Why Trump’s claim of 3-5 million illegal immigrant votes makes no sense

Nearly 2.9 million Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than for Donald Trump (see e.g. The Cook Political Report‘s final tally), but back in late November Trump tweeted that he actually won the popular vote for president “if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.”

He offered no evidence for this, and voting officials of both parties have rejected the claim as clearly false, as have independent investigators. A January 25 report on CNN observed that

A number of studies have found no evidence of widespread voter fraud.

The Truth About Voter Fraud, a report written by experts at The Brennan Center for Justice, found voter fraud rates were between 0.00004% and 0.0009%.

“Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely that an American will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls,” reads the report.

Other news reports have accurately described Trump’s claim as “false” or “debunked,” but I don’t think it’s been made clear enough that his claim simply doesn’t even make sense from the standpoint of basic arithmetic. That is, there’s no plausible way it could be anywhere close to true.

See, for example, the January 26 article by Politico’s Chris Ashby, who calculates the wildly implausible magnitude of fraud that would have been required.

And we should recall that Trump isn’t just asserting massive voter fraud. He’s more specifically said that the votes in question came from 3 to 5 million illegal immigrants. According to multiple sources, he repeated this claim during a January 23 meeting with members of Congress. Quoting Fox News, “President Donald Trump claimed at a meeting with congressional leaders Monday that he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in last November’s election because between three million and five million ‘illegals’ cast ballots, multiple sources told Fox News.” Or as the Associated Press reported it, “President Donald Trump asserted in a private meeting with congressional leaders Monday night that he would have won the popular vote in the 2016 election if 3 million to 5 million immigrants living in the country illegally hadn’t voted.”

Yesterday Kevin Drum noted in passing, “There are about 20 million noncitizens in the US. Trump is therefore saying that 15-25 percent of all noncitizens voted. This is fantastically beyond anything even remotely plausible.” (That’s just one point he makes; read the whole piece. He also points out that a 2014 study cited by Trump himself actually suggests that very few if any noncitizens try to vote.)

And Trump isn’t just claiming that noncitizens voted but specifically that 3-5 million illegal immigrants voted. The Department of Homeland Security (link to PDF) and the Pew Research Center (link) agree that there are about 11 million illegal immigrants in this country. More than two million of them are children, so there are at most 9 million old enough to be mistaken for an eligible voter. Trump’s 3-5 million would be (at least) 33 to 56 percent of them.

Incidentally, according to Trump, there were no illegal votes cast for him. Or so he told David Muir of ABC News in an interview that aired Wednesday night. But a January 26 piece by Aaron Blake for The Washington Post points out that of four known cases of illegal votes in the 2016 election, one was cast by some claiming to work for the Trump campaign and another by someone who claimed to have voted for Trump. A third was registered as a Republican. (The original report is here.)

Finally, on January 25 Trump tweeted, “I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states, …” As various sources, including an article in yesterday’s New York Times, have reported, people registered to vote in more than one state include his daughter Tiffany, his press secretary Sean Spicer, his advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner, his nominee for Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin, and (at least until a few days ago) his strategist Steve Bannon.

Being registered in two states is actually very common and typically occurs when someone moves from one state to another. It doesn’t mean that the people in question have voted twice.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Inauguration 2017 from Bad Lip Reading

Here’s the Trump inauguration as reimagined by the folks at Bad Lip Reading. Some of the lines are remarkably plausible.


Link: https://youtu.be/gneBUA39mnI

In the interest of equal time here’s their version of Obama’s second inauguration, which I thought less inspired than the Trump version:


Link: https://youtu.be/fpwhA-LdOHo

And for completeness, Beyonce’s performance in 2013:


Link: https://youtu.be/JI1kq6CA_38



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Colbert’s farewell to Obama

Stephen Colbert and his conservative identical cousin “Stephen Colbert” say farewell to President Obama. It’s reasonably funny but also has some points to make. This was originally broadcast last Thursday, the night before the inauguration.


Link: https://youtu.be/0YmCUgacULs

There are a couple of in-jokes in the sketch having to do with legal matters related to Colbert’s previous show on Comedy Central. On that show he portrayed a parody of a conservative, and after he left for CBS, attorneys for Comedy Central told him that they owned the rights to that character and also to his segment “The Word.” In response, Colbert announced that he would henceforth not play the same parody conservative character but rather an entirely different one who just happened to look the same and was also named “Stephen Colbert.” He also created an entirely different version of “The Word” that was identical to the previous version except for being called “The Werd.”



