## Election Fraud 2012: Simple Algebra of Early, Election Day and Late Recorded Votes

09 Jan

Election Fraud 2012: Simple Algebra of Early, Election Day and Late Recorded Votes

Richard Charnin
Jan. 9, 2013
Updated: Nov. 2, 2013

The 2012 True Vote Model determined that Obama won the election by 55-43%, a 15.5 million vote margin. Officially, Obama won the recorded vote by 51.0-47.2%, a 5.0 million margin. The following early and late vote analysis will confirm that the TVM estimate is close to the truth.

Calculating Obama’s Election Day vote is an algebra problem. We have Obama’s 51.0% share of the (T)otal recorded vote (129 million). The Total vote is the sum of the (E)arly, Election (D)ay and (L)ate votes. We have the late votes recorded after Election Day. We have a good estimate of the number of early votes (31% of the total) and Obama’s share. Since T = E+D+L, we can solve for Obama’s Election Day Vote: D = T-E-L. It turns out that in order to match Obama’s 51.0% share, he must have had only 48% of the recorded Election Day votes. This is highly implausible.

Obama led by just 50.3-48.0% after the first 117.4 million votes were recorded early and on Election Day. But he had a 58-38% margin in the 11.7 million late votes recorded after Election Day.

The same phenomenon occurred in 2008. Quoting from the Huffington Post: “Obama dominated early voting in 2008, building up such big leads in Colorado, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina that he won each state despite losing the Election Day vote, according to voting data compiled by The Associated Press”.

But the article never questioned why the anomaly occurred in the first place or mentioned the fact that Obama won the 10 million late votes recorded after Election Day by 59-37%. The omissions were typical of the mainstream media which never bothers to do an in-depth data analysis.

Total Vote = Early Vote + Election Day Vote + Late Vote
TV = EV + ED + LV

TV = 129.13 million (Obama led by 51.0-47.2%)
LV = 11.67 million (Obama led by 58.0-38.3%)
EV = 40.0 million (Obama had an estimated 55%; the Early Vote was approximately 31% of TV)

Therefore, solving for the Election Day recorded vote:
ED = TV – LV – EV = 77.46 million = 129.13 – 11.67 – 40.0

We use simple algebra to solve for Obama’s Election Day recorded share. Since we know his total vote, early and late vote, we calculate his Election Day share (X) from the formula:
Total Vote = 65.90 = .51*TV = .55*EV + X*ED + .58*LV
X= (0.51*TV -.55*EV – .58*LV) / ED
X = (0.51*129.13 – .55*40.0 – .58*11.67) / 77.46
X = (65.90 – 22.0 – 6.77) / 77.46
X = 37.13/77.46
X = 47.9%
Romney won the 77.5 million votes cast on Election Day by 50.4-47.9% (third-parties had 1.7%).

Are we to believe that Romney won by 2.5% on Election Day (votes were cast on optical scanners and touchscreens) while Obama won 40 million Early votes (hand-delivered or mail-in paper ballots) by 12% and also won the 11.7 million Late recorded votes (absentee and provisional ballots) by 20%? It is very convincing evidence that votes were stolen from Obama on Election Day by rigging the voting machines.

Sensitivity Analysis
The only assumption is that Obama had 55% of the early vote. We know he had 58% of the late vote and therefore must have had 48% on Election Day. Let’s consider other early vote scenarios.

If Obama had 53% of the early vote, then he needed 49% on Election Day to match the recorded vote. Is the 5% spread between his early and late vote plausible? If he had 51%, he needed 50% on Election Day. Is the 7% spread plausible?

The 2012 True Vote Model contains a comprehensive Early vs. Late Vote sensitivity analysis.
1. Obama and Romney shares of early, Election Day and late votes
2. Vote shares required to match the Calculated Total Vote
3. Obama’s Total Vote Share Sensitivity to Early and Election Day Shares

Correlation
The 2008 and 2012 recorded total and late votes are highly correlated:
Recorded Vote: 0.983
Late Vote: 0.813
Late Vote percent of recorded: 0.831

2008-2012 Summary Comparison
Note the uniform 2% difference between 2008 and 2012 voting statistics.

1. Total Recorded Vote
Obama had 52.9% of 131.4 million in 2008 and 51.0% of 129.1 in 2012 (1.9% difference).

2. Early Voting
Although the exact numbers are unknown, media reports indicated that Obama led the early voting by substantial margins in both 2008 and 2012. Based on his estimated 2008 and 2012 True Vote Model shares (58% and 55%, respectively), recorded (53%, 51%) and late shares (59%, 58%), then in both 2008 and 2012, his early share (57%, 55%) was 4% better than recorded and 2-3% lower than his late share.

3. Election Day Recorded Vote (including early votes)
Obama had 52.4% in 2008 and 50.3% in 2012 (2.1%)

4. Late Vote

5. True Vote Model
Obama led by 58.0-40.5% in 2008 (1% lower than the late vote) and by 55.2-43.1% in 2012 (3% lower).

6. Weighted State Late Vote / True Vote match
The weighted average 2008 late vote share (57.4-38.6%) closely matched (within 1%) the independent True Vote Model. The 2012 weighted late share (54.0-41.8%) closely matched the TVM (within 1%).

7. 2008 Exit Poll / Late Vote Match
Obama had 58.0% in the unadjusted 2008 weighted aggregate of the state exit polls and 61% in the unadjusted National Exit Poll. He had 59.2% of the late vote. Just 31 states had exit polls in 2012. Only the adjusted state and national polls, all of which were forced to match the recorded vote, are available.

Related 2012 Election Analysis Posts:
Election Fraud Model: http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2012/12/07/a-model-for-estimating-presidential-election-day-fraud/
Election Fraud Proof: http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/01/02/2012-election-fraud-a-true-vote-model-proof/

``` ....................Pct Obama Romney Other Early/Elect Day.....91% 50.34% 48.07% 1.59% Late.................9% 57.99% 38.29% 3.72% Total..............100% 51.03% 47.19% 1.78% ```

``` ....................Pct Obama Romney Other Early...............31% 55.00% 44.00% 1.00% Election Day........60% 48.00% 50.00% 2.00% Late.................9% 57.99% 38.29% 3.72% Total..............100% 51.03% 47.19% 1.78% Recorded Calculated.........100% 51.07% 47.09% 1.84% Official...........100% 51.03% 47.19% 1.78% Obama Vote Shares Required to Match 51.0% Recorded Share (Obama had 58.0% of 11.7 million Late Votes) Early Election Day 48% 51.62% 49% 51.10% 50% 50.58% 51% 50.07% 52% 49.55% 53% 49.03% 54% 48.52% 55% 48.00% 56% 47.48% 57% 46.97% Vote Share Sensitivity to Early and Election Day Shares ............Obama Election Day Share Early 48.00% 50.00% 52.00% 54.00% 56.00% Share.........Obama Total Share 58% 52.00% 53.20% 54.40% 55.60% 56.80% 57% 51.69% 52.89% 54.09% 55.29% 56.49% 56% 51.38% 52.58% 53.78% 54.98% 56.18% 55% 51.07% 52.27% 53.47% 54.67% 55.87% < True Vote 54% 50.76% 51.96% 53.16% 54.36% 55.56% 53% 50.45% 51.65% 52.85% 54.05% 55.25% 52% 50.14% 51.34% 52.54% 53.74% 54.94% 51% 49.83% 51.03% 52.23% 53.43% 54.63% 50% 49.52% 50.72% 51.92% 53.12% 54.32% 49% 49.21% 50.41% 51.61% 52.81% 54.01% 2012 True Vote Model (2-party) 2008... True Share Alive Cast............Mix Obama Romney Obama Romney Obama. 76,196 58.00% 72,386 68,767.........54.2% 90% 10% 61,890 6,877 McCain 52,995 40.34% 50,346 47,828.........37.7% 7% 93% 3,348 44,480 Other....2,185 01.66% 2,076 1,972...........1.5% 50% 50% 986 986 DNV..........................8,265..........6.5% 59% 41% 4,874 3,390 Total 131,372 100.0% 124,808 126,832.........100% 56.1% 43.9% 71,099 55,733 .........................................Recorded 51.0% 47.2% 64,709 59,881 ..........................................2-party 51.9% 48.1% ........................................Projected 51.6% 48.4% ```

Track Record: Election Model Forecast; Post-election True Vote Model

2004 Election Model (2-party shares)
Kerry:
Projected 51.8%, 337 EV (snapshot)
Recorded: 48.3%, 255 EV
State exit poll aggregate (unadjusted): 51.7%, 337 EV
True Vote Model: 53.6%, 364 EV

2006 Midterms
Regression Trend Model Projected Democratic Generic share: 56.43%

2008 Election Model
Obama:
Projected: 53.1%, 365.3 EV (simulation mean);
Recorded: 52.9%, 365 EV
State exit poll aggregate (unadjusted): 58.0%, 420 EV
True Vote Model: 58.0%, 420 EV

2012 Election Model
Obama:
Projected: 51.6% (2-party), 332 EV snapshot; 320.7 expected; 321.6 mean
Recorded: 51.0%, 332 EV
True Vote Model 56.1%, 391 EV (snapshot); 385 EV (expected)
Unadjusted State Exit Polls: not released
Unadjusted National Exit Poll: not released

1 Comment

Posted by on January 9, 2013 in 2012 Election

### One Response to Election Fraud 2012: Simple Algebra of Early, Election Day and Late Recorded Votes

1. January 9, 2013 at 4:14 pm

Another excellent presentation of the “facts of life” in regard to American elections. Ordinary citizens are not supposed to know about this. The populous is supposed to believe that scientifically conducted exit polls and Charnin’s alternative mathematical model just do not apply to American elections, because everyone knows Karl Rove could not possibly get away with stealing American elections–even with the assistance of an electronic voting empire at his disposal.

Karl Rove has been investigated for involvement in other crimes. But, Rove has never been investigated, or even questioned under oath, about vote stealing activity in the U.S.