RSS

TRUMP WON THE TRUE POPULAR VOTE

Richard Charnin
May 10, 2019

Buy this book! Look inside. It is the only one which does a complete mathematical analysis of the 2016 election. Don’t believe the media/DNC/pundit propaganda that Hillary won by 2.8 million votes.

https://www.amazon.com/Trump-Won-True-Vote-Independents/dp/1979900973/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1512494633&sr=1-2&refinements=p_27%3ARichard+Charnin

TRUMP WON THE TRUE POPULAR VOTE.

Track record: I am the only analyst who exactly forecast the BOGUS recorded electoral vote and estimated the True Vote in each of the last three elections.

IT’S ABOUT TIME TO EXPOSE THE HRC POPULAR VOTE MYTH WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR SPYGATE.

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/07/2016-election-model-forecast/

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

 

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on May 10, 2019 in Uncategorized

 

A VERY preliminary 2020 ELECTION MODEL forecast

Richard Charnin
April 27, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

This is a VERY preliminary 2020 ELECTION MODEL forecast. It is based on recorded and true vote assumptions of returning 2016 voters and forecast vote shares. The TRUE VOTE is never equal to the RECORDED VOTE

The model does not currently forecast the Electoral vote. I forecast the EV exactly in each of the last 3 elections. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/09/14/summary-2004-2012-election-forecast-1968-2012-true-vote-model/?fbclid=IwAR2jXWG8Uymn3hbGjCMN5FqGa6vn3Btg8ViKTv_7Mn-TLIPnnTuwcCjGJJg

VIEW a SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS BASED ON INCREMENTAL TRUMP VOTE SHARES OF RETURNING TRUMP AND CLINTON VOTERS.   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yh0YkXBVctdJwt0_XHrpCC6f7K30oEz0Vr13MiU5qT4/edit?fbclid=IwAR0ejmGXPoEej6nErcJ_eFK24ErumOM6Kgsanf8wA_J88kJuACkLkUp4sDA#gid=0

RECORDED VOTE FORECAST
2016  Recorded Turnout Mix DEM Trump Other
Clinton 59.94 44.40% 86% 9% 5%
Trump 57.36 42.49% 6% 90% 4%
Other 6.93 5.13% 45% 45% 10%
DNV (new) 10.77 7.98% 40% 45% 15%
Total 135.00 Recorded 46.24% 48.13% 5.63%
Vote (mil) 62.42 64.98 7.60
Margin 2.56
TRUE VOTE FORECAST
2016  True Turnout Mix DEM Trump Other
Clinton 54.66 40.49% 84% 11% 5%
Trump 60.87 45.09% 6% 92% 2%
Other 8.70 6.44% 40% 40% 20%
DNV (new) 10.77 7.98% 40% 45% 15%
Total 135.00 True Vote share 42.48% 52.10% 5.41%
True Vote 57.35 70.34 7.31
Margin 12.99
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 27, 2019 in Uncategorized

 

Bill Binney: NSA Has 32 Pages of Communications Between Seth Rich and Julian Assange

Richard Charnin
April 21, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

Mark F. McCarty in Medium.com
View at Medium.com

“About six months ago, a blogpost by “Publius Tacitus” appeared regarding attorney Ty Clevenger’s FOIA request regarding Seth Rich:
“But now there is new information that may corroborate what the human sources quoted in the Fox article claimed about Seth’s role in getting the DNC documents to Wikileaks. Borne from a FOIA request filed in November 2017 by attorney Ty Clevenger, who requested any information regarding Seth Rich and Julian Assange. The NSA informed Clevenger in a letter dated 4 October 2018 that:

Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA. Fifteen documents (32 pages) responsive to your request have been reviewed by this Agency as required by the FOIA and have found to be currently and properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526. These documents meet the criteria for classification as set forth in Subparagraph © of Section 1.4 and remains classified TOP SECRET and SECRET.”

Here’s what Binney says:

“Ty Clevenger has FOIAed information from NSA asking for any data that involved both Seth Rich and also Julian Assange. And they responded by saying we’ve got 15 files, 32 pages, but they’re all classified in accordance with executive order 13526 covering classification, and therefore you can’t have them.

That says that NSA has records of communications between Seth Rich and Julian Assange. I mean, that’s the only business that NSA is in — copying communications between people and devices.

If Binney is interpreting this correctly — and bear in mind that, not only is he extraordinarily bright, but he is sometimes referred to as “the father of the NSA” — this provides strong support for the hypothesis that Seth was indeed Wikileaks’ source for the DNC emails it published. Assange has strongly hinted at this, Sy Hersh claims to have a trusted informant inside the FBI who states that he has seen FBI documents verifying this, and Binney himself says that he has two sources inside the intel community vouching for this.”
Read the rest of this entry »

 
1 Comment

Posted by on April 21, 2019 in Uncategorized

 

Bill Binney: The Mueller Report lied about the DNC Server. It was a leak not a Russian hack

Richard Charnin
April 19, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

Duncan Campbell and James Risen in the Intercept

“CIA DIRECTOR MIKE POMPEO met late last month with a former U.S. intelligence official who has become an advocate for a disputed theory that the theft of the Democratic National Committee’s emails during the 2016 presidential campaign was an inside job, rather than a hack by Russian intelligence.

Pompeo met on October 24 with William Binney, a former National Security Agency official-turned-whistleblower who co-authored an analysis published by a group of former intelligence officials that challenges the U.S. intelligence community’s official assessment that Russian intelligence was behind last year’s theft of data from DNC computers. Binney and the other former officials argue that the DNC data was “leaked,” not hacked, “by a person with physical access” to the DNC’s computer system.

Binney claims the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election is false, and that the Democratic National Committee e-mails were leaked by an insider instead. He has appeared on Fox News at least ten times between September 2016 and November 2017 to promote this theory. Binney said that the “intelligence community wasn’t being honest here”. He has also been frequently cited on Breitbart News. In November 2017 it was reported that a month earlier, Binney had met with CIA Director Mike Pompeo at the behest of President Trump.”

https://theintercept.com/2017/11/07/dnc-hack-trump-cia-director-william-binney-nsa/

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 19, 2019 in 2016 election

 

Trump had the Big MO: He won voters who decided after Sep1 by at least 48-40%

Richard Charnin
Feb. 24, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

National Exit Poll- When Decided 

The NEP is ALWAYS adjusted to match the recorded vote.

The 2016 NEP indicates that of the 26% of voters who decided after Oct.1, 48% voted for Trump and 40% for Clinton. Of the 74% who decided before Oct.1, Clinton led 51-45%.

Of the 40% of voters who decided after Sept.1, Trump won by 48.0-42.0%. Clinton won voters who decided before Sept.1 by 52.5-45.0%.

Were Clinton’s  poll shares rigged to match the recorded vote? Clinton won the national recorded vote by 2.8 million. She won IL, CA and NY by a combined 7 million votes. Therefore Trump won the recorded vote by at least 4 million everywhere else.

But Trump’s True Vote margin had to be higher than 4 million. As many as 3 million of Clinton’s 7 million margin in IL, CA and NY may have been fraudulent- matching her national 2.8 million margin. Were Clinton’s votes inflated (rigged) in these and other states?

Since the NEP was forced to match Clinton’s 48.3-46.2% recorded vote, it appears that her vote shares were inflated.

The third-party Recorded vote is another clue that Clinton’s vote was rigged.
According to the National Exit Poll, 4% of voters who decided before Oct.1 voted for a third party candidate; 12% voted third party after Oct.1. Jill Stein had just 1% of the total recorded vote. Could it be that Jill really had at least 3% of which 2% or more were shifted to Clinton?

Click for state deciders href=”https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit?fbclid=IwAR2CRD4z4Z7Q_qpEYNDM9EOj8q5Jzy1_LkKM1lF5TqZngXsp48WoTcMcUE8#gid=1036252757″

Decided…. Pct Clinton Trump Other
Post Oct. 1 26% 40.0% 48.0% 12.0%
Pre Oct. 1.. 74% 51.0% 45.0% 4.0%
Total……… 100% 48.3% 46.2% 5.5%

Decided….. Pct Clinton Trump Other
Post Sept. 1 40% 42.0% 48.0% 10.0%
Pre Sept 1.. 60% 52.5% 45.0% 2.5%
Total……… 100% 48.3% 46.2% 5.5%

State exit poll………….. IL…….. CA……. NY
Total Recorded %…… 56-39-5.. 62-32-4. 60-37-3
Before Oct.1……….….66-32-2.. 67-29-4. 67-31-2 < Rigged?
After Oct.1…………… 33-55-12. 51-42-7. 38-53-9 < shift to Trump & 3rd party
Votes (mil)…………….. 5.5……. 14.2……. 7.5
Margin (mil)…………… 0.95……. 4.3…….. 1.7 Total 6.95 million

https://scontent.fmia1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/52830928_2582663225109009_9135850851154264064_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_eui2=AeG2bdqKdBw2QbAT7jh9x2Lr4oMSzVQnHH3lptQnmmyZ6Xt68OirxZBqcDJdq7uk5Tg5IEydhOqjPRmZTKn7kN-sr2MleovhVwa0itVqhnhrFA&_nc_ht=scontent.fmia1-1.fna&oh=f96540887d5279fbe3444495fb3ae42c&oe=5D248212

 
3 Comments

Posted by on February 24, 2019 in 2016 election

 

STATES OFFERING DRIVER’S LICENSES TO UNAUTHORIZED IMMIGRANTS

Richard Charnin
Feb. 17, 2019

From Q: It’s very simple – w/o the illegal vote D’s lose.
Previous illegal imm high pop v D win by county provided.
[Example 2]

Why do D’s push for illegals to obtain a driver’s license?
Does having a DL make it easier to vote?

This brief summarizes state legislation authorizing driver’s licenses or authorization cards for unauthorized immigrants (not to be used for federal identification purposes) and examples of limits or exceptions for legal immigrants’ licenses.

http://www.ncsl.org/…/states-offering-driver-s-licenses-to-…

What states provide DL’s to illegals?
What checks are in place within each of the ‘DL granted states’ to prevent 2x-3x-4x-5x voting?

Compare v. 2016 Presidential election results.
What do you notice?
Do you believe in coincidences?
Memes are important.
#FactsMatter
Q

Total…………..Clinton…………………Trump
136,216,677 65,719,398 48.25% 62,889,892 46.17%
DL states
34,675,682 19,700,670 56.81% 12,439,441 35.87%
Non DL
101,540,995 46,018,728 45.32% 50,450,451 49.68%
No photo description available.

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 17, 2019 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , ,

Did CBS and CNN low-ball Trump’s Democratic SOTU viewers and approval?

Richard Charnin
Feb 7, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

Did CBS and CNN low-ball Trump’s Democratic SOTU viewers and approval?

According to CBS and CNN, 76% of  viewers approved of Trump’s SOTU. But the percentage of Democratic viewers was very low considering that CBS and CNN viewers are heavily Democratic.  Trump must have done much better among Democratic viewers than indicated in each poll and may have had over 80% total approval.

On CBS, Republican viewers (44%) outnumbered Democrats (25%) and Independents (31%) with 30% of Dems approving, 97% of Repubs and 82% of Independents. One would expect that CBS viewers would be overwhelmingly Democrats.

Assume CBS viewers were Dem 60%, Rep 20%, Ind 20%. Then to match Trump’s total 76% approval, estimated Dem approval is 66%, Rep 97%, Ind 86%.  This is plausible.

Assume CBS viewers represented Gallup national voter affiliation (34% Dem, 25% Rep, 41% Ind). Then to match Trump’s 76% approval, estimated Dem approval is 56%, Rep 97%, Ind 80%.

On CNN, Dem approval is 36%, Rep 87%, Ind 57%. Then to match 76% Trump approval, CNN viewers must have been: Dem 15%, Rep 75%, Ind 10%. This is not plausible.

Assume CNN viewers were Dem 45%, Rep 30%, Ind 25% with  Dem approval 66%, Rep 97%, Ind 87%. Then Trump had 81% total approval. This is plausible.

CBS poll Pct Approv
Dem………25% 30% < NOT PLAUSIBLE. Only 25% Dem viewers?
Rep……….44% 97%
Ind………..31% 82%
Total…….100% 76%

CBS1……. Pct Approv
Dem……. 60% 66% < 60% Dem is plausible
Rep……… 20% 97%
Ind………. 20% 86%
Total…….100% 76%

CBS2……. Pct Approv
Dem……. 60% 75% < 60% Dem is plausible
Rep……… 20% 97%
Ind………. 20% 86%
Total…….100% 82%   TRUMP 82% TOTAL APPROVAL

Gallup……Pct Approv
Dem………34% 56%
Rep……….25% 97%
Ind………..41% 80%
Total…….100% 76%

CNN poll.. Pct Approv
Dem………15% 36% < NOT PLAUSIBLE. Only 15% Dem viewers?
Rep………..75% 87%
Ind…………10% 57% Only 10% Ind?
Total…….100% 76%

CNN1….. Pct Approv
Dem……. 30% 60% < only 30% Dem viewers?
Rep…….. 30% 87%
Ind……… 40% 80%
Total…….100% 76%

CNN2….. Pct Approv
Dem……. 45% 66% <plausible
Rep…….. 30% 97%
Ind……… 25% 87%
Total…….100% 81%  TRUMP 81% TOTAL APPROVAL

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 7, 2019 in 2018 Elections

 

Tags: , ,

2016 Census Race Demographic & National Exit Poll indicates Fraud

Richard Charnin
Jan.27, 2019

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

This analysis of the 2016 National Exit Poll Race cross tab and corresponding Vote Census indicates that Clinton did not win the true popular vote.

She won the recorded vote, which is never the same as the true vote. The recorded vote is often fraudulent. The National Exit Poll (NEP) is always forced to match the recorded vote, even if it requires adjusting the category percentage mix and corresponding vote shares. 

Recorded vote:  Clinton  48.25%- Trump 46.17%;  Margin 2.83 mil; Trump has 57% of whites. The NEP indicates Whites were 71% of the electorate.

The Census indicates Whites were 73.3% of the electorate (0.4% MoE). Making just this change to the NEP and keeping vote shares constant, Trump wins by 703,000.

Sensitivity Analysis (assume Whites 73.3% of the electorate)
1. Trump 57% of whites+21% other (black, hispanic, asian, other)
Trump 47.39%- Clinton 46.88%;   Margin 703,000

2. Trump 58% of whites+21% other 
Trump 48.12%-Clinton 46.14%; Margin 2.700 million

3. Trump 59% of whites+22% other 
Trump 49.12%-Clinton 45.14%; Margin 5.425 million

National Exit
Pct Clinton Trump Other
White 71.0% 37.0% 57.0% 6.0%
Non-white 29.0% 74.0% 21.0% 5.0% Clinton Margin
Calc 100.0% 47.73% 46.56% 5.71% 1.17%
136,216 65,016 63,422 7,778 1,594
Recorded 48.25% 46.17% 5.70% 2.08%
136,216 65,724 62,891 7,764 2,833

……

Census
National Exit Poll
Pct Clinton Trump Other
White 73.31% 37.0% 57.0% 6.0%
Non-white 26.69% 74.0% 21.0% 5.0% Trump Margin
Calc 100.00% 46.88% 47.39% 5.73% 0.52%
136,216 63,852 64,555 7,809 703
Recorded 48.25% 46.17% 5.70% 2.08%
136,216 65,724 62,891 7,764 2,833

Sensitivity Analysis

Trump % White
Trump % 57.0% 58.0% 59.0% 60.0% 61.0%
Non-white Trump
24.0% 48.19% 48.93% 49.66% 50.39% 51.12%
23.0% 47.93% 48.66% 49.39% 50.12% 50.86%
22.0% 47.66% 48.39% 49.12% 49.86% 50.59%
21.0% 47.39% 48.12% 48.86% 49.59% 50.32%
20.0% 47.12% 47.86% 48.59% 49.32% 50.06%
Clinton
24.0% 46.07% 45.34% 44.61% 43.88% 43.14%
23.0% 46.34% 45.61% 44.88% 44.14% 43.41%
22.0% 46.61% 45.88% 45.14% 44.41% 43.68%
21.0% 46.88% 46.14% 45.41% 44.68% 43.94%
20.0% 47.14% 46.41% 45.68% 44.94% 44.21%
Trump margin
24.0% 2,885 4,882 6,879 8,876 10,873
23.0% 2,158 4,155 6,152 8,149 10,146
22.0% 1,430 3,428 5,425 7,422 9,419
21.0% 703 2,700 4,698 6,695 8,692
20.0% -24 1,973 3,971 5,968 7,965
Census NEP
Census 2016 Pct Clinton Trump Other
White 100,849 73.31% 37% 57% 6%
Black 17,119 12.44% 89% 8% 3%
Latino 12,682 9.22% 66% 28% 6%
Asian 5,049 3.67% 65% 27% 8%
Other 1,843 1.34% 56% 36% 8%
Calc 137,567 100.0% 47.42% 46.84% 5.73%
65,234 64,431 7,877
Margin 803
National Exit Poll
NEP Pct Clinton Trump Other
White 71.0% 37% 57% 6%
Black 12.0% 89% 8% 3%
Latino 11.0% 66% 28% 6%
Asian 4.0% 65% 27% 8%
Other 2.0% 56% 36% 8% Clinton Margin
Calc 100.00% 47.93% 46.31% 5.76% 1.62%
136,216 65,288 63,082 7,846 2,207
Recorded 48.25% 46.17% 5.70% 2.08%
136,216 65,724 62,891 7,764 2,833

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1447777586
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1088655249
https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls/national/president

Other adjustments: True Vote Sensitivity
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit?fbclid=IwAR3x0INVIU5VkxsAhSG4IU3JonEc0DOThwK2iwBIoQVx92ld6feg4DM1SfA#gid=1672204415

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 27, 2019 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,

2018 House: Probability Analysis Indicates Fraud

Richard Charnin
Nov. 17, 2018

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

According to Real Clear Politics, there was a 203D-194R split on Election Day. There were 38 tossups. Currently, the Dems lead 235-199 with one race disputed.

– If the Repubs win the disputed race (235D-200R), the probability that the Dems would win 32 of 38 tossups is P= 0.001% = 1 in 99,569 = binomdist (32, 38, 0.5, false)

– If the Dems win the race (236D-199R), the probability that the Dems would win 33 of 38 tossups is P= 0.0002% = 1 in 547,629 = binomdist (33, 38, 0.5, false)

Of the 38 tossups, 33 were  Repub-held. We would normally expect a tossup split of 19 Dems and 19 Repubs. That would result in a 222D-213R House.

The Democrats led in 203 (51.1%) of 397 seats. They won 32 (84.2%) of the remaining 38 tossups. Note that 51.1% of 38= 19.4. 

Of the 15 seats which leaned to the  Dems, 11 were Repub-held. Assuming a 19D-19R tossup split, the Repubs needed 5 of the 15 to win the House (218=194+19+5).

The recorded vote is never the same as the True Vote. There are vote miscounts in every election, especially in close races within the MoE.

Given 203D-194R on Election Day, the following  table displays Democrat win probabilities assuming a 50/50 and  50.5D-49.5R split in the 38 tossups.

50.0D-50.0R 50.5D-49.5R
X=Dem seats Prob (X) 1 in Prob (X) 1 in
215 1.0% 101 0.9% 117
216 2.0% 50 1.7% 57
217 3.5% 28 3.2% 31
218 5.6% 18 5.2% 19
219 8.1% 12 7.6% 13
220 10.5% 9.6 10.0% 10
221 12.2% 8.2 12.0% 8.4
222 expected 12.9% 7.8 12.8% 7.8
223 12.2% 8.2 12.4% 8.0
224 10.5% 10 10.9% 9.2
225 8.1% 12 8.6% 11.7
226 5.6% 18 6.1% 16.4
227 3.5% 28 3.9% 25
228 2.0% 51 2.2% 45
229 1.0% 102 1.1% 88
230 0.4% 228 0.5% 195
231 0.2% 581 0.2% 486
232 0.1% 1,686 0.1% 1,383
233 0.0178% 5,621 0.021% 4,519
234 0.0046% 21,781 0.0058% 17,165
235  0.0010% 99,569 0.0013% 76,918
236 0.0002% 547,629 0.0001% 414,672
237 0.00003% 3,723,876 0.000036% 2,763,934
238 0.000003% 32,583,915 0.000004% 23,705,526

2018 MIDTERMS POSTS

AZ Senate vs Governor a major discrepancy
Dems needed a 5.6% popular vote margin to win the House
17 House races: what-if?
Repub CA House races too close to call flipped to Dems
Did the GOP actually win the House?
2018 House probability analysis indicates fraud
GOP House: Red wave?
What is the probability Dems will win the House?
Arizona CBS Senate Poll More Anomalies
Generic vote forecast model vs RCP average (10-29)
Inflated Democratic generic polls indicates Republicans will win the House
GOP wins Texas-SD-19 for first time in-139-years
Florida Governor Polling Analysis
Trump has a higher approval rating than MSM polls
Rasmussen vs. WaPo: Trump approval

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/house/2018_elections_house_map.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/live_results/2018/house/ https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/house/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTvZppVule4a_07xPErlSU-yVsOC-otyIakWvE9_9CQp5K55Vkqcefjsr0J9_EyRk5TyTWLHTccQeKR/pubchart?oid=1371017998&format=interactive

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nB_kFzxGOEDQoNU6X1x7YyG6Mc3-Tb1S1r8TjmamwqQ/edit#gid=1032811684

The MSM, CNN and LA Times admitted the GOP could keep the House in a Red Tsunami
http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/msm-red-tsunami/?fbclid=IwAR0C43VxE9xy7HPybwzd_cIBKdcTjDXh5f-UGB9-zD7icp-aGMIB9DTo_Dk

 
4 Comments

Posted by on November 11, 2018 in 2018 Elections

 

Tags:

Trump won the True vote; Clinton won the Fraudulent Recorded vote

Richard Charnin
June 24, 2017
Updated: July 10,2017

77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts
Proving Election Fraud: Phantom Voters, Uncounted Votes and the National Poll
LINKS TO  POSTS

Hillary Clinton’s 2.8 million recorded vote margin is a myth.  THE RECORDED VOTE IS NEVER EQUAL TO THE TRUE VOTE. Mainstream media pre-election and exit polls were rigged for Clinton.  

She won the Recorded Vote 48.3-46.2%. Trump had 306 EV. The True Vote Model indicates that Trump won by 48-44% (5 million votes) with 351 EV. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/07/2016-election-model-forecast/

1988-2012: Democrats won the True Vote and the unadjusted exit polls 52-42%. They won the recorded vote by 48-46%. They won the True Vote in every election. The exit polls and the True Vote Model indicated that the 1988,2000 and 2004 elections were stolen.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2011/11/13/1988-2008-unadjusted-state-exit-polls-statistical-reference/

So what changed in 2016? The establishment was in the tank for Clinton. The pre-election and exit polls were biased in her favor. Trump won the primaries easily; Clinton had to cheat Bernie. Trump and Bernie drew big crowds, Clinton drew small crowds. Trump and Bernie won (non-scientific) online debate polls by large margins.

2016 Democratic primary: 11 of 26 unadjusted exit polls exceeded the MoE for Sanders. The probability is one in 77 billion.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/05/05/democratic-primaries-election-fraud-probability-analysis/

2016 Election: Clinton led 9 pre-election polls by 2.5% – exactly matching the recorded vote.
Pre-election polls were rigged for Clinton. Democratic Party ID was inflated.
True National Party ID was 40-I-32D-28R
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1036175945

Unadjusted exit polls were also rigged for Clinton. Large exit poll discrepancies favored Clinton in the Rust belt and Red states.  Exit polls matched the recorded vote in large states (i.e. CA). If the recorded vote was bogus, then the unadjusted exit polls must have also overstated Clinton shares. In NY the 5% discrepancy actually favored Trump.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/12/30/why-the-recorded-vote-and-unadjusted-exit-polls-are-wrong/

True Vote Sensitivity Analysis 1 – returning 2012 voters 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1768941212

True Vote Sensitivity Analysis 2 – adjustments to recorded vote
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1672204415

Ohio unadjusted exit poll indicated an implausible 47% tie .  Trump won Ohio by 51.7-43.6%.  To match the unadjusted poll, Clinton needed to win Independents by 50-35%, an implausible margin.  However, the final Ohio exit poll (which is always matched to the recorded vote) indicated that Trump won Independents by 51-38%.

Humboldt County, CA is only US county with an Open Source foolproof vote count/audit. Bernie had his highest CA share in Humboldt (71%). Jill Stein had her highest share there(6%) compared to 1% elsewhere.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/01/01/more-clues-on-election-fraud-from-humboldt-cty-ca/

Voter turnout: millions of Sanders voters a) did not turnout, b) voted for Stein, c) voted for Trump.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/03/15/2016-voter-turnout-and-vote-share-sensitivity-analysis-trump-won-the-popular-vote/

Trump and Bernie each won Independents by 10%. Trump had a higher percentage of Republicans than Clinton had of Democrats.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1042213556

“Crosscheck”: It is estimated that one million votes were suppressed, costing Hillary.
http://www.gregpalast.com/election-stolen-heres/

Illegal voters: Estimated at 1-3 million. Obama encouraged illegals to vote.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/02/25/2016-true-vote-sensitivity-analysis-illegal-voters-uncounted-votes-machine-vote-flipping/
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/06/20/report-as-many-as-5-7-million-non-citizens-voted-in-2008-election
http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-encourages-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

Fraction Magic: votes were flipped to Clinton on Central tabulators (Bev Harris)
http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-1/

Hillary supporter George Soros had an interest in voting machines in 16 states.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2176907-voting-machines-in-16-states-tied-to-george-soros-ally/

Recounts in MI and WI showed that Trump did better than reported. Wayne County, MI had more votes than registered voters.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/records-many-votes-detroits-precincts/95363314/

National Exit Poll- When Decided:  The NEP is ALWAYS adjusted to match the recorded vote. The 2016 NEP indicates that 26% of voters decided after Oct.1;  48%  voted for Trump and 40% for Clinton. Of the 74% who decided before Oct.1, Clinton led 51-45%.

The 2016 NEP indicates that 40% of voters decided after Sept.1. Trump won these voters by 48.0-42.0%. Clinton won voters who decided before Sept.1 by 52.5-45.0%. Since the poll was forced to match Clinton’s 48.3-46.2% recorded vote, it appears that her pre-Sept. vote share was inflated.

The third-party Recorded vote is another clue that Clinton’s vote was rigged.
According to the National Exit Poll, 4% of voters who decided before Oct.1 voted for a third party candidate; 12% voted third party after Oct.1. Jill Stein had just 1% of the total recorded vote. Could it be that Jill really had at least 3% of which 2% or more were shifted to Clinton?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit?fbclid=IwAR2CRD4z4Z7Q_qpEYNDM9EOj8q5Jzy1_LkKM1lF5TqZngXsp48WoTcMcUE8#gid=1036252757

Decided Pct Clinton Trump Other
Post Oct. 1 26% 40.0% 48.0% 12.0%
Pre Oct. 1.. 74% 51.0% 45.0% 4.0%
Total……… 100% 48.3% 46.2% 5.5%

Decided Pct Clinton Trump Other
Post Sept. 1 40% 42.0% 48.0% 10.0%
Pre Sept 1.. 60% 52.5% 45.0% 2.5%
Total……… 100% 48.3% 46.2% 5.5%

Were Clinton’s pre-Oct.  poll shares rigged to match the recorded vote? Clinton won the national recorded vote by 2.8 million. She won IL, CA and NY by a combined 7 million votes. So Trump won the recorded vote by at least 4 million everywhere else. But Trump’s True Vote margin had to be higher than 4 million. Here’s why: As many as 3 million of Clinton’s 7 million margin in IL, CA and NY may have been fraudulent- matching her national 3 million margin. Were Clinton’s votes inflated (rigged) in these and other states?

State exit poll………….. IL…….. CA……. NY
Total Recorded %…… 56-39-5.. 62-32-4. 60-37-3
Before Oct.1………….66-32-2.. 67-29-4. 67-31-2 < Rigged?
After Oct.1………….. 33-55-12. 51-42-7. 38-53-9 < shift to Trump & 3rd party
Votes (mil)…………….. 5.5……. 14.2……. 7.5
Margin (mil)…………… 0.95……. 4.3…….. 1.7 Total 6.95 million

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQJ4IiceZg07muhLrjITSiesptsTygA1vM3CXC7OZBN9wxxS_4_HDpj8ODf7qht3NpaqIuh_Nt02W6G/pubchart?oid=427327952&format=interactive&fbclid=IwAR0yXAzjeCpyAdWaQX7KI3xTHvceLXe8s0d2iqjkrAyFh_6KYJd4Uj3f5zY

 
3 Comments

Posted by on June 24, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis