# Category Archives: 2000 Election

## Proving Election Fraud: The PC, Spreadsheets and the Internet

Proving Election Fraud: The PC, Spreadsheets and the Internet

Richard Charnin
Mar. 31, 2016

This post is an overview of major advances in technology which ultimately proved that election fraud is systemic. There were three major turning points:

1- Personal computer (1979)
3- Internet data access (1995)

A BRIEF HISTORY OF COMPUTERS AND SPREADSHEET TECHNOLOGY

Before the advent of the personal computer,  mainframes and minicomputers were programmed by professionals  in major corporations. Programming was hard and time consuming. Computers were used by scientists, engineers, investment bankers and other analytical professionals.

In 1965, my first job was as a numerical control FORTRAN programmer in the aerospace industry. The 7094 IBM mainframe  was a 512k machine which required a full floor of office space. It was on rental from the U.S. Navy.

Computers grew in power and were smaller in size during the 1970s. As manager of software development in Investment Banking  at Merrill Lynch on Wall Street . I used FORTRAN to develop financial models.

In the late 1970s, personal computers were considered as toys- until the first spreadsheets appeared. All of a sudden,  one could do simple calculations without having to write complex programs. Lotus 1-2-3 had limited programming features (“macros”). I immediately converted  FORTRAN financial programs to spreadsheets  with graphics capabilities. As a consultant to major domestic and foreign  corporations I switched to Excel in 1995 . Excel was used with C++ for advanced financial data base and derivatives models.

MATRIX OF DECEIT

A matrix is just a table (rectangular array) of numbers. In a spreadsheet, the table consists of data in cells (column, row). Basic arithmetic operations applied to the matrix are sufficient to prove election fraud.

Actual, raw unadjusted exit poll results are changed in all matrix crosstabs (demographics) to conform to the recorded vote. The crosstab “How Did You Vote in the previous  election?” has proved to be the Smoking Gun in detecting presidential election fraud from 1988-2008.

2000

Gore won the unadjusted National Exit Poll and State Exit Poll aggregate which indicated that he won by 3-5 million votes – not the 540,000 recorded. But the National Exit Poll  was forced to match the recorded vote. The election was stolen – big time.

 2000 Unadjusted National Exit Poll (13,108 respondents) Total Gore Bush Nader Other 13,108 6,359 6,065 523 161 48.51% 46.27% 3.99% 1.23%

 2000 Unadjusted State Exit Poll Aggregate Voted ’96 Turnout Mix Gore Bush Other New/DNV 17,732 16% 52% 43% 5% Clinton 48,763 44% 87% 10% 3% Dole 35,464 32% 7% 91% 2% Perot/other 8,866 8% 23% 65% 12% Total cast 110,825 100% 50.68% 45.60% 3.72% 110,825 56,166 50,536 4,123

 2000 National Exit Poll (forced to match recorded vote) Voted ’96 Turnout Mix Gore Bush Other New/DNV 18,982 18% 52% 43% 5% Clinton 42,183 40% 87% 10% 3% Dole 35,856 34% 7% 91% 2% Other 8,437 8% 23% 65% 12% Total 105,458 100% 48.38% 47.87% 3.75% 105,458 51,004 50,456 3,998

2004

The Final National Exit Poll was forced to match the recorded vote (Bush won by 3 million). The election was stolen.

Kerry won the unadjusted National Exit Poll and  State Exit Poll aggregate by 6 million votes. The True Vote Model (assuming a plausible estimate of returning 2000 election voters)  indicated that he won by 10 million votes with a 53.7% share.

 2004 Unadjusted National Exit Poll (13,660 respondents) Kerry Bush Other 13,660 7,064 6,414 182 share 51.71% 47.0% 1.3%

 2004 Unadjusted National Exit Poll (implausible 2000 returning voters; Gore won by 4-6m) 2000 Voted Mix Kerry Bush Other DNV 23,116 18.38% 57% 41% 2% Gore 48,248 38.37% 91% 8% 1% Bush 49,670 39.50% 10% 90% 0% Other 4,703 3.74% 64% 17% 19% Total 125,737 100% 51.8% 46.8% 1.5% 125,737 65,070 58,829 1,838

 2004 Final Adjusted National Exit Poll (Impossible Bush 2000 voter turnout; forced to match recorded vote) 2000 Turnout Mix Kerry Bush Other Alive Turnout DNV 20,790 17% 54% 44% 2% – – Gore 45,249 37% 90% 10% 0% 48,454 93% Bush 52,586 43% 9% 91% 0% 47,933 110% Other 3,669 3% 64% 14% 22% 3,798 97% Total 122,294 100% 48.27% 50.73% 1.00% 100,185 94% 59,031 62,040 1,223

2008

Obama won the unadjusted National Exit Poll by 61-37% (a 30 million vote margin). He won the  State Exit Poll aggregate 58-40% (a 23 million vote margin). But the Final National Exit Poll was forced to match the recorded 9.5 million vote margin. The landslide was denied.

 2008 Unadjusted National Exit Poll (17,836 respondents) Obama McCain Other 17,836 10,873 6,641 322 100% 61.0% 37.2% 1.8%

 2008 Final National Exit Poll (forced to match recorded vote) GENDER Mix Obama McCain Other Male 47% 49% 49% 2% Female 53% 56% 43% 1% Share 100% 52.87% 45.59% 1.54% Votes(mil) 131.463 69.50 59.94 2.02

 2008 Unadjusted National Exit Poll (plausible returning 2004 voter mix) Voted 2004 2008 Exact match to TVM & unadj state exit pollls 2004 Implied Votes Mix Obama McCain Other DNV – 17.66 13.43% 71% 27% 2% Kerry 50.18% 57.11 43.44% 89% 9% 2% Bush 44.62% 50.78 38.63% 17% 82% 1% Other 5.20% 5.92 4.50% 72% 26% 2% Total 131.46 100% 58.00% 40.35% 1.65% Votes 131.463 76.25 53.04 2.17

 Adjusted 2008 National Exit Poll (forced to match recorded vote with Voted 2004 2008 impossible returning 2004 voters) 2004 Implied Votes Mix Obama McCain Other DNV – 17.09 13% 71% 27% 2% Kerry 42.53% 48.64 37% 89% 9% 2% Bush 52.87% 60.47 46% 17% 82% 1% Other 4.60% 5.26 4% 72% 26% 2% Total 131.46 100% 52.87% 45.60% 1.54% Votes 131.463 69.50 59.95 2.02

2004 Sensitivity Analysis

How is Kerry’s vote share effected by changes in vote share assumptions? Consider the following matrices (tables). He wins all plausible scenarios.

 2004 True Vote Model (Plausible 2000 returning voter mix) 2000 Voted Mix Kerry Bush Other DNV 22,381 17.8% 57% 41% 2% Gore 52,055 41.4% 91% 8% 1% Bush 47,403 37.7% 10% 90% 0% Other 3,898 3.1% 64% 17% 19% Total 125,737 100% 53.6% 45.1% 1.4% 67,362 56,666 1,709
 Kerry share of returning Gore voters 89.0% 90.0% 91.0% 92.0% 93.0% Share of returning Bush 2000 Kerry Vote Share 12.0% 53.2% 53.6% 54.1% 54.5% 54.9% 11.0% 52.9% 53.3% 53.7% 54.1% 54.5% 10.0% 52.5% 52.9% 53.3% 53.7% 54.1% 9.0% 52.1% 52.5% 52.9% 53.3% 53.7% 8.0% 51.7% 52.1% 52.5% 52.9% 53.4% Margin (000) 12.0% 9,827 10,859 11,892 12,924 13,956 11.0% 8,871 9,903 10,935 11,967 13,000 10.0% 7,914 8,946 9,978 11,011 12,043 9.0% 6,957 7,990 9,022 10,054 11,086 8.0% 6,001 7,033 8,065 9,097 10,130
 Kerry share of New voters (DNV) Kerry share of 53.0% 55.0% 57.0% 59.0% 61.0% returning Bush 2000 voters Kerry Vote Share 12.0% 53.3% 53.7% 54.1% 54.4% 54.8% 11.0% 53.0% 53.3% 53.7% 54.0% 54.4% 10.0% 52.6% 52.9% 53.3% 53.6% 54.0% 9.0% 52.2% 52.6% 52.9% 53.3% 53.6% 8.0% 51.8% 52.2% 52.5% 52.9% 53.2% Margin 12.0% 10,098 10,995 11,892 12,789 13,686 11.0% 9,141 10,038 10,935 11,832 12,729 10.0% 8,184 9,081 9,978 10,876 11,773 9.0% 7,228 8,125 9,022 9,919 10,816 8.0% 6,271 7,168 8,065 8,962 9,859
 Kerry Win Probability 53.0% 55.0% 57.0% 59.0% 61.0% Win Prob (3% MoE) 12.0% 99.6% 99.8% 99.9% 100.0% 100.0% 11.0% 99.2% 99.6% 99.8% 99.9% 100.0% 10.0% 98.4% 99.2% 99.6% 99.8% 99.9% 9.0% 97.2% 98.4% 99.1% 99.6% 99.8% 8.0% 95.1% 97.0% 98.3% 99.1% 99.5%

## A Simple Arithmetic Proof that Bush Stole the 2004 Election

A Simple Arithmetic Proof that Bush Stole the 2004 Election

Richard Charnin
Sept.5, 2015
Updated: Sept.17, 2015

Compendium of Links to all of my posts
``` 1. The 2000 election There were 105.458 million recorded votes. Gore won by 548,000 recorded votes. But his True Vote margin was much higher. Over 5 million votes were uncounted - at least 70% for Gore. The election was stolen. Recorded Votes Share Bush 50.456 47.84% Gore 51.004 48.36% Other 3.998 3.79% ```

``` 2. Gore won the Unadjusted National Exit Poll. He won by an equivalent 2.3 million vote margin. Unadjusted 2000 National Exit Poll Sample Gore Bush Other 13,108 6,359 6,065 684 Share 48.51% 46.27% 5.22% Votes 51.16 48.80 5.82. 3. Gore won the Unadjusted State Exit Polls (50.7-45.6%), a 5.5 million vote margin. Voted Turnout Mix....Gore..Bush..Other Clinton 48,763 44%.....87%...10%...3% Dole....35,464 32%......7%...91%...2% Other....8,866 8%......23%...65%..12% DNV.....17,732 16%.....52%...43%...5% Share..110,825.......50.7% 45.6% 3.7% Votes..110,825......56,166 50,536 4,123 2000 True Vote Model matched the unadjusted exit polls. 4. 2000 Voter mortality (1.25% annual rate) Approximately 5 million Election 2000 voters died prior to 2004. Only 100 million were alive in 2004. Election 2000 voters ALIVE in 2004: Bush 47.93 Gore 48.45 Other 3.80 Total 100.19 5. The 2004 Election There were 122.294 million recorded votes. Bush won by a bogus 3.0 million vote "mandate". Bush 62.044 50.73% Kerry 59.012 48.25% Other. 1.238 1.01% 6. 2000 Election Voter Turnout in 2004 Estimate 98% of LIVING 2000 Election voters turned out in 2004. Therefore, the MAXIMUM number of returning 2000 voters was: Bush 46.97 million (38.41% of 122.3 million 2004 voters) Gore 47.48 (38.83%) Other 3.72 (3.04%) Total 98.18 (80.28%) DNV 24.11 (19.72% did not vote in 2000) Total 122.29 100.0% 7. Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll (13,660 Respondents) Kerry won by an equivalent 6 million votes. Respondents Share...Equiv. vote Kerry 7,064 51.71% 63.24 million Bush. 6,414 46.95% 57.42 Other...182. 1.33% 1.63 8. Proof of fraud: IMPOSSIBLE ADJUSTED 2004 National Exit poll The NEP required 7 million more returning Bush than Gore voters in order to MATCH the recorded vote. It indicated that 52.59 million Bush 2000 voters turned out in 2004 (43% of the vote). But Bush only had 50.46 million votes in 2000. APPROXIMATELY 2 MILLION DIED AND 1 MILLION DID NOT RETURN IN 2004. Therefore there had to be at least 5 MILLION (52.6-47.5) PHANTOM BUSH VOTERS. An IMPOSSIBLE adjustment had to be made to the National Exit poll in order to MATCH the recorded vote, therefore the RECORDED VOTE must also have been IMPOSSIBLE. THE 2000 and 2004 ELECTIONS WERE STOLEN. 2000 Turnout Mix....Kerry.Bush..Other....Alive..Turnout DNV. 20,790 17%....54%...44%....2% ------ ------ Gore 45,249 37%....90%...10%....0%.....48,454...93% Bush 52,586 43%.....9%...91%....0%.....47,933. 110% Other 3,669 3%.....64%...14%...22%......3,798...97% Total.122,294.....48.3%..50.7% 1.0%....100,185..94% Votes............59,031..62,040 1,223 9. Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll Kerry had 51.7% in the Unadjusted National Exit Poll. Given the 12:28am exit poll shares, matching to 51.7% required an implausible 1.4 million more returning Bush than Gore voters. But Gore won the unadjusted state exit polls by 5 million votes. 2000 Turnout Mix.....Kerry...Bush..Other DNV. 23,116 18.4%....57%.....41%...2% Gore 48,248 38.4%....91%......8%...1% Bush 49,670 39.5%....10%.....90%...0% Other. 4,703 3.7%....64%.....17%...19% Total 125,737......51.7% 46.8% 1.5% Cast. 125,737......65,070 58,829 1,838 ```

```2004 True Vote Model 10- Kerry won by 10.6 million votes assuming 2000 voters returned in proportion to the unadjusted state exit polls aggregate. 2000 Turnout Mix....Kerry..Bush...Other DNV. 22,381 17.8%...57%....41%....2% Gore 52,055 41.4%...91%.....8%....1% Bush 47,403 37.7%...10%....90%....0% Other 3,898 3.1%....64%....17%...19% Total 125,737......53.6% 45.1% 1.3% Cast. 125,737......67,362 56,666 1,709 Recd. 122,294......59,028 62,041 1,224 Diff...3,443.......8,334 -5,375 485 ```

1 Comment

Posted by on September 5, 2015 in 2000 Election, 2004 Election

## A Simple 2000-2012 Electoral Vote Simulation Model

A Simple 2000-2012 Electoral Vote Simulation Model

Richard Charnin
July 27, 2015
Updated: Oct.5, 2015
Links to website and blog posts
Look inside the books:
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts
Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy

The purpose of the Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation Model is to calculate the probability of a candidate winning at least 270 Electoral votes.

The Total EV is calculated as the sum of the products of the state win probabilities and corresponding electoral votes. The probability of winning each state is required in order to calculate the total probability of winning 270 EV. It is calculated using the projected two-party vote share and the margin of error (MoE) as input to the Normal distribution.

Prob = NORMDIST (vote share, 0.5, MoE/1.96, true)

The probability of winning the election is the ratio of winning simulation trials (at least 270 EV) to the total number of simulation trials (200).

The model contains the following 2-party vote shares:
2000- Gore unadjusted state and national exit polls and recorded shares
2004- Kerry unadjusted state and national exit polls and recorded shares
2008- Obama Unadjusted state and national exit polls and recorded shares
2012- Obama state and national True Vote and recorded shares
(In 2012, 19 states were not exit polled)

Only ONE input (code 1-8) is required to indicate the election and method:
2000: 1- exit poll, 2- recorded votes
2004: 3- exit poll, 4- recorded votes
2008: 5- exit poll, 6- recorded votes
2012: 7- True vote, 8- recorded votes

The Electoral Vote Histogram shows the results of 200 simulation trials.

There are three Total Electoral Vote calculations:
1-Theoretical EV: the product sum of state win probabilities and corresponding EVs.
2-Snapshot EV: sum of the projected electoral votes.
3-Mean EV: average EV of the all simulation trials.

In 2000, Gore defeated Bush by just 544,000 recorded votes. But he won the unadjusted state exit poll aggregate by 51.7-46.8%, Given that there were 105.4 million recorded votes, then based in the exit polls, he won by at least 5 million votes. There were 11 states in which he led the exit polls but flipped to Bush. If he had won just one, he would have won the election. If he won all 11, he would have had 408 electoral votes.

In the 2008 Election Model Obama’s 365.3 expected theoretical electoral vote was a near-perfect match to his recorded 365 EV. The simulation mean EV was 365.8 and the snapshot was 367. Obama’s won all 5000 election trials. His projected 53.1% share was a close match to the 52.9% recorded share.

The 2008 TVM exactly matched Obama’s 58% share of the unadjusted state exit polls: he won by 23 million votes (not the 9.5 million recorded) and had 420 electoral votes. Obama led the unadjusted National Exit Poll (17,836 respondents, 2% MoE) by 61-37%, an astounding 30 million vote margin.

The 2012 Monte Carlo Simulation Forecast exactly matched Obama’s 332 electoral votes and 51.0% total vote share. In the True Vote Model he had 55.6% and 391 Electoral votes.

Pre-election Registered Voter (RV) polls projected a 57% Obama share which closely matched the True Vote Model. Likely Voter (LV) polls are a subset of the RV polls. The LVs eliminate many new voters or others who did not vote in the prior election, cutting the projected Democratic share.

LV polls have an excellent track record in predicting the bogus recorded vote, as proven by the 2008 and 2012 Election Models. Final pre-election LV polls are used by the political pundits for their projections. After all, the media is paid to forecast the official recorded vote – not the true vote.

## The Election Fraud Quiz II

The Election Fraud Quiz II

Richard Charnin
Sept. 23, 2013

1 The exit poll margin of error is not a function of
a) sample-size, b) 2-party poll share, c) national population size

2 In the 1988-2008 presidential elections, the Democrats won the recorded vote 48-46%. They won both the average unadjusted state and national exit polls by
a) 50-46%, b) 51-45%, c) 52-41%

3 In 2004 the percentage of living Bush 2000 voters required to match the recorded vote was
a) 96%, b) 98%, c) 110%

4 In 2000 the approximate number of uncounted votes was
a) 2, b) 4, c) 6 million

5 In 2008, Obama won by 52.9-45.6%. He led the unadjusted National Exit Poll (17,836 respondents) by
a) 53-45%, b) 58-40%, c) 61-37%

6 In 1988 Bush beat Dukakis by 7 million votes (53.4-45.6%). Dukakis won the National Exit Poll by
a) 49.9-49.1%, b) 50.7-48.3%, c) 51.0-48.0%

7 In 1988 the approximate number of uncounted votes was
a) 6, b) 9, c) 11 million

8 Of 274 state exit polls from 1988-2008, 135 exceeded the margin of error (14 expected). How many moved in favor of the GOP?
a) 85, b) 105, c) 131

9 Gore won the popular vote in 2000. In 2004, returning Nader voters were 5-1 for Kerry, new voters 3-2 for Kerry. In order for Bush to win, he must have won
a) 30% of returning Gore voters, b) 90% of returning Bush voters, c) both (a) and (b).

10 In 2008 Obama won 58% of the state exit poll aggregate. Given it was his True Vote, he had how many Electoral Votes?
a) 365, b) 395, c) 420

11 What is the probability that 131 of 274 state exit polls from 1988-2008 would red-shift to the GOP beyond the margin of error?
a) 1 in 1 million, b) 1 in 1 trillion, c) 1 in 1 trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion (E-116)

12 In 2000 12 states flipped from Gore in the exit polls to Bush in the recorded vote. Gore would have won the election if he had won
a) 1, b) 2, c) 3 of the 12 states

13 In 1988 24 states had exit polls (2/3 of the total recorded vote). Dukakis won the state polls by
a) 50-49%, b) 51-48%, c) 52-47%

14 Exit polls are always adjusted to conform to the recorded vote. It is standard operating procedure and
a) reported by the corporate media, b) noted by academia, c) statistical proof of election fraud

15 Bush had 50.5 million votes in 2000. Approximately 2.5 million died and 1 million did not return to vote in 2004. Therefore, there could not have been more than 47 million returning Bush 2000 voters. But the 2004 National Exit Poll indicated 52.6 million returning Bush voters. This is proof that
a) Bush stole the 2004 election, b) it was a clerical error, c) 6 million Bush votes were not recorded in 2000.

16 In 2000 Gore won the popular vote by 540,000 votes (48.4-47.9%). He won the unadjusted state exit poll aggregate by 50.8-44.4% and the unadjusted National Exit Poll by 48.5-46.3%, indicating that
a) the state exit poll aggregate was outside the margin of error, b) the National poll was within the margin of error, c) the election was stolen, d) all

17 Corporate media websites show that Bush won the 2004 National Exit Poll (13660 respondents) by 51-48%, matching the recorded vote. But the unadjusted National Exit Poll indicates that Kerry won by 51.0-47.6% (7064-6414 respondents). The discrepancy is proof that
a) the poll was adjusted to match the recorded vote, b) Bush stole the election, c) both, d) neither

18 The pervasive difference between the exit polls and the recorded vote in every election is due to
a) inexperienced pollsters, b) Republican reluctance to be polled, c) systemic election fraud

19 In 1992 Clinton defeated Bush by 43-37.5% (Perot had 19.5%). Clinton won the unadjusted National exit poll by 48-32-20%. Bush needed 119% turnout of returning 1988 Bush voters to match the recorded vote. These anomalies were due to
a) bad polling, b) Bush voters refused to be polled, c) Bush tried but failed to steal the election.

20 Sensitivity analysis is a useful tool for gauging the effects of
a) various turnout assumptions, b) various vote share assumptions, c) both, d) neither

21 Monte Carlo simulation is a useful tool for
a) predicting the recorded vote, b) electoral vote, c) probability of winning the electoral vote.

22 The expected electoral vote is based on
a) state win probabilities, b) state electoral votes, c) both, d) neither

23 To match the recorded vote, which exit poll crosstab weights and shares are adjusted?
a) when decided, b) how voted in prior election, c) party ID, d) gender, e) education, f) income, g) all

24 In 2004 Bush’s final pre-election approval rating was 48%, but it was 53% in the adjusted National Exit Poll. The discrepancy was due to
a) late change in approval, b) different polls, c) forcing the exit poll to match the recorded vote

25 The True Vote Model is designed to calculate the fraud-free vote. The TVM utilizes final exit poll shares but estimates returning voters based on the prior election
a) recorded vote, b) votes cast, c) unadjusted exit poll, d) true vote, e) all

1c 2c 3c 4c 5c 6a 7c 8c 9c 10c 11c 12a 13c 14c 15a 16c 17c 18c 19c 20c 21c 22c 23g 24c 25e

## 2000-2004 Presidential Elections County True Vote Model

2000-2004 Presidential Elections County True Vote Model

Richard Charnin

March 28, 2012

The database has been restructured for easier use. It is based on county recorded vote changes and 2000 and 2004 as well as National Exit Poll vote shares. It now calculates the approximate 2004 True Vote for counties in 21 states.

The 2004 County True Vote Model:

In 2000, Gore won the unadjusted state exit polls by 50.8-44.4%. He won the National Exit Poll by 48.5-46.3%

In 2004, Kerry won the unadjusted state exit polls by 51.1-47.6%. He won the National Exit Poll by 51.7-47.0%%

The database contains Election Day recorded votes. In 2000 approximately 2.7 million votes were recorded after Election Day; in 2004 approximately 6 million were. Gore and Kerry each had 55% of the late two-party vote.

In 2000, there were approximately 6 million uncounted votes. In 2004, there were approximately 4 million. Gore and Kerry had 70-80%. Total Votes Cast, which includes uncounted votes, are not available by county and therefore not included in the County True Vote calculations. Therefore, the Democratic County True Vote is conservative (uncounted votes are 70-80% Democratic). Total votes cast are included in the National and State True Vote models.

The number of returning 2000 voters is calculated assuming 5% voter mortality over the four year period. The default turnout assumption is that 98% of living 2000 voters voted in 2004.

The number of new voters is calculated as the difference between the 2004 recorded vote and the number of returning 2000 voters. This is just an approximation since the recorded 2000 county vote is used – not the True Vote based on total votes cast .

The Model uses adjusted 12:22am National Exit Poll vote shares as a basis for calculating total state and county vote shares. The adjusted shares are applied to each county’s estimated share of new voters and returning Gore, Bush and Other voters. The weighted average of the county vote shares should closely match the calculated state True Vote.

State and county vote shares are calculated based on the differential between the unadjusted state and national exit poll shares.

The Input sheet is for data entry. Enter the state code in cell A2.

The default assumption is that 2000 voters return to vote in proportion to the 2000 unadjusted exit poll. Enter code 1 to use the 2000 recorded vote as the returning voter option. Since the unadjusted 2000 exit poll is close to the True Vote, the default option is a better choice.

The user has the option of incrementing the returning Gore voter mix percentage. The Bush share will decrease (increase) by the same percentage.

The living 2000 voter turnout rate is set to 98%, but can be changed if desired.

In order to gauge the impact of changes in vote shares, incremental changes to Kerry’s base case vote shares can be input. Bush’s shares will adjust automatically in the opposite direction (the total must equal 100%). Other third-party vote shares are unchanged.

Analyzing the results
The data is sorted by 2004 county vote. The discrepancies are displayed as vote margin (in thousands) and a percentage. The probability of fraud increases as the discrepancy increases. The county True Vote is only an estimate. It can only be determined if the ballots are hand-counted.

The correlation statistic shows the relationship between two variables and ranges from -1 to +1, where -1 is a perfectly negative correlation and +1 is perfectly positive. A near-zero correlation indicates that there is no relationship. A positive correlation indicates that both variables move in the same direction: as one variable increases (decreases), the other also increases (decreases). A negative correlation indicates just the opposite: as one variable increases (decreases) the other decreases (increases).

The model calculates the correlation statistic (relationship) between Kerry’s recorded vote share and the True Vote discrepancy. In general, there is a strong negative correlation between the variables, indicating that as Obama’s recorded county vote share increases (decreases) the discrepancy decreases (increases). This is an indication that the GOP counties are the most fraudulent (as measured by vote share margin discrepancy).

For example, in Ohio, the -0.82 correlation was very strong indicating that Bush counties were extremely fraudulent relative to Kerry counties (based on vote share margin discrepancies).

County Correlation Ratios between the Democratic Recorded Vote and
the True Vote Share Margin Discrepancy
State 2004 2008
NC -0.01 -0.72
WI -0.70 -0.50
OH -0.82 -0.50
NY -0.62 -0.45
FL -0.43 -0.79

Florida
At 8:40pm CNN showed that of 2846 exit polled, Bush led by 49.8-49.7%.
Kerry won the unadjusted exit poll (2862 respondents) by 50.8-48.0%.
But at 1:41am, the poll flipped to Bush (52.1-47.9%) for the SAME 2862 RESPONDENTS, matching the recorded vote a 381,000 vote margin.
Kerry won the True Vote by 52.7-46.1%, a 500,000 vote margin.

Kerry’s largest discrepancies from the True Vote were in DRE counties:
Broward, Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Dade, Pinellas.
Most fraudulent counties based on…
Margin: Broward Palm Beach Volusia Polk

Ohio
At 7:30pm CNN showed that of 1963 exit polled, Kerry led by 52.1-47.9%
Kerry won the unadjusted exit poll (2020 respondents) by 54.1-45.9%.
At 1:41am, the poll flipped to Bush (50.9-48.6%) for the SAME 2020 RESPONDENTS, matching the recorded vote, a 119,000 vote margin.
Kerry won the True Vote by 53.1-45.5%, a 426,000 vote margin.

Ohio used Punched card machines, DREs and Optical Scanners.
Most fraudulent counties based on…
Margin: Butler Warren Clermont

New York
All counties Lever machines.
Kerry won the recorded vote by 58.4-40.1%, a 1,251,000 vote margin.
Kerry won the Exit Poll by 62.1-36.2%.
Kerry won the True Vote by 63.0-35.1%, a 2,060,000 vote margin.
Most fraudulent counties based on…
Margin: Nassau Suffolk Staten Island Rockand

Wisconsin
Kerry won the recorded vote by 49.7-49.3%, an 11,000 vote margin.
Kerry won the Exit Poll by 52.0-46.8%.
Kerry won the True Vote by 52.8-45.6%, a 217,000 vote margin.
Most fraudulent counties based on…
Margin: Waukesha Brown Sheboygan Washington

Arizona
In 2000 Gore won the exit poll (47.2-46.4%) but lost the vote by 50.9-44.7%.
In 2004, Bush won the exit poll (52.8-46.3%) and the recorded vote (54.9-44.4%).

But Kerry won the True Vote by 52.0-46.2% (assuming 2000 voters returned in proportion to the 2000 exit poll). If the model is correct, there was massive election fraud (a 16% discrepancy).

Pennsylvania
Most fraudulent counties based on…
Margin: Northampton York Westmoreland

## The 2000-2004 Presidential County Recorded Vote Database

Richard Charnin
March 1, 2012
Updated: Oct.27, 2015

The 2000-2004 Presidential County Recorded Vote Database

The 2000-2004 Presidential County Vote Database is a forensic spreadsheet tool for viewing, filtering, sorting and comparing county vote changes from 2000 to 2004. It is important to note that the database contains Election Day recorded votes. The state True Vote is calculated as well. The 2004 county voting machine type is indicated.

The database consists of two worksheets:

Filtering and sorting the database:
1. Click the arrow in cell A13
2. Click the Clear button
3. Enter the state code to filter the 2000-2004 county votes.
4. Click OK
5. Sort Option (optional):
Sort any column by clicking the arrow in row 13 of the column.
Choose A-Z for low to high or Z-A for high to low.
Examples: Filter for a state, then sort by county vote, vote share, machine type, etc.

In 2000 Gore won the recorded vote by 540,000. But there were nearly 6 million uncounted votes. Gore won the unadjusted exit poll by 50-44% – a six million vote margin that was close to the True Vote Model.

In 2004, Bush won the recorded vote by 3 million. There were nearly 4 million uncounted votes. Kerry  won the unadjusted exit poll by 51-47.5%. The True Vote model indicates that he had 53.5% and won by 10 million votes.

Why bother to analyze state and county recorded votes? What if a county had a near-zero percentage increase in Bush’s 2004 margin from 2000? In other words, if there was nearly equal fraud in both elections, how would we know? If we have evidence of 2004 fraud in a given county, but there was no change in margin from 2000, then we can hypothesize that fraud also occurred in 2000. Conversely, if there was a change in margin in 2004, we could hypothesize that there was an increase in the fraud factor. Since Election Fraud is systemic, the 2000/2004 county vote database has applicability in other state and presidential elections.

New York

New York had the highest level of fraud; there was a 55% average difference between comparable Kerry and Bush correlations. Florida was next at 49%, Ohio had 35%. Oregon, the only vote-by-mail 100% paper ballot state with mandated random county hand-recounts, had just a 4% difference. The results confirmed a prior analysis which indicated a) that Oregon stood alone as the only fraud-free Battleground state and b) confirmed that election fraud caused the large exit poll discrepancies in New York, Florida and Ohio- and many other states.

Bush’s 2004 recorded NY county vote gain over 2000 is indeed an Urban Legend. His percentage gain in the 15 largest NY urban and suburban (Democratic) counties far exceeded those of Kerry. In 2000, Gore won the NY recorded vote by 60-35% with 5% to third parties. But Kerry won by just 58-40%, a 7% decrease in margin. NY voted exclusively on Lever machines which had the highest discrepancies (11%) of all voting machine types.

In 2004, Nader had less than 0.5% of the vote nationally. Since returning Nader voters preferred Kerry over Bush by 64-17%, Kerry should have won NY by 63-36% (assuming zero net defections of returning voters). In fact, he won the unadjusted exit poll by 62.1-36.2%. But his recorded margin exceeded Gore in just 6 of 62 counties.

Columbia was the ONLY COUNTY where Bush had fewer votes than he did in 2000 – an indication of zero fraud. Bush had 12,100 votes in 2000 and 11,200 in 2004.
This graph shows Bush and Kerry percentage gains over 2000 in the 15 largest NY counties.http://www.richardcharnin.com/TIACountyVoteDatabase_24111_image001.png

The Bush Urban Legend is also illustrated in this graph which shows the implausible high (0,61) correlation between NY county population size and Bush percentage gain from 2000.http://richardcharnin.com/TIACountyVoteDatabase_14517_image001.gif

Florida

Gore won the FL unadjusted exit poll by a whopping 53.4-43.6% (3% to Nader et al), but Bush won by 537 votes. They were tied at 48.8% – only because the Supreme Court stopped the recount. There were nearly 200,000 uncounted spoiled ballots, a combination of undervotes, overvotes, Butterfly ballots, etc.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, Kerry led the 2004 pre-election polls.
http://richardcharnin.com/FL04exitpoll_12679_image001.png

In 2004 Bush won again, this time by 52.1-47.9%. Returning Nader 2000 voters broke by nearly 4-1 for Kerry, who also won the unadjusted exit poll by 50.8-48.0%. So how did Bush do it? Well, for one thing FL voting machines were now a mix of unverifiable DREs and Optical scanners. No more punch cards. No more hanging chads. HAVA fixed that problem, so that votes could be stolen cleanly in Cyberspace. No longer would there be blood evidence at the crime scene.

The biggest Democratic counties (Palm Beach, Broward and Dade) showed  virtually no change in Bush’s margin from 2000 to 2004. But changes in county recorded votes can be misleading. Does no change mean that there was no fraud? Obviously not. Election Fraud in both 2000 and 2004 caused Gore and Kerry margins to decline at nearly the same rate. The near-zero net change in margin masks the uniform vote thefts. But the the level of fraud must have increased in counties where Bush gained the most over his 2000 vote (Brevard, Polk, Hillsborough, etc.). Margins increased by 4% in Hillsborough, 7% in Broward and 6% in Palm Beach. These counties used DRE touchscreens in 2004.

Of the 67 Florida counties, Kerry did better than Gore in just five, whereas Bush increased his margin in 62. But in Leon County there was a 10,000 increase in Kerry’s margin, his biggest county gain. Does the fact that Ion Sancho, the Election Integrity activist whose famous “Hursti Hack” demonstrated that Optical Scanners can be rigged and also happens to be the Leon County Election Supervisor, have anything to do with it?

Oregon

This 100% paper ballot state uses Optical scanners. Vote is by mail or hand-delivery of ballots to a polling site. A hand recount of ballots is mandated for randomly selected counties. Not surprisingly, with the combination of mandated hand counts (a fraud deterrent) and high turnout, Oregon was the only Battleground state that Kerry won by a margin better than Gore.

Gore won Multnomah, Oregon’s largest county, by 104,000 votes (64.3-28.6%). But Kerry did even better. He won it by 152,000 votes (72.5-27.5%) and apparently picked up a large number of returning Nader 2000 voters. It’s very telling to compare Kerry’s expected gains in urban Multnomah to Bush’s impossible, unexpected gains in heavily Democratic NY counties.

Oregon is a 100% paper ballot state, mandates random hand recounts and enjoys heavy voter turnout. Do these factors have anything to do with Oregon being the only Battleground state in which Kerry’s winning vote share exceeded that of Al Gore?

Ohio

In 2000, Bush beat Gore by 50.0-46.5%, but the exit poll was close (48.5-47.4%). In 2004, Kerry won the exit poll by a solid 54.1-45.7% but lost the recorded vote by 50.8-48.7% – quite a red-shift. Although there were many Battleground states and strong Democratic states in which vote miscounts favored Bush, Ohio was the epicenter of election fraud. The majority of its 88 counties voted on punch card machines, the rest on DREs and Optical scanners.

In 2000, Gore won Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) by 63-34%. Kerry did even better; he won by 67-33%. Kerry had a 61,000 net gain in margin. But keeping in mind that these are recorded vote shares. Based on the vast evidence of documented fraud, Gore and Kerry must have done much better than their recorded votes indicate. Bush vote gains from 2000 were highest in Butler, Warren and Clermont counties. All had numerous voting irregularities and anomalies.

Did Ken Blackwell, Secretary of State and co-chair of the Ohio Bush-Cheney campaign, have anything to do with Kerry losing Ohio ?

Posted by on March 1, 2012 in 2000 Election, 2004 Election

## Et tu, Al Gore?

Updated: Jan. 27, 2012

Et tu, Al Gore?

Watching The Young Turks covering the NH primary last night on Al Gore’s Current TV, I was struck by the comments made by Gore and Jennifer Granholm. Cenk, who appears to be one honest, smart reporter dedicated to the truth, brought up the topic of exit polls. Gore and Granholm immediately reverted to the media canard that they are not to be trusted.

Al Gore KNOWS he won in 2000 and that the exit polls indicated just that in Florida until 16,000 votes were DEDUCTED from Gore’s total in Volusia county. At that point, Fox News called Florida for Bush and the other networks immediately did likewise. Al Gore KNOWS that exit polls are very accurate; his comment was a real letdown to this analyst who has always been a fan.

For Gore and Granholm to dismiss the “unreliable” exit polls, they would also have to dismiss the following 2000 election facts.

Gore beat Bush by 540,000 recorded votes(48.4-47.9%). But he won the aggregate unadjusted state exit polls (56,000 respondents) by 50.8-44.5% – a 6 million vote margin. The True Vote Model had Gore by 51.5-44.7%. The Supreme Court awarded the election to Bush (271-267 EV).

Twelve states flipped from Gore in the exit poll to Bush in the recorded vote: AL AR AZ CO FL GA MO NC NV TN TX VA. Gore would have won the election if he captured just one of the states. Democracy died in 2000.

Coincidentally, according to the Census, there were nearly 6 million uncounted votes (spoiled, provisional, absentee), of which 75-80% were Gore votes. Therefore, uncounted votes account for approximately one half of the 6 million exit poll discrepancy.

Now consider Florida which Bush “won” by 537 recorded votes. But there were nearly 200,000 spoiled ballots, of which 70% were Gore votes – a combination of underpunched, overpunched and “butterfly” ballots. That’s a net loss to Gore of 80,000 votes right there. But how many TOTAL ballots (spoiled, provisional, absentee, etc.) were never counted?

Investigative reporter Greg Palast calculated that spoiled ballots of African-Americans cost Gore 77,000 votes:

Palast writes:
Here’s how to estimate the effect of spoilage on the election outcome. For fun, let’s take Florida 2000. We know from comparison of census tracts to precincts that 54% of the 179,855 ballots “spoiled” were cast by African-American voters, that is, 97,000 of the total.

Every poll put the Black vote in Florida for Al Gore at over 90%. Reasonably assuming “spoiled” ballots matched the typical racial preferences, Gore lost more than 87,000 votes in the spoilage pile. Less than 10% of the African-American population voted for Mr. Bush, i.e. Bush lost no more than 10,000 votes to spoilage. The net effect: Gore had a plurality of at least 77,000 within the uncounted ballots cast by Black citizens.

OK, then, what about “Non-Black” voters, whose votes made up the remaining 46% of the spoilage pile? Well, frankly, you can ignore these, as these voters split their vote somewhat evenly between Gore and Bush. Sticklers wanting a closer exam would note that Gore probably won a majority of these votes as well. Moreover, the only large group of spoiled votes in a wealthy white county occurred in Palm Beach (due to “butterfly” ballots), a rare, rich white group of strongly Democratic voters.

Gore won the unadjusted Florida exit poll in a landslide 53.4-43.6%. There were 1816 respondents (a 3% margin of error), so there was a 95% probability that Gore’s share was between 50.4% and 56.4% – and a 97.5% probability that his share was at least 50.4%, a 230,000 vote margin. So how do we account for the 230,000 discrepancy from Bush’s 537 recorded vote margin?

Let’s be conservative. We will assume that the uncounted ballots were all spoiled ballots. According to the Census, there were 43,000 Net Uncounted votes (uncounted – stuffed ballots)in Florida.

Since Stuffed ballots is equal to Gross uncounted (200,000 spoiled) less Net uncounted (43,000), there must have been 157,000 stuffed ballots.

Therefore, Gore’s margin was reduced by approximately 80,000 from 200,000 spoiled ballots and another 157,000 from stuffed (presumably Bush) ballots. The 237,000 total is within 7,000 of the 230,000 calculated above. And that is being conservative. Remember, we are assuming that a) Gore’s vote share was 3% lower than his unadjusted 53.4% exit poll share and b) all of the uncounted votes were the result of 200,000 spoiled ballots. We have ignored absentee and provisional ballots – and votes switched or dropped in cyberspace.

President Gore, what is the mission of Current TV? To be truly independent and fact-based, or just another clone of the mainstream media?
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2011/12/05/current-tv-and-election-truth/

President Gore, you won a mini-landslide in 2000:

``` Unadjusted National Exit Poll Gore Bush Buch Nader Other Total 6,359 6,065 76 523 85 13,108 48.5% 46.3% .6% 4% .6% 100%```

``` ```

``` Unadjusted State Exit Poll Aggregate Voted'96 Cast Mix Gore Bush Other New/DNV 19,949 18% 52% 43% 5% Clinton 47,655 43% 87% 10% 3% Dole... 34,356 31% 7% 91% 2% Perot... 8,866 8% 23% 65% 12% Total. 110,825 100% 50.8% 45.4% 3.8% Votes. 110,825 56,277 50,370 4,178 ```
Note: I am including this report and will provide my comments later.

Election Model Forecast; Post-election True Vote Model

2004 (2-party vote shares)
Model: Kerry 51.8%, 337 EV (snapshot)
State exit poll aggregate: 51.7%, 337 EV
Recorded Vote: 48.3%, 255 EV
True Vote Model: 53.6%, 364 EV
US Count Votes did a comprehensive analysis of the 2004 exit poll discrepancies which disproved the exit pollster’s reluctant Bush responder hypothesis.

2008
Model: Obama 53.1%, 365.3 EV (simulation mean);
Recorded: 52.9%, 365 EV
State exit poll aggregate: 58.0%, 420 EV
True Vote Model: 58.0%, 420 EV

2012 (2-party state exit poll aggregate shares)
Model: Obama 51.6%, 332 EV (Snapshot)
Recorded : 51.6%, 332 EV
True Vote 55.2%, 380 EV

_______________________________________________________________
Television’s Performance on Election Night 2000: A Report for CNN
By Joan Konner, James Risser, and Ben Wattenberg
January 29, 2001

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/02/02/cnn.report/cnn.pdf

My initial reaction is that the report is misleading at best. The authors assume that the Florida exit poll (which showed Gore with a significant lead) was incorrect and the recorded vote counts were accurate. They discourage the use of exit polls, claiming the vote counts should effectively stand by themselves.

It is this type of limited hangout, “conventional wisdom”, unquestioning, see-no-evil reporting, which finds fault with scientific exit polls but not with bogus reported vote counts, that provide cover for not just the 2000 stolen election but all the stolen elections which followed.

For example, there is no mention that 200,000 votes were uncounted, the great majority in Democratic minority districts. However, the authors cite the canard that the “early Gore call” discouraged Florida panhandle voters from coming out. This is unsupported by the facts; they had already voted earlier in the day – and were included in the exit poll.

Stay tuned.

Posted by on January 11, 2012 in 2000 Election, Media

Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis