Sadly, Texas obviously has access to its DMV records and its voter registration records but does not have access to naturalization records, which are presumably held by the feds. Comparing non-citizen driversâ licenses or state IDs with voter registrations without checking against naturalization records in the intervening time is likely to result in about 90% false positives. To do this so openly and in conjunction with fund-raising is making a fraud out of alleging voter fraud.
Well, Democrats, sounds like there is enough reason for you to stop this âgood governmentâ guy. Please do so. Please.
If this was done through a computer system , then ask the programer what s/he was TOLD to do .
Even Brett would break character and slap Whitley upside his head.
Exactly, because it sounds like to me some one was playing around trying to see what kind of data they could compile. We need to know who told what to who and use what parameters, as you mentioned.
Well said, loan arranger. Also, the Secretary of State whoâs taking the heat for this is the newb kid on the block, whereas State AG Paxton has a proven track record of hateful deeds (trying to kill Affordable Care and remove Planned Parenthood as a medicaid provider for the state) and is in fact under indictment himself for something he claims is nothingburger the charges for which will not be pursued until he leaves office (sound familiar?).
So I think Paxton told the new guy exactly what to do and how to do it to maximize pearl-clutching fear of voter fraud reactions as a way to disguise what a piece of old-fashioned voter supression tgis actually is.
BTW, theyâve already been trying to downplay the bogus list due to all of the outcry previously reported in The Texas Tribune and elsewhere.
Most naturalization information is held at the county level in Texas. Harris County (Houston) eliminated 20,000 names before stopping the process altogether.
Interesting! So Paxton et al. could have done cross checks against their list if they had had any interest in providing accurate data.
They wanted the sound bite â and so the Trump retweet.
Paxton wants anything to distract from the fact that heâs still under indictment.
Quick, prove youâre a citizen. No, a photocopy wonât do. You have to have it notarized.
Nope, not a poll tax at all.
âInteresting! So Paxton et al. could have done cross checks against their list if they had had any interest in providing accurate data.â
NARRATOR: They had no interest.
None.
They released the number to the press right away so that it was reported as a matter of fact at first. The minute I heard it on the news I said no fucking way and I guess every voting and civil rights advocate in Texas had the same reaction. The next day they had to back up.
But Ken Paxton is: a criminal, a GOP tea party true believer, stupid.
So, they collected and distributed statistics that were known to be unsuitable for enforcement actions, and could be used to mislead, in ways that conveniently fit the right-wing anti-other narrative â but now they want to say gee, itâs none of their fault if some folks used those numbers inappropriately.
Reminds me of the Prohibition-era âwine brickâ. Grape growers would sell these bricks of grape concentrate, with instructions on how to reconstitute it into grape juice, and then clear and explicit warnings that you must not store the resulting juice in a cool cupboard for 21 days, otherwise certain violations of the Volstead Act might accidentally happen⌠through no fault of the grape grower, of course.
But the data is what the data is, and we were confident that was the best data we could get.
Data and information are not the same thing. What fucknuts failed to do is apply a filter or process to data the goes back 22 years!
Republicans are desperate for voter fraud (by Democrats, preferably immigrants voting for Dems), so they jumped on this without thinking. Maybe if theyâd have discretely checked their list against one countyâs recordsâŚ
They thought they had hit the equivalent of the Sutterâs Mill of voter fraud. And it was all going to be âillegal immigrantsâ cause thatâs how they reported it at first.
Texasâ election chief on Thursday defended giving prosecutors a list of 95,000 potential noncitizens on the stateâs voter rolls before vetting the information, which turned out to wrongly include scores of people who were naturalized before casting legal ballots.
Being familiar with the Gettysburg Address, I know what a score is, and it would take 4,750 score to equal 95,000 illegal voters. Words have meaning, and the way the sentence is written it appears that the number of naturalized citizens barely puts a dent in the list.
Well, if itâs held by the county, the state still doesnât have it, but they could get it easily enough. But centralizing that task would be a burden on the state level and it would be more efficient to farm the lists out to the counties to be checked against the naturalization records. But doing that, they would know that the original lists were worthless before they had been checked against the naturalization data. Publicizing them can only be an attempt at fear-mongering voter fraud.
O yes thatâs what it is.