Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, September 23, 2026

Data shows as many as 30,000 non-citizens may have been mistakenly registered to vote. Numbers too small to impact US elections, experts say.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Secretary Mullin: "How many did the governor of New Jersey say voted in their elections illegally, wasn't it over 30,000?" The real number? "Fewer than 400."

[image or embed]

-- Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) 3:21 PM · Sep 18, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article ...

... US states may have added more than 30,000 self-declared non-citizens to the nation's voter rolls since 2000 because of software glitches and clerical errors made while processing their driver's license and state ID applications, according to official records reviewed by Reuters.

The cases expose weaknesses in voter registration systems across a dozen US states governed by both Democrats and Republicans, but at numbers that experts said were too small relative to the country's more than 170 million registered voters to impact elections. Reuters was not able to determine how many of these non-citizens actually cast a ballot. ...

The findings suggest that inadvertent bureaucratic failures, rather than organized efforts to register immigrants illegally, are a major source of non-citizen registrations, and raise questions about whether legislative efforts to require proof of citizenship for voter registration would eliminate the issue.

President Donald Trump and his supporters have claimed, without evidence, that non-citizen voting is widespread and part of an organized conspiracy led by Democrats who hope to retake Congress in November's midterm elections, and are pushing lawmakers to toughen up voting requirements.

Bureaucratic errors have also been reported in at least 11 other states " including Republican strongholds like Iowa, Texas and South Dakota - bringing the nationwide figure above 30,000 since 2000, according to the Reuters reporting.
A nationwide tally of such mistakes has not previously been reported.

Reuters used data from the Center for Election Innovation & Research, a non-profit group that tracks claims of non-citizen voter registration and voting, to identify states where self-declared non-citizens were registered. Reuters then verified the numbers with state officials, court records, and local media reports.

The data showed errors occurred in California, Illinois, Iowa, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Virginia.

The numbers are inexact because state data is often tentative and subject to revision.

Such mistakes are likely a top reason non-citizens make it onto the nation's voter rolls, according to Don Palmer, a senior legal fellow for election integrity at the conservative Heritage Foundation and former Trump-appointed chair of the US Election Assistance Commission.

"I think that's the primary issue," Palmer said. "Driver's license agencies often make mistakes, and they often are not taking this as seriously as election officials." He said states also need to do more to verify voter eligibility. ...



#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-23 01:44 PM | Reply

Guess we gotta cancel elections and crown Trump king.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-23 01:45 PM | Reply

"Data shows as many as 30,000 non-citizens"

"...as many as..."

And that's possibly REGISTERED, not actually VOTED.

So, based on what the prior claims turned out to be, we're probably taking about a few hundred votes. Out of hundreds of millions of votes cast.

Remember Kansas' Kris Kobach? He claimed he had "over 100 cases" "ready to file" of illegals voting when the KS legislature empowered him. Four years and millions of dollars later, he'd found ONE illegal immigrant vote. And eight others: 3 addled elderly, 3 folks who'd moved and "forgot", and 2 cases of a surviving spouse returning a mail-in ballot after the voter had died.

When Trump enlisted Kobach to find illegal votes, they came up empty-handed.

#3 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-23 01:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

@#3 ... And that's possibly REGISTERED, not actually VOTED.

So, based on what the prior claims turned out to be, we're probably taking about a few hundred votes. Out of hundreds of millions of votes cast. ...

That is about the way I see it also.


#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-23 02:02 PM | Reply

"...because of software glitches and clerical errors made while processing their driver's license and state ID applications"

So...NOT because of some nefarious election-stealing scheme. Got it.

Wanna bet most folks "registered" had no idea???

Whatever the Vegas line is...I'm taking the over.

#5 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-23 02:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Its not a mistake.

@#3 ... And that's possibly REGISTERED, not actually VOTED.

How do you know? No one knows, but DeflectionDan is certain. He's willing to have citizens votes discounted just to maintain his ego.


Guess we gotta cancel elections and crown Trump king.
#2 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

Great job "progressives". All Lumpers have to do is protect citizens vote and you couldn't even do that.

Crime go ahead, kill people. Trains sure give us Billions and 40yrs. Illegals don't get benefits, wrong BILLIONS in health care.

Is there any project Lumpers fought for that is actually doing well?

#6 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-23 03:37 PM | Reply

"How do you know? No one knows"

Sure they do. Utah checked, and found ONE illegal registered.,,and he hadn't voted. And idiots keep getting suckered in by human error, while ignoring the near-total lack of criminal intent.

"He's willing to have citizens votes discounted just to maintain his ego."

Wow. You lie very nonchalantly. Rather sick trait.

In truth, I've merely pointed out EVERY SINGLE method suppressionists want to enact, will suppress more LEGAL votes than thwart ILLEGAL ones.

You know...Actual Math.

What kind of Math are YOU using?

#7 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-23 03:46 PM | Reply

"is protect citizens vote"

Oh, gee: look who can't tell the difference between being on a voter roll, versus having actually cast a false vote.

#8 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-23 03:48 PM | Reply

What kind of Math are YOU using?

#7 | Posted by Danforth

OneIronNut uses the same MAGA Math that says 12 years old is the new 18.

#9 | Posted by Sycophant at 2026-09-23 05:18 PM | Reply

Danforth,

What is your threshold whereby the number of non citizens voting becomes unacceptable to you ?

Also, why do you assume that all illegal votes end up being discovered especially on states where those in power don't want illegal votes to be discovered?

#10 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-09-24 01:41 AM | Reply

#10 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You voted for Trump three times.

Go eat your tainted beef.

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 03:46 AM | Reply

@#10 ... What is your threshold whereby the number of non citizens voting becomes unacceptable to you ? ...

My preference is zero.

However, that preference comes with a major caveat ...

In trying to attain that zero level of non-citizens voting, there cannot be any obstacles put into place that reduce the number of valid citizen voters.


#12 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-24 11:46 AM | Reply

Related ...

State error in Texas creates huge backlog in voter registration applications as midterm voting nears
apnews.com

... County election offices throughout Texas are scrambling to process a massive backlog of voter registration applications stemming from an error at the state level, a headache that is hitting just as they are preparing for voting to begin in the midterm elections.

The problem, which officials in the Republican-controlled state have not publicly defined, also could have disenfranchised people who wanted to vote in the state's March primary but whose registration applications were never processed, local election officials said during a news conference Wednesday.

"This is really out of left field. Knowing that this one element of (state) applications didn't come through, and we had no insight on it," said Chris McGinn, executive director of the Texas Association of County Election Officials.

The size of the backlog statewide hasn't been determined, but the association said it is in the tens of thousands for some of the state's most populous counties. In Bexar County, which includes San Antonio, the election office received about 45,000 backlogged voter registration applications.

Some election offices will need to hire temporary workers to handle the crush, officials with the association said.

The issue started last October in the Texas Department of Public Safety, which among other things allows people to register to vote or update their voter registrations when they renew their driver's license.

An unspecified error failed to send a large number of records to applicants' home counties, where the applications are processed and verified. Those records could be a new voter registration application or an update to an existing registration, such as a change of address.

The association of local election officials said its members did not receive any communication from the Department of Public Safety about why the backlog occurred or why they were not informed of the issue for nearly a year. ...


#13 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-24 11:49 AM | Reply

"What is your threshold whereby the number of non citizens voting becomes unacceptable to you ?"

Well, first is those making the claim distinguish between criminal intent and institutional errors. No suppressionist has even TOUCHED that salient distinction.

Second is you actually FINDING a problem. VA has had ONE voter fraud conviction PER DECADE in the last 20 years. Where's the problem??

Third is the unmistakable fact any additional barrier to voting WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL BARRIER TO VOTING.

Your turn: how many legal votes are you willing to suppress, so you can thwart TWO illegal votes?

#14 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:56 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"An unspecified error failed to send a large number of records to applicants' home counties, where the applications are processed and verified."

So ... programming and data entry, rather than nefarious criminal intent.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:58 AM | Reply

how many legal votes are you willing to suppress, so you can thwart TWO illegal votes?

POSTED BY DANFORTH

Ez pz! I got this one!

The obvious answer is ...

AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.

#16 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 12:03 PM | Reply

This is old news. New Jersey actually agrees with the 30,000 number.

Secondly, the only people who refuse to concern themselves with non-citizens voting in our elections are silly progressives. Gee, I wonder why that is?

#17 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-24 12:06 PM | Reply

Turds would prefer no one voted and pedophiles had free rein.

#18 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-24 12:08 PM | Reply

"New Jersey actually agrees with the 30,000 number."

Registered, not voted. How many falsely voted?

"...the only people who refuse to concern themselves with non-citizens voting in our elections are silly progressives."

On the contrary, progressives admit the fraud is so rare as to be meaningless. It's SLURPERS who are concerned with non-citizens voting, especially since THEY CAN'T FIND THEM.

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 12:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Tell us, LHT:

How many legal votes are you willing to suppress, so you can thwart TWO illegal votes?

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 12:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Also, why do you assume that all illegal votes end up being discovered especially on states where those in power don't want illegal votes to be discovered?
#10 | Posted by BellRinger

Where do you think the votes are coming from? Voter history rolls are public record. They have a history of every vote that was cast in the election.

Every ballot cast has to have a corresponding person on the voter rolls that now shows as having voted. Otherwise the number of cast ballots would be more than the number of people shown as having voted. If that were the case, it would be pretty easy for you to show evidence of it. So show me the evidence.

There are other possibilities as well. Ineligible voters being on the rolls... and THEN CASTING A VOTE. But that is also easy to prove. Find a person on the rolls who was ineligible, and then show that they voted from their history.

The last I can think of is an ineligible person impersonating someone who did not vote. But you should be able to find people on the rolls who show as having voted, but did not actually vote. Again, that should be pretty easy to find. And you would likely have a bunch of people who got flagged for trying to vote twice, because how would the fraudsters know who to impersonate?

So please share your evidence of fraud or your theories (based upon how voting, voter rolls, and public information work) of how the fraud could be committed without it being pretty easily uncovered by citizen journalists, much less the political party that has a vested interest in uncovering fraud.

#21 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2026-09-24 12:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"With fewer than 400"

IOW, maybe it was 4.

Right now, they're probably counting folks with the same name and birthdate as "possibles". Folks named Josephina Hernandez (3/19), or Patrick Kelly (3/17), for example.

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 12:21 PM | Reply

especially on states where those in power don't want illegal votes to be discovered?
#10 | Posted by BellRinger

Please name one person in those states who is in power who does not want illegal votes to be discovered?

Just when you think the nonsense can't get any worse you guys manage to be even more ridiculous with your lies.

#23 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 12:42 PM | Reply

So please share your evidence of fraud or your theories (based upon how voting, voter rolls, and public information work) of how the fraud could be committed without it being pretty easily uncovered by citizen journalists, much less the political party that has a vested interest in uncovering fraud.

#21 | POSTED BY GTBRITISHSKULL

Good luck with that.

Next lie being teed up for Americans.

We have to stop the votes because ...

It's a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE!!!

#24 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 12:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Danforth,
What is your threshold whereby the number of non citizens voting becomes unacceptable to you ?
Also, why do you assume that all illegal votes end up being discovered especially on states where those in power don't want illegal votes to be discovered?
#10 | Posted by BellRinger

What solution do you propose that wouldn't disenfranchise far more voters?

Which is a bigger problem for democracy the limited (very limited) voter fraud or massive voter suppression?

#25 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-24 12:46 PM | Reply

Oh yes and I forgot. We can't tell you why we had to stop the voting.

Because of ...

NATIONAL SECURITY!!!

#26 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-24 12:48 PM | Reply

Go eat your tainted beef.

