RSS

Category Archives: Uncategorized

2016 Election Scenario Analysis

Richard Charnin
Nov. 23, 2016

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 Exit Poll
LINKS TO  POSTS

This is an analysis of four election scenarios. 

1. Gallup Party-ID and True Vote Model (TVM) vote shares
2. Gallup Party-ID and National Exit Poll (NEP) vote shares
3. NEP Party-ID and NEP vote shares
4. NEP Party-ID and TVM vote shares

It is a FACT: the Reported vote is NEVER equal to the True Vote. The pundits always brainwash the public into assuming that the Reported vote represents True voter intent. 

The National Exit Poll is always forced to match the Reported vote  (view Scenario 3).
NEP Party-ID is 36D-33R-31I.
Clinton leads Trump by 2.03 million votes: 47.7-46.2%.
Others (including Johnson and Stein) have just 6.1% combined. Stein has 1%.

The True Vote Model (Scenario 1) uses Gallup Party-ID: 40I-32D-28R.
Trump leads Clinton by 2.18 million votes: 45.7-44.0%.  How many of the Other 10.3% voted for Jill Stein? Surely more than 1%. Probably close to 5%.

It is clear that the third party vote is a key factor. Jill Stein had an implausibly low 1% share. Where did her votes go?  Compare Trump’s 2.18 million True Vote margin in Scenario 1, in which third parties had 10.3%, to his negative margins in scenarios 2 and 3 where third parties had 6-7%. The differential  indicates that Stein did better than 1%. Her votes were stolen.

Exit poll discrepancies: http://tdmsresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2016-Presidential-Election-Table_Nov-17.-2016.jpg

 True Vote Sensitivity Analysis: Calculate Trump’s vote margins over a range of his shares of Republicans and Independents.

 1. True Vote Model  Party-ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 32% 89% 9% 2%
Rep 28% 7% 90% 3%
Ind 40% 34% 44% 22%
TVM Total 100% 44.0% 45.7% 10.3%
Votes (mil) 133.26 58.69 60.87 13.70
2. Gallup/NEP   Party-ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 32% 89% 8% 3%
Rep 28% 8% 88% 4%
Ind 40% 42% 46% 12%
Total 100% 47.5% 45.6% 6.9%
Votes (mil) 133.26 63.33 60.77 9.17
3. NEP/NEP Party-ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 36% 89% 8% 3%
Rep 33% 8% 88% 4%
Ind 31% 42% 46% 12%
Total 100% 47.7% 46.2% 6.1%
Votes (mil) 133.26 63.57 61.54 8.16
4. NEP/TVM Party-ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 36% 89% 9% 2%
Rep 33% 7% 90% 3%
Ind 31% 34% 44% 22%
Total 100% 44.9% 46.6% 8.5%
Votes (mil) 133.26 59.82 62.07 11.37

True Vote Model Sensitivity Analysis

Scenario 1 Trump % Rep
Trump 85.0% 87.0% 89.0% 91.0% 93.0%
% Ind Trump
48% 46.2% 46.7% 47.3% 47.8% 48.4%
44% 44.6% 45.1% 45.7% 46.2% 46.8%
40% 43.0% 43.5% 44.1% 44.6% 45.2%
Clinton
48% 43.6% 43.0% 42.4% 41.9% 41.3%
44% 45.2% 44.6% 44.0% 43.5% 42.9%
40% 46.8% 46.2% 45.6% 45.1% 44.5%
 Share Margin
48% 2.6% 3.7% 4.8% 6.0% 7.1%
44% -0.6% 0.5% 1.6% 2.8% 3.9%
40% -3.8% -2.7% -1.6% -0.4% 0.7%
 Vote (000)  Margin 
48% 3.5 5.0 6.4 7.9 9.4
44% -0.8 0.7 2.2 3.7 5.2
40% -5.1 -3.6 -2.1 -0.6 0.9

Summary Comparison (based on Party-ID)

Unadj   Reported   True Vote  
Vote Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Avg 48.39% 45.80% 46.14% 49.65% 44.57% 48.45%
Diff   -2.59%   3.51%   3.88%
OH 47.0% 47.1% 43.5% 52.1% 43.9% 51.4%
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% 48.2% 45.2%
         
% Share of Ind  Unadj   Reported   True Vote  
Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Avg 47.33% 40.30% 39.17% 53.09% 36.11% 50.22%
Diff   -7.03%   13.92%   14.11%
OH 50.0% 34.0% 38.0% 52.0% 38.0% 52.0%
NC 44.0% 44.0% 38.5% 56.0% 35.0% 49.0%
NJ 67.0% 28.0% 51.0% 48.0% 36.0% 52.0%
PA 50.0% 43.0% 36.0% 56.0% 32.0% 53.0%
MI 32.0% 52.7% 35.0% 56.3% 45.0% 56.3%
MO 45.0% 40.0% 28.0% 62.0% 39.0% 45.0%
IA 42.0% 41.0% 35.0% 51.0% 35.0% 51.0%
FL 48.0% 43.0% 48.0% 50.5% 32.0% 53.0%
WI 48.0% 37.0% 43.0% 46.0% 43.0% x46.0%
 
23 Comments

Posted by on November 23, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Implausible: the WI Unadjusted Exit Poll

Richard Charnin
Nov. 16, 2016

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

Trump won four key battleground states (FL, NC, PA, WI). Unadjusted exit polls indicate that Clinton won all four and had 302 EV. But statistical analysis indicates Trump very likely won the four states.

View the summary tables for 9 Battleground states below.

Clinton won the WI unadjusted exit poll  by 48.2-44.3%
Trump won the reported vote (party-ID) by 47.9-46.9%.
Trump won the reported vote (gender) by 48.4-46.6%.
The  CNN adjusted exit poll calculation did not exactly match the reported vote.

WI Reported Vote (CNN)
Trump wins: 47.9-46.9% (27,000 vote margin)
Calculated: Trump wins: 48.1-46.1%
Trump won Independents: 46-43%
Party ID: 35D- 34R- 30I

WI Unadjusted exit poll
Clinton wins: 48.2-44.3% (118,000 vote margin)
Clinton won Independents: 48-37%  (implausible)
Party ID: 35D- 34R- 30I

WI True Vote Model 
Trump wins 48.2-45.2% (45,000 vote margin)
Trump wins Independents: 46-43%
Party ID: 33.9D -32.6R -33.5I (derived from Gallup)

CNN National Exit Poll (matched to the recorded vote)
Clinton wins 47.8-47.4%
Trump won Independents: 48-42%
National Party ID: 37D- 33R- 30I

True Vote Model
Gallup Party-ID:  32D- 28R- 40I (8% Party ID  advantage to Independents)
Before Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA)
Trump wins the popular vote: 44.4-42.9% (1.6 million vote margin)
Trump wins the recorded Electoral vote: 306-232

True Vote: After Undecided Voter Allocation
Trump wins  48.5%-44.3% (5 million vote margin)
Trump wins the  Electoral Vote: 351-187

Unadjusted Exit Polls: http://tdmsresearch.com/2016/11/10/2016-presidential-election-table/

View Row 380: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sGxtIofohrj3POpwq-85Id2_fYKgvgoWbPZacZw0XlY/edit#gid=1141167047

SUMMARY COMPARISON (based on Party-ID)

Unadj   Reported   True Vote  
Vote Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Avg 48.39% 45.80% 46.14% 49.65% 44.57% 48.45%
Diff   -2.59%   3.51%   3.88%
OH 47.0% 47.1% 43.5% 52.1% 43.9% 51.4%
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% 48.2% 45.2%
         
% Share of Ind  Unadj   Reported   True Vote  
Clinton Trump Clinton Trump Clinton Trump
Avg 47.33% 40.30% 39.17% 53.09% 36.11% 50.22%
Diff   -7.03%   13.92%   14.11%
OH 50.0% 34.0% 38.0% 52.0% 38.0% 52.0%
NC 44.0% 44.0% 38.5% 56.0% 35.0% 49.0%
NJ 67.0% 28.0% 51.0% 48.0% 36.0% 52.0%
PA 50.0% 43.0% 36.0% 56.0% 32.0% 53.0%
MI 32.0% 52.7% 35.0% 56.3% 45.0% 56.3%
MO 45.0% 40.0% 28.0% 62.0% 39.0% 45.0%
IA 42.0% 41.0% 35.0% 51.0% 35.0% 51.0%
FL 48.0% 43.0% 48.0% 50.5% 32.0% 53.0%
WI 48.0% 37.0% 43.0% 46.0% 43.0% 46.0%

WISCONSIN

Unadj EP Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein Other
Dem 35% 91% 7% 1% 1% 0%
Rep 35% 6% 90% 3% 0% 1%
Ind 30% 48% 37% 6% 2% 7%
Calc 100% 48.4% 45.1% 3.2% 1.0% 2%
Unadj 100% 48.2% 44.3% 2.0% 1.3% 4%
Votes (000) 3,014 1,453 1,335 60 39 127
Margin -118 -3.9%
Reported Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein Other
Dem 35% 91% 7% 1% 1% 0%
Rep 35% 6% 90% 3% 0% 1%
Ind 30% 43% 46% 6% 2% 3%
Calc 100% 46.9% 47.8% 3.2% 1.0% 1%
Reported 100% 46.9% 47.9% 2.2% 0.7% 2.3%
Votes (000) 3,014 1,380 1,404 106 31 93
Margin 24 0.93%
True Vote Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein Other
Dem 33.9% 91% 7% 1% 1% 0%
Rep 32.6% 6% 90% 3% 0% 1%
Ind 33.5% 43% 46% 6% 2% 2%
TVM bef UVA 95.2% 42.7% 45.7% 4.3% 2.3%
True Vote 100.0% 45.2% 48.2% 4.3% 2.3%
Votes (000) 3,014 1,361 1,452 131 70
Margin 90 3.0%

2016-presidential-election-table_nov-10-2016

 
9 Comments

Posted by on November 16, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Implausible: the NJ Unadjusted Exit Poll

Richard Charnin
Nov. 13, 2016

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

Are we to believe the NJ exit poll?
Clinton won the poll by 59.8-35.8%, an 880,000 vote margin. 
Are we to believe she had 67% of Independents compared to 28% for Trump?

She won the recorded vote with 55.0-41.8%.
But the recorded vote is never equal to the True Vote. 
There is always a fraud factor.
The True Vote Model estimates Clinton won NJ by 50.7-46.4%

JILL STEIN HAD JUST 1%. WHERE DID HER VOTES GO?

CNN National Exit Poll (matched to the recorded vote)
Clinton wins 47.8-47.4%
Trump won Independents: 48-42%
CNN National Party ID: 37D- 33R- 30I 
Gallup party affiliation: 32D-28R-40I 

NJ Recorded Vote (CNN)
Clinton wins: 55.0-41.8% (486,000 vote margin)
Party ID: 43D- 27R- 30I 
Clinton won Independents: 51-38%

NJ Unadjusted exit poll
Clinton wins: 59.8-35.8% (879,000 vote margin)
Party ID: 43D- 27R- 30I
Clinton won Independents: 67-28% (implausible)

NJ True Vote Model
Clinton wins 50.7-46.4% (157,000 vote margin)
Party ID: 25.8D -15.7R -58.5I 
Trump wins Independents: 52-46%

National True Vote Model
Gallup Party-ID:  32D- 28R- 40I 

Before Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA)
Trump wins the popular vote: 44.4-42.9% (1.6 million vote margin)
Trump wins the recorded Electoral vote: 306-232

After Undecided Voter Allocation
Trump wins  48.5%-44.3% (5 million vote margin)
Trump wins the True Electoral Vote: 351-187

View the spreadsheet

New Jersey
Unadjusted EP Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 43% 86% 12% 1% 1%
Rep 27% 10% 82% 6% 2%
Ind 30% 67% 28% 3% 2%
Calc 100% 59.8% 35.7% 3.0% 1.6%
Unadjusted 100% 59.8% 35.8% 3.0% 1.4%
Votes (000) 3,663 2,190 1,311 110 51
    Margin -879    
    Margin -24.0%  
Reported Vote  Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 43% 86% 12% 0% 2%
Rep 27% 10% 82% 7% 1%
Ind 30% 51.0% 48.0% 0.0% 1%
Calc 100% 55.0% 41.7% 1.9% 1.4%
Reported 100% 55.0% 41.8% 1.9% 1.0%
Votes (000) 3,663 2,022 1,536 69 36
    Margin -486    
    Margin -13.3%
True Vote Model Party ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 25.8% 86% 12% 0% 2%
Rep 15.7% 10% 82% 7% 1%
Ind 58.5% 46.0% 52.0% 1.0% 1%
True Vote 100.0% 50.7% 46.4% 1.7% 1.3%
Votes (000) 3,663 1,856 1,699 62 46
    Margin -157    
    Margin -4.3%    

2016-presidential-election-table_nov-10-2016

 
1 Comment

Posted by on November 13, 2016 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,

Implausible: 2016 National Exit Poll; Unadjusted NC Exit Poll

Richard Charnin
Nov. 13, 2016

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

JILL STEIN HAD JUST 1%. WHERE DID HER VOTES GO?

CNN National Exit Poll (matched to the recorded vote)
Clinton wins 47.8-47.4% (implausible)
Trump won Independents: 48-42%
CNN National Party ID: 37D- 33R- 30I (weighted to Dems)
Gallup party affiliation: 32D-27R-40D (weighted to Independents)

NC Recorded Vote (plausible)
Trump wins: 50.5-46.7% 
Party ID: 36D- 31R- 33I (weighted to Dems)
Trump won Independents: 56.5-38.5% (plausible)

NC Unadjusted exit poll (implausible)
Clinton wins: 48.6-46.5% Same Vote shares as recorded but..
Party ID: 36D- 31R- 33I (weighted to Dems)
Independents split: 44-44% (implausible)

NC True Vote Model (plausible)
Trump wins 50.5-46.6%
Party ID: 32.9D -24.2R -42.9I (weighted to Independents)
Trump wins Independents: 58.5-36.5% (plausible)

National True Vote Model (plausible)
Gallup Party-ID: 32D- 27R- 40I (weighted to Independents)

Before Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA) (plausible)
Trump wins the popular vote: 44.4-42.9%
Trump wins the recorded electoral vote: 306-232

After Undecided Voter Allocation (plausible)
Trump wins 48.5%-44.3% (5 million vote margin)
Trump wins the True electoral Vote: 351-187

NC Unadjusted EP Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 36% 91% 8% 1% 0%
Rep 31% 4% 94% 2% 0%
Ind 33% 44% 44% 9% 3%
Calc 100% 48.5% 46.5% 4.0% 1.0%
Unadjusted 100% 48.6% 46.5% 4.0% 0.9%
Votes 4.630 2.250 2.153 0.185 0.042
Margin -0.097    
    Margin -2.1%
NC Reported 2016
NEP Party-ID Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 36% 91% 8% 0% 0%
Rep 31% 4% 94% 1% 0%
Ind 33% 38.5% 56.0% 5.0% 0.5%
Calc 100% 46.7% 50.5% 2.0% 0.8%
Reported 100% 46.7% 50.5% 2.1% 0.7%
Votes 4.630 2.162 2.340 0.097 0.032
Margin 0.178    
    Margin 3.8%
NC True Vote Model Adjusted Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 32.9% 91% 8% 1% 0%
Rep 24.2% 4% 94% 2% 0%
Ind 42.9% 36.5% 58.5% 3.0% 2.0%
True Vote 100.0% 46.6% 50.5% 2.1% 0.9%
Votes (mil) 4.630 2.156 2.337 0.097 0.040
Margin 0.181    
    Margin 3.9%
CNN Party ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 37% 89% 9% 2%
Rep 33% 7% 90% 3%
Ind 30% 42% 48% 10%
Total 100.0% 47.8% 47.4% 4.7%
Gallup Party ID Clinton Trump Other
Dem 32% 89% 9% 2%
Rep 28% 7% 90% 3%
Ind 40% 42% 48% 10%
Total 100.0% 47.2% 47.3% 5.5%
Model Gallup Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem 32.0% 89% 6% 2% 1%
Rep 28.0% 5% 89% 3% 1%
Ind 40.0% 32.6% 43.9% 8.0% 5.0%
Total 94.6% 42.9% 44.4% 4.7% 2.6%
Total-100% 100.0% 45.4% 46.9% 4.9% 2.7%
Electoral Vote   232 306  
2016-presidential-election-table_nov-10-2016
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 13, 2016 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: ,

ELECTION MODEL VS. RECORDED VOTE

Richard Charnin
Nov.9, 2016

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 2016 Election Model  forecast exactly matched the 306-232  electoral vote – just like it did in 2008 and 2012. But  Obama did much better in the True Vote.  Trump won the True Vote by  351-187.  View the post:  2016 Election Model Forecast

Final poll and recorded votes shares
Clinton 47.7, Trump 47.5, Johnson 3.3, Stein 1.0
Who believes Jill Stein had just 1.0%? Who did her votes go to?

Before Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA):
Vote………..Clinton….Trump…..Margin…..Evote
Model………..42.9%…..44.4%…..1.5%…….306
Model………..45.4%…..46.9%…..1.5%…….306 (adjust to 100%)
Recorded……47.7%…..47.5%…..-0.2%……306

75% UVA to Trump:
Model………..44.3%…..48.5%…..4.2%…….351
Trump had a 96% popular vote win probability given a 2.5% margin of error.

Election Model vs. National Exit Poll (Party-ID):
Trump wins the EM by 1.5%.
Clinton wins the NEP by 0.4% (forced to match the recorded vote). 

Forecast vs. Actual 

Election Model Gallup Pct Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Democrats 32% 89% 6% 2% 1%
Republicans 28% 5% 89% 3% 1%
Independents 40% 32.6% 43.9% 8.0% 5.0%
Total 94.6% 42.9% 44.4% 4.7% 2.6%
Total-100% 100.0% 45.4% 46.9% 4.9% 2.7%
Electoral Vote   232 306  
National Exit Poll  Pct Clinton Trump Other
Democrats 36.5% 89% 9% 2%
Republicans 32.5% 7% 90% 3%
Independents 31.0% 42% 48% 10%
Total 100.0% 47.8% 47.4% 4.8%
Electoral Vote   232 306

Election Model: Track Record
Exact EV forecast:
2008: Obama 365
2012: Obama 332
2016: Trump 306 (assuming he won Michigan)

 But the recorded votes were fraudulent.
They won the TRUE VOTE by much more…
2008: Obama 58.0-40.4%, 420 EV
2012: Obama 55.2%, 380 EV
2016: Trump 48.5-44.3%%, 351 EV ( 75% UVA to Trump):

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/president

 
26 Comments

Posted by on November 9, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , ,

Oct. 12, 2016: Online debates, focus groups and strange pre-election polls

Richard Charnin
Oct.12, 2016

Just published: 77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud
Matrix of Deceit 
Proving Election Fraud

Trump led 77-22% in the latest online debate polls of 4 million respondents. He had 59% in the online polls after the first debate. Clinton won the CNN “scientific” poll  of 537 respondents by 57-34%.

But the CNN poll indicated  that Trump did better than expected (Better 63%; Worse 21%; Same 15%). This confirms Trump’s 18% improvement in the online polls from the first debate.

In a CNN focus group, a participant reported: After the debate, they asked all of us in the focus group if we were decided on a candidate. Out of 28 panel members, 5 said they were decided on Clinton, 2 said they were decided on Trump, and 12 said they were going to vote 3rd party. But once they saw the response, they reshot the segment and replaced “3rd party” with “still undecided”.

The Frank Luntz focus group came up with an interesting result to the question:Who are you willing to vote for? Four Clinton voters and five undecideds switched to Trump.

Before the debate Hillary: 8: Trump: 9. After: Hillary: 4; Trump: 18

The latest NBC/WSJ Poll of 447 likely voters shows Clinton surging to an 11 point lead.But just like the other mainstream media pre-election polls, Independent Party ID percentages conflict with the Gallup Party Affiliation Survey.

Is there an NBC pollster Conflict of interest?

NBC Party ID Clinton Trump Stein Johnson
Dem 43.0% 94.0% 4.0% 1.0% 1.0%
Rep 36.0% 4.0% 80.0% 1.0% 15.0%
Ind 12.0% 35.0% 37.0% 10.0% 18.0%
Match 91.0% 46.1% 35.0% 2.0% 8.0%
Poll 92.0% 46.0% 35.0% 2.0% 9.0%

Pre-election polls ask voters whether they lean to the Democrat or the Republican. But Bernie Sanders won the vast majority of Independents who will likely  vote for  Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

Estimated True Vote Model

Model Gallup Clinton Trump Stein Johnson
Dem 32.0% 80.0% 5.0% 10% 5.0%
Rep 28.0% 5.0% 85.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Ind 40.0% 20.0% 25.0% 50.0% 5.0%
VOTE 100.0% 35.0% 35.4% 24.6% 5.0%
Poll 92.0% 46.0% 35.0% 2.0% 9.0%
 
3 Comments

Posted by on October 12, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud

Richard Charnin

Oct. 7, 2016

77 Billion to One: 2016 Election Fraud 

The 2016 Democratic primaries have finally awakened the public to Election Fraud. Millions of voters who were unaware or in denial came to realize that our election system was rigged and that the mainstream media is complicit in covering up Election Fraud.

The media and its cadre of exit poll naysayers in the corporate media don’t dare mention the third-rail of American politics – election fraud. The media pundits remain silent on electronic vote rigging. They maintain that the exit polls are inaccurate and call truth-seeking activists conspiracy buffs.

The media is silent on the 2015 Year in Elections report, an independent research project by 2,000 elections experts from Harvard University and the University of Sydney. The report ranked the United States dead last in electoral integrity among established Western democracies in evaluating the  integrity of 180 national parliamentary and presidential contests held July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2015 in 139 countries worldwide.

This book focuses largely on exit polls since they are the focus of virtually all naysayer arguments. But cumulative vote share analysis is based on actual vote counts and is a companion method. The two mathematical methods confirm each other and overwhelmingly prove election fraud. The State Department relies on exit polls in elections overseas to check for fraud if the discrepancies exceed 2%. There is no such check in the U.S.

Overwhelming evidence shows that Sanders won the primaries, despite the 3 million Clinton vote margin repeated endlessly in the media. He won the vast majority of 18-34 year-old voters.  His positions on Wall Street corruption, universal health care, eliminating student debt, etc. made him an overwhelming favorite among young voters.

 

 
13 Comments

Posted by on October 7, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis