RSS

Author Archives: Richard Charnin

About Richard Charnin

In 1965, I graduated from Queens College (NY) with a BA in Mathematics. I later obtained an MS in Applied Mathematics from Adelphi University and an MS in Operations Research from the Polytechnic Institute of NY. I started out as a numerical control engineer/programmer for a major defense/aerospace manufacturer and then moved to Wall Street as a manager/developer of corporate finance quantitative applications for several major investment banks. I consulted in quantitative applications development for major domestic and foreign financial institutions, investment firms and industrial corporations. In 2004 l began posting weekly "Election Model" projections based on state and national polls. As "TruthIsAll", I have been posting election analysis to determine the True Vote ever since.

Trump 2016 Landslide? Do the Math

13 Oct

Richard Charnin
Oct. 13, 2019

The following analysis indicates how Trump may have won the True Vote by 10.9- 13.4 million…and the electoral vote with at least 356 EV (he had 306 recorded EV) and did about 5% better than his recorded 46% share. Is that so hard to believe when you consider what the DNC did to Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries?

Recorded	Gallup	Trump	Clinton	Other
Rep	28%	88.0%	8.0%	4.0%
Dem	32%	8.0%	89.0%	3.0%
Ind	40%	47.3%	43.7%	9.1%
	Vote	46.1%	48.2%	5.7%
	Check	46.1%	48.2%	5.7%
	136.22	62.80	65.66	7.76

Independents	Gallup	Trump	Clinton	Other
Rep	28%	88.0%	8.0%	4.0%
Dem	32%	8.0%	89.0%	3.0%
Ind	40%	59.5%	30.7%	9.8%
	Vote	51.0%	43.0%	6.0%
	Check	51.0%	43.0%	6.0%
	136.22	69.47	58.57	8.17

When Decided	NEP	Trump	Clinton	Other
Before 9/1	60%	47.0%	52.0%	1.0%
After 9/1	40%	57.0%	29.5%	13.5%
	Vote	51.0%	43.0%	6.0%
	Check	51.0%	43.0%	6.0%
	136.22	69.47	58.57	8.17

Adjustments	Total	Trump	Clinton	Other
Recorded	136.22	62.89	65.72	7.61
	100%	46.17%	48.25%	5.59%
Illegals	-3.0	0.0	-3.0	0,0
Vote Suppression	3.0	0.0	3.0	0.0
Google Vote Flip	0.0	6.5	-6.5	0.0
Adjusted Vote	138.22	69.39	59.22	7.61
	100%	52.01%	42.34%	5.65%

“Taken from the “NSA Core Records”
TRUMP CLINTON
70.12 57.18
51.5% 42.0%

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2018/02/13/did-trump-actually-win-by-13-million-votes/

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2019/10/09/2016-national-exit-poll-independents-undecided-voters-and-google/

2016 Election Model https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17h3tOueSvQWwYFLwOEg3tCoIFdoB7wnEscsMgSFeDAk/edit#gid=1036175945

Leave a comment

Posted by Richard Charnin on October 13, 2019 in Uncategorized

2016 National Exit Poll Independents, Undecided voters and Google

09 Oct

2016 National Exit Poll Independents, Undecided voters and Google

Richard Charnin
Oct.9, 2019

According to the 2016 National Exit Poll, Independents comprised 31% of the electorate and 40% of voters decided after Sept.1. The NEP indicates that Trump won Independents by 46-42%. The NEP also indicates that Trump won voters who decided after Sept. 1 by 47.9-42.6%.

The presumptive “incumbent” Clinton was unpopular. As the challenger, Trump would expect to capture at least 60% of undecided voters.

But the Gallup monthly Voter affiliation survey taken at the time of the election indicated that Independents comprised 41% of the electorate, virtually matching the 40% who decided after Sept.1. It is logical to assume that the majority of undecided voters were Independents.

Trump needed 56% of Independents to win by 9 million votes and 356 EV (50.0-43.4%).

According to Dr. Epstein, 2.4-10.6 million undecided voters were flipped by Google’s search engine to favor Clinton. Assume 6.5 million were flipped.

Gallup………. NEP shares
Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem… 31% 90.4% 7.7% 0.0% 1.9%
Rep… 28% 8.0% 88.0% 4.0% 0.0%
Ind… 41% 32.0% 56.0% 6.0% 4.0% < 56% = 46% + 10%
Share 100% 43.4% 50.0% 3.6% 2.2%
Votes 136.2. 59.3. 68.3. 4.9. 3.0
EVote………182..356

Trump won the following states (51 EV) that he lost in the recorded vote:
CO 9, MN 10, ME 4, NH 4, NM 5, NV 6, VA 13

National Exit Poll
When Decided.. Voted Clinton Trump Other
After Sept 1……40% 30.6% 60.0% 9.4% < 60% = 48% + 12%
Before Sept 1…..60% 52.0% 45.0% 3.0%
Vote share…….100% 43.4% 51.0% 5.6%
Votes…………..136.2. 59.1…69.5.. 7.6

The NEP is always forced to match the recorded vote. The recorded vote is never equal to the True Vote. Recorded Vote = True Vote + Election Fraud

Sensitivity Analysis



	Party ID	Dem	Rep	Ind
	Gallup	31.0%	28.0%	41.0%
Base Case	Trump%	7.7%	88.0%	56.0%
EVote	Clinton	182	Trump	356
	Vote share	43.4%		50.0%
	Votes	59,275		68,296

			Trump % Repubs
Trump	88.0%	89.0%	90.0%	91.0%	92.0%
% Ind			Trump
56%	50.0%	50.3%	50.5%	50.8%	51.1%
52%	48.3%	48.6%	48.9%	49.2%	49.5%
50%	47.5%	47.8%	48.1%	48.4%	48.6%
48%	46.7%	47.0%	47.3%	47.5%	47.8%
46%	45.9%	46.2%	46.4%	46.7%	47.0%
			Clinton
56%	43.4%	43.1%	42.8%	42.5%	42.3%
52%	45.0%	44.7%	44.5%	44.2%	43.9%
50%	45.8%	45.6%	45.3%	45.0%	44.7%
48%	46.7%	46.4%	46.1%	45.8%	45.5%
46%	47.5%	47.2%	46.9%	46.6%	46.4%
			Vote Share Margin
56%	6.6%	7.2%	7.7%	8.3%	8.8%
52%	3.3%	3.9%	4.4%	5.0%	5.6%
50%	1.7%	2.2%	2.8%	3.4%	3.9%
48%	0.0%	0.6%	1.2%	1.7%	2.3%
46%	-1.6%	-1.0%	-0.5%	0.1%	0.6%
			Vote Margin (000)
56%	8,948	9,706	10,465	11,224	11,983
52%	4,503	5,262	6,021	6,779	7,538
50%	2,281	3,039	3,798	4,557	5,316
48%	58	817	1,576	2,335	3,094
46%	-2,164	-1,405	-646	112	871

When Decided
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17h3tOueSvQWwYFLwOEg3tCoIFdoB7wnEscsMgSFeDAk/edit?fbclid=IwAR2x2qXiBcemeKXGNh6c2FW31-2Flwe2pgn-1IWFGhsjDrpRC2MbLwmDp5s#gid=793126276

Independents
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17h3tOueSvQWwYFLwOEg3tCoIFdoB7wnEscsMgSFeDAk/edit?fbclid=IwAR2x2qXiBcemeKXGNh6c2FW31-2Flwe2pgn-1IWFGhsjDrpRC2MbLwmDp5s#gid=1036175945

Leave a comment

Posted by Richard Charnin on October 9, 2019 in Uncategorized

2016 Election Model Update

03 Oct

2016 Election Model Update

Richard Charnin
Oct. 2, 2019

LINKS TO BLOG POSTS

The 2016 Forecast Model has been enhanced to include Gallup 2016 state party I, voter turnout and vote share adjustments.

The Model uses 4 Party-ID groups:
– Gallup 2016 State voter affiliation with leaners
– Pre-election (9 poll average)
– Gallup 2016 National voter affiliation
– National Exit Poll (matched to recorded vote)

View the sensitivity of Vote share, Vote margin and Electoral Vote to Trump shares of Republicans and Independents (15 scenarios).

For example, consider the following vote share scenarios:

1) National Exit Poll (matched to recorded vote):
Trump wins 8% of Dems, 88% of Repubs and 46% of Independents.
Result: Trump has 224 Electoral votes and loses the popular vote by 2.1 million.

2) Trump wins 8% of Dems, 90% of Repubs and 48% of Independents.
Result: Trump has 321 Electoral votes and wins the popular vote by 1.4 million.

3) Trump wins 8% of Dems, 92% of Repubs and 50% of Independents.
Result: Trump has 356 Electoral votes and wims the popular vote by 4.9 million.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17h3tOueSvQWwYFLwOEg3tCoIFdoB7wnEscsMgSFeDAk/edit#gid=1036175945

Leave a comment

Posted by Richard Charnin on October 3, 2019 in Uncategorized

Will anyone in the Main Stream Media discuss this? NYC Fire Commissioners on July 24, 2019 unanimously called for a new investigation of all aspects of 9/11 based on “overwhelming evidence” of explosives in ALL 3 WTC Towers…

02 Oct

Richard Charnin
Oct. 2, 2019

LINKS TO BLOG POSTS

Will anyone in the Main Stream Media discuss this? NYC Fire Commissioners on July 24, 2019 unanimously called for a new investigation of all aspects of 9/11 based on “overwhelming evidence” of explosives in ALL 3 WTC Towers

Ed Asner video on WTC 7 collapse https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nyogTsrsgI

https://commonground.ca/explosives-used-on-9-11-say-commis…/

https://www.lewrockwell.com/…/the-official-story-of-the-co…/

Commissioners from the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, located near Queens, New York, unanimously passed a historic resolution on July 24 that calls for a new investigation into all aspects of 9/11 and which cites “overwhelming evidence” that explosives were planted in all THREE (3) towers prior to 9/11. The resolution states that the district’s Board of Fire Commissioners “fully supports a comprehensive federal grand jury investigation and prosecution of every crime related to the attacks of September 11…”

“It was a mass murder,” Commissioner Christopher Gioia said in an interview. “Three thousand people were murdered in cold blood.” Gioia, who wrote and introduced the resolution, says the toll on his department from the events of that day has been devastating. Members Thomas J. Hetzel and Robert Evans died at Ground Zero on 9/11. Others, including commissioners Philip Malloy and Joseph Torregrossa, have become ill from exposure to the toxic air during rescue and recovery operations.

Leave a comment

Posted by Richard Charnin on October 2, 2019 in Uncategorized

Pre-election polls and Election Fraud

24 Sep

Richard Charnin
Sept. 24, 2019

LINKS TO BLOG POSTS

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.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0032321717706013

2016 Election Model
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17h3tOueSvQWwYFLwOEg3tCoIFdoB7wnEscsMgSFeDAk/edit#gid=1036175945

Leave a comment

Posted by Richard Charnin on September 24, 2019 in Uncategorized