People want to vent so here’s a space. Please do not veer into threats or other potential violations of our terms of service.
Most of our readers realize that today’s media pronouncements are meaningless and we are in for a month or more of lawfare.
Stay calm, breathe, and have faith.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Mi auguro che la verità emerga, e che gli usa la mostrino al mondo…
I hope the same, although the truth may not be enough.
Biden won because he had a greater public mandate, via a clear majority, if you don’t like democracy then there are alternative places to live such as North Korea or Cuba.
The U.S. is not a democracy. The people do NOT elect the President. I certainly hope you are not an American because if you are you should know this.
Sorry your civics is lacking we don’t live in the democracy, we live in a Representative Republic ruled by a constitution. The democracy you want is called mob rule, if you get what you we will be like North Korea of Cuba.
“Sorry your civics is lacking we don’t live in the democracy, we live in a Representative Republic ruled by a constitution.”
Uh, ok. But Biden won, even when encumbered by that vestige of fealty to slave states, the electoral college. I.e., what you confuse with a “Representative Republic”.
bigoilbob,
‘Winning’ should be all players following the rules. If one of your football teams fielded extra players and won, is that OK by you? I don’t think the majority of football fans would accept that situation and neither should you for voting.
It appears the Dems had many extra players for their ‘win’.
See https://youtu.be/ficae6x1Q5A for an explanation of how frail your voting system is
That’s a simplistic and biased view.
The electoral college was primarily to protect small states like Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Hampshire, (at the time) New York, as well as Delaware, SC, Georgia, against being ruled by Virginia, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania.
Together with the Senate having equal representation for all states, the Electoral College protects us against the tyranny of the majority and forces important decisions to take into account the concerns of all regions, rather than being exclusively focused on the interests of large cities.
Yes the issue of slavery complicated the negotiations. But the controversy was less a concern for election of the president than for representation in Congress. The EC simply reflects the compromise made on slavery in the representation in Congress.
Had there not been slavery, it would still have been the founders’ desire to limit the passions of the public and to protect the interests of small states. The same motive explains electing senators in three cohorts so that in no election can more than one third of the Senators be thrown out of office.
You are right. The Electoral College and the Senate representation were concessions to the smaller colonies to get them to ratify the Constitution. Without those concessions, those colonies would never have ratified it. It had little to do with slavery and the south. As a resident of a small midwest state, I appreciate those protections for the minority states. Otherwise, California and New York would rule the entire country.
The electoral college and the senate are now imposing minority rule. Over 50% of the
US population live in just 9 states and thus get only 18% of the senate votes. And the
disparity is only predicted to get worse if you look at birth rates. How does California with 40 million people having the same number of senate seats as Wyoming with roughly 600 000 make any kind of democratic sense? Plus there is the fact that the 3 million people in living in Puerto Rico get no representation in the senate or a vote for the president despite being US citizens? It seems extremely unfair that if you move from Texas to the UK for example you still get to vote but not if you move to Washington DC.
I already explained why I am in favor of what you prefer to call minority rule. It is to ensure broad consensus and prevent the country being dictated to by California and New York.
The best outcome would be to amend the Constitution to allow secession. Then give California and New York freedom from their bondage under “minority rule”.
It would be so wonderful to see them go!
Gee whiz Rich, you sound like a progressive with all your talk of protecting the minority!
“That’s a simplistic and biased view.”
Actually, no.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/electoral-college-racist-origins/601918/
Oh well since it’s in the Atlantic, I’ll have to stand corrected
Not.
Perhaps you should read Federalist No. 68. Hamilton explains exactly why there is an electoral college and why they chose to elect the President in this way. The larger states with their larger cities have more electoral votes than smaller states so it is not so much that the small states are protected. The electoral college is a temporary body chosen by the people of each state for the sole purpose of electing the President. The purpose was to have a Presient that has broad appeal across all areas of the Country instead of just being popular in a small area.
No. The purpose you claim was never the purpose.
“The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue. And this will be thought no inconsiderable recommendation of the Constitution, by those who are able to estimate the share which the executive in every government must necessarily have in its good or ill administration. Though we cannot acquiesce in the political heresy of the poet who says: “For forms of government let fools contest That which is best administered is best,” yet we may safely pronounce, that the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.”
https://tinyurl.com/y524atkj
sycomputing November 7, 2020 at 8:49 pm
“No. The purpose you claim was never the purpose.”
You quoted from Federalist no.68 but do not seem to understand its meaning:
“the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate”
This is exactly what I said it means. The intent was to elect someone with broad appeal across the entire nation.
Even when taken out of context, as you’ve done, your quote bolsters my argument, not yours.
“Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity” cannot but evidence Hamilton’s low view of both ad hominem rhetoric and the notion of popularity, or “broad appeal,” as you’ve used it.
This premise is bolstered by the next part of his phrase: “but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union…”
“But” here obviously means, “in spite of,” rather than, “in addition to.” The conjunction itself is meant to contrast the former argumentative phrase with the latter.
Hamilton would likely respond to you by saying, “If by ‘broad appeal across the entire nation’ you mean the ‘broad appeal’ of the electors chosen by each state legislature to cast the final vote for the Chief Magistrate, then we’re in agreement.” But I don’t think that’s what you mean.
The electors aren’t required to cast a vote for the candidate chosen by the majority of the people in each state. This was the point of the EC, as Hamilton’s argument in 68 clearly lays out. Hamilton, et al., didn’t want individuals mesmerized by rhetoric (i.e., the “broad appeal” of the Mob across the nation) to have the final say in who was chosen as Chief Magistrate. Thus that final decision lay at the feet of electors chosen by the state legislatures, who are not required to vote in the same way as the majority in their state voted. In theory, the electors of each state could overcome the current progressive hatred that led Mob Rule to choose Biden/Harris over the incumbent President. In other words, they could vote against the “broad appeal of the entire nation.” Again your argument seems obviously contradicted by these facts.
In addition, Hamilton is very clear as to the intent and purpose of the EC:
“The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.”
“Broad Appeal” cannot effect the above purpose, as this most recent election (and many in the past, e.g., Jimmy Carter) surely proves. Hamilton’s own words contradict you.
“It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue.”
Again, this not from the “broad appeal” of the Mob across the nation, as you’ve claimed, but rather from the careful consideration of individuals in state legislatures who choose electors that may, if they choose, override the vote of the Mob when the Mob chooses unwisely. For example, when the Mob chooses out of Hatred, as this Mob has done in voting *against* the incumbent, rather than *for* the challenger.
Clearly then, “broad appeal across the entire nation” is not at all in view when we consider Hamilton’s arguments carefully.
The small states protection derives from the EC elector count mirroring representation in Congress, which with its equal representation in the Senate means that the EC is a feature like the Senate, providing assurance to all regions that the President will consider the interests of the whole country. Without these features, the Constitution would not have been ratified.
To undo it, it would only be just to release all states from perpetual union, providing a process for secession. Rescinding this feature without allowing the states to leave the Union would be akin to a mortgage borrower signing a binding agreement to repay a loan in return for title to the home, then subsequently the bank unilaterally retains the title but continues to enforce the loan terms.
It is certainly also correct to say that the founders were very dubious of giving direct decision-making to the public. I will concede that this aspect of the EC is no longer functional. The idea that wise heads would choose a president from among many worthy candidates, with the people only choosing which wise heads from their state would make that call. There were no parties in 1787 and the hope was to avoid “factions”, but that was not a success, obviously. Now instead of having prominent citizens choose candidates, we have direct voting in primary elections, followed by direct voting for a “ticket” that has pledged electors.
Nowadays the idea of an elector not voting for the candidate to whom they were bound is called a faithless elector, which is kind of the opposite of the original intent.
Let’s not forget that the original intent of the Senate was to have the state legislatures appoint senators, another example of where the founders distrusted direct democratic rule. Personally I think it was a mistake to enact the 17th amendment that changed that rule. It was a “reform” of the original Progressives whose primary goal was to dismantle the checks and balances that frustrate revolution.
Their goal was to create an all-powerful central government where states, if they continued to exist at all, would be mere administrative subdivisions, forced to follow one approach to local government throughout the continent. Instead of having to get 50 governments to agree, where people who live in your town or nearby are going to be voting, they want unelected experts in Washington to decide what’s best for us and then the rarified elite national politicians will implement the policies where nobody out in the provinces have anything to do with it except to comply.
This may sound familiar to subjects of the EUssr.
“To undo it, it would only be just to release all states from perpetual union, providing a process for secession.”
Why not? That’s how we got started 244 years ago…
The idea that wise heads would choose a president from among many worthy candidates, with the people only choosing which wise heads from their state would make that call.
The people haven’t been doing a very good job of choosing “wise heads”.
Their goal was to create an all-powerful central government where states, if they continued to exist at all, would be mere administrative subdivisions, forced to follow one approach to local government throughout the continent.
It would appear they have, for all practical purposes, succeeded.
sycomputing November 8, 2020 at 7:24 am :
“Hamilton would likely respond to you by saying, “If by ‘broad appeal across the entire nation’ you mean the ‘broad appeal’ of the electors chosen by each state legislature to cast the final vote for the Chief Magistrate, then we’re in agreement.” But I don’t think that’s what you mean.”
No. it is exactly what I mean. No 68 addresses the reasoning behind having electors choose the President so it is all about having a broad appeal to those electors around the nation.
———————————————————-
““But” here obviously means, “in spite of,” rather than, “in addition to.” ”
That is not correct. The words following “but” are “it will require”. This is clearly addressing the need for additional requirements that go beyond low intrigue and little arts of popularity that would be sufficient to win in a single state.
Then we’re agreed.
You know if you don’t like the electoral college, you can always try to call for a constitutional convention to get rid of it. Of course, any amendment to the constitution must be ratified by 3/4ths of the states, most of which benefit from the electoral college, since they are not California or New York.
“You know if you don’t like the electoral college, you can always try to call for a constitutional convention to get rid of it.
I do.
“Of course, any amendment to the constitution must be ratified by 3/4ths of the states, most of which benefit from the electoral college, since they are not California or New York.”
I agree that the low population, red, taker states that have disproportionate influence because of the EC, for no good reason, like it. They don’t want the gravy train to stop. Their made up reasons for doing so are totally fact free.
Fact is, the EC has kept us 50 years behind the times since it was adopted..
Um no. There was massive voter fraud by the usual cheat’s method of mail-in ballots but magnified immensely as it had to be to overcome Trump’s clear popular mandate.
What “clear popular mandate”? Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 and is on track to lose it
by an even larger margin this time round. He has also been behind in almost every poll since 2019.
All of which has no bearing on the election of the President but is used to fool simple minds into thinking Biden should have won without question.
As I understand it official ballots have block-chain watermarks made visible by infra-red readers. Unofficial mail-in ballots do not have this watermark. This was a sting operation. Fraud can readily be exposed. See: https://stateofthenation.co/?p=34662
And precisely when is the government going to announce this? Or at least present an example of such
a watermarked ballot so that people know what to look for?
Sorry, this is ridiculous wishful thinking. Ballots are printed by state or local authorities, not the federal department of homeland security. I think that snopes.com must be correct that DHS could not have been involved. Not that I trust them, but common sense says this is disinformation.
Not only is it impossible that DHS could arrange this, but also does anyone understand what a blockchain watermark would do? It could only foil fraud if duplicate serial numbers were found. If legitimate ballots were used fraudulently (as they surely were), the “watermark” would make them appear legitimate. Obviously they cannot encode the voter id because that would negate the secrecy of the ballot. And even then what would that prove, unless the person could be proven to be ineligible to vote? But again, if they made the ballot identifiable to the voter so that they could know how each person voted, that would be a violation of the constitution in itself.
Not to say that states might not include forgery-resistant microprinting on their ballots to be able to detect fake copies, but the theory would then be that the Dems running those states keep the microprinting secret from the Dems running the voter fraud. What sense does that make?
100,000 biden votes dumped into the count in WI at 4 am. sounds legit.
