RSS

Implausible: the Missouri Unadjusted Exit Poll

14 Nov

Richard Charnin
Nov. 14, 2016

Trump won the MO unadjusted Exit Poll by 51.2-42.8%
He won the recorded vote by 57.1-38.0%.
Why the discrepancy?
Clinton won Independents in the poll by an implausible 45-40%.
Trump won Independents in the vote by a plausible 62-28%.

Go to row 255 in the spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sGxtIofohrj3POpwq-85Id2_fYKgvgoWbPZacZw0XlY/edit#gid=1141167047

MO Recorded Vote
http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/missouri/president
Trump wins: 56.8-38.1% (531,000 vote margin)
Trump won Independents: 61-28%
Party ID: 34D- 39R- 27I 

MO Unadjusted exit poll
Trump wins: 51.2-42.8% (232,000 vote margin)
Clinton won Independents: 45-40%  (implausible)
Party ID: 34D- 39R- 27I 

MO True Vote Model
Trump wins 57-38.1% (522,000 vote margin)
Trump wins Independents: 61-31%
Party ID: 30.8D -35.0R -34.2I 

National Exit Poll (matched to the recorded vote)
Clinton wins 47.8-47.4%
Trump won Independents: 48-42%
National Party ID: 37D- 33R- 30I 

True Vote Model 
Gallup Party-ID:  32D- 28R- 40I 
Before Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA)
Trump wins the popular vote: 44.4-42.9% (1.6 million vote margin)
Trump wins the recorded Electoral vote: 306-232

After Undecided Voter Allocation
Trump wins  48.5%-44.3% (5 million margin)
Trump wins the  Electoral Vote: 351-187

JILL STEIN HAD JUST 1% NATIONALLY. WHERE DID HER VOTES GO?

TDMS research: Presidential Election Table: Exit Polls vs. Vote Count

Unadjusted EP Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 34% 84% 13% 1% 2%
Rep 39% 5% 92% 2% 1%
Ind 27% 45% 40% 3% 12%
Match 100% 42.7% 51.1% 1.9% 4.3%
Unadjusted 100% 42.8% 51.2% 1.8% 4.2%
Votes (000) 2,762 1,182 1,414 50 116
    Margin 232 8.4%
Reported Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 34% 84% 13% 1% 2%
Rep 39% 5% 92% 2% 1%
Ind 27% 28% 61% 8% 2%
Match 100% 38.1% 56.8% 3.3% 1.6%
Reported 100% 38.1% 56.8% 3.0% 2.1%
Votes (000) 2,762 1,055 1,586 96 25
    Margin 531 19.0%
True Vote Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 30.8% 84% 13% 1% 2%
Rep 35.0% 5% 92% 2% 1%
Ind 34.2% 31% 61% 7% 3%
True Vote 100.0% 38.1% 57.0% 3.5% 1.4%
Votes (000) 2,762 1,052 1,574 97 39
    Margin 522 18.9%  
 
11 Comments

Posted by on November 14, 2016 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , ,

11 responses to “Implausible: the Missouri Unadjusted Exit Poll

  1. Nicholas Nowlin

    November 14, 2016 at 2:01 pm

    Richard could you perhaps come on my show for another interview. I want to deconstruct the narrative that Clinton won more votes. Also lets talk about polling and what is wrong with it.

    nick200505@comcast.net

    Nick

     
  2. Dale Franson

    November 14, 2016 at 3:17 pm

    What is the bottom line for this election as far as you know at this point, Richard? Was the vote flipped to red or blue? Are the exit polls adjusted on the spot, or are you finding some each way? Seems like things are more jumbled than usual, with indications of vote flipping going each way. Could this be part of a strategy to make things inconsistent and still result in favor of the chosen candidate just to disguise the manipulation?

     
  3. Sally Hansley Odum (@sallyodum)

    November 14, 2016 at 8:14 pm

    I wish you would give a summary Richard. What are we supposed to take away from this info and the other graphs? Or what is the bottom line as Dale asked above.

     
    • Richard Charnin

      November 15, 2016 at 6:17 am

      Takeaway. The unadjusted exit poll understates Trump’s vote share by 6%.
      The reason: To match the poll, Clinton needed to win independents by 45-40%.
      This is implausible.
      What graphs are you referring to?

       
  4. Richard Charnin

    November 15, 2016 at 6:24 am

    Dale,
    The bottom line is that Trump won the national vote. the True Vote Model estimate is 5 million.
    I do not believe the unadjusted exit polls. It appears they were rigged to show HRC winning.
    I believe that HRC tried to steal it by rigging the voting machines and with Obama allowing 3 million illegal aliens to vote.

    For example, consider Missouri and other states I am posting on.
    The unadjusted exit poll understates Trump’s vote share by 6%.
    To match the poll, Clinton needed to win independents by 45-40%.
    This is implausible.

     
    • Dale Franson

      November 15, 2016 at 2:35 pm

      Thanks for the reply.

      So, it is safe to say that the exit polls in MO actually were adjusted. The ones that are supposed to be unadjusted were in fact adjusted on the spot by some kind of manipulation. “Implausible: the Missouri Unadjusted Exit Poll” is a bit of a misnomer then. I thought I misunderstood something.

      Have you looked at any of the CVS yet? Are they showing a blue shift for president? The Racine County, WI CVS for president and senate races may be a good place to spot check.

       
    • Cindy

      November 27, 2016 at 11:22 pm

      In what states do you think the “3 million illegal aliens” were allowed to vote most heavily? Nevada? Something really funny always goes on last minute in that state.

       
  5. Ren

    November 15, 2016 at 2:36 pm

    Wait, I thought you valued the unadjusted exit polls? I thought it was the adjusted exit polls that are the rigged polls. What’s different here? And what do you think of this person (I never heard of them until just a few minutes ago – never heard of them during the primaries)? —> http://www.alternet.org/something-stinks-when-exit-polls-and-official-counts-dont-match

     
    • Richard Charnin

      November 16, 2016 at 7:59 pm

      Read my latest posts. Just because the exit polls were accurate in the past does not mean that they were not rigged by the MSM for Hillary.
      The MSM and the DNC helped her steal the nomination, so why stop in the general – by rigging the pre-election polls AND the exit polls.

       
    • Richard Charnin

      November 16, 2016 at 8:08 pm

      Read my posts…

       
  6. Cindy

    November 27, 2016 at 11:25 pm

    You know this makes even more sense to me now that I’m thinking about it more… the MSM was aware you/we were on to them from pubic analyses like yours and the lawsuits requiring they did not destroy the data in the primary…. so they almost HAD to change their scheme.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis

%d bloggers like this: