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 | Newsworthy 1

"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 | Newsworthy 1

"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 | Newsworthy 1

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

"Where did you get the idea I vote by mail?"

It's obviously easy for you to vote.

How long were you in line last time around? My guess is it was about the same amount of time it'd take to fill out an absentee ballot.

And nowhere near, say, 4-6 hours.

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

Dan,

Funny.

Your first line is calling me a liar.

Then your next paragraph isn't exactly what I've said.

I've never said or implied the word "ONLY".

Not in the mood for your games.

#50 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 12:48 AM | Reply

Your first line is calling me a liar.

You are a liar and a troll.

It's why people treat you with contempt and derision.

#51 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-09-25 12:49 AM | Reply

Dan,

Try reading what I actually write.

I said I am less concerned with mailed ballots than I have been but they should be requested so eligibility can be determined before it is mailed.

#52 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 12:52 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

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

Election boards already ensure that happens.

As we've seen repeatedly of late, when folks who shouldn't be on voting rolls are on voting rolls...

a) it's usually a programming or data entry error, and NOT voter criminality.
b) they're usually unaware of being on voter rolls.
c) they rarely vote: Why? They know they shouldn't (plus that deportation thingy...).

#53 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 12:57 AM | Reply

"I said I am less concerned with mailed ballots than I have been but they should be requested so eligibility can be determined before it is mailed."

And I asked if your feelings should supersede the voters in, say, Alaska and Utah?

Because eligibility is already determined before mailed ballots are mailed. WHY ARE YOU PRETENDING THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN?

Which Commandment addresses bearing false witness in your sect? I know it's #8 for Catholics.

#54 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 01:04 AM | Reply

"Then your next paragraph isn't exactly what I've said."

It's exactly your theory.

It's the ONLY way your loser President doesn't lose the Presidency: tens of thousands of stolen votes, and every single victim chooses to remain silent, even after a close, emotional election, and even after January 6th. Every. Single. One. What are the odds?

No really....WHAT ARE THE ODDS???

Every time you get cornered by the math, you pretend it's really something else.

At this point, you can't even come to grips with your own home state's vote fraud records. Nor can you admit every plan of yours prevents more legal votes than prevents illegal ones.

#55 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 01:11 AM | Reply

"I've never said or implied the word "ONLY"."

I've asked you repeatedly who does it more, and at what percentage more. You've NEVER quantified.

I've even allowed you to choose whatever cockamamie percentage one side does it compared to the other: 120%? 135%? 150%???

Until you quantify, the default is ONLY.

#56 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 01:22 AM | Reply

Here's what the Heritage Foundation Website demonstrates.

The plurality of vote fraud doesn't come from the voter: it comes from either Canvassers, Cullers, or Campaigns.

When it IS a voter casting a fraudulent vote, it's almost always ONE illegal vote.

The usual fraudulent vote is the garden-variety type: dead housemate with an absentee ballot; addled elderly moved and forgot; moved and purposely forgot; and if in-person...usually once by mail, once in-person. The rarest is in-person multiple votes at the same precinct.

The ROI for the fraud is ludicrously bad: up to $10,000 and a year in jail PER VOTE. And if you're in America illegally, deportation.

States average about 1 conviction per state per year.

Fraud at scale is self-defeating: the larger the conspiracy, the more impossible to keep secret.

Regarding Presidential elections, it's a foregone conclusion in roughly 80% of the states. A stolen vote in MA or WY would be like a fart in a very large windstorm.

When a reason why is given, the most common answer is, I was convinced the other side was doing it.

#57 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-09-25 01:45 AM | Reply

Ur a dumb fk

#58 | Posted by Weiczyk at 2026-09-25 07:31 AM | Reply

How about proof of citizenship in order to register?

#31 | Posted by BellRinger

How does one do that?

With a birth certificate

I explained the difficulty people will have

10s of millions of Americans do not have birth certificates

I, fairly well off, middle class American had to exert significant time and money to obtain one for a passport

What will happen to the millions of Americans who cannot do that?

They won't be able to vote

#59 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 09:42 AM | 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

Christ what a vile attitude you have

You are talking about as an example a poor elderly black woman in Louisiana who would have zero resources to obtain some ID.

Or a disabled veteran where travel is a massive burden

Or a poor single mother who has to work 3 jobs to keep a roof over their family's head

You are a fucking vile human being

#60 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 09:45 AM | Reply

Bill, re your post 42 you wrote:

"The information on their request would be checked against their voter registration record, and their eligibility would be verified before the ballot is mailed."

When I voted by mail during Covid, my ballot was placed inside an envelope, which I then sealed. On that envelope, I could enter either my driver's license # or the last 4 digits of my SS# so my voter eligibility could be confirmed BEFORE the ballot was processed. I entered my choice, signed it (when I vote in person I have to sign the line next to my name on the voter roll), put it in another envelope, which I then sealed. I then put that envelope into another envelope to mail it to the county courthouse to be processed.

I could follow the processing of my ballot online. I mailed it on a Friday, it was received on Saturday and processed on Monday.

