This is why polls are anonymous. They are used to collect statistics, not information on individuals. There are also margins of error taken into account that allow for lying/misunderstanding questions/mistake answers/errors in reporting. That's one of the first things we learned in stats class, actually.
Please read the full article for a breakdown of exactly Richman's conclusions:
The Perils of Cherry Picking Low Frequency Events in Large Sample Surveys | CCES
"Importantly, the group with the lowest likelihood of classification errors consists of those who reported being non-citizens in both 2010 and 2012. In this set, 0 percent of respondents cast valid votes. That is, among the 85 respondents who reported being non-citizens in 2010 and non-citizens in 2012, there are 0 valid voters for 2010. [1]"
"Richman and colleagues offer interpretations of their results based on predicted vote rates of non-citizens and the share of that group of all voters. Their calculations incorrectly assume that the validated vote of those who reported being non-citizens each year is an unbiased estimate of actual non-citizen voting rates. Our analysis indicates that all three of those cases are nearly certainly citizen voters who are misclassified as being non-citizens. Hence, their predicted vvote rates of non-citizens in fact reflect the behavior of citizens."
"Stepping back from the immediate question of whether the CCES in fact shows a low rate of voting among non-citizens, our analysis carries a much broader lesson and caution about the analysis of big databases to study low frequency characteristics and behaviors. Very low levels of measurement error are easily tolerated in samples of 1,000 to 2,000 persons. But in very large sample surveys, classification errors in a high-frequency category can readily contaminate a lowfrequency category, such as non-citizens. As a result, researchers may draw incorrect inferences concerning the behavior of relatively rare individuals in a population when there is even a very low level of misclassification."
----------------
I see noone is addressing the fact that the Richman paper is analysing the Obama election and not Drumpf's at all. His allegations of voter fraud are for the 2012 election cycle!