This Is How Obama Is Helping Democrats Win The Whitehouse Using Illegals And Refugees

mudwhistle

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Jul 21, 2009
130,174
66,276
2,645
Headmaster's Office, Hogwarts
Hispanic.jpg


Obama is strategically placing hundreds of thousands of refugees in blues states and swing states to change electoral vote totals. Using the census, which doesn't take into account citizenship status,.....he's attempting to steal future elections by throwing America's demographics out of wack with reality.

politico.com
Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary
By Paul Goldman and Mark J. Rozell

Illegal immigrants—along with other noncitizens without the right to vote—may pick the 2016 presidential winner. Thanks to the unique math undergirding the Electoral College, the mere presence of 11-12 million illegal immigrants and other noncitizens here legally may enable them to swing the election from Republicans to Democrats.

The right to vote is intended to be a singular privilege of citizenship. But the 1787 Constitutional Convention rejected allowing the people to directly elect their President. The delegates chose instead our Electoral College system, under which 538 electoral votes distributed amongst the states determine the presidential victor. The Electoral College awards one elector for each U.S. Senator, thus 100 of the total, and D.C. gets three electors pursuant to the 23rd Amendment. Those electoral numbers are unaffected by the size of the noncitizen population. The same cannot be said for the remaining 435, more than 80 percent of the total, which represent the members elected to the House.

The distribution of these 435 seats is not static: they are reapportioned every ten years to reflect the population changes found in the census. That reallocation math is based on the relative “whole number of persons in each state,” as the formulation in the 14th Amendment has it. When this language was inserted into the U.S. Constitution, the concept of an “illegal immigrant,” as the term is defined today, had no meaning. Thus the census counts illegal immigrants and other noncitizens equally with citizens. Since the census is used to determine the number of House seats apportioned to each state, those states with large populations of illegal immigrants and other noncitizens gain extra seats in the House at the expense of states with fewer such “whole number of persons.”

This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. The GOP’s path to victory, by contrast, depends on states that would lose a mere three electoral votes in total. Republican stronghold Texas would lose two House seats and therefore two electoral votes. Florida, which Republicans must win to reclaim the presidency, loses one seat and thus one electoral vote.

But that leaves the electoral math only half done. The 10 House seats taken away from these states would then need to be reallocated to states with relatively small numbers of noncitizens. The following ten states, the bulk of which lean Republican, would likely gain one House seat and thus one additional electoral vote: Iowa, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.

Read more at........Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary

shhhssh-i-stole-the-election_thumb.jpg

 
Um, I think you might be a little confused on how electoral votes are calculated.

# Electors = # of Representatives + 2 (Senators)

The House of Representatives is only reapportioned during census years, the next of which will be 2020.

Your evil Obama plan doesn't make any sense.
 
you just wait to find out everything that administration has done behind our backs. I believe when it comes out they should be tried as traitors to our country. and using our tax dollars to do it

 
Man, Reagan did more for the democrats then Obama can dream of....

3 million illegals got amnesty.
...California is gone for good, New york is history and it is now impossible for the republicans to win like Reagan did electorally.

George hw Bush, Clinton and George Bush brought in 88% non-white legal immigration by the million yearly. 700,000 naturalizations/yearly....


When you consider that the majority of all growth has came from immigration and that blacks, Hispanics and asians all vote at least 70% democratic. Well, Obama just kept it going.


88% of the electorate was white in 1980 for Reagan! 2012 it was 72% and probably down to 70% for 2016. Your parties problem is the reality that its ceiling is 62% of the white vote. 38% are educated, public sector, union and believe that we must invest in America. By running a more radical candidate you make this smaller.

Bush won 2004 by 286 electorals having won Ohio, co, Virgina, florida and Nev. Nev has shifted a lot with its growth of hispanics since this time and the same could be said about most of these.

Bush got 44% of the hispanic vote. Think about that for a second.
 
Hispanic.jpg


Obama is strategically placing hundreds of thousands of refugees in blues states and swing states to change electoral vote totals. Using the census, which doesn't take into account citizenship status,.....he's attempting to steal future elections by throwing America's demographics out of wack with reality.

politico.com
Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary
By Paul Goldman and Mark J. Rozell

Illegal immigrants—along with other noncitizens without the right to vote—may pick the 2016 presidential winner. Thanks to the unique math undergirding the Electoral College, the mere presence of 11-12 million illegal immigrants and other noncitizens here legally may enable them to swing the election from Republicans to Democrats.

The right to vote is intended to be a singular privilege of citizenship. But the 1787 Constitutional Convention rejected allowing the people to directly elect their President. The delegates chose instead our Electoral College system, under which 538 electoral votes distributed amongst the states determine the presidential victor. The Electoral College awards one elector for each U.S. Senator, thus 100 of the total, and D.C. gets three electors pursuant to the 23rd Amendment. Those electoral numbers are unaffected by the size of the noncitizen population. The same cannot be said for the remaining 435, more than 80 percent of the total, which represent the members elected to the House.

The distribution of these 435 seats is not static: they are reapportioned every ten years to reflect the population changes found in the census. That reallocation math is based on the relative “whole number of persons in each state,” as the formulation in the 14th Amendment has it. When this language was inserted into the U.S. Constitution, the concept of an “illegal immigrant,” as the term is defined today, had no meaning. Thus the census counts illegal immigrants and other noncitizens equally with citizens. Since the census is used to determine the number of House seats apportioned to each state, those states with large populations of illegal immigrants and other noncitizens gain extra seats in the House at the expense of states with fewer such “whole number of persons.”

This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College. Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. These three states, which have voted overwhelming for Democrats over the latest six presidential elections, would lose seven electoral votes altogether. The GOP’s path to victory, by contrast, depends on states that would lose a mere three electoral votes in total. Republican stronghold Texas would lose two House seats and therefore two electoral votes. Florida, which Republicans must win to reclaim the presidency, loses one seat and thus one electoral vote.

But that leaves the electoral math only half done. The 10 House seats taken away from these states would then need to be reallocated to states with relatively small numbers of noncitizens. The following ten states, the bulk of which lean Republican, would likely gain one House seat and thus one additional electoral vote: Iowa, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.

Read more at........Illegal Immigrants Could Elect Hillary

shhhssh-i-stole-the-election_thumb.jpg


I'm not understanding the "why" of this cuz. We know they are doing this. Is this simply about power? That's all I can come up with.
 
Man, Reagan did more for the democrats then Obama can dream of....

3 million illegals got amnesty.
...California is gone for good, New york is history and it is now impossible for the republicans to win like Reagan did electorally.

George hw Bush, Clinton and George Bush brought in 88% non-white legal immigration by the million yearly. 700,000 naturalizations/yearly....


When you consider that the majority of all growth has came from immigration and that blacks, Hispanics and asians all vote at least 70% democratic. Well, Obama just kept it going.


88% of the electorate was white in 1980 for Reagan! 2012 it was 72% and probably down to 70% for 2016. Your parties problem is the reality that its ceiling is 62% of the white vote. 38% are educated, public sector, union and believe that we must invest in America. By running a more radical candidate you make this smaller.

Bush won 2004 by 286 electorals having won Ohio, co, Virgina, florida and Nev. Nev has shifted a lot with its growth of hispanics since this time and the same could be said about most of these.

Bush got 44% of the hispanic vote. Think about that for a second.

Matthew a big heads up. The left has been attempting to make "hispanic" a race to screw the demographics in the media. They are actually freaking out that hispanics identify as caucasian.

I put up a left wing OP ED on it a number of times.

And this is why they are doing this. You know I was in the music business right? Here's where I learned to read demographics. And I would not bother going into certain areas with say a punk band but I would go into other areas with rock or country.

But when it comes to politics we are talking a shell game. And it's been working. This is why you look at gerrymandering. Take a look at Illinois Fourth in Chicago and you will bazooka barf at the manipulation.
 
Um, I think you might be a little confused on how electoral votes are calculated.

# Electors = # of Representatives + 2 (Senators)

The House of Representatives is only reapportioned during census years, the next of which will be 2020.

Your evil Obama plan doesn't make any sense.
He's just thinking ahead.

If they can't get voting rights for them....well, 2020, which is only 5 years from now, is going to be in the bag for Democrats.

Nice try.
 
Um, I think you might be a little confused on how electoral votes are calculated.

# Electors = # of Representatives + 2 (Senators)

The House of Representatives is only reapportioned during census years, the next of which will be 2020.

Your evil Obama plan doesn't make any sense.
He's just thinking ahead.

If they can't get voting rights for them....well, 2020, which is only 5 years from now, is going to be in the bag for Democrats.

Nice try.
This has been going on for decades.

I think Obama is just trying to speed up the process a bit.

You see, he feels he won't get caught.....he has no shame.....that sort of thing.
 
you know what should tick us all off about this. they (our elected government and CongressCritters) are SELLING US OUT right in front of our eyes. and not a peep,especially from the democrat base. it's damn sad in my book.
 
Man, Reagan did more for the democrats then Obama can dream of....

3 million illegals got amnesty.
...California is gone for good, New york is history and it is now impossible for the republicans to win like Reagan did electorally.

George hw Bush, Clinton and George Bush brought in 88% non-white legal immigration by the million yearly. 700,000 naturalizations/yearly....


When you consider that the majority of all growth has came from immigration and that blacks, Hispanics and asians all vote at least 70% democratic. Well, Obama just kept it going.


88% of the electorate was white in 1980 for Reagan! 2012 it was 72% and probably down to 70% for 2016. Your parties problem is the reality that its ceiling is 62% of the white vote. 38% are educated, public sector, union and believe that we must invest in America. By running a more radical candidate you make this smaller.

Bush won 2004 by 286 electorals having won Ohio, co, Virgina, florida and Nev. Nev has shifted a lot with its growth of hispanics since this time and the same could be said about most of these.

Bush got 44% of the hispanic vote. Think about that for a second.


stephanie always plays dodgeball everytime her hero Reagan is esposed as the most corrupt administration that was ever run at the time.she runs off and changes the subject to Obama all the time as do all reaganut worshippers.

Obama is running the most corrupt administration ever no doubt but she always trolls and ignores that Reagan ran the most corrupt adminisistration ever back then at the time.:rolleyes:

she gets frustrated when you take her to school on that and puts you on ignore.:D
 
Man, Reagan did more for the democrats then Obama can dream of....

3 million illegals got amnesty.
...California is gone for good, New york is history and it is now impossible for the republicans to win like Reagan did electorally.

George hw Bush, Clinton and George Bush brought in 88% non-white legal immigration by the million yearly. 700,000 naturalizations/yearly....


When you consider that the majority of all growth has came from immigration and that blacks, Hispanics and asians all vote at least 70% democratic. Well, Obama just kept it going.


88% of the electorate was white in 1980 for Reagan! 2012 it was 72% and probably down to 70% for 2016. Your parties problem is the reality that its ceiling is 62% of the white vote. 38% are educated, public sector, union and believe that we must invest in America. By running a more radical candidate you make this smaller.

Bush won 2004 by 286 electorals having won Ohio, co, Virgina, florida and Nev. Nev has shifted a lot with its growth of hispanics since this time and the same could be said about most of these.

Bush got 44% of the hispanic vote. Think about that for a second.

neither reagan nor bush are president now.
Why is the border still open?
 
I don't like the way census groups all into the hispanic grouping...
There should be American indian for the pure breeds, meso for the half and "Spaniard" for the white.

We don't take in more then 2,000 Spaniards per year and they were no more then 2-3% of the population in the 50's. So I find it hard to believe they would make up more then 2-3% of the hispanic population today.

In away it doesn't matter as the hispanic voting bloc vote 70% democrat no matter what racial back ground they have. It is more or less a cultural thing....

And yes, Reagan really made our problems a lot worse. Not that Obama isn't doing his damnest to keep the ball rolling.
 
you know what should tick us all off about this. they (our elected government and CongressCritters) are SELLING US OUT right in front of our eyes. and not a peep,especially from the democrat base. it's damn sad in my book.
It's because Democrats want to win at any cost.

They don't care about the damage this is causing to the economy. They don't care about the fact that this nonsense is driving down wages, at the moment that Democrats are constantly calling for raising the minimum-wage.
 
Last edited:
I don't like the way census groups all into the hispanic grouping...
There should be American indian for the pure breeds, meso for the half and "Spaniard" for the white.

We don't take in more then 2,000 Spaniards per year and they were no more then 2-3% of the population in the 50's. So I find it hard to believe they would make up more then 2-3% of the hispanic population today.

In away it doesn't matter as the hispanic voting bloc vote 70% democrat no matter what racial back ground they have. It is more or less a cultural thing....

And yes, Reagan really made our problems a lot worse. Not that Obama isn't doing his damnest to keep the ball rolling.

whats funny is Obama said in his inagural speech that he wanted to follow the footsteps of Reagan which he has done an excellent job of with bringing illegals into the country and sending jobs overseas ect ect, a fact reaganut worshippers like stephanie cant handle.:biggrin:
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top