiar with the meeting.

Trump has repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that widespread voter fraud caused him to lose the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, even while he clinched the presidency with an electoral college victory.

‘There’s no proof! Where’s your evidence?’ his critics wailed.

Now he has some.

As noted by the Washington Times, a new report from an independent think tank that is widely cited estimates that, in the 2008 election, as many as 5.7 million non-citizens cast ballots, with about two-thirds of that amount voting in the 2012 election.


To come up with its findings, the organization Just Facts, led by President James D. Agresti, examined voter data compiled by Harvard/YouGov, an exhaustive study that is conducted every two years using questions from a sampling of tens of thousands of voters — some of whom admit that they are not U.S. citizens but who vote anyway.

The group’s findings “confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: Those who said it happens a lot and those who said the problem is nonexistent,” The Times reported.

On the one one side, there are studies by researchers at Old Dominion University who sought to gather scientifically obtained voting data on non-citizens using the Harvard compilations, which are embodied in an ongoing analysis called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

On the other side are those who contend from other studies using the same data that “zero” non-citizens out of some 18 million U.S. adults voted. As expected, the discredited Left-leaning “mainstream” media quickly took this position — so they could say ‘No, Mr. President, there is no problem with widespread voter fraud,’ thus debunking the Old Dominion conclusions.

But despite being lambasted by the liberal press, the ODU profs have stood by their conclusions, contending that data show anywhere between 38,000 and 2.8 million voted illegally in 2008.

However, Agresti’s analysis concluded that the actual numbers are very likely much higher. He says data show that about 7.9 million non-citizens were registered illegally that year, and that between 594,000 and 5.7 million of them voted.

The Times noted further:

These numbers are more in line with the unverified estimates given by President Trump, who said the number of ballots cast by noncitizens was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

We may soon get further verification that Trump was right. The president signed an executive order in May establishing a commission tasked with attempting to find on-the-ground facts regarding illegal voting. The commission is headed by Vice President Mike Pence and it will principally examine outdated voter registration rolls around the country containing names of the deceased and people who have registered in multiple jurisdictions. (RELATED: Voter Fraud: Dead People Are Voting)

“The details are technical,” says Agresti of his conclusions, “but the figure I calculated is based on a more conservative margin of sampling error and a methodology that I consider to be more accurate.”

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for and, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.


Submit a correction >>

, , , ,

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
Get Our Free Email Newsletter
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.
Your privacy is protected. Subscription confirmation required.

Get the world's best independent media newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.

By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.