llinois 2014 Governor: A Comprehensive True Vote Sensitivity Analysis

Illinois 2014 Governor: A Comprehensive True Vote Sensitivity Analysis

Richard Charnin
Dec.16, 2015
Updated: Dec.18,2015

Look inside the books:
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts
Proving Election Fraud: Phantom Voters, Uncounted Votes and the National Exit Poll
LINKS TO WEB/BLOG POSTS FROM 2004

In Illinois, Rauner (R) defeated Quinn (D) by 142,000 votes (50.4-46.3%). In this analysis the focus is on sensitivity analysis in the Illinois True Vote Model.

The True Vote Model (TVM) has been used in scores of presidential, governor and congressional races. The TVM confirms the Cumulative Vote Share analysis of the 2014 governor elections. Both methods indicate that the elections were fraudulent.

Some posters have criticized the TVM by questioning the base case assumptions. Let’s put that canard to rest. The built-in sensitivity analysis displays a  range of assumptions in addition to the base case (most-likely) scenario.  Six elections were analyzed using Cumulative Vote shares (CVS). 

Exit poll  crosstabs are always forced to match the recorded vote. Exit pollsters no longer ask the question How did you vote in 2012? 

Base Case assumptions
1. 2012 presidential recorded vote shares
2. 2% of 2012 voters died prior to the 2014 election
3. Equal 60% turnout of Obama and Romney voters
4. Quinn had 7% of Romney voters; Rauner had 91
5. Quinn and Rauner each had 43.55% of returning and new voters.
5. Quinn and Rauner each had 45% of new voters.

In order to match the recorded vote, Quinn had 74.7% of Obama voters 

Vote shares are identical to the shares used to match the recorded vote with one exception: Quinn has a  plausible 87% of returning Obama voters and wins by 52.4-44.3%,  a  294,000 vote margin. The TVM is a close match to the CVS in which Quinn had 53.7%.

True Vote Sensitivity Analysis
Five tables and a probability matrix. Each contains 25 scenarios.

Base Case: Quinn 52.4% True Vote (295,000 margin)

Table I: Quinn’s share of new voters vs. share of Romney voters
Worst case: 51.1% (201,000 margin); Best case 53.7% (388,000)

Table II: Quinn’s share of returning Obama voters vs. share of returning Romney voters.
Worst case: Quinn wins by 102,000 votes with 49.7%.

Table III: Obama voter turnout vs. Romney turnout in 2014
Worst case: 58% Obama and 62% Romney turnout.
Quinn wins by 213,000 votes with 51.3%.

Table IV: Obama vote share vs. Quinn share of Romney
Worst case (Obama recorded): Quinn 51.7%; wins by 244,000 votes.

Table V: Obama vote share vs. Obama turnout
Worst case (Obama recorded): Quinn 49.4%; wins by 77,000 votes

Table VI: Quinn Win Probability over a range of votes shares.
Worst Case: Quinn 96.7% (he has 83.5% of Obama and 5% of Romney).

Cumulative vote shares  

The largest IL counties all showed Rauner vote shares increasing with cumulative precinct vote totals. This is a major red flag. The results confirm the counter-intuitive CVS trend: GOP cumulative shares rise from the smallest to the largest counties, as shown in the graphs.

At the 10% CVS mark, Quinn had 54.4%, compared to his final 45.7%. At the 25%  mark, Quinn had 52.7%.