1,600 voters born 1900 or earlier voted in NC alone
-
document link removed - raphjd
That means 1600 people in North Carolina who are over 120 years old… voted. But Trump won NC anyway. The thing is, it probably means that some Republican legislators will end up winning more house seats.
I bet that's 1600 votes that Biden loses in North Carolina.
-
Both sides of my family are looking into if any of our dead relatives voted.
My older brother died in 1981 when he was 14. He voted twice in the 1990s. I don't know if he's voted since then.
My dad died a couple of years ago. My aunt Mary dealt with his affairs, including informing the elections people. He was registered to vote for this election but appears he didn't vote. According to the records, he was removed from the voting rolls when they were notified that he died, but he was re-registered.
-
To the OP - this data should NOT be publically shared like this. It has a huge amount of sensitive and private data and this could be something you are at the minimum fined for sharing. It's also clearly come from a data breach - which is not what these forums or boards are about. Please do remove it.
Also there are numerous reasons why this data would include people who look like they are 120 years old - for example, they put their DoB incorrectly on a form or census. This doesn't mean anything… it's all around the quality of the data. As any data scientist will tell you.
So please try not to spread conspiracy theories around... let the people who are looking into all the various allegations of voter fraud do their jobs and don't prejudice the cases against your side unneccesarily.
-
You gotta be kidding me with this crap.
I didn't even read all of what you said, because it's incorrect. The link was posted by an ATTORNEY. I would think HE'S the legal expert, not you!
Just listen to the terrified frantic tone in your statement. People from the 1800s are not sensitive data because they aren't alive anymore and have nothing to worry about. This isn't someone checking the wrong year, these are records of people still on the voter rolls from that long ago because a corrupt democratic city decided it was better to not acknowledge their death certificates and reflect that on the voter rolls… Philly, Michigan. You can't just change your date of birth by accident. Your date of birth is already recorded. DUH. Jesus you're so obvious. You must be on the payroll. Nah. Too dumb. It isn't a data breach... it's publicly available information. Everyone on the voter rolls is public. That's all it says is if you're registered and when you were born and if you voted. It doesn't say if you vote R or D. Anyone can look this up easily !!! you can check if you're registered !!! This isn't some kind of hack as you're trying to frame it. AKA "Data Breach." That's dumb. You obviously have NO idea what the fuck you're talking about, do you? Are you trying to spread false information? You sound like someone who doesn't want to get caught.An attorney posted this information.
It's publicly available information.
Your claim that it's a hack or data breach is factually therefore, mute.
It doesn't reveal political sides.
It only shows who's registered.
You can't change your birthday.
Anyone born that long ago should be removed from voter rolls.
Anyone that old isn't sensitive except to the politicians who don't update facts.
I mean it's pretty obvious that what you're saying is inaccurate.
So step aside smarty pants. Everyone knows there was fraud. That also is publicly available info!We know there's fucking fraud. I mean the link I posted was to a government fucking website. I posted a link to a government website, public, and you sound the alarm that it's a data breach... I don't think so. It's over. Nice try. We know there's something goin on. And it aint right. I refuse to be in a party of cheaters. We can do better.
-
I’m sure that, if you’re right, the truth will out, as we say here - and you’ll get all the court cases through. Surely, after all, if freely available public data (as you claim) is so easily visible that even someone like you could find it and prove it, the courts will have no problem, will they? So don’t worry, calm down, and let’s see what happens.
In the mean time, the information shouldn’t be spread (that was electoral roll information - no it’s not public ally available - and no, an atourney probably doesn’t know more about it than I do… as you have no idea what I do or what I know, I would recommend you don’t make assumptions about it...).
Best of luck with your various cases! I hope, if there is fraud it is proven so - and if there isn’t fraud, likewise. And you accept either result, from people you are very happy to defer to (the atourneys).
-
You are correct until you say that the information should not be spread. This is about 1,600 people who were born before 1900 who are still voting. It should absolutely be spread because… transparency. The idea that you're calling for the censorship of this information is antithetical to freedom and the opposite of what you just said in the first paragraph. See... we actually CAN check to see if the votes are legit, and it's turning out that they're not in many cases.