#11

Better yet, his beef's taint...

#27 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2026-09-24 01:10 PM | Reply

" What solution do you propose that wouldn't disenfranchise far more voters?"

I describe that is a false Choice. How does taking additional measures to prev it fraudulent voting automatically translate to disenfranchisement?

#28 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-09-24 03:45 PM | Reply

what measures could you take that wouldn't disenfranchise voters?

It is a simple irrefutable fact that you add conditions you add hurdles. those hurdles cause voters not to vote

#29 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-24 05:53 PM | Reply

How does taking additional measures to prev it fraudulent voting automatically translate to disenfranchisement?

#28 | Posted by BellRinger

Because there are eligible voters who will not be able to meet the new requirements.

Take something as simple as a birth certificate.

I had to get a passport a few years back

I didn't have a birth certificate

I had to take time off work, travel several states over, present myself to the local clerk to get one

There are MANY people unable to do that simple task, age, distance, money, overseas..that simply won't be able to do that

I knew where I was born, which hospital, had some documents from my birth to prove my identity

There are many people who can't clear that simple hurdle

They might not know their birth parents, or the hospital they were born in or weren't even born in a hospital

Literally millions of people don't have birth certificates

To require one is to disengranchise a LOT of people

#30 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-24 06:01 PM | Reply

How about proof of citizenship in order to register?

#31 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-09-24 10:31 PM | Reply

@#31 ... How about proof of citizenship in order to register? ..

How many might qualified voters might that requirement disenfranchise valid voters from being able to register vs the number of people it may find of invalid voters?


Please, specify verified numbers, and not the usual phlegm of your current trolling alias.

thx.

#32 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-24 10:44 PM | Reply

Truth,

It's called growing up.

Unfortunately, a lot of people never do, usually because they were never expected to.

If you want to vote, you'll have to work through the system like everyone else.

Who ever said it was the government's job to treat grown adults like helpless children?

#33 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 10:45 PM | Reply

Truth,

"To require one is to disengranchise a LOT of people"

That's a load of bs.

Look up the meaning of disenfranchise.

No one is denying anyone the right to vote.

They have the same right to vote as anyone else and must fulfil the same requirements as everyone else.

Why do some people have to be pandered to like a child all their life?

Grow up or at least find someone to help you.

#34 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 10:50 PM | Reply

Voting is a RIGHT,not a PRIVILEGE.

Why do we pander to every loser who wants a Gun?

Even when the Losers Kill Children?

Because Gun ownership is a RIGHT.

Voting is also a RIGHT.

It's not Supposed to be difficult or Expensive to Exercise a Civil RIGHT.

Many gun laws meant to make Gun Ownership Expensive or Difficult have been Ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

VOTING is an Even More Basic Right in a Free Society.

DO WE LIVE IN A FREE SOCIETY?

Bj Boi.

#35 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-09-24 11:07 PM | Reply

@#34 ... No one is denying anyone the right to vote. ...

Oh, sometimes your trolling alias says the funniest things.

The GOP is actively trying to deny the right to vote of those who might tend to vote against them.

To wit ...

U.S. Appeals Court Strikes Down North Carolina's Voter ID Law (2016)
www.npr.org

...The appeals court noted that the North Carolina Legislature "requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices" -- then, data in hand, "enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans."

The changes to the voting process "target African Americans with almost surgical precision," the circuit court wrote, and "impose cures for problems that did not exist."

The appeals court suggested that the motivation was fundamentally political -- a Republican legislature attempting to secure its power by blocking votes from a population likely to vote for Democrats....

[emphasis mine]


#36 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-24 11:18 PM | Reply

Eff,

"Because gun ownership is a RIGHT."

Not everyone is permitted to own a gun.

And even those who are permitted still have to meet certain legal requirements.

Voting is also a right, but most states still require you to register and follow the rules for voting.

Yet somehow, if someone can't vote from their sofa, we're told they're being disenfranchised.

That's BS.

#37 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 11:33 PM | Reply

"Look up the meaning of disenfranchise. No one is denying anyone the right to vote."

Making it harder for the legal voter to cast her or his legal vote is, BY DEFINITION, voter suppression.

A well-placed construction site on the main thoroughfare to the sole remaining voting precinct will suppress more votes IN ONE CYCLE than your home state has had fraudulent votes since records have been kept.

#38 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:40 PM | Reply

"They have the same right to vote as anyone else and must fulfil the same requirements as everyone else."

Not true. You want to add ADDITIONAL barriers to voting. And you want to pretend they won't be additional barriers to voting.

Can you name ONE SUGGESTION of yours that doesn't suppress more legal votes than thwarts illegal ones?

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:43 PM | Reply

"Yet somehow, if someone can't vote from their sofa, we're told they're being disenfranchised."

If you don't understand ANY further parameters suppress LEGAL votes, you don't understand the concept of macro dials. Also, you're refusing to address the rarity of vote fraud, and the pretense the cases which exist would've been thwarted by stricter Voter ID controls.

You failed all three elementary tests. Sorry, but it's off to the little kids' table for you.

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:54 PM | Reply

" if someone can't vote from their sofa, we're told they're being disenfranchised"

What excuse did you give last time, so you could vote by mail?

#41 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-24 11:55 PM | Reply

Dan,

"Making it harder for the legal voter to cast her or his legal vote is, BY DEFINITION, voter suppression."

Some states have to make accommodations because people live far from polling stations. Others live nearby.

Everyone in a locality has the same requirements they've had every four years.

Yet ever since 2020, the argument seems to be that unless people automatically receive a mailed ballot, their vote is being suppressed.

As I've posted extensively, I've changed my tune. I used to favor banning mailed ballots except for traditional absentee voting. Now I believe ballots should not be mailed automatically, but everyone should be able to request one through the same process used for absentee ballots.

They can still vote from their sofa, but they'll have to at least put in the effort to request a ballot. The information on their request would be checked against their voter registration record, and their eligibility would be verified before the ballot is mailed. If they can't fulfil these basic requirements, they don't get to vote.

Is that too much to ask?

#42 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 11:56 PM | Reply

Dan,

"What excuse did you give last time, so you could vote by mail?"

Where did you get the idea I vote by mail?

#43 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-24 11:57 PM | Reply

Just mail the Ballot.

It's a Vote. Not a Firearm or Ammunition.

Trust of Civilians is a Valid Concern.

Remember, Guilt must be Proved.

The Default legal position is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

What you are Suggesting is Assuming Guilt before the Fact.

Selectively, to help one Party.

The TRUMP Party.

#44 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-09-25 12:24 AM | Reply

Eff,

No idea what you're talking about if that's intended for me.

#45 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 12:35 AM | Reply

Eff,

You mean requiring people to be eligible to vote to get a ballot?

#46 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 12:36 AM | Reply

" ever since 2020, the argument seems to be that unless people automatically receive a mailed ballot, their vote is being suppressed."

That's a lie.

Since 2020, you've been pretending mailed ballots are usually purloined, tens of thousands of times at least, but ONLY by Democrats, and ONLY against Republicans, and all those Republican victims NEVER EVER came forward because...they were too patriotic.

If that seems idiotic, you're right.

Your answer, Bill, always, is to suppress more legal votes than you would thwart. Why do you NEVER ADDRESS THAT CENTRAL FLAW in your proposal(s)?

FFS, you can't even use your own home state as an example.

#47 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 12:37 AM | Reply

"They can still vote from their sofa, but they'll have to at least put in the effort to request a ballot. The information on their request would be checked against their voter registration record, and their eligibility would be verified before the ballot is mailed. If they can't fulfil these basic requirements, they don't get to vote. Is that too much to ask?"

Depends. What if the majority of the voters in that state CHOOSE to have universal mailed ballots? Should you, as a resident of Virginia, be able to override citizens of other states on how to run their elections?

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 12:41 AM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort