Did over 100,000 people older than 124 years vote in Wisconsin?

American Thinker.com ^ | January 23, 2022 | Andrea Widburg

[Kaslin]

If you’ve been wondering about the extent of voter fraud in America, we may be seeing a staggering amount of either fraud or grotesque negligence in Wisconsin voter rolls. A review of the state’s voter roles showed that 569,277 voters registered on January 1, 1918. Of that number, 20% of these people, all of whom must be at least 124 years old, voted last November. Biden “won” in Wisconsin by 20,682 votes....

For regular American Thinker readers, this shouldn’t come as a surprise. Roughly two weeks ago, Jay Valentine wrote about the extent of fraud he and his team have discovered as they’ve uploaded voter rolls (which often had corrupted data that seemed deliberately intended to keep information opaque) into Valentine’s system. Once the information for any given state was loaded and sorted, it invariably revealed rather surprising information in both red and blue states. Among other things, in one red state, there were “4,300 people over 100 years old on their rolls. Some were 121. Those were the kids. The really old ones were almost 2,000 years old, and there were a bunch of them – and they voted.”

(For those wondering, my understanding is that Valentine did not identify specific states because it’s important for the volunteer canvassers to have complete anonymity. Naming states could make the officials who are being exposed as corrupt or inept start looking for canvassers.)

The revelations out of Wisconsin (and I have no idea whether Jay Valentine has been part of the Wisconsin analysis) are staggering. It turns out that at least one out of every 14 voters in Wisconsin is at least 124 years old. Thus, to register in 1918, a person would have had to have been 21 or older.

[Bernard]

Has anybody seen an actual name of one or more of these people? Amateurs playing with data bases can produce all sorts of stupid results.

And the part that actually bothers me about this is that only about 20 % of these people with bad registration dates actually voted in 2020. That's a very low number. Or would be, if any of this could be real.

[MikelTackNailer]

You guys are just confusing people with facts when their party plainly lays out how to think with minimal mental stress. Don't harsh their buzz!

Seriously though, it's obvious the Democrats are hard-scrabbling to retain all their cheating tactics while technology favors the smarter. It's a shame they have legions of willfully ignorant people still propping them up perpetuating their voting preference like Pavlov's dogs while not seeing how they're enabling their own destruction.

[rlmorel]

I think the mistake made by those who minimize this is that they think there was a monolithic method of stealing the election, and I don’t think there was.

I think we need to pay attention to, and combat all of the methods they use. Exploiting the voter rolls is just one of them they use.

[Svartalfiar]

If the counties that didn’t store DOB had their data batch loaded, all those voters would have a DOB year of 1900.

A review of the state’s voter roles showed that 569,277 voters registered on January 1, 1918.

If their DoB was randomly entered as 1900, what does that have to do with registration dates of 1918? A, that translates into a DoB of 1897, not 1900. B, where did all those registrations come from? 1918JAN01 doesn't sound like a default date, and if there was no registration date, shouldn't those registrations be deleted?

[BiglyCommentary]

Read the article details. DOB of 1900 plus default of 18 years to be of voting age = 1918.

[BiglyCommentary]

“and if there was no registration date, shouldn’t those registrations be deleted”

If you were implementing some statewide DB and some counties did not have all the required fields such as DOB, you would still import those voters in, not leave a crippled unusable system that cant be rolled out on schedule. The assumption would be that those records would be cleaned up in the future.