Pre-election polls and Election Fraud

24 Sep

Richard Charnin
Sept. 24, 2019


Kirrill Kalinin, a Professor of Political Science, has written a comprehensive analytical study: “Linking Preference Falsification and Election Fraud in Electoral Autocracies: The Case of Russia”. He references my book “Matrix of Deceit” in which I show how pre-election polls are used as a tool to commit election fraud.

Note that Clinton led the 2016 pre-election polls by 48-46%, with a recorded vote margin of 2.8 million votes, a figure relentlessly quoted by the MSM, politicians and analysts. These “experts” always assume that the recorded vote is pristine. They contradict themselves: if there is zero Election Fraud, why bother to call for election reform? I have done extensive analysis which indicate that Trump won the popular vote by at least 5 million.

Kalinin writes:
“What is the general mechanism behind a close match between the polls and the rigged election results? Can pre-election polls constrain the autocrat’s ability to commit election fraud? Can pre-election polls be used as a reliable way to detect election fraud? The answers to this set of questions are consequential to our understanding of how elections are organised in electoral autocracies and of how helpful the polling data can be as a tool of election fraud detection in democracies (Charnin, 2012).

In elections under authoritarian rule, the ruling party or an incumbent usually enjoys overwhelming electoral support, with the elections often considered fraudulent (Diamond, 2002). Electoral autocracies or hybrid regimes combine democratic and authoritarian elements, masking the authoritarian nature of the regime with democratic political institutions, such as multi-party elections. These regimes conduct public opinion polls in addition to holding elections, and surprisingly, a close match between public opinion polls and election results is often observed, even when obvious vote stealing takes place.

Indeed, the importance of pre-election polling is hard to overestimate since a single opinion poll can serve as a coordination mechanism, having a significant influence on election outcomes and allowing the incumbent to guarantee the credibility of rigged election results”.

Author Kirill Kalinin is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Michigan and a Research Associate of the ‘Election Forensics Toolkit’ project at the Center for Political Studies (Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan). His principal research interests are in the politics of authoritarian regimes, election forensics, and political and survey methodology.

2016 Election Model

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 24, 2019 in Uncategorized


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: