BREAKING: List of Pennsylvania voters older than USA´s oldest living person

originally posted by: djz3ro
Like you say, not enough to change the outcome but still significant.

Nobody can say which side this would benefit. The people who received these ballots, the folk who live there now, could support anyone.

The mail in ballots could have been binned by the new home owners, or they may have used them to fraudulently vote for Trump, or Biden, or an Independent.

Clearly they need to update it for 2020

If there´s no government oversight for dead people voting there could be a lot more dead people´s votes, they should bin all mail-in ballot votes because of this one fact, in my opinion, because there is no way of knowing now how many mail-in ballots that were fake.

-MM

Now I wouldn't normally reply on things like this but the whole 2020 election forums seem to have people frothing at the mouth and in no way acting like rational people

While it its not Pennsylvania, similar claims where made about Michigan, with 10,000 dead voters

A bit a fact checking concluded that this wasn't actually true.

www.bbc.co.uk...

What similar checks have been done in this case and can be proven?

This whole attempted silencing of dead people's voices strikes me as very un-american and is hurting our democracy.

originally posted by: lugonn
Now I wouldn't normally reply on things like this but the whole 2020 election forums seem to have people frothing at the mouth and in no way acting like rational people

While it its not Pennsylvania, similar claims where made about Michigan, with 10,000 dead voters

A bit a fact checking concluded that this wasn't actually true.

www.bbc.co.uk...

What similar checks have been done in this case and can be proven?

I have downloaded the official PA data from PA.data.gov and I checked all the claims and everything checked out ok - so this is factual and not fake news. You can download the text file for yourself and use a plain text editor to jump to the line numbers listed in the OP thread to check for yourself, it´s easy to do so.

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Boadicea

All I know is that dead people don´t apply for a mail-in ballot sent out to them, fill it out, and mail it back to the government.

No, of course they don't. So no dead people voted, right? That's really not what we're talking about. We are talking about how it could appear that dead people voted.

One obvious way is that live people assumed the identity of a dead person for voting purposes, right? Isn't it important to figure that out? And figure out who? And all the other whys and wherefores?

It may also be that a real live person who is eligible to vote forgot to fill in their birthdate as required when they returned their ballot, and election workers filled in a random date. It could also be data entry operators who don't feel like double-checking dates and just put in easy digits. Those are also problems, but not the same problem. And it's an election process problem, not a voter problem, and certainly not a dead voter problem.

The dead voters tell us there is a problem. But the actual problem is not people rising from the dead and voting. We have to investigate and find out if and who is voting in the name of dead people.

a reply to: Boadicea

I´m no lawyer, but all of what you suggested is illegal, as far as I know.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Mail in Ballots is a broad brush, which includes absentee ballots for servicemen abroad, should they not vote? Plus we are in the middle of a pandemic (that is bigger than the US elections) so Mail in Ballots were very important this year.

Besides, Trump started stating the mail in ballots before the election and warning of fraud. Meaning everyone knew they had to toe the line, those people who watch over the proceedings, especially Republican ones, were watching with vigour, it would have been harder to get away with anything this time round compared with previous elections.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

they should bin all mail-in ballot votes because of this one fact, in my opinion

There by denying a large percentage of the electorate their right to vote.

If you really think fraud has been carried out, then the common sense answer is to re-run the election. When everyone has been vacinated and can only vote in person.

Ain't going to happen is it ?

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

they should bin all mail-in ballot votes because of this one fact, in my opinion

There by denying a large percentage of the electorate their right to vote.

If you really think fraud has been carried out, then the common sense answer is to re-run the election. When everyone has been vacinated and can only vote in person.

Ain't going to happen is it ?

Then have an audit or a re-election. As it stands now the people just can´t trust the authenticity of PA mail-in ballots because of multiple discrepancies imo.

-MM

originally posted by: lugonn
Now I wouldn't normally reply on things like this but the whole 2020 election forums seem to have people frothing at the mouth and in no way acting like rational people

Just had to start off with insults, huh? Okay.

While it its not Pennsylvania, similar claims where made about Michigan, with 10,000 dead voters

A bit a fact checking concluded that this wasn't actually true.

www.bbc.co.uk...

The claim of dead voters is the same, but the methods used for identifying these dead voters are vastly different.

In the Michigan example, someone looked at the voter names and then looked at death records, and assumed that if he found a death record with the same name as a voter, they must be the same person. And of course that's ridiculous. And of course the BBC easily shot that nonsense down.

But in this example, we are talking about actual voter birthdates listed in official voter records of the state.

What similar checks have been done in this case and can be proven?

Since the information comes from the state, and elections are conducted by the state's rules, isn't it up to the state to investigate and explain how "dead voters" could be voting?

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Boadicea

I´m no lawyer, but all of what you suggested is illegal, as far as I know.

Of course it is!!! And I've said it's a problem, I've said there are multiple problems, I've said it ALL needs to be investigated and sorted and explained to the public!!!

I'm not disagreeing with you! But this is not productive, so I'm happy to leave our interactions here.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

So, let me get this clear, like the BBC, you have taken names at random from the list and checked them against the entire USA to ensure that there are not people with the exact same names and that two separate lists of dead people and voters have not been amalgamated to create a list that has dead people voting?

Frankly as someone from the UK I find the whole of the US election fascinating and no, I have no preference either way for your next president.

I know passions run high but as an outsider looking in, I find the level of paranoia that comes across as staggering.

Looking elsewhere on the forums, both side are controlled by a hidden government anyway, so does it really matter who gets in?

Like over here, anything worthwhile takes a long time to do and politicians only look as far as the next elections, so most things get talked to death about and maybe started, only for the next group to rip it up for their own pet projects.

I think it's safe to assume that most (if not all) politicians are only in it for what they can get out of it and if it benefits the general population as well, then that's a bonus.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
a reply to: Boadicea

I´m no lawyer, but all of what you suggested is illegal, as far as I know.

Of course it is!!! And I've said it's a problem, I've said there are multiple problems, I've said it ALL needs to be investigated and sorted and explained to the public!!!

I'm not disagreeing with you! But this is not productive, so I'm happy to leave our interactions here.

I was not disagreeing with you, either. But I guess my clumsy short replies came out that way, I´m very sorry about that. I appreciate your content.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Whew! I'm so very happy to hear that!!!

We'll just carry on then...

a reply to: lugonn

No. The researchers compared the birthdates for all mail-in ballots voters and listed the ones born earlier than 1905. No names are involved. All based on open data sets from pa.data.gov . See the OP link for a description.

-MM

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Whew! I'm so very happy to hear that!!!

We'll just carry on then...

Thank you.

-MM

a reply to: Boadicea

No insults or at least none meant.

I was just asking a specific question.

Over 350,000 posts on the 2020 Election forum and the ones I've read from after the result seem to be highly emotional (hence frothing at the mouth) one way or the other.

From what I have seen, most seem to have an opinion and it's set in stone and if your opinion doesn't agree then it feels like there's a lot of I'm right you're wrong.

I don't see much of someone taking an argument like the super old voters in PA , forming a hypothesis and then testing it and showing how it was tested and what the results where.

For something to be proven, surely it has to tested (and shown to be tested) in a way that others can repeat, test and if necessary challenge the results?

I have looked at the list in the link the OP posted and while I understand that it apparently shows that people with an unrealistic birthdate applied for a vote, this in no way means that those actual birthdates are correct.

I would say, how did the birthdate get in there?

Surely only one of two ways, either the name of the applicant was matched up with records and the birthdate entered automatically (in which case given the number of people in the USA, you can match up the birthdate of someone with the exact same name, who happens to have been born much earlier, like the BBC investigation showed happened in Michigan) or you enter it yourself.

If the latter, how stupid would you need to be to provide thousands of fraudulent votes that the records show to be older than the oldest person recorded to be alive in the USA?

If there was to be a fraud to steal the election, don't you think it would at least be halfway competent?

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

This is something you should put on Parler quickly!

Before anyone resticts your freedoms.

Did you fact check this is any way before you posted it?

Script...is this a specific unbiased script? Anyone could have written your script in the link with any data source. There is more comment than code.

well done! What an enlightening and fantastic all around post! You accepted the material, and offered an exceptional rebuttal.

This is how ATS should be!

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Trolling is right. Exactly my modus operandi.

This op in itself presents nothing tangible. It looks like credible data but does not substantiate it.

A chicken suit would be a step in the right direction.

All jokes aside, yourself included, can you deny the material in the OP? or is that well beyond your mental capabilities?

originally posted by: lugonn
Now I wouldn't normally reply on things like this but the whole 2020 election forums seem to have people frothing at the mouth and in no way acting like rational people

While it its not Pennsylvania, similar claims where made about Michigan, with 10,000 dead voters

A bit a fact checking concluded that this wasn't actually true.

www.bbc.co.uk...

What similar checks have been done in this case and can be proven?

Bruh, you can't use the BBC to fact check. They are as crooked as they come lol