I am sure that every state follows a similar procedure for mail in ballots.

#61 | Posted by Chantresse at 2026-09-25 09:45 AM | Reply

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

Why do you have to put hurdles in the way of people exercising their vote?

Oh, right, because you are a shitty human being.

#62 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 09:46 AM | Reply

Truth,

How has the elderly black woman been voting without an ID up to now?

I think you believe Democrats are too dumb to take care of themselves.

People can get absentee ballots if they are immobile.

You think I'm too dumb to see through your nonsense.

#63 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 11:06 AM | Reply

"How has the elderly black woman been voting without an ID up to now?"

She's been voting in that precinct all her life and taught all the election officials third grade?

#64 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-25 11:12 AM | Reply

You think I'm too dumb to see through your nonsense.

#63 | POSTED BY BILLJOHNSON

We think that you support a dictator and a madman.

#65 | Posted by Zed at 2026-09-25 11:13 AM | Reply

What you're missing BJ Boi, is that if voting is a Right, it isn't legal to make it difficult or Expensive to Excercise.

How many Gun laws have been ruled unconstitutional for this very reason?

How many Voting Laws?

Poll Taxes, Grandfather Clauses, etc.

Voting is Particularly important because it is the basis of a free Society.

You want to force people to conform to your Bias about mail in Ballots.

---- that.

In New Jersey you don't have to show picture ID to vote,you didn't used to in Virginia.

Showing ID is Redundant, isn't that what VOTER REGISTRATION is For?

In Virginia for most of my adult life it was enough to confirm your identity verbally and recite back your home Address at the polling place. This was under threat of Perjury if you Lied.

If you really live in VIRGINIA I'm sure you remember how it was.

All of these Voter Changes are meant to keep the Poor and Urban from Voting Easily.

You don't care about Fraud.

You want to Suppress Black and Poor Votes to help Trump.

Just admit it.

Trump Does.

#66 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-09-25 11:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The problem in New Jersey stems from people being registered to vote while obtaining a driver's license. The company issuing the licenses weren't required to check for voter eligibility.

Here's a ------' clue, quit handing out driver's licenses to people who are in the country illegally.

How many of the 30,000 actually voted? I have no idea. But I can tell you that every one of them knew they shouldn't have registered to vote. Smells like intent to me.

#67 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 11:35 AM | Reply

Here's a ------' clue, quit handing out driver's licenses to people who are in the country illegally.

By all means more unqualified drivers without insurance!

#68 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:40 AM | Reply

Truth,
How has the elderly black woman been voting without an ID up to now?
I think you believe Democrats are too dumb to take care of themselves.
People can get absentee ballots if they are immobile.
You think I'm too dumb to see through your nonsense.

#63 | Posted by BillJohnson

You are simply not responding to my point.

That woman would need to prove her citizenship.

That woman would need to acquire a birth certificate that may not exist

These are irrefutable facts

These are irrefutable hurdles to voting

You refuse to acknowledge them

You refuse to argue how the legal votes prevented will be less then the fraudulent voters

Face it you are not a good person

#69 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:43 AM | Reply

By all means more unqualified drivers without insurance!

#68 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

Here's clue number 2:

Go back home and apply to come here legally.

#70 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 11:50 AM | Reply

-That woman would need to acquire a birth certificate that may not exist

LMAO Now that's some serious stretching....

#71 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 11:53 AM | Reply

Here's clue number 2:
Go back home and apply to come here legally.

#70 | Posted by lfthndthrds

how does not giving them a license achieve that end?

#72 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:53 AM | Reply

v

-That woman would need to acquire a birth certificate that may not exist
LMAO Now that's some serious stretching....

#71 | Posted by lfthndthrds a

the argument is confirming citizenship

At least 3.8 million adult American citizens do not have a birth certificate or other citizenship documents (like a passport or naturalization papers) at all. Additionally, over 21.3 million voting-age Americans (about 9.1%) do not have these documents readily available.

You're an idiot

#73 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:54 AM | Reply

how does not giving them a license achieve that end?

#72 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-09-25 11:53 AM | Reply | Flag

Clue number 3

When the person who came here illegally shows up to get a driver's license, they get deported. Not rewarded with a DL and registered to vote.

#74 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 12:01 PM | Reply

-(about 9.1%) do not have these documents readily available.

BS If they're a naturalized citizen there is a record of it and it can be acquired. You're simply reaching for anything to hand your hat on.

What do you suppose these 30,000 people showed the New Jersey DMV to acquire a driver's license?

#75 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 12:06 PM | Reply

What you're missing BJ Boi, is that if voting is a Right, it isn't legal to make it difficult or Expensive to Excercise.

Now do guns!

#76 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How many Gun laws have been ruled unconstitutional for this very reason?

Doesn't' mean its not expensive to excercise, there's still 11% tax on guns in CA,

#77 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:10 PM | Reply

Now do guns!

You mean like he did in his very next sentence?

#78 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-09-25 12:10 PM | Reply

By all means more unqualified drivers without insurance!
#68 | Posted by truthhurts

This is an enforcement issue.

#79 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:11 PM | Reply

I am sure that every state follows a similar procedure for mail in ballots.

Sounds like something you "could" do, not that you have to do it.

Would ballots be processed if people DIDN'T fill in that information? Prolly

#80 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:14 PM | Reply

How has the elderly black woman been voting without an ID up to now?

Its racist to believe Black people can't register and identify themselves to vote, it really is.

Anyone claiming Black people can't do this basic step to function in a civilized society are racist, plain and simple.

#81 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:15 PM | Reply

You mean like he did in his very next sentence?

It was a question,not a a fact.

To which I answered his bogus claim in the very next sentence.

Again DO GUNS, where you need an ID, and fill our copious forms, and pay afee.

Feel free MAID Canadian.

#82 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-09-25 12:17 PM | Reply

Clue number 3

When the person who came here illegally shows up to get a driver's license, they get deported. Not rewarded with a DL and registered to vote.

#74 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Clue number 1

A "non-citizen" is not necessarily here illegally as you are assuming and claiming.

Clue number 2

Your violations of civil rights are based on data that has not been verified and is very inaccurate.

#83 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-25 12:20 PM | Reply

It isn't just black people.

Poor People often have limited access to birth certificates and Picture ID.

Voting should be Very Easy.

Not an Obstacle Course that only Affluent or Stable Citizens can Perform.

Voter Suppression was a Cherished Way of Life in the South for Over 100 years.

It took the Civil Rights Act and Strong Enforcement to End that and now Trump wants to bring it back for Personal Power.

He's a Usurping Criminal.

He Openly Admits his goal is to create a One Party State.

With Him in Charge.

There is no Hidden Agenda, the Food is right on the Plate.

Wake Up....

#84 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-09-25 12:27 PM | Reply

Anyone claiming Black people can't do this basic step to function in a civilized society are racist, plain and simple.

#81 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Wrong again commie spyboy wannabe.

Arguments highlighting systemic barriers that focus on how these requirements disproportionately impact marginalized communities, including Black, low-income, and rural citizens is not "racist".

Pointing out that obtaining basic documentation on the eve of a critical election which often involves hidden costs, complex bureaucracy, limited access to government offices, and systemic obstacles is not "racist".

Calling the questioning of the new proposed election requirements as "racist" overlooks the documented inequalities in access, and implementing such rules without addressing those gaps on the eve of a critical election is and will be viewed as disenfranchising and could even be considered an attempt at tampering or rigging the elections in favor of the incumbent.

#85 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-25 12:32 PM | Reply

It was a question,not a a fact.

Tucker Carlson has entered the chat.

LOL.

#86 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-09-25 12:33 PM | Reply

-A "non-citizen" is not necessarily here illegally as you are assuming and claiming.

No ----. But in order to obtain a DL and register to vote you'd think the state would demand to know the difference between a legal non-citizen and someone here illegally.

#87 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-09-25 12:37 PM | Reply

Guns are a lethal weapon. Frankly the right to guns is an Outlier in most free societies.

VOTING is the Most BASIC Civil Right.

Creating ANY impediments to free Exercise of the Vote is Voter SUPPRESSION.

A Common Occurrence in the South for 100 years.

Threats, Poll Taxes, Grandfather Clauses, The Elimination of polling Sites in Urban or Majority Black Areas to make Voting a Huge investment of time and energy.

Suburban Voting is a snap, I've never waited more than five minutes to vote in any election.

Go into the inner city and it a 4 to 5 hour ordeal in many cases.

All By DESIGN.

The threat to democracy is NOT VOTER FRAUD,IT'S VOTER SUPPRESSION.

The SCOTUS is Complicit in this SUPPRESSION.

#88 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-09-25 12:43 PM | Reply

Doesn't' mean its not expensive to excercise, there's still 11% tax on guns in CA

Nice try at poking California Bear again. California is obviously way smarter than you.

It's already been ruled constitutional by the Supremes.

Because the 11% tax you are referring to only applies to commercial retailers and vendors, rather than being a direct constraint on an individual's personal right to own a gun.

#89 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-25 12:45 PM | Reply

#80 OneNut "Would ballots be processed if people DIDN'T fill in that information? Prolly"

No, they would not you know nothing, ignorant foreigner. They would be contacted with the opportunity to correct any errors. If they chose not to correct the errors, THEN the ballot would not be processed. If the errors were corrected to meet the requirements, THEN the ballot is processed.

#90 | Posted by Chantresse at 2026-09-25 01:08 PM | Reply

you'd think the state would demand to know the difference between a legal non-citizen and someone here illegally.

#87 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

Why?

Many states have decided to allow undocumented residents to get a DL for very good reasons.

These include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington (along with D.C.).

Do you know why they all decided to do that and what the reasons are and do you even care?

#91 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-09-25 01:13 PM | Reply

Eff,

"Voting should be Very Easy."

Once upon a time I would have agreed.

But now its all changed.

People exploit holes in the system.

Society brought this on themselves.

Holes must be closed up

Voter identification has become necessary.

#92 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2026-09-25 01:15 PM | 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