I have written many times that voter fraud and/or illegal voting tends to work in the favor of Democrats. and that it can make a difference during extremely close elections. I've noted that in the Bush/Gore thing of 2000 the media recount found that about 5,000 illegal votes were case and about 70% of them were Democrats. That means it's reasonable to think Gore had a net edge of somewhere in the ballpark of 2000 in terms of the illegal vote.
However, if the point of your post is to suggest that there was enough illegal voting to account for Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote, I think that is extremely unlikely. She won the popular vote by about 2.9 million. Overwhelmingly likely that more legal, legitimate voters voted for Clinton than voted for Trump and that the margin was in the millions.
Just to kind of put it into perspective, if you were to take the 2000 Florida situation and multiply it by 51 for the number of jurisdictions voting in a Presidential election you get a net Democrat edge of 102,000 votes. Yes I know that's very rough and crude but what it's telling you is that even in a case like 2000 Florida where everything was looked at in a lot of detail there just aren't that many illegal votes proportionately. It's ridiculous for Trump to suggest, when Clinton won the popular vote by 2.9 million, that it was because of illegal voting.
Boy has JSO’s take on voter fraud changed 180 degrees or WHAT?
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
