RSS

Clinton’s popular vote “margin” is a myth: the Recorded vote is always fraudulent

10 Dec

Richard Charnin
Dec. 10, 2016; Updated 8/6/2017

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

Clinton’s popular vote “margin” is a myth: the Recorded vote is always fraudulent.

Those who cite Clinton’s lead in the popular vote fall into the same old media-driven TRAP. They fail to realize the FACT that the recorded vote is ALWAYS fraudulent – as it was in this election. The True Vote Model indicates Trump won the popular as well as the electoral vote.

This recent post from June 24, 2017 outlines the reasons why Trump won: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/06/24/trump-won-the-true-vote-clinton-won-the-fraudulent-recorded-vote/

The primaries were rigged in favor of  Clinton. The odds: 77 billion to one – based on exit poll discrepancies. But the 2016  election was different. The corporate media (the National Election Pool) which funds the pollster’s pre-election and exit polls were heavily biased in favor of Clinton.

Election analysts calculated that Clinton won the  Electoral vote by 302-236 based on unadjusted exit polls.  The states that Clinton won the unadjusted exit poll  and Trump won  the recorded vote were WI, NC, MI and PA. The analysts failed to consider that Trump won the MN unadjusted exit poll, and therefore Clinton won by 292-242 EV.  But the analysts assumed that the exit polls were fairly conducted.  Just because unadjusted exit polls were excellent indicators of fraud in the past does not mean that they were in 2016.  

The exit polls were the impetus for recounting MI, WI and PA. But why only recount the states that Trump narrowly won? I asked the question in this post: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/12/01/the-2016-presidential-recounts-why-not-add-these-six-states/

 The  polls look suspicious in states where they closely matched the recorded vote:  CA IL MI TX MN WA NY. Clinton’s CA margin exceeded Obama’s by an implausible 6%. An unknown number of illegals were encouraged to vote by Obama. http://tdmsresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2016-Presidential-Election-Table_Nov-17.-2016.jpg

Unadjusted and reported exit polls were compared to an estimate of the True Vote. The True Vote Model was based on the Gallup voter affiliation national survey to estimate each state’s Party-ID.  The unadjusted polls over-weighted Democratic party-ID and Clinton’s share of Independents.  https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/23/2016-election-scenario-analysis/

2016 Election Model:  27 Adjusted state exit polls vs. Recorded Vote vs. True Vote + 24 states recorded vote https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=0

These tables display a summary of 9 states. They show that a) the Democratic Party-ID share was inflated compared to the estimated Party-ID based on the Gallup survey and b)  the unadjusted exit polls over-weighted Clinton’s share of Independents compared to the Reported and True Vote. As a result, Clinton’s unadjusted vote share was inflated, showing her winning the  unadjusted exit poll average by 2.6% while losing the Reported and True Votes by 3.5% and 3.6%, respectively.

Unadj EP   Reported   True Vote  (Gallup) 
Vote Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Avg 48.4% 45.8% 46.1% 49.6% 44.6% 48.2%
Diff -2.6% 3.5% 3.6%
OH 47.0% 47.1% 43.5% 52.1% 44.1% 49.2%
NC * 48.6% 46.5% 46.7% 50.5% 45.9% 46.6%
NJ 59.8% 35.8% 55.0% 41.8% 44.6% 46.4%
PA * 50.5% 46.1% 47.7% 48.8% 47.8% 45.8%
MI 46.8% 46.8% 47.5% 47.7% 45.3% 47.8%
MO 42.8% 51.2% 38.0% 57.1% 41.5% 51.7%
IA 44.1% 48.0% 42.2% 51.8% 41.1% 50.6%
FL * 47.7% 46.4% 47.8% 49.1% 45.9% 47.7%
WI * 48.2% 44.3% 46.9% 47.9% 44.9% 48.1%

9-State Summary

9-states Reported     Gallup 
Party-ID Dem Rep Ind Dem Rep Ind
 Average 36% 34% 30% 32.9% 28.9% 38.2%
Average   Unadj EP   Reported   True Vote  
Share of Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Ind 47.7% 40.2% 39.0% 52.8% 36.3% 50.7%
Vote 48.4% 45.8% 46.1% 49.6% 44.6% 48.2%

1988-2008

An analysis of 274 state and 6 national unadjusted exit polls from 1988-2008 prove systemic election fraud beyond any doubt (the odds are trillions to one) as well as in the 2016 primaries.

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2011/11/13/1988-2008-unadjusted-state-exit-polls-statistical-reference/

Recall the 2004 stolen election in which Bush defeated Kerry by 50.7-48.3% ( 3 million bogus popular votes)- which was promoted all over the media.  Kerry actually won the True vote by 6-10 million (he had 51-53.5%). Bush did not want a repeat of the 2000 election in which Gore won the official (bogus) popular vote by 540,000 (he actually won by 3-4 million). Bush needed to win the popular vote in 2004, so his vote share was padded in big states that Kerry won easily- like NY and CA.

The 2016 Election Model: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/09/election-model-vs-recorded-vote/ https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/07/2016-election-model-forecast/

A brief history of election fraud:  https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/proving-election-fraud-the-pc-spreadsheets-and-the-internet/

 

Advertisements
 
3 Comments

Posted by on December 10, 2016 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

3 responses to “Clinton’s popular vote “margin” is a myth: the Recorded vote is always fraudulent

  1. Culture Vulture

    December 13, 2016 at 10:56 am

    To really know if media narrative is false, wouldn’t one have to analyze all the remaining states’ data as well?

     
  2. Kevin Trye

    December 20, 2016 at 4:54 pm

    Obviously both parties are doing their best to scam the system where they have access to the technology. From the Greg Palast investigations, in many states Republicans removed millions of minorities from the rolls using crosscheck as well as removing polling places where minorities live. Seems corruption and election fraud is systemic in our ‘democracy’. The media, of course is complicit in the crime.

     

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: