Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Mapping the Vote
Alex Egoshin ran the presidential election returns through GIS software to create new relief maps comparing the United States of Doanld to the United Urban Centers of Hillary. Above, you have the Clinton Archipelago, and below, TrumpLand. Open each in a new tab for the full-size versions.
Just for fun, since we are in a mapping mood, I decided to see what the population of illegals is by county in the US , and found some 2014 data. It does a very interesting overlay to the gulag archipelago.
Why do you think it is interesting? If you had a map of legal immigrants it would look about the same. People go where there are other people and where the jobs are. Which means cities.
If that were true, the trends would be proportional. Look at LA County with over 1 million illegals in one county alone.
It almost make the case for the entire margin being due to motor voter illegals in the western states,
It does no such thing. Anymore than than mapping out Klan affiliation to show over representation in rural zones proves Trump voters are Klansmen.
You really just can’t accept that Trump legitimately lost the popular vote? That more people wanted Hillary to win, but only the particulars of our electoral system granted Trump his victory.
I would also like to point out that LA county has nearly 10 million people in it, making it the most populous county in the nation, by far. So even if it is 1 million illegals that is only 10% of the population. High to be sure but doesn’t seem outrageously high. The Cook County bar in your graph looks fairly tall too. Is it 500K? Because, Cook County has about 5 million people in it.
Where in God’s little green acre did you get that one?
What I am showing is a reason the Democrats promote illegal immigration, ferociously demand sanctuary cities and cling to their urban cores. It also shows why they reject voter ID laws and any other form of tightening of voter fraud.
The recount in Detroit showed massive fraud in the city. The easiest way to have fraud is to allow illegals to vote with a driver’s license and no checks.
Until these issues are addressed, the real citizens in those cities are being disenfranchised.
You think I give a goddam about the silly popular vote?
I care about what it will take to turn that whole map red so we can free the people trapped behind enemy lines.
Trump won the popular vote in thirty states. The national popular vote is irrelevant, much like NeverTrumpers.
Yeah. Obviously Donald Trump lost the popular vote because of 20 million illegals voting for him in California, and not because he’s the most unpopular major party candidate in history.
I mean obviously millions of people voted for him illegally in California. Look at all the evidence.
Still stuck at the denial stage, evidently.
No. Because it means we have President-elect Trump. That’s a thing to mourn, not celebrate.
There were potential benefits to a Clinton presidency. One of them being that one major party would at least pretend to care about limited government.
Who is that?
It’s nice to see a mention of the execrable Baker v Carr decision, another pivotal moment in the deconstruction of American conservatism that took place in the constitutional trough known as the Sixties.
Technically I think it’s her bride price.
Because what the GOP is doing — creating a center-right party dominating politics at the local, state and federal electoral and judicial levels — should be allergically offputting to a center-right community, right?
No, it doesn’t even almost make this case.
I believe that voter fraud is a real thing. I have first hand experience with it. However, there is nothing to suggest that the margin of popular vote victory for Clinton was due in a meaningful way to illegal aliens voting. Suggesting or intimating this makes one sound like a kook or worse.
1 in 10 illegal doesn’t seem “outrageously high” to you? It does to me.
Some people have no problem with Mexican nationals living in the US. The more, the merrier.
After all, what could possibly go wrong?
Here’s something to keep in mind about provable cases of voter fraud:
If the fraudsters win, they are in power and don’t investigate the fraud;
If the fraudsters lose, the winners don’t bother investigating the fraud.
Voter fraud is usually investigated in venues characterized by one-party dominance, when one faction seeks to overthrow its intraparty rival, such as good government reformers trying to unseat corrupt bosses of the same party.
For instance, Jimmy Carter first won office in Georgia by overturning a state senate primary election he had lost because of egregious voter fraud.
The problem is that in the process conservatism is being morphed into Trump-ism. So the meaning of “center-right” will change in the process.
It’s not as if this is some strange new phenomenon.
Here’s the thing about voter fraud: It leaves evidence. To get million of people to vote illegally would be a massive operation. The notion that there would be no leaks, no whistleblowers, no trails of evidence strains credulity.
Wow, that maps on really well to this one:
That’s a map of US population density. It’s weird that all the concentrations of undocumented immigrants also lines up with major cities.
No, wait. It’s not weird at all. It makes perfect [expletivd] sense.
Nor is removing them from the country.
Look, voter fraud is a thing of the past. Sure it existed in the days of Tammany Hall, the Pendergast machine in Kansas City, or the Daleys in Chicago, biut politicians are just more honest now. They have more integrity.
And don’t worry about the fact that in this last election many precincts in Detroit reported more votes cast than voters in the precinct.
Just a silly mistake, nothing to get worked up about.
Why are you just kidding?
I live in Massachusetts. Before that, Delaware and CT. What I could tell you about being held against my will in a corrupt despotism…
I have seen voter fraud, which was just roundly ignored by the officials at the polling place.
Manchester NH, November 2004, two buses of barely-legal students from BU pulled up. Students got off and registered en mass as same-day voters using the skimpiest of proof–electric bills, that sort of thing.
Bush lost NH by fewer than 9,000 votes.
Similarly, in 2016 Clinton took the state by fewer than 3,000 votes. There were 20,000 same day registrants.
So don’t tell me there’s no voter fraud.
Wow. What blindness. Are you serious?
I am sure the White Russians cared about limited government, as no doubt did the Kulaks.
Caring about limited government doesn’t matter a whit if a totalitarian is in charge of your country.
Exactly. Hence the Electoral College, to assure that a Union of States would elect a president that serves the needs of the States, not of the cities.
People need to read pre-1980 Civics text books to understand how our Constitutional Republic is meant to function. I recommend Common Sense of the Constitution by Alva Southworth (1924), which I have enjoyed reading in high school and as an adult, likely in a later edition. Perhaps I should post it on line.
Another JEB! supporter?
The particulars of the political geography are different from those of “The Hunger Games” (it is futuristic fiction, after all) but the principle is exactly the same. I used to think the book and movie series was silly teen sci-fi, but now it seems to be a rather prescient “Animal Farm” style allegory.
It doesn’t generally leave evidence, where did you get that notion? It’s a complete falsehood to claim that voter fraud always, or even generally, leaves evidence.
There are tens of thousands of precincts and many of these are dominated by Democrats concentrated in cities. No massive conspiracy is needed, simply incentive to act independently.
Many, many instances of voter fraud have been uncovered in this election and in previous ones. There is not just evidence, there’s proof. What history did you read?