RSS

Category Archives: 2016 election

2017 Alabama Senate: Jefferson County- Implausible voter turnout

Alabama Senate: Jefferson County- Implausible voter turnout

Richard Charnin
Jan. 12, 2018

My Books
Trump Won the True Vote
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
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
LINKS TO  POSTS

Problem: Estimate a) Clinton and Trump voter turnout in 2017 and b) Trump voter defection required to match the recorded vote.

In 2016, Clinton won Jefferson by 32,000 votes (52.3-45.0%).
In 2017, Jones won Jefferson by 83,000 votes (68.1-30.2%).

In order to match the vote, Jones needed
1) 25% higher 2016 Clinton voter turnout than Trump (85-60%).
2) 21% of returning Trump voters (8% would normally be expected to defect).
3) 98% of Clinton voters.

True Vote Estimate: Assume 80% turnout of Clinton voters and 66% of Trump  voters. Moore wins 84% of Trump voters and 3% of Clinton.   Jones’ margin in Jefferson is reduced from 83,000 to 56,000 votes.

Go to row 133
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YoXVkz6KGUoMzEDJBxwROEaukSkgqWVHX3qy_lBxIgc/edit#gid=0

Recorded Vote-Turnout Assumption: 85% Clinton; 60% Trump;60% Other

JEFFERSON COUNTY
2017
2016 Recorded Votes 99% Alive Turnout Turnout
Clinton 52.32% 156,873 155,304 85% 132,009
Trump 44.95% 134,768 133,420 60% 80,052
Other 2.73% 8,199 8,117 60% 4,870
Did Not Vote 2,610
TOTAL 100% 299,840 296,842 219,541
Margin 22,105 73.22%
2017 Pct Jones Moore Other
Clinton 60.1% 98.0% 2.0% 0.0%
Trump 36.5% 21.0% 76.0% 3.0%
Other 2.2% 37.0% 40.0% 23.0%
DNV (new) 1.2% 59.0% 34.0% 7.0%
Match 100% 68.11% 30.21% 1.69%
Votes 219,541 149,521 66,315 3,704
Recorded 100% 68.11% 30.20% 1.69%
  219,541 149,522 66,309 3,710

True Vote estimate- Turnout Assumption: 80% Clinton; 66% Trump; 66% Other
2017 Pct Jones Moore Other
Clinton 56.6% 97.0% 2.0% 1.0%
Trump 40.1% 14.0% 84.0% 2.0%
Other 2.4% 37.0% 45.0% 18.0%
DNV (new) 0.9% 59.0% 34.0% 7.0%
True Estimate 100% 61.92% 36.21% 1.87%
Votes 219,541 135,937 79,504 4,100
Recorded 100% 68.11% 30.20% 1.69%
219,541 149,522 66,309 3,710

 

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 12, 2018 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Mainstream Media and the Mathematics of Conspiracies

Mainstream Media and the Mathematics of Conspiracies

Richard Charnin
Dec. 31, 2017

Mainstream media pundits who called me a JFK / Seth Rich “Conspiracy Theorist”  avoided mathematical proofs in my blog posts, five books and the 84-page Moore complaint.  They also failed to mention that I was the only analyst in the universe to exactly forecast the electoral vote in each of the last three elections. Granted, a combination of skill and luck. My Blog  Posts: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ib27G_vDNtQDNLDR8rXiU2LJLCn7Hspd4g5SKtQw1CM/edit#

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/12/14/2017-alabama-true-vote-75-turnout-of-of-clinton-voters-but-only-45-of-trump-voters/

https://www.scribd.com/document/367999441/Moore-Voter-Fraud-Complaint

The True Pundit: https://truepundit.com/roy-moore-takes-polygraph-files-complaint-election-fraud-dems-cheated-finally-proof/ The election experts, who submitted affidavits in the complaint, agree that the irregularities in 20 precincts of Jefferson County alone are enough to reverse the outcome of the election. Richard Charnin, who holds three degrees in applied mathematics, and who has written four books on election fraud, calculates the probability of the election results in these precincts happening naturally is “less than one in 15 billion.”

INFOWARS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpmJf58mDMQ

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-analysis/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/28/politics/roy-moore-files-complaint/index.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAi_jcB0pks
Porter also defended the campaign against questions about one of the election experts that it cited in the court brief, Richard Charnin. Charnin has claimed there is a “less than one in 15 billion” chance that voter fraud played no role in the Alabama outcome. Bash questioned Charnin’s credentials, noting he has previously used mathematical analysis to claim that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was a conspiracy.

The Hill: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/366689-moore-camp-warns-of-consequences-if-jones-is-certified-as-alabama-winner Moore and his campaign filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Montgomery, Alabama, listing several allegations and called for “a new special election.” His complaint alleges that out-of-state residents had been allowed to vote and that election fraud experts had concluded through statistical analyses that fraud had taken place. One of the election experts Moore cites is Richard Charnin, who also posts about JFK conspiracy theories and the murder of DNC staffer, Seth Rich.

Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/12/28/roy-moore-asks-alabama-court-for-a-new-election/?utm_term=.367f6ed15013   Richard Charnin, who provided the court with an argument that there was just enough possible fraud to swing the election, claimed to have “mathematically” proved a conspiracy behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In 2016, Charnin alleged that mass election fraud had stolen key Democratic primaries from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), to the benefit of eventual nominee Hillary Clinton.

NPR: https://www.npr.org/2017/12/28/574222257/fact-check-where-roy-moores-voter-fraud-claims-fall-flat  Richard Charnin, one of those so-called experts, is a well-known conspiracy theorist whose blog contains sections about the John F. Kennedy assassination and claims that Trump won the popular vote in the 2016 election — even though he in fact lost it by almost 3 million votes.

LAW AND CRIME: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/in-effort-to-delay-vote-certification-roy-moore-uses-election-expert-who-is-jfk-and-seth-rich-conspiracy-theorist/ Nearly three weeks have passed, and Moore has still refused to concede to Democrat Doug Jones who won the election by more than 20,000 votes. The Alabama Secretary of State is expected to certify the election results on Thursday (and says he plans to despite the complaint). The complaint, filed in Alabama state court, also called for a new election. However, probably most entertaining (troubling? frightening?), is that in the complaint, Moore’s attorneys attach several affidavits from so-called election experts including Richard Charnin, who calculated that the probability of the elections results in these precincts happening naturally is ‘less than one in 15 billion.”

RAW STORY: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/12/roy-moores-voter-fraud-expert-is-a-notorious-crank-who-says-he-mathematically-proved-plot-to-kill-jfk/ Richard Charnin, the purported “expert” in voter fraud who has been cited by the Roy Moore campaign to claim that Democrat Doug Jones did not legitimately win this month’s Alabama Senate special election, is a notorious conspiracy theorist who has claimed that he has “mathematically proved” that there was a vast conspiracy to assassinate former President John F. Kennedy. As noted by CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins, Charnin in 2014 published a book called “Reclaiming Science: the JFK Conspiracy,” which was described as “a mathematical analysis of unnatural deaths, witness testimony, altered evidence and media disinformation” about Kennedy’s assassination in 1963. In essence, the book examines purportedly “unnatural” deaths of key people related to the supposed assassination plot — and concludes that it’s mathematically impossible for their deaths to be a coincidence. “Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy is based on a statistical analysis of unnatural JFK-related deaths, Dealey Plaza eyewitness observations, medical, acoustic and photographic evidence,” reads the book’s description. “Warren Commission defenders and the Corporate Media avoid the evidence and continue to promote the bogus Single Bullet Theory and that Oswald was the lone shooter, despite overwhelming evidence that he was not on the 6th floor of the Texas Book Depository.” Collins says that Charnin has written extensively on his personal blog about both voter fraud conspiracies and has also calculated the probabilities that the DNC had former staffer Seth Rich murdered to cover up his ties to WikiLeaks.

The Telegraph-UK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/28/roy-moore-launches-legal-challenge-against-alabama-election/” It cited “irregularities in 20 precincts” of the state’s Jefferson County which it said were “enough to reverse the outcome of the election,” quoting the views of conspiracy theorist Richard Charnin who claims the 2004 presidential election and 2016 Democratic primary were also rigged”.

NY Magazine: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/12/roy-moore-files-lawsuit-alleging-voter-fraud-in-alabama-race.html One of the experts Moore cites is Richard Charnin, who says the probability that the election results are accurate is “less than one in 15 billion.” Charnin runs a blog devoted to “JFK conspiracy and systemic election fraud analysis,” and is known for pushing dubious voter-fraud claims, like that George W. Bush stole the 2004 election from John Kerry, Bernie Sanders is the rightful winner of the 2016 Democratic primary, and President Trump actually beat Hillary Clinton in the popular vote, not just the Electoral College.

Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/moore-election-lawsuit-alabama-fraud-761364Since the election, which marked the first time a Republican had lost a Senate election in Alabama in over two decades, Moore has refused to concede to Jones. The suit cites three “national election integrity experts” who state fraud occurred during December 12’s special election and includes Moore’s claim of passing a polygraph test to prove he did not commit any acts of sexual misconduct or molestation with teenage girls, according to AL.com. “This is not a Republican or Democrat issue as election integrity should matter to everyone,” Moore said according to AL.com. “We call on Secretary of State Merrill to delay certification until there is a thorough investigation of what three independent election experts agree took place: election fraud sufficient to overturn the outcome of the election.”

New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/us/politics/roy-moore-block-election.htmlIt was not immediately clear when a judge would consider Mr. Moore’s complaint or the affidavits from several people his campaign described as experts in elections; To support his arguments, Mr. Moore included affidavits from several people his campaign described as experts in elections; one has claimed to have “mathematically proved a conspiracy to assassinate” President John F. Kennedy. (Mr. Moore has himself indulged in conspiracy theories, including that former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States.)

BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42501154Mr Moore’s lawsuit alleges that there were voting irregularities in 20 precincts and calls for a fraud investigation and a new election. One of the election experts cited in the suit is Richard Charnin, a conspiracy theorist who also claims there was widespread voter fraud against Donald Trump in the presidential election. Mr Moore’s lawyer said the purpose of the complaint was to “preserve evidence of potential election fraud and to postpone the certification of Alabama’s Special Election by Secretary of State John Merrill until a thorough investigation of potential election fraud, that improperly altered the outcome of this election”.

NBC: https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/amp/roy-moore-alleges-voter-fraud-files-challenge-election-defeat-n833041?amp_js_v=0.1 The statement gives few details of the purported irregularities, which it says were substantiated “with a reasonable degree of statistical and mathematical certainty” by three election experts.The statement identifies only one of the experts, Richard Charnin, whom it quotes as saying the probability that the official election results were accurate was “less than one in 15 billion.” Charnin, who says he has three degrees in applied mathematics, is a prominent figure among believers that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was the result of a conspiracy. He has also argued that the Republicans stole the 2004 presidential election and that Hillary Clinton stole the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

The Hill: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/366689-moore-camp-warns-of-consequences-if-jones-is-certified-as-alabama-winner Porter also defended the campaign against questions about one of the election experts that it cited in the court brief, Richard Charnin. Charnin has claimed there is a “less than one in 15 billion” chance that voter fraud played no role in the Alabama outcome. Bash questioned Charnin’s credentials, noting he has previously used mathematical analysis to claim that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was a conspiracy.

NY DAILY NEWS: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/picture-democracy-ballot-images-article-1.3724556 Roy Moore tried and failed to challenge the outcome of the U.S. Senate special election where he was bested by Democrat Doug Jones. We are grateful that Alabamians rejected Republican Moore, with his bigoted views and documented history of attempts to seduce teen girls, won’t be in the Senate. But count us disappointed that Moore’s ex-colleagues on the Alabama Supreme Court denied him fair opportunity to prove his cockamamie claim that rampant voter fraud denied him so many votes that he should have beaten Jones instead of losing by around 22,000 votes.

THE ATLANTIC: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/roy-moores-last-gasp/549332/Most of the lawsuit focused on what Moore’s attorneys described as electoral anomalies that raise questions about the 22,000-vote margin. They include “expert testimony” from a Florida-based elections analyst named Richard Charnin who wrote in an accompanying letter that there was “overwhelming statistical proof of fraud in Jefferson County.” (Charnin is perhaps best known, to the extent that he is, as a positor of conspiracy theories about the assassination of John F. Kennedy and, more recently, the 2016 murder of Seth Rich, a staffer with the Democratic National Committee.) Moore alleges that in Republican precincts in the county, there was an unexplained drop-off in votes by people who checked off a straight party-line vote for the GOP but did not vote for Moore.

THE GUARDIAN: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/28/alabama-election-roy-moore-files-lawsuit-to-stop-doug-jones-certification The filing cited “experts” including Richard Charnin, who has a blog dedicated to John F Kennedy conspiracy theories and has also floated conspiracies over the 2016 death of Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee staffer. Another cited authority, James Condit Jr, has espoused antisemitic views and promoted conspiracies about a supposed Jewish takeover of the Vatican.

DAILY DOT: https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/roy-moore-election-challenge/  Richard Charnin, who prognosticates elections online, said he saw enough evidence to say that the election could have been swung illegally for Doug Jones. Charnin’s previous claim to fame is that he thinks it’s mathematically proven that John F. Kennedy’s assassination was a conspiracy. “I mathematically proved a conspiracy to assassinate JFK – and cover it up,” Charnin says on his website. “JFK Calc is a spreadsheet database of suspicious and unnatural witness deaths and other statistical anomalies. Many witnesses who were called to testify in four investigations died unnaturally. The probability is one in trillions – absolute mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

LAGNIAPPEMOBILE https://lagniappemobile.com/roy-moore-files-lawsuit-stop-election-certification/ All three experts submitted affidavits to the court along with Moore’s complaint, though only one was identified by the Moore campaign in its statement announcing the legal challenge. Richard Charnin is quoted as saying the probability of the election results in certain precincts in Jefferson County happening naturally is “less than one in 15 billion.” Charnin is no stranger to post-election controversy, though. He has a history of making similar claims after races won by both parties like the 2004 presidential election of George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton’s victory in the 2016 Democratic primary. According to the New York Times, Charnin has also claims to have “mathematically proved a conspiracy to assassinate” President John F. Kennedy.

 

NY DAILY NEWS: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/judge-denies-roy-moore-attempt-delay-alabama-senate-results-article-1.3723608 One “expert” named by Moore was Richard Charnin, who has claimed to have “mathematically proved a conspiracy to assassinate” President John F. Kennedy. A website run Charnin specializes in writings about election fraud and notes about JFK conspiracies. In a blog post from earlier this month, Charnin cites the “the FACT that the recorded vote is ALWAYS fraudulent” and claims that President Trump won the 2016 popular vote, which he lost by nearly 3 million. While Charnin calling the Alabama victory of Jones fraudulent is therefore not surprising, Moore’s camp said that a thorough investigation should be launched based on his expertise.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on December 31, 2017 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

2017 Alabama True Vote: 75% turnout of Clinton voters but only 45% of Trump voters?

Richard Charnin
Dec.14, 2017

My Books
Trump Won the True Vote
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
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
LINKS TO  POSTS

2017 Alabama Senate True Vote Model

In 2016, Trump won the state by 589,000 votes: 62.08-34.36%.
There were 2,123,372 total recorded votes.

In the Senate election, Jones won by 20,715 votes: 49.9-48.4% .
There were 1,344,438 total recorded votes.

Returning 2016 Voter Turnout 

Did 75% of Clinton and 45% of Trump voters return in 2017?
That’s what was required to match the recorded vote.

Clinton Trump Moore margin
75%.. 45%.. -20,715 Recorded vote
70%.. 50%.. 70,577 True Vote Model base case
65%.. 55%.. 161,011
60%.. 60%.. 251,446 Equal turnout

True Vote Model: Use identical exit poll recorded vote shares of returning and new voters, but adjust 2016 voter turnout to 70% Clinton and 50% Trump.

Sensitivity Analysis
Base case scenario: Moore has 4% of Clinton and 92% of Trump voters.
Moore wins by 51.8-46.5% (71,000 votes)

Worst case scenario: Moore has 2% of Clinton and 90% of Trump voters.
Moore wins by 50.1-48.3% (24,000 votes)

Best case scenario: Moore has 6% of Clinton and 94% of Trump voters.
Moore wins by 53.5-44.8% (117,000 votes)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YoXVkz6KGUoMzEDJBxwROEaukSkgqWVHX3qy_lBxIgc/edit#gid=1736734781

https://www.scribd.com/document/367999441/Moore-Voter-Fraud-Complaint

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/alabama-exit-polls/?utm_term=.8906eed4d60f

Recorded vote match: Returning voter turnout: Clinton 75%; Trump 45% 

2016  2017 Returning  Vote
Turnout Voters Pct Jones Moore Oth
Clinton 75% 541,761 40.3% 96.0% 4.0% 0%
Trump 45% 587,210 43.7% 7.0% 92.0% 1%
Other 60% 44,927 3.3% 47.0% 24.0% 29%
DNV (new) 170,539 12.7% 52.0% 46.0% 2%
 Total 1,344,438  100% 49.91% 48.43% 1.66%
 Votes   671,151 650,436 22,811
 Recorded     49.92% 48.38% 1.70%

2016 Returning voter turnout: Clinton 70%; Trump 50% 

 2017 Returning    
2016 Turnout Voters  Pct Jones Moore Other
Clinton 70% 505,644 37.6% 96.0% 4.0% 0.0%
Trump 50% 652,456 48.5% 7.0% 92.0% 1.0%
Other 60% 44,927 3.3% 47.0% 24.0% 29.0%
DNV(new) 141,411 10.5% 52.0% 46.0% 2.0%
 Total 63.32% 1,344,438  True Vote 46.54% 51.79% 1.66%
 Votes 1,344,438 625,740 696,317 22,382
 Recorded 49.92% 48.38% 1.70%
True Vote 
 Sensitivity Analysis
Moore% Clinton
Moore 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%
% Trump Moore
94% 52.0% 52.4% 52.8% 53.1% 53.5%
93% 51.5% 51.9% 52.3% 52.7% 53.0%
92% 51.0% 51.4% 51.8% 52.2% 52.5%
91% 50.6% 50.9% 51.3% 51.7% 52.1%
90% 50.1% 50.4% 50.8% 51.2% 51.6%
Jones
94% 46.3% 45.9% 45.6% 45.2% 44.8%
93% 46.8% 46.4% 46.1% 45.7% 45.3%
92% 47.3% 46.9% 46.5% 46.2% 45.8%
91% 47.8% 47.4% 47.0% 46.7% 46.3%
90% 48.3% 47.9% 47.5% 47.1% 46.8%
Moore  margin
94% 5.7% 6.4% 7.2% 7.9% 8.7%
93% 4.7% 5.5% 6.2% 7.0% 7.7%
92% 3.7% 4.5% 5.2% 6.0% 6.8%
91% 2.8% 3.5% 4.3% 5.0% 5.8%
90% 1.8% 2.6% 3.3% 4.1% 4.8%
Moore margin (000)
94% 76 87 97 107 117
93% 63 74 84 94 104
92% 50 60 71 81 91
91% 37 47 58 68 78
90% 24 34 44 55 65

 

 
3 Comments

Posted by on December 14, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

Trump Won the True Vote

Richard Charnin
Dec. 5, 2017

Look inside the book: Trump Won the True Vote

Mainstream media pundits claim that Clinton won the primary and presidential election by three million votes. It’s a myth. They fail to consider the FACT that the recorded vote is ALWAYS fraudulent.

A True Vote Model analysis indicates Trump won the popular as well as the electoral vote. The pundits always assume that the recorded vote is accurate but never consider the fraud factor. The historical statistical evidence is conclusive: every election is fraudulent.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 5, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: ,

2016 Election: Introduction to my upcoming book

Richard Charnin
Nov. 13, 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

Introduction

The mainstream media pundits claim that Clinton won the primary and presidential election by three million votes. It’s a myth. The pundits fail to consider the FACT that the recorded vote is ALWAYS fraudulent. A True Vote Model analysis indicates Trump won the popular as well as the electoral vote.

The pundits always assume that the recorded vote is accurate but never consider the fraud factor. The historical statistical evidence is conclusive: every election is fraudulent. The recorded vote is NEVER equal to the true vote.

The establishment-dominated media was in the tank for Hillary Clinton in the primary and general elections.

The claim that Clinton won the popular vote is quoted ad nauseam in the media, academia and by corrupt politicians. They persist in promoting the fully discredited meme of Russian “hackers” stealing the election from Clinton. But there is not one iota of proof that the Russians had anything to do with it. Included in the appendix are two memos from the Veteran Intelligence Professional for Sanity (VIPS) to Obama and Trump which prove that the Russians did not hack the vote. Election Fraud is always an inside job.

Sanders and Trump drew much larger crowds than Clinton. They won the unscientific online polls by large margins. Trump’s Republican base was solid. Clinton’s Democratic base was fractured by defecting Sanders voters.

Millions of Sanders primary voters stayed home or voted for Jill Stein or Donald Trump. Trump won Independents by a solid majority (at least 8% higher than Clinton). There was a surge of late deciders to Trump after Labor Day.

Former interim Democratic National Committee chairwoman Donna Brazile delivered a bombshell in her book “Hacked”. She claimed that the Hillary Clinton campaign seized control of the Democratic Party as far back as August 2015. Well, this was not a bombshell to researchers who have presented massive evidence that the primary was rigged from Day One.

In ‘77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud’, I provided mathematical evidence that the primary was rigged for Clinton. The exit poll discrepancies were in one direction only; they showed that Sanders did consistently better in the polls than the recorded vote. It was solid proof that the primaries were rigged.

But just because the unadjusted exit polls were quite accurate in prior elections and the 2016 primary does not mean they reflected the true vote in the presidential election.

Six major media corporations (the National Election Pool) fund exit pollster Edison Research. The pollsters had to show that Clinton won the pre-election and unadjusted polls to lend credence to her 2.8 million recorded popular vote margin.

In 2008, 2012 and 2016 my pre-election models exactly forecast the recorded electoral votes. Trump was projected to win 306 recorded electoral votes based on adjustments made to nine final pre-election polls. It also forecast that he would have had 350 electoral votes in a fraud-free election.

Democratic Party-ID was over-weighted in the pre-election and exit polls at the expense of Independents. A post-election exit poll analysis based on the Gallup voter affiliation survey conducted the week prior to the election confirmed the forecast. But Trump did much better than the unadjusted exit polls indicated. The Gallup survey showed that Independents comprised 41% of the electorate on Election Day, with 31% Democrats and 28% Republicans.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on November 13, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Race: 2016 National Exit Poll vs. Census

Richard Charnin
Oct. 22, 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

The National Exit Poll (NEP) shows Trump winning white voters by 57-37%. Clinton had 89% of Blacks and 66% of Latinos. As always, the NEP was forced to closely match the recorded vote.

Clinton won the recorded vote by 2.8 million votes (48.3-46.2%).
Clinton won the NEP by 2.2 million votes (47.9-46.3%).
Clinton won the Census-adjusted NEP by 800,000 votes (47.4-46.8%).

Trump wins by 3.6 million votes (48.6-46.1%) after adjusting the recorded vote for illegals, disenfranchised and machine vote flips.

Compare the Census (0.3% margin of error for votes cast) to the NEP.  Which is closer to the truth?

Race Census MoE NEP
White 73.30% (0.4%) 71%
Black 12.45% (1.1%) 12%
Latino 9.22% (1.5%) 11%
Asian 3.67% (1.9%) 4%
Other  1.34% …… 2%

National Exit Poll (forced to match the recorded vote)  http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls/national/president

NEP 2016 Clinton Trump Other
White 71.0% 37% 57% 6%
Black 12.0% 89% 8% 3%
Latino 11.0% 66% 28% 6%
Asian 4.0% 65% 29% 8%
Other 2.0% 56% 36% 8%
Calculated 100.0% 47.93% 46.31% 5.76%
Recorded 136,216 48.25% 46.17% 5.58%

Recorded votes vs. Census votes cast

According to the 2016 Census, 137.5 million votes were cast (0.3% margin of error).
136.2 million votes were recorded.
Therefore there were 1.3 million uncounted votes
Clinton won the recorded vote by 2.8 million: 65.7-62.9 (48.3-46.2%)

 Scenario I:  Estimated Adjustments to the Recorded Vote

1- According to Greg Palast, 1 million voters were disenfranchised due to Cross-check.
2- Assume 1.3 million additional voters were disenfranchised.
3- Researchers claim there were at least 1 million illegal voters.
Matching the Census 137.5 million: There were 1.3 million uncounted votes.

Assumptions:
1) Clinton had 80% of illegal and disenfranchised voters
2) 3.2 million votes (4.8%) were flipped on voting machines from Trump to Clinton.
3) 0.6 million votes were flipped from third parties to Clinton.

Trump is a winner by 3.3 million votes (48.2-45.8%}

Votes  Clinton Trump Other
Illegal 1.0 80% 15% 5%
Disenfran. 2.3 80% 15% 5%
Net Vote Flip 4.0 5% 80% 15%
Adjustment Total Clinton Trump Other Margin
Recorded  136.22 65.72 62.89 7.61 2.83
Share   48.25% 46.17% 5.59% 2.08%
Illegal -1.0 -0.80 -0.15 -0.05 -0.65
Disenfran. 2.3 1.84 0.35 0.12 1.50
Net Vote Flip 0.0 -3.80 3.20 0.60 -7.00
AdjVote 137.52 62.96 66.28 8.27 3.33
 Share   45.78% 48.20% 6.02%  2.42%

NEP Race Demographic: Census and share of Whites matched to the adjusted  vote

Race Census Pct Clinton Trump Other
White 73.30% 34.7% 58.9% 6.4%
Black 12.45% 89% 8% 3%
Latino 9.22% 66% 28% 6%
Asian 3.67% 65% 27% 8%
Other 1.36% 56% 36% 8%
Adj Share 100.0% 45.78% 48.20% 6.02%
Votes 137.52 62.96 66.28 8.27
Recorded 100.0% 48.25% 46.17% 5.59%

Sensitivity Analysis: Adjusted NEP

Illegal to Clinton
Vote Flip 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%
to Clinton Trump 
3.0% 48.2% 48.3% 48.3%
5.0% 48.1% 48.20% 48.3%
7.0% 48.1% 48.1% 48.2%
Clinton 
3.0% 45.8% 45.7% 45.7%
5.0% 45.9% 45.78% 45.7%
7.0% 45.9% 45.8% 45.8%
Trump Vote
3.0% 66.26 66.36 66.46
5.0% 66.18 66.28 66.38
7.0% 66.10 66.20 66.30
Margin
3.0% 3.28 3.48 3.68
5.0% 3.12 3.33 3.52
7.0% 2.96 3.17 3.36

Sensitivity Analysis: Trump shares of whites and blacks

Census
% of Whites
56.9% 57.9% 58.86% 59.86% 60.86%
% of Blacks Trump
10% 46.98% 47.72% 48.45% 49.18% 49.92%
9% 46.86% 47.59% 48.33% 49.06% 49.79%
8% 46.73% 47.47% 48.20% 48.93% 49.67%
7% 46.61% 47.34% 48.08% 48.81% 49.54%
6% 46.49% 47.22% 47.95% 48.68% 49.42%
Clinton
10% 47.00% 46.27% 45.53% 44.80% 44.07%
9% 47.12% 46.39% 45.66% 44.93% 44.19%
8% 47.25% 46.52% 45.78% 45.05% 44.32%
7% 47.37% 46.64% 45.91% 45.17% 44.44%
6% 47.50% 46.77% 46.03% 45.30% 44.57%
 Share Margin
10% -0.02% 1.45% 2.92% 4.38% 5.85%
9% -0.27% 1.20% 2.67% 4.13% 5.60%
8% -0.51% 0.95% 2.42% 3.88% 5.35%
7% -0.76% 0.70% 2.17% 3.63% 5.10%
6% -1.01% 0.45% 1.92% 3.39% 4.85%
 Vote Margin
10% -0.02 1.99 4.01 6.03 8.04
9% -0.36 1.65 3.67 5.68 7.70
8% -0.71 1.31 3.33 5.34 7.36
7% -1.05 0.97 2.98 5.00 7.01
6% -1.39 0.62 2.64 4.66 6.67

Scenario II:  Adjustments to the Recorded Vote

Base case assumptions: Illegals, disenfranchised voters and machine vote flips

1) Illegals: 80% of 1 million for Clinton
2) Uncounted: 80% of 7 million disenfranchised and cross-checked for Clinton
3) Voting machines: 4.1 million (net) Trump votes  and 0.5 million third-party votes flipped to Clinton

 Adjustments to the Recorded Vote

Assumption
 Votes to Clinton Trump Other
Illegal 1.0 80% 15% 5%
Disinfran. 7.0 80% 15% 5%
Net Vote Flip 5.0 8% 82% 10%
Total Clinton Trump Other Margin
Recorded  136.22 65.72 62.89 7.61 2.83
    48.25% 46.17% 5.59% 2.08%
Illegal -1.0 -0.80 -0.15 -0.05
Disenfran. 7.0 5.60 1.05 0.35
Net Vote Flip 0.0 -4.60 4.10 0.50
True Vote 142.22 65.92 67.89 8.41 1.97
 Share   46.35% 47.74% 5.91% 1.39%
 
Illegal to Clinton
 
Vote Flip 75.0% 80.0% 85.0%
to Clinton   Trump Vote
6.0% 67.94 67.99 68.04
8.0% 67.84 67.89 67.94
10.0% 67.74 67.79 67.84
Flip Trump
6.0% 47.77% 47.81% 47.84%
8.0% 47.70% 47.74% 47.77%
10.0% 47.63% 47.67% 47.70%
Flip Clinton
6.0% 46.32% 46.28% 46.25%
8.0% 46.39% 46.35% 46.32%
10.0% 46.46% 46.42% 46.39%
Flip Margin
6.0% 2.07 2.17 2.27
8.0% 1.87 1.97 2.07
10.0% 1.67 1.77 1.87

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 22, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , ,

Sensitivity of 2016 Electoral and Popular Vote to Registered Voter Turnout

Sensitivity of 2016 Electoral and Popular Vote to Registered Voter Turnout

Richard Charnin
Oct.4, 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

Eight voter turnout scenarios:
Trump wins the base case (86% Dem, 91% Rep) by 328-210 EV and 1.15 million votes.

Trump needs 89% Dem and 88% Rep turnout to match his 306 EV.
Clinton needs an implausible 92% Dem, 85% Rep turnout to tie Trump at 269 EV.
Clinton needs 93% Dem, 87% Rep turnout to win by 298-240 EV and 3.12 million.
Clinton needs 92.5% Dem, 84.5% Rep turnout to match her 2.8 million margin.

Trump vote margins are conservative since the calculations are based on state exit poll vote shares forced to match the recorded vote.

Sensitivity analysis (assume constant 87% Independent voter turnout)

Turnout Trump Votes (000) Vote Shares
Dem Rep EV Trump Clinton Margin Trump Clinton
0.85 0.92 332 64,647 62,885 1,762 47.5 46.2
0.86 0.91 328 64,347 63,195 1,152 47.2 46.4
0.87 0.90 321 64,047 63,505 542 47.0 46.6
0.88 0.89 315 63,747 63,815 -68 46.8 46.9
0.89 0.88 305 63,447 64,125 -678 46.6 47.1
0.90 0.87 289 63,147 64,435 -1,288 46.4 47.3
0.91 0.86 289 62,847 64,745 -1,899 46.1 47.5
0.92 0.85 269 62,546 65,055 -2,509 45.9 47.8
0.93 0.84 240 62,246 65,365 -3,119 45.7 48.0
0.94 0.83 240 61,946 65,675 -3,729 45.5 48.2

Given these facts:
– Census 2016 registered voter turnout of 87%.
– Gallup national voter affiliation (Party-ID) on Election Day:
(41% Independents, 31% Democrats and 28% Republicans)
– 28 exit poll states: vote shares forced to match recorded vote.
– 23 non-exit poll states recorded vote shares .

Assumptions: Bernie Sanders defectors…
– 5% of registered Democrats stayed home
– 4% voted for Jill Stein and 1% for Trump.
Then….
1. Adjusted Voter Turnout: 78.6% Dem, 91.6% Rep, 91.6% Ind
2. Adjusted Gallup Party-ID: 29.5% Dem, 29.1% Rep, 41.4% Ind
3. Gallup Party-ID calculated for each of the 28 exit polled states
4. Trump wins by 48.13-45.33% (3.81 million votes) with 332-206 EV

Since the 28 state exit polls were forced to match the recorded vote and likely inflated for Clinton (as were the 23 states not polled), Trump probably did better than indicated. 

…………..Clinton Trump
28 states 45.67% 47.67% Exit polls (Gallup/NEP-adjusted)
Votes…… 50,664 52,776


23 states 43.71% 50.40% Not exit polled. Assume recorded vote.
Votes…… 11,079 12,777


51 states 45.33% 48.13% (conservative- Trump may have done better)
Votes…… 61,744 65,554

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=857963642

No automatic alt text available.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on October 4, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis