RSS

RACE: 2012-2016 National Exit Poll and 2012 Census

Richard Charnin
Jan.15, 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

According to the 2012 Vote Census, the percentage of black citizens registered to vote exceeded that of whites (73-71.8%). They also exceeded the percentage of whites who voted (65.9-62.1%). The 2016 Census will be out in April.

According to the National Exit Poll, Trump won the white vote by 57-37%. But he must have done better than that since the National Exit Poll was forced to match Hillary’s bogus recorded vote (48-46%). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1042213556

National Exit Poll
Voted………2012…………. 2016
White….. 95,187. 74%. 96,702. 71%
Black….. 17,297. 13%..16,344. 12%< Cross-check?
Hispanic 10,869.. 8%…14,982. 11% < Illegal?
Asian…… 3,795.. 3%… 5,448. 4%
Other……. 1,949.. 2%… 2,724. 2%
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1546668571

2012 Census (2016 not available)
% Citizens registered:
White 71.8; Black 73.0; Hispanic 58.7; Asian 57.3
% Citizens voted:
White 62.1; Black 65.9; Hispanic 48.0; Asian 47.9
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=555030619

National Exit Poll- Party ID
……….. Pct Clinton Trump Other
Dem….. 36% 89% 8% 3%
Rep…… 33% 8% 88% 4%
Ind……. 31% 42% 46% 12%
Total… 100% 47.7% 46.2% 6.1%
Votes… 136.2 65.0 62.9 8.3
Margin -2.07

True Vote- Party ID (Gallup)
………..Pct Clinton Trump Other
Dem…..32% 88% 9% 3%
Rep….. 28% 7% 89% 4%
Ind…… 40% 38% 51% 11%
Total. 100% 45.3% 48.2% 6.5%
Votes 136.2 61.7 65.7 8.8
Margin 3.92

National Exit Poll- Race
…………. Pct Clinton Trump Other
White…… 71% 37% 57% 6%
Black……. 12% 89% 8% 3%
Hispanic… 11% 66% 28% 6%
Asian…….. 4% 65% 27% 8%
Other…….. 2% 56% 36% 8%
Total…….. 100% 47.9% 46.3% 5.8%

True Vote- Race
……………Pct Clinton Trump Other
White…….. 71% 33% 59% 8%
Black……… 12% 87% 9% 4%
Hispanic….. 11% 66% 28% 6%
Asian………..4% 65% 27% 8%
Other………. 2% 56% 36% 8%
Total…….. 100% 44.9% 47.9% 7.3%

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 15, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , ,

Pre-election and National Exit Poll Categories vs. the True Vote

Richard Charnin
Jan. 13, 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

This spreadsheet displays the average of nine national pre-election polls which were used as a basis for the Election Model forecast. Also included are National Exit poll categories with adjustments made to match the  estimated 48-45% Trump true margin (4 million votes). Therefore, he probably had at least 350 electoral votes, not the 306 reported. 

 Clinton won the nine pre-election polls by  47.5-46.0%.  Party-ID was 39D-32R-29I As the de-facto challenger, Trump won an estimated 65% of late undecided voters. He won Independents in the nine polls by  43.6-33.8%.  

Using the Gallup voter affiliation survey (32D-28R-40I),  Trump won the nine-poll average by 47.5-45.1%. 

Clinton won the Final National Exit Poll by 47.7-46.2%,  which closely matched the recorded vote shares. Party-ID was 36D-33R-31I 

Using Gallup and NEP vote share adjustments, Trump matched the nine-poll average by 48.2-45.3%.

All National Exit Poll crosstab categories were forced to match the recorded vote. Each crosstabs vote shares and weights  were adjusted to match the previously calculated True Vote.  The adjustments are not unique; other estimates could achieve a match.

Key points:
1. Pre-election polls over-weighted Democrats and underweighted Independents.
2. Exit polls over-weighted Democrats and underweighted Independents.
3. The Gallup voter affiliation party-id is the only such survey of the electorate.
4. All National Exit Poll categories are adjusted to match the recorded vote.
5. Trump won the True vote by an estimated 48-45%, a 4 million vote margin.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 13, 2017 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

Sensitivity Analysis: Ohio Unadjusted Exit Poll Anomalies

Richard Charnin
Jan. 11, 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

Sensitivity Analysis shows that the Ohio unadjusted exit poll which indicated a virtual 47% tie was implausible. Clinton had to win a solid majority of Independents given her recorded shares of Democrats and Republicans.

Trump won Ohio by 51.7-43.6%. But the unadjusted poll indicates that he won by just 47.1-47.0%. Assuming the unadjusted poll is accurate, the 8% discrepancy indicates a virtual 100% probability of election fraud favoring Trump. But let’s take a closer look.

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

Trump led Independents in nine national pre-election polls by 43.6-33.8%. He also led Independents in the National Exit Poll by 46-42%.

A sensitivity analysis of Trump’s and Clinton’s Ohio vote share revealed that Trump had nearly 50% using conservative assumptions below the base case recorded vote.

The Ohio final exit poll indicated that Trump won 89% of Republicans, 12% of Democrats and 51% of Independents which resulted in his 51.7-43.6% win.

I calculated Trump’s total vote share for three cases assuming he had 7-12% of Democratic shares and 87-89% of Republican shares.

The exit poll party-ID is used in cases 1-2. The Gallup-adjusted Party ID was used in case 3.

1.Unadjusted Exit poll (Clinton won Independents by 50-35%)
2.Recorded Vote (assume Trump won Independents by 51-38%)
3.True Vote (assume Trump won Independents by 51-38%)

In cases 4-6, Trump’s total share was calculated over a range of his shares of Independents and Republicans.

A sensitivity analysis of the Ohio RACE exit poll demographic confirmed that Trump had at least 50%.

Conclusion: It is a mistake to ASSUME that the unadjusted 2016 exit polls were accurate, even though I proved that they were close to the True Vote in 1988-2008. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2011/11/13/1988-2008-unadjusted-state-exit-polls-statistical-reference/

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1904912692

Reported Vote
OHIO Pct Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 34% 87% 12% 0% 1%
Rep 37% 8% 89% 2% 1%
Ind 29% 38% 51% 8% 3%
Calc 100% 43.6% 51.8% 3.1% 1.6%
Reported 100% 43.6% 51.7% 3.2% 1.6%
Votes 5,496 2,394 2,841 174 46
    Margin 447 8.1%
     
    Trump % Dem    
  % Rep 7% 9% 12%
89% 50.1% 50.8% 51.8%
88% 49.7% 50.4% 51.4%
87% 49.4% 50.0% 51.1%
Trump % Ind
% Rep 35% 45% 51%
89% 47.2% 50.1% 51.8%
88% 46.8% 49.7% 51.4%
87% 46.4% 49.3% 51.1%
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 11, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: ,

Summary of pre-election and exit poll anomalies

Richard Charnin
Jan. 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

Nine final pre-election polls
– Clinton won by 45.8-43.6%
– Trump won by 306-232 EV
– Democrats over-weighted: 39D-32R-29I ???
– Trump won Independents by 43.6-33.8% ***

Gallup voter affiliation survey: Independents a solid majority
Party-ID: 32D-28R-40I
– Trump won by 46.8-45.9%
– Trump won by 306-232 EV

28 unadjusted state exit polls
-Clinton won by 49.6-43.5%
-Clinton won by 297-241 EV
-Democrats over-weighted: 36D-33R-31I ???
-HRC won Independents by 44.0-41.3% ???

Final 28 state and national exit polls(forced to match recorded vote)
– Clinton won by 48.2-46.2%
– Trump won by 306-232 EV
– Democrats over-weighted: 36D-33R-31I ???
– Trump won Independents by just 46-42% ???
– Trump won late deciders from Oct.1 by 50-40% ***

23 states not exit polled
– Trump won by 50.4-43.7%

View the calculations:
href=”https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1036175945

 
1 Comment

Posted by on January 10, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

ANOTHER PRE-ELECTION AND EXIT POLL ANOMALY: WHEN DID VOTERS DECIDE WHO TO VOTE FOR?

Richard Charnin
Jan. 8, 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

According to Real Clear Politics, 45.4% of those polled after Oct. 1 said they would vote for Clinton and 40.7% for Trump. Of those polled before Oct. 1, 42.4% said they would vote for Clinton and 39.2% for Trump – a net 1.5% discrepancy.

The National Exit Poll (which is ALWAYS adjusted to match the recorded vote) indicates that 26% of voters decided who to vote for after Oct. 1. Of these late deciders, 48% said they voted for Trump and 40% for Clinton. Of those who decided before Oct. 1, Clinton led by 51-45% – a 14% flip in vote margin.

In the 28 states that were exit polled (and forced to match the recorded vote) 51% of respondents who decided after Oct. 1 voted for Trump and 41% for Clinton. Of those who decided before Oct. 1, Clinton led by 52-44%, an 18% flip in vote margin.

The momentum was clearly in favor of Trump. So how do you explain the large difference in margins between the pre-election polls vs. the exit polls?

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

Decided after Oct.1     Decided Before Oct. 1  
    Clinton Trump Margin Clinton Trump Margin
  Real Clear Politics 45.4% 40.7% -4.7% 42.4% 39.2% -3.2%
  National Exit Poll 40% 48% 8% 51% 45% -6%
  Decided after Oct.1   Decided before Oct 1  
  Clinton Trump Margin Clinton Trump Margin
Avg 25.6% 38.1% 50.5% 12.4% 49.4% 37.0% -12.4%
Wtd 25.6% 40.7% 50.8% 10.0% 52.3% 44.1% -8.2%
OH 25% 37% 54% 17% 47% 50% 3%
NC 25% 33% 57% 24% 51% 47% -4%
NJ 25% 50% 41% -9% 55% 43% -12%
PA 24% 43% 49% 6% 47% 51% 4%
MI 26% 37% 52% 15% 50% 47% -3%
MO 29% 36% 52% 16% 38% 59% 21%
IA 26% 35% 53% 18% 47% 47% 0%
FL 26% 43% 50% 7% 49% 49% 0%
WI 14% 30% 59% 29% 49% 47% -2%
VA 23% 42% 48% 6% 52% 44% -8%
NV 11% 45% 40% -5% 49% 44% -5%
NH 29% 42% 50% 8% 51% 45% -6%
MN 29% 33% 51% 18% 51% 41% -10%
ME 31% 35% 51% 16% 51% 43% -8%
CO 22% 37% 48% 11% 52% 42% -10%
TX 24% 46% 47% 1% 44% 51% 7%
IL 30% 34% 71% 37% 66% 32% -34%
CA 29% 51% 42% -9% 67% 29% -38%
NY 26% 38% 60% 22% 67% 31% -36%
GA 20% 47% 55% 8% 45% 53% 8%
AZ 25% 40% 48% 8% 48% 48% 0%
WA 22% 46% 41% -5% 57% 38% -19%
UT 44% 17% 39% 22% 36% 52% 16%
SC 26% 39% 50% 11% 42% 56% 14%
KY 28% 27% 63% 36% 31% 67% 36%
OR 20% 32% 48% 16% 54% 38% -16%
NM 28% 37% 41% 4% 52% 40% -12%
IN 29% 34% 53% 19% 35% 61% 26%
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 8, 2017 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,

More clues on Election Fraud from Humboldt Cty, CA

Richard Charnin
Jan.1, 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

Humboldt is the gift that keeps on giving. It is the only county in the U.S. which uses an Open Source System (TEVS) to count and audit votes. The system was installed in 2006.

In 2008-2012, Obama did 2.58% better in Humboldt than he did in the full state. This is to be expected. Humboldt is very progressive. But in 2016, Clinton did 1.75% worse in Humboldt. Her 4.26% increase over Obama in CA represents a 1.2 million increase in margin. Was she really that popular? Or was her vote padded?

In the CA primary, Bernie Sanders had his highest margin (71%) in Humboldt. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/07/02/bernie-landslide-in-ca-humboldt-cty-open-source-system/

Keep in mind that the recorded vote is never equal to the True Vote. There is always election fraud. But in Humboldt, we can assume that the recorded vote is the True Vote due to its near foolproof Open Source system. There is no reason to believe Clinton’s recorded CA vote is legitimate.

Humboldt Democratic 2-party share
1988-2004 Before TEVS: 57.2%
2008-2016 After TEVS: 64.6%

California Presidential share
……Dem… Rep…Other
2008 60.21% 36.46% 3.33%
2012 60.24% 37.12% 2.64%
2016 61.73% 31.62% 6.66% HRC margin 7% over Obama?

Humboldt Presidential share
……Dem… Rep…Other
2008 62.05% 33.95%.4.00%
2012 59.68% 32.61% 7.72%
2016 56.04% 31.01% 12.95% HRC loses 3.64% vs Trump 1.60%

Democratic 2-party Presidential share
……CA….Humboldt..Diff
2008 62.28% 64.64% 2.36%
2012 61.87% 64.67% 2.80%
2016 66.13% 64.37% -1.75% HRC gains 4.26% over Obama?

Clinton’s 56% share of Humboldt County ranked #20 of 58 California counties. Humboldt is a liberal county. Jill Stein’s 6.1% share in Humboldt was her highest in the state. Stein’s average in the 19 counties was 2.3%. Clinton averaged 68.0%. So how come Stein did so much better in Humboldt than in the 19 liberal counties?

Could it be Humboldt’s nearly foolproof Open Source voting system? Could it be that fraud was prevented in Humboldt? Could it be that nearly 2/3 of Stein’s votes were blue-shifted to Clinton? Could it be that Clinton’s 61% CA share was inflated by at least 4%? Note that 4% of 14 million votes is 560,000.

…………………. Stein Clinton
1 San Francisco.. 2.4% 85.0%
2 Alameda……… 2.7  78.7
3 Marin…………..2.2  78.1
4 San Mateo……..1.6  75.7
5 Santa Cruz……..3.5  73.9
6 Santa Clara…….1.8  72.7
7 Los Angeles……2.2  71.8
8 Sonoma……….. 3.2  69.4
9 Contra Costa…..1.9  68.5
10 Imperial……….1.6  67.9
11 Monterey………2.1  66.8
12 Yolo…………….2.2 66.7
13 Napa……………2.1  63.9
14 Solano………….1.7  61.6
15 Santa Barbara ..2.1  60.6
16 Mendocino…….5.6  58.9
17 Sacramento….. 1.8  58.3
18 San Benito……. 1.7 57.1
19 San Diego………1.8 56.3
20 Humboldt……..6.2 56.0

View this spreadsheet of 58 county votes. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1462588532

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1010903783

No automatic alt text available.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on January 1, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Why the recorded vote and unadjusted exit polls are wrong

Richard Charnin
Dec.30, 2016

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

Some analysts claim that the 2016 unadjusted state exit polls prove that the election was rigged for Trump. I proved mathematically that in the 1988-2008 presidential elections, 274 unadjusted state and 6 national exit polls were accurate and reflected true voter intent. But just because the polls were excellent indicators of the True Vote in the past does not prove that they were accurate in 2016.

Basic analysis indicates Trump won the popular and electoral vote. Pre-election and exit polls were rigged for Clinton. Democratic Party-ID was inflated in the pre-election and exit polls.

The National Election Pool of six media giants funds exit pollster Edison Research. The published results are always forced to match the recorded vote which implies zero election fraud. But there is always election fraud.  Historically, unadjusted state and national exit polls always favored the Democratic candidate, but there was  a RED shift from the Democrat in the poll to the Republican in the recorded vote.

Exit pollsters at  Edison Research never reveal the location of precincts, votes and survey results. The only way to prove that the unadjusted exit polls are correct (and the published results bogus) is 1) to reveal the complete exit poll timeline and the data for all precincts polled and 2) a True Vote analysis based on historical and current independent data.

I used the True Vote Model analysis based on a plausible number of returning voters from the prior election to prove the unadjusted exit polls were correct in 1988-2008. I used a True Vote Model analysis based on Gallup Party-ID voter affiliation to prove that the unadjusted polls were bogus in 2016.

The True Vote Model indicates that the 1988-2008 unadjusted exit polls were accurate.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/09/14/summary-2004-2012-election-forecast-1968-2012-true-vote-model/

The 2016 election was different in kind from prior elections; the Democrat was the establishment candidate. It was established beyond a reasonable doubt that the primaries were stolen from Bernie Sanders by the DNC which colluded with the media.

As usual, state and national exit polls were forced to match the recorded vote. This was the first election in which the media discussed election fraud – but avoided the obvious U.S. suspects: the rigged voting machines, illegal and disenfranchised voters. No, it was the Russians!

And we are supposed to believe that the MSM would not rig the unadjusted exit polls to match the rigged  pre-election polls  to make it appear that Clinton was the winner?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=0

Party-ID
Nine Pre-election polls (average): 28.8 Ind – 38.7 Dem- 31.9 Rep.
Final National Exit Poll (CNN): 31 Ind – 36 Dem – 33 Rep.
Gallup national voter affiliation survey: 40 Ind -32 Dem -28 Rep. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=505041111

Nine Pre-election polls 
Clinton won the average: 45.8-43.3%
Trump won the average Gallup-adjusted poll: 44.4-42.9%
Trump won Independents: 43.6-33.8%

Final  National Exit Poll (forced to match the Recorded Vote)
Clinton won the reported vote: 48.2-46.2%.
Clinton won the National Exit Poll: 47.7-46.2%.
Trump won Independents by just 46-42% – a 5.8% discrepancy from the pre-election polls which he led by 9.8%. This anomaly is additional evidence that Trump won the True Vote.

Unadjusted exit polls (28 states)
Clinton won the polls: 49.6-43.6%
Clinton won the corresponding recorded vote: 49.3-45.2%

States not exit polled
Trump won: 50.4-43.7%

True Vote
Trump led the True Vote Model (three scenarios of his share of late undecided voters)
– Scenario I:  47.5-45.1%, 306 EV (50% undecided)
– Scenario II: 47.9-44.7%, 321 EV (60% undecided)
– Scenario III: 48.3-44.3%, 351 EV (70% undecided)

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 30, 2016 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis