Thursday, August 11, 2022

Claims Floating Around the Internet

 This was apparently a Tweet last year:

There is not a complete URL but I went to to check.  This shows "2020 General Election Mail Ballot Counts by Birth Year Chart" counts by birth year;  I also filtered by birth years from 1865 to 1900:

There are none before 1890 (when there is 1).  You have to wonder how competent the voters born before 1900 are (they would be 120 in the 2020 election, and at least one who was 130) and if they cast those votes or their health care provider did so.  These could also be voters born in 2000 whose birth year was mistyped.  (The number of keystrokes entered makes small numbers of such mistakes inevitable.  I would have written software that asked the entry clerk to verify that year.)  The claim about voters born during the Civil War from Penn.'s data is clearly false.

I do not doubt that there was widespread fraud; multiple reports such as "Office of the Special Counsel Second Interim Investigative Report On the Apparatus & Procedures of the Wisconsin Elections System Delivered to the Wisconsin State Assembly on March 1, 2022" demonstrate criminal actions of election officials and votes cast by persons who had been disenfranchised apparently because of senility whose votes may have been cast by caretakers and dozens of news reports of voter fraud in recent years, at least those so poorly done as to get caught.

Let's not redistribute false information.

The Wikipedia page shows eight Americans over 110.  Pretty clearly 300% of them live in Pennsylvania.


  1. To complete the Gross Democrat party voting fraud of 2020, they needed voters.
    These fake voters mostly came from using 2010 census data. Most of the 90-100 year olds in 2010 were deceased in 2020.
    I don't have the source at this time but the guy working with Mike Lindell shows that the 2010 census is the distribution for 2020 voting in many, many, many places.
    The freakish birth years could be typos on registrations

  2. A note accompanying the data says, "The reason some birth dates will display as 1/1/1800 is due to confidentiality reasons of the registered voters.
    Usually this is for victims of domestic violence."

    Maybe they mean 1900 instead of 1800?

    According to the Gerontology Research Group, there are only four or five living individuals over the age of 110 in the entire United States, none of them in Pennsylvania. The Gerontology Wiki lists three supercentenarians in Pennsylvania not verified by the GRG, however.

    The rest are probably due to typos which are all to common in data that isn't validated.

  3. I can verify that Pennsylvania uses this hack for confidential records. Of course, the dates used are all over the map. When this first became a story at the time of the election, there was no caveat explaining the matter -- very bad look. Done right, they'd have added a column for an index into the restricted table and a constraint saying the combination of the date of birth column and the index would be NOT NULL, i.e., one or the other must be filled in. So of course, they just told clerks to put in "obviously" bad dates of birth. Top. Men.