I thought, and hoped for truly, that we would not relive the year 2000 election. Yet it comes again and it seems to me that the democrat party has spent the last two decades practicing ways to get back at the republican party. Donald Trump is often a boor but he did do many good things for economic growth, racial reconciliation, and peace-over-war, which the establishment politicians of both parties had fastidiously avoided for generations.
“…Most of our readers realize that today’s media pronouncements are meaningless and we are in for a month or more of lawfare.
Stay calm, breathe, and have faith…”
Thanks for that reminder. DEEP breath.
Us Brits stand agog when we look at the US electoral process. For us this is mostly done and dusted on the night, with only a few constituencies declaring the next day. Only postal votes received up to voting day are counted. The results of each constituency is announced by a returning officer, not the media.
The election takes normally no more than 4 weeks from start to finish.
Power is transferred on the night of the election if a clear decision is made.
Yes, and don’t forget that counting takes place in public halls under the watch of observers and cameras.
USPS whistle blower says boss ordered him to backdate ballots to Nov 3.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1324850528279474176
Apparently, according to Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, Pennsylvania counties refused to comply, and Alito issued a second order.
https://twitter.com/bigleaguepol/status/1324893558201962497
Read Jonovas post on Benfords law.
Clear and strong indications of fabricated numbers for Biden.
This will be fun. Just hopping on to follow the comments!
This is GREAT ! Really !
History in the making. This does not happen often enough!
The Electoral College process after Nov. 3 runs from Nov. 4 through January 6.
Nov. 4 to Dec. 23 is for “counting popular votes and filing certificates of ascertainment”.
Dec. 8th is the “Safe Harbor” deadline … the deadline for “conclusive results” … no contested results allowed.
Dec. 14th is the day of the Electors Vote in each state.
It does not end there!
Dec. 23rd is the deadline for Certificates Delivered to Designate Officials.
The REALLY BIG DAY is January 6th, Joint Session of Congress to Count Electoral Votes and Declare Election Results with the Vice President presiding! Challenges and Objections to individual state’s results can be made and debated. Both House and Senate, after debate, will vote to accept or reject any Objection.
I’m stocked up on Popcorn and plenty of Dry London Gin and various “flavorings” to watch the proceedings.
Ya Ho ! 🙂
–Reg
Ref.: “The Electoral College: A2020 Presidential Election Timeline”, Congressional Research Service, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11641
Currently:
– this was the first US election with mass mailed-in ballots, unsolicited in several swing states. One can reasonably expect that such a shift in voting method will throw up anomalies. It should be incumbent in a properly functioning society to analyse and understand those anomalies rather than cover them up.
– the Wisconsin voter turnout of nearly 90% is crazy (the average for this election looks to be around 67%)
– swing states have large numbers of voters who voted for Biden but not for any of the senators/ reps/ local Dem politicians (PENN 98k; Georgia 80-90k; AZN – 42k; Michigan 70 – 115k; Wisconsin – 63k). Overall, the absence of voting down the ticket happened 3% of the time previously, but 18% here
– this is an election where Trump overperformed on the popular vote by a massive margin compared to 2016; Republicans over-performed on winning seats, but Trump still lost despite winning very close to the same number of votes as those Republicans on the down-ticket
– there are several Milwaukee precincts with voter turnout over 100%
– counting votes without poll watchers present strongly suggests cheating. The big voting dumps in Michigan and Wisconsin happened around 4am (UK time) after they had announced they were stopping for the night and Republican poll watchers disappeared
– the big voting dumps for Biden defy belief probabilistically. More likely that a monkey would have written a Shakespeare play in that time
– multiple witnesses are testifying to various aspects of voter fraud/ poll watcher intimidation
– all the IT ‘glitches’ favoured Biden. Again, from a probability standpoint, this is really unlikely
– Biden got more votes than Obama 2008. He got more black votes than Obama in some swing states, while underperforming Obama for this demographic everywhere else
– some analytical tools that I don’t fully know (Benford’s Law) suggest anomalous voting
– votes counted days after the election finished are what ‘won’ it for Biden. Almost as if they ballot-harvested; stopped counting on election night once they knew how many of those votes to use; dumped those votes or got them into the system in the days after the election
There’s plenty there to warrant a proper investigation.
mdman
Typical reaction reminding me what I use to name ‘pseudoskepticism’.
All guessing, no real proof.
” There’s plenty there to warrant a proper investigation. ”
Good luck / Bonne chance / Viel Glück
J.-P. D.
mdman- I am curious about the source for the comment “– swing states have large numbers of voters who voted for Biden but not for any of the senators/ reps/ local Dem politicians (PENN 98k; Georgia 80-90k; AZN – 42k; Michigan 70 – 115k; Wisconsin – 63k). Overall, the absence of voting down the ticket happened 3% of the time previously, but 18% here” since it makes little sense that people would only vote for the president and nothing else. I would like to look at this in more detail.
When you are in a hurry to obtain more presidential ballots, its your only choice. Down voting created ballots takes time.
Just read claims today that thousands of witness signatures were filled in by WI vote counters. That is illegal to do and by law the ballots do NOT count.
Claims. Clearly you know nothing of Wisconsinites. We may breed serial killers in this state, but we are not abjectly blind to any kind of corruption and follow the rules and process to root it out when we do find it. The mere idea of counters filling in signatures is laughable and quite disgusting to even consider. Biden won our state and it was a hard damn win for those that supported him. Even suggesting that win was not a good fight and resulted in cheating would get you “lost in the North Woods” or drowned in the Lake around here. So take your little conspiracy theories and claims and leave, there’s the door, don’t let hit whack you on the butt on your way out. Those that supported Biden and those that supported Trump are all part of OUR community and we recognize these are our people, and our people stand together even when we disagree.
Before you go attacking more states, you better know what that states’ culture is first.
Looks like self-righteous ad hominem might not be the best option until this matter is confirmed or not:
Administrative changes in Wisconsin election put tens of thousands of votes in question
“Wisconsin Statute 6.87(6d) stipulates that any ballot ‘may not be counted’ if it is missing the address of the voter’s witness. The Wisconsin Elections Commission in August issued a directive to voters that reaffirmed that statute: ‘If [the witness signature and address] is missing, your ballot will not be counted,’ the directive read.
Then in mid-October, the Wisconsin Elections Commission issued a directive to the state’s county clerks appearing to give them the authority, in contravention of state law, to fix incomplete (or ‘spoiled’) ballots that are missing witness signatures.
‘Please note that the clerk should attempt to resolve any missing witness address information prior to Election Day if possible,’ the directive states, ‘and this can be done through reliable information (personal knowledge, voter registration information, through a phone call with the voter or witness). The witness does not need to appear to add a missing address.’
Retired Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman, told local radio station 1130 WISN this week that the statute is ‘very, very clear. If an absentee ballot does not have a witness address on it, it’s not valid. That ballot is not valid.'”
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/many-200000-wisconsin-residents-may-have-voted-absentee-without-having
Do you mean this culture, from later in the same article?
“The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty had argued that the Wisconsin Elections Commission was bound by law to remove the voters whose addresses it could not verify. The commission had asked to delay the removal until after the election, citing concerns that some voters might be improperly removed from the rolls.
A circuit court judge had ruled last year that the elections commission was required to remove the tens of thousands of voters that had been targeted for removal. The commission at the time refused to do so, leading to their being held in contempt of court.”
Biden won. There is no lawsuit what will change that.
Biden has not won yet.
Yes, he won. Only the formalities remain. Sticking your fingers in your ears and crying “No! No! No!” won’t change reality.
Of course he has.
All lawsuit efforts arising from Trump’s campaign until now have shown to lack any substance.
Und das ist gut so !!!
J.-P. D.
Is there a valid reason that German nationals keep commenting on the non certified results of American elections? I’d like to know what it is.
Trump lost.
Get over it
Teach
Who appointed you election arbiter? Or did you have to buy the office?
Jindra
You said, “Biden won.” Legitimately? There is a reason that sports activities have umpires.
The fix was in months ago.
That’s why Biden didn’t need to campaign.
It’s all over folks, too many higher-ups are Democrats, the evidence is shredded and the media will never insist on an investigation. They were are smiles covering the story today since they now get a 4 years vacation.
There will never be a Republican president ever again
“..the evidence is shredded and the media will never insist on an investigation.”
You’re goin’ full Reynolds wrap bonnet here. Total alt.world. Got proof?
And on Jay-Z’s Tidal streaming service, the main playlist (that we cannot remove from view) is called “Here comes the Sun again – the US has spoken”, obviously celebrating Biden’s “victory”. From day one Trump has been hated by the same globalist-atheistic System that cannot be beaten.
Dark days lie ahead, indeed. May they all enjoy the taste of Bolivarianism now.
Fake news.
Fake polls.
Fake ballots.
Fake president.
Which one ???
+ Fake country.
You refer to the EUssr I presume.
No: I mean the USA during its Trumped time.
J.-P. D.
How is that green revolution going for you back in Deutchlandia?
Are you enjoying the 4x electricity rates?
How about “carbon” taxes?
Must be paradise when compared with the backward rubes in the U.S.
We will see. Things like the following, I do not decide until the evidence is fully in. There are mentions here of a “Sting Operation,” but this could also be Power “Elites” trying to stir up civil war:
https://rumble.com/vay72h-2020-election-sting-operation-donald-trump-blockchain-security-steve-piecze.html
I saw that earlier and thought it was BS.
In the US people are focused on the Trump Biden Farce & covid19.
In UK & Europe people are focused on the Brexit Farce & covid19.
You have to wonder… what are the puppet masters doing now behind the curtain ???
In 30 States, A Computer System Known To Be Defective Is Tallying Votes
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/30-states-computer-system-known-be-defective-tallying-votes
There are many stories of cheating on the elections and some arguments to disprove or explain.
Dead people voting; or fabricated votes in Michigan, this is supposedly a glitch in the system and the people of the list too old to be alive didn’t really vote their identically named descendants did.
More people registered for voting than actually living in the region:
this isn’t the sign of a good, well maintained system but doesn’t necessarily indicate fraud
Trump’s observers not allowed to do teir job:
if this happened, then this cannot be explained away, it’s a problem wherever this happened.
Some voting system counting rep votes as if they were dem votes, in Michigan
Yes this seems to be a problem if it really happened, but the extent of this happening is probably very limited.
Can Trump legal team do something about all this? Did these really take place? What is the extent of any of this if it did take place? Is it enough to change the outcome of the election of us president?
jani129
If there was any hope for Trump keeping president, the guy certainly wouldn’t look like this:
Translation from pixels into English:
” America, you never really liked me. I think I’ll punish you for it. ”
J.-P. D.
Why is the ENSO meter swinging left for Biden? Is there any decency?
More suspicious “surface” adjustments?
Like it or not, Biden is in. We need to get over that and look forward to watching him fail to change the climate.
What on Earth makes you think that this is in any way related to, or pertaining to, the climate? Good grief man… get a grip!
You’re a bigger dullard than your past comments led me to imagine.
Why are “we” (daring to speak for the majority here) so concerned about Biden and either enamored of Trump, or accepting of him despite serious concerns? One very big reason is policy on climate. Sure we’re also wise enough to oppose communism, but the common thread I dare say for every single one of “us” is climate policy.
And that’s how climate is extremely relevant here.
Biden did say today that he has a clear mandate to fix climate change and systemic racism. I thought coronavirus was his laser focus on day one.
”What on Earth makes you think that this is in any way related to, or pertaining to, the climate? Good grief man… get a grip!”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Wow!
Check this out. Scroll down to the table and click on Date of Birth to sort. There are about 1500’ish voters greater than 100 years old. Several of them are over 200 years old.
https://data.pa.gov/Government-Efficiency-Citizen-Engagement/2020-General-Election-Mail-Ballot-Requests-Departm/mcba-yywm
That looks like crap database design to me. The date of birth column has ridiculous stuff in it. This means that for certain some dates are wrong, but by implication that none of the dates can be trusted. So how can eligibilty to vote be established? And if the temporal data is corrupted, what other data as well?