Skip to comments.
850 voters in NYC are officially 164 years old
New York Post ^
| October 22, 2014
Posted on 10/22/2014 3:14:50 PM PDT by SMGFan
A single Bronx voter listed in official records as being 164 years old led Board of Elections officials to review their files — where they turned up another 849 New Yorkers who were supposedly alive when Abe Lincoln was president.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Government; Politics/Elections; US: New York
KEYWORDS: computerglitch; electionfraud; newyork; votefraud; voterfraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
Old Democrats never die.
1
posted on
10/22/2014 3:14:50 PM PDT
by
SMGFan
To: SMGFan
Age discrimination! Why shouldn’t our Mexican War and Civil War veterans be allowed to vote?
2
posted on
10/22/2014 3:17:33 PM PDT
by
oblomov
To: SMGFan
I wonder if anyone is still voting from the days of Washington?
3
posted on
10/22/2014 3:19:22 PM PDT
by
GeronL
(Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
To: SMGFan
4
posted on
10/22/2014 3:19:33 PM PDT
by
Nachum
(Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
To: SMGFan
Well folks are living a lot longer than they used to.
5
posted on
10/22/2014 3:21:17 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(You can't half ass conservatism.)
To: SMGFan
This isn't necessarily vote fraud. The article states that
Board officials chalked up the implausible age snafu to previous practices that allowed residents not to provide their exact birthdays when registering to vote. One of the voters is actually 73.
6
posted on
10/22/2014 3:25:17 PM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
To: SMGFan
Further research shows that these same voters were also listed as being 164 years old back in 1864!
7
posted on
10/22/2014 3:28:02 PM PDT
by
dowcaet
To: dowcaet
They were all whigged out.
8
posted on
10/22/2014 3:31:08 PM PDT
by
TurboZamboni
(Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.-JFK)
To: dowcaet
So they’re really 314 years old!!!
164 maybe, but 314? No way!!!
B^)
To: SMGFan
10
posted on
10/22/2014 3:37:36 PM PDT
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: TurboZamboni
11
posted on
10/22/2014 3:38:02 PM PDT
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: Jack Hydrazine
Do they vote early and often?
12
posted on
10/22/2014 3:38:28 PM PDT
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: smoothsailing
They’re Democrat voters. Technically they can live forever. Gotta love the Dems get out the vote efforts.
13
posted on
10/22/2014 3:40:21 PM PDT
by
dowcaet
To: oblomov
Don’t forget our revolutionary war vets. I bet ol’ George Washington and Patrick Henry always wanted to cast their votes for Obama and Hillary.
To: DJ MacWoW
One of the voters is actually 73. Assuming he is only registered as one voter.
15
posted on
10/22/2014 4:05:34 PM PDT
by
FredZarguna
(His first name is 'Unarmed,' and his given middle name is 'Teenager.')
To: FredZarguna
She. Did you read the article?
16
posted on
10/22/2014 4:07:14 PM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
To: SMGFan
This leads to confusion in closed primary states, where many of the oldest voters were registered under the Democratic-Republican Party.
17
posted on
10/22/2014 4:07:28 PM PDT
by
FredZarguna
(His first name is 'Unarmed,' and his given middle name is 'Teenager.')
To: GeronL; SMGFan
anyone is still voting from the days of Washington?If the demoncrits got a hold of their name, yes...
But reading the article does explain this anomaly. Hopefully before any FReeper starts Alex Jonesing this, they will do just that! (i.e. read the article ;-)
Now, if the NY comPost wants to really do some research, maybe they could look into whether any of these voters listed as 164 years old is actually deceased and continues to vote, as has been reported as happening in other Demoncrit cesspools. Then see if they want to publish THAT information...
18
posted on
10/22/2014 4:11:02 PM PDT
by
NoCmpromiz
(John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
To: DJ MacWoW
She. How exactly does that make any difference?
Unless I missed your </sarc> tag, how could this possibly be anything other than vote fraud?
A now 73 year old, who's registered as 164 years old currently, would -- at best -- have to have claimed to have been 112 at the time of his (or her, or its) first registration. Please do explain to me how a voter mistakes an estimate of his (or her, or its) own age by NINETY ONE YEARS. Any age over 21 makes the estimate even worse. Please.
19
posted on
10/22/2014 4:12:51 PM PDT
by
FredZarguna
(His first name is 'Unarmed,' and his given middle name is 'Teenager.')
To: SMGFan
And I’m guessing that they voted against Abe, too. Probably several times.
20
posted on
10/22/2014 4:16:02 PM PDT
by
super7man
(Oh why did I post that, now I'll never be able to run for Congress.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