Don't spread this information folks! That's what you're saying! It's ridiculous. That means we need to SPREAD it even further and faster than ever before. It's a fact, and you're openly calling to shut it down. If there are that many Civil War citizens still voting, there needs to be a little light shine down on it.
And YES, it IS publicly available. I just posted the link to the government website BRUH!!! You wanna say for a THIRD time that this info isn't publicly available??? You said it twice now. It's a government website.
-
Please don’t misquote me. If you don’t understand what I’m saying, ask… I’ll be happy to explain it another way.
So, to be clear... I am very happy with you running around making claims that there was voter fraud. You’ll be asked for evidence, which - if it’s publicly available information - I’m very happy for you to share it (although, if it is, I’m fairly sure it would be well known about enough to have been dealt with by now, removing any need for you to be running around panicking...).
I do not and will not abide by people spreading data which is not publicly available which has sensitive and private information about idividuals on it.
Hopefully the distinction, whilst obvious, is clear now for you?
If you like, you may want to read a few of the sites which have thoroughly debunked your various claims already:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-dead-people-voting-not-23004835
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/thin-allegations-of-dead-people-voting/As I say, I’m very hopeful that any voter fraud will be turned up and dealt with. This will go through the proper legal procedures - as it should. It doesn’t need you to spread lists of private personal data about individuals you know nothing about online - and it certainly doesn’t belong here.
-
Shut up. You're acting like I'm hurting people who are over 120 years old. Always with the victim card, that never gets old. And it is publicly available. It's a government website, meaning it's official and open to the public. Your assertion is false. You shall not pass!
-
If your best comeback is “shut up”, I think we are at an impasse.
Have a read of the articles I’ve shared - you are incorrect in your assertion that those people are 120 years old UNLESS you go out and check those people and can verify they are. Have you done this? Can you do this and report back please? As other people have and have found this claim to be incorrect.
So…
-
Dead people voting has been a thing for ages.
The feds have caught over 250k fake IDs coming into the US, in just June, July, and August. Most have been traced back to Biden's beloved China. At least some of these IDs are stolen from dead people.
If you watched Ted Cruz questioning Jack Dorsey of Twitter, then you would know that a woman in Texas has been charged with 135ish counts of vote fraud from the 2020 election.
We posted it here back in 2016, but Texas prosecuted people for vote fraud, including a woman who had her teenage vote in place of the dad because she thought he wouldn't vote and an illegal who voted in several elections before being caught. In 2018, there was the woman who voted while on parole and was butt hurt because she got busted. She clearly didn't read the form before signing it as it said that she couldn't vote until all of her court punishments were settled; ie Parole.
-
If your best comeback is “shut up”, I think we are at an impasse.
Have a read of the articles I’ve shared - you are incorrect in your assertion that those people are 120 years old UNLESS you go out and check those people and can verify they are. Have you done this? Can you do this and report back please? As other people have and have found this claim to be incorrect.
So…
Birth certificates. A voter should not be on the rolls if their birth certificate is pre-1900. That's the problem and you're just not getting it.
-
Indeed so! These things, as you say, have been going on for ages… and don’t swing elections. They’re well known about, usually get caught (as your own knowledge of them shows) and are not the sort of mass conspiracy that would be required to make an electoral change of president.
You can find the data that the OP is referring to here in a way that’s acceptable to share: https://data.pa.gov/Government-Efficiency-Citizen-Engagement/2020-General-Election-Mail-Ballot-Requests-Departm/mcba-yywm
As you can see, right at the top, there’s yet another reason for why the DoB on these lists is listed as 1800.
In short, I’m sure there was voter fraud... to a very small extent, as there always is in every election. It’s tiny, will be caught, and won’t make any difference to the election result. It’s not close enough that this small number of votes will make a difference. If I’m wrong and it’s proven in court, fantastic! But I will need that level of proof to believe anything other than the norm happened. Republican and Democrat election officials have both said that this was one of the best elections they have ever had in terms of fraud.
-
ManHandler I complete agree with you - if their birth certificate says they are born in 1800, we can be pretty sure they shouldn’t be voting. So do you have these birth certificates? Have you checked them personally and confirmed that they are indeed the persons you claim?
I also hope you mean post 1900, not pre… as pre would make them old indeed...
-
They do swing elections. You state that as a fact. Just gonna stop you right there before you continue. That’s 1600 votes. It swings. Cuz that's just in North Carolina.
-
The Mirror is left-leaning and then uses leftist CNN as their source.
FactCheck.org is also left-leaning, though not as blatantly as mot. They "fact check" opinions and lean left. As an example, what is 4 months in government time too slow or is it faster than usual? I ask this because they flip-flopped on that very same question, depending on the situation and who it was being criticized.
-
ManHandler I complete agree with you - if their birth certificate says they are born in 1800, we can be pretty sure they shouldn’t be voting. So do you have these birth certificates? Have you checked them personally and confirmed that they are indeed the persons you claim?
I also hope you mean post 1900, not pre… as pre would make them old indeed...
They are there on the government link that you thought was a data breach and had it flagged
-
Indeed so! These things, as you say, have been going on for ages… and don’t swing elections. They’re well known about, usually get caught (as your own knowledge of them shows) and are not the sort of mass conspiracy that would be required to make an electoral change of president.
You can find the data that the OP is referring to here in a way that’s acceptable to share: https://data.pa.gov/Government-Efficiency-Citizen-Engagement/2020-General-Election-Mail-Ballot-Requests-Departm/mcba-yywm
As you can see, right at the top, there’s yet another reason for why the DoB on these lists is listed as 1800.
In short, I’m sure there was voter fraud... to a very small extent, as there always is in every election. It’s tiny, will be caught, and won’t make any difference to the election result. It’s not close enough that this small number of votes will make a difference. If I’m wrong and it’s proven in court, fantastic! But I will need that level of proof to believe anything other than the norm happened. Republican and Democrat election officials have both said that this was one of the best elections they have ever had in terms of fraud.
Let's go on a hunt for crystals. Let me check my pocket! Nope… no crystals in there... I guess crystals don't exist. Yea this is what you're doing. You're pretending that the evidence isn't in your face and acting like it's harmful. It's so transparent and pathetic and lame. Hmmm... I don't see any China collusion under THIS rock... I guess it doesn't exist. Shut up. We know what you're doing.
We're talking about just one of the examples. 1600 in North Carolina. Imagine how many more there are, and people who died in 1920, 1930, 1940. I guarantee it's more than 1600. Interesting that number.
-
Pennsylvania counts votes where the signature doesn't match or the postmark is missing or unclear and other (lawd, please forgive me) problematic things.
Even during Obama, the Carter/Baker commission on voting clearly found that the system of just sending out ballots was the worst way to do it. And here we are with it being the DNCs voting method of choice.
Remember, the DNC claims we must do exactly what Faucci says, but we can ignore him as the village idiot when he says that voting in person is safe if masks are required.
-
They do swing elections. You state that as a fact. Just gonna stop you right there before you continue. That’s 1600 votes. It swings. Cuz that's just in North Carolina.
Ok, let’s check this one together… can you tell me of any historical vote that has been changed based on electoral fraud?
-
The Mirror is left-leaning and then uses leftist CNN as their source.
FactCheck.org is also left-leaning, though not as blatantly as mot. They "fact check" opinions and lean left. As an example, what is 4 months in government time too slow or is it faster than usual? I ask this because they flip-flopped on that very same question, depending on the situation and who it was being criticized.
Sure… but this doesn’t mean they are wrong? This doesn’t mean anything apart from their political leaning... and sure, you might need to be careful and check their information for unconscious bias... but again, it doesn’t make them wrong.
Indeed this is a logical fallacy if you use it to try and claim they are wrong, purely because they are left leaning.
