Skip to content

Pulido: Kaye Here Today, Gone Tomorrow

Also at Tuesday night’s meeting Brendan Read one of his prepared statements, this time attacking Jim Bean for “suppressing” the vote of former Belmar resident Sam Kaye.  Kaye moved to Ocean Township in 2012.  Bean challenged Kaye’s vote on those grounds, asking the Board of Elections to verify whether he was eligible to vote in Belmar.  Ultimately the Board decided he wasn’t and disallowed Kaye’s vote.

You may have noticed all the screeching about Bean’s “suppression” of Kaye’s vote over the weekend before election day.  It was covered by the Asbury Park Press and WRAT.  It was on the usual suspects’ Facebook pages and the Democrats also distributed a flyer about it that weekend, November 1 and November 2.

Former Belmar Democratic chairman Luis Pulido should have been the most outraged of anyone at Bean’s “suppression” of Kaye’s vote.  After all, it was he who hand delivered Kaye’s vote that Friday, October 31.

Screen Shot 2014-11-20 at 9.56.15 AM

But unfortunately he couldn’t assist in helping to spread the “suppression” story the next day and day after, Saturday November 1 and Sunday November 2, because he was acting as the agent in an estate sale in Belmar those two days. (Pulido owns a second-hand shop in Asbury Park.)

The address of the estate sale?  414 7th Ave.  SAM KAYE’S HOUSE!

Screen Shot 2014-11-20 at 9.52.38 AM

“Everything must go!”


I guess Pulido learned sometime between Friday afternoon and 9:00 Saturday morning that Sam Kaye was not returning to Belmar.

Here is Pulido’s bio from a 2012 Monmouth County Democrat press release:

Screen Shot 2014-11-20 at 1.20.11 PM


  1. Teddy Ehmann wrote:

    Personally, I am happy that the “there’s NO THERE There” crowd has made this a big deal. For instance the new alternative blog, Belmar View posting the names of those challenged voters and the names of their challengers. You know like non-resident Samuel Kaye. These folks are so nuts that they don’t know the difference between voter suppression and the right to challenge based on facts or the belief that the person is not legally allowed to vote. I know personally of friends who got knocks on their door after putting up a Vote No sign in August. Yes, they were elected and yes, they wanted a Vote Yes. My friends were so intimidated they took down their lawn sign. Now, that’s suppression. In the months ahead I will be all to happy to feed these negative attacks with the information that supports a challenge of these voters.

    Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 5:12 pm | Permalink
  2. Anonymous wrote:

    So it’s quite possible Pulido knowingly delivered an invalid ballot. I wonder if that’s a crime.

    Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 7:43 pm | Permalink
  3. noreen wrote:

    Isn’t this the same character that threw an 80+ year Democratic board worker under the bus because he resented her bipartisan activities?

    Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 8:43 pm | Permalink
  4. Tulip wrote:

    Starting with the moving of the voting machines of Districts 1 and 4 from the gym and meeting room and the information about the change of the above and the times printed in the Letters to the Editor column each election has been a nightmare. The last was totally unbelievable. At some point something should be done about what where and when
    or discontinued. They are a joke from the National right down to the Municipal. And to Noreen when I sent the information about the incident to the Coast Star they wouldn’t print it. I was told they had the right to print what they thought was important.
    As for Mr. Kaye He filled out a provisional ballot last year. Whoever checks wasn’t checking. This whole nightmare has to end, too many nasty things going on and being ignored.

    Thursday, November 20, 2014 at 11:52 pm | Permalink
  5. Southie wrote:

    Luis Pulido should be charged with federal voter fraud. As the sales agent representing the estate sale of the house where Samuel Kaye previously lived Mr. Pulido was well aware in advance that Mr. Kaye had not lived there during the last 30 days and in fact not for two years. Mr. Pulido knew that the reason Mr. Kaye was not living in Belmar was not a result of the house being damaged from Sandy as the repairs where completed within months and the house was on the market for sale for a long time. Mr. Pulido had custody and control over Mr. Kaye’s ballot and was part of voter harvesting by the Doherty campaign. It is not a question of whether Mr. Kaye is 90 years old, a veteran and loved living in Belmar it is question of legal residence and domicile.

    Friday, November 21, 2014 at 7:49 pm | Permalink
  6. Guest wrote:

    Another “conspiracy theory?”

    Saturday, November 22, 2014 at 11:56 am | Permalink
  7. Eugene Creamer wrote:

    I hope it was a pre-Estate Sale.

    Thursday, November 27, 2014 at 10:46 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.