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Distracting oneself from the present by thinking about the past

Novelist and blogger John Green muses about out how far back “back” goes in a vlog post that manages to inspire a fair mount of awe in just 3 minutes and 42 seconds:


Link: https://youtu.be/qxfD1DhqBiA

The time spans he mentions are immense, and yet in the grand scheme of things they aren’t very much at all. From the first occupation of the Chauvet cave until today is less than six one-hundredths of one percent of the time since the end of the Mesozoic, the Age of the Dinosaurs. And from the end of the Mesozoic until today is less than 1.5 percent of the lifetime of the Earth. (Feel free to check my arithmetic.)



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

It could have been worse

If you’re in a funk about today’s inauguration, just remember that it could have been worse.

No, I don’t mean Hillary Clinton would have been worse. For all her faults, she would be nowhere near as bad as Trump. That’s why pretty much the entire Republican foreign policy and national security establishment backed her — not because they liked her or agree with her on a lot, but because (as conservative writer P.J. O’Rourke memorably put in on NPR’s Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me last year, “I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises. It’s the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, but she’s way behind in second place. She’s wrong about absolutely everything, but she’s wrong within normal parameters.”

I beg to differ with P.J. There were third-party candidates who were worse than Hillary. (Which ones. Pretty much all of them for differing reasons, though ignorance was a common fault.)

Anyway, back in September the folks at the Glove & Boots YouTube channel assembled a debate among a set of presidential candidates who were even worse. Watching this might cheer you up:


Link: https://youtu.be/-yOcRIt4JdA



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Last words from Obama’s anger translator

One of the best bits on the Key & Peele show had Jordan Peele playing Barack Obama with Keegan-Michael Key as his “anger translator” Luther. It became so popular that Luther appeared with the real President Obama in the 2015 White House Correspondents Dinner.

Alas, Key & Peele is no longer on the air, but Key and Peele came back to allow Luther to express the president’s feelings on leaving office. Here it is courtesy of The Daily Show:


Link: https://youtu.be/QFmLReorTSY

(The unbleeped version is here.)



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Medicaid helps children even years later

Pediatrician Aaron Carroll summarizes recent research showing the Medicaid benefits for children end up saving the federal government money. How is that possible? Because children who had health insurance through Medicare grow up healthier and are less likely to be on welfare as adults.


Link: https://youtu.be/m893crJWCkA

This is in keeping with an earlier video Carroll did on the same subject.

Medicaid is a joint state-federal program so the eligibility rules and benefits vary from state to state. The Affordable Care Act was intended to expand eligibility nationwide while covering almost all the costs. States would ultimately pay up to 10 percent of the expansion costs, but that would be offset by savings in subsidies to public hospitals. Unfortunately a number of states refused to agree to the expansion — even though they’d come out ahead — because of political opposition to Obamacare.

Incidentally, it’s worth recalling that while Medicaid is normally thought of as health insurance for the poor, the majority of people who use the benefits aren’t working-age adults but children and especially the very elderly in nursing homes. Medicare doesn’t cover extended nursing home care and most people don’t have long-term care insurance (it’s not cheap), so once someone’s wealth has been wiped out by medical bills, Medicaid is the only thing that pays for nursing home care.

For more about Medicaid see these posts and for more about Obamacare see these.

It’s also worth recalling why Republicans have been so opposed to improving health insurance.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Review: The Big Short (2015 movie)

The Big Short begins with an on-screen quotation: “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” Perhaps appropriately for a film largely about mistakes and fraud, it falsely attributes the line to Mark Twain.

As with Spotlight, this film dramatizes real events, with an excellent cast, many of whom based their performances on the real people they’re portraying (though the character names are changed). It also breaks the fourth wall like Deadpool, not to mention matching it in foul language.

It’s frequently very funny as well, despite the fact that the subject matter is the development of the financial crisis that peaked in 2008 and brought about the Great Recession that would almost certainly have led to an economic collapse worse than the Great Depression had not the Federal Reserve and the Bush and Obama administrations not intervened as forcefully as they did.

The detonator was something called a mortgage backed security (MBS), a type of bond that let investors buy part of a pool of home mortgages. Since people tend to pay their mortgages because they don’t want to lose their homes, and even when they don’t lenders presumably can foreclose and sell the house to recover the principal, mortgage lending is considered a pretty safe investment. A collection of mortgages ought to be even safer, since any individual bad mortgage would be a tiny fraction of the whole pool. There’s nothing at all wrong with this in itself.

But as mortgage backed securities grew more popular with investors, the Wall Street firms issuing them ran short of quality mortgages needed to construct the pools and started buying up any and all mortgages they could find.

This meant that lenders could make a quick profit by selling mortgages to Wall Street as fast as they could make the loans, as opposed to waiting years for the borrowers to repay them. In fact, since they were making money up front, it made no difference to the lenders whether the loans got repaid at all. To meet the demand they cheerfully lent to subprime borrowers, people with bad credit and low income, and to attract them the lenders structured mortgages with tiny teaser interest rates in effect for the first year or so, making for very low payments almost anybody could afford. They often didn’t bother to explain to borrowers that before too long they would suddenly owe monthly payments three or four times as big. The Wall Street firms buying and packaging the mortgages into MBSes overlooked their low quality as well, and they effectively bribed the rating agencies to lie about their safety. They also embraced obscure terminology to make things harder for investors to understand.

That presented a problem for the filmmakers. How do you explain the necessary details to the audience without making their eyes glaze over? I liked the way they solved this problem. When it becomes necessary to demystify what a subprime MBS is, the narrator announces, “Here’s Margot Robbie in a bubble bath to explain.” Cut to just that.

A handful of people realized that a crisis was in the making, and they’re the protagonists of the movie but not its heroes. They were mainly just looking to make a lot of money by betting against (“shorting”) the investments other people thought were safe. Only a couple of them think about the fact that a lot of innocent people are going to be hurt. If there’s a hero, it’s the character played by Steve Carell, who stands out even in this fine cast. He’s a morose, angry man made that way by personal tragedies and by his conscience and feelings of guilt. When he grasps the full scope of the problem he tries to make more people aware of what’s going on, and at a couple of points he speaks his mind loudly and publicly, and (as other characters turn to camera to tell us) he actually did that in real life.

Near the end Carell says, “I have a feeling in a few years people are going to be doing what they always do when the economy tanks. They will be blaming immigrants and poor people.” He’s right.

Right-wind media in particular tried to blame it on borrowers for taking out loans they couldn’t repay, overlooking the fact that they were routinely misled by the lenders. With even less justification, others tried to blame an anti-redlining regulation requiring commercial banks to make loans in minority neighborhoods, even though that regulation had been in effect for decades without problems and explicitly prohibited the risky lending practices in question. Moreover, the regulation applied only to commercial banks, and the subprime mortgage problem was markedly worse among other types of mortgage lenders who were not subject to the regulation and were less regulated in general.

This is an excellent film I highly recommend.


Link: https://youtu.be/vgqG3ITMv1Q



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

U.S. cracks down on robocalls, maybe

On Friday the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced a crackdown on two massive robocall operations as described on their website. Unfortunately the penalties sound less like a crackdown than a wrist-slap.

The two “ringleaders,” Justin Ramsey and Mike Jones, along with their companies and business partners, settled with the FTC by signing legal agreements that forbid them from continuing to call numbers on the Do Not Call list, and they have also agreed to pay a combined penalty of over half a million dollars.

That strikes me as a pretty weak punishment given that it seems likely they’ll still end up well ahead financially, having made millions upon millions of illegal calls over four years or more.

On the other hand, Ramsey, Jones, et al are still being sued by multiple state attorneys general, so maybe they’ll end up paying more. It also reassures me that they must have lawyers to pay, and maybe that’s what’s really going to hit them hard.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Mr D’s good point about the Supreme Court

Brian Keith Dalton makes a good point here about nominees to the Supreme Court:


Link: https://youtu.be/Mvzf8nw9KQs

In brief, last year GOP leaders in Congress refused for the first time in American history even to consider the president’s nominee to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. Their argument was that it was too close to the presidential election (even though the election was nearly a year in the future at that point) and the American people deserved to have a say on whom they wanted to name the next justice.

Well now, as Dalton notes, we know who the American people chose: the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, by a margin of 2.1 percent and well over 2.8 million votes. It’s true she’s not the incoming president because the wasn’t the choice of the Electoral College. But Mitch McConnell et al didn’t say the Electoral College should have a voice, they specifically said the American people.

Of course, Clinton can’t make the nomination, but Trump could at least have the decency to name someone acceptable to Democrats. A good choice would be the judge Obama nominated, Merrick Garland, a moderate widely praised by Republicans and Democrats.

But watch Dalton’s video. He says it much better and more entertainingly.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather