RSS

Tag Archives: election fraud

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.

Advertisements
 
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 margin Winner
75%.. 45%.. -20,715 Recorded Jones
70%.. 50%.. 70,577  Moore  (Base Case scenario)
65%.. 55%.. 161,011 Moore
60%.. 60%.. 251,446 Moore

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
Actual Turnout Voters Pct Jones Moore Other
Clinton 75% 541,761 40.3% 96% 4% 0%
Trump 45% 587,210 43.7% 7% 92% 1%
Other 60% 44,927 3.3% 47% 24% 29%
DNV (new) 170,539 12.7% 52% 46% 2%
 Recorded 1,344,438  100% 49.9% 48.4% 1.7%
 Votes   671,151 650,436 22,811
     

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

True Vote (est.)  2017 Returning    
2016 Turnout Voters  Pct Jones Moore Other
Clinton 70% 505,644 37.6% 96% 4% 0%
Trump 50% 652,456 48.5% 7% 92% 1%
Other 60% 44,927 3.3% 47% 24% 29%
DNV(new) 141,411 10.5% 52% 46% 2%
 Total 63.32% 1,344,438  True Vote 46.5% 51.8% 1.7%
 Votes 1,344,438 625,740 696,317 22,382
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

 

 
4 Comments

Posted by on December 14, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

CLINTON DID NOT WIN THE POPULAR VOTE: UNADJUSTED EXIT POLLS AND RECORDED VOTES ARE BOGUS

Richard Charnin
Sep. 29, 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

This is an analysis of Party-ID, recorded vote shares and unadjusted State Exit Polls. It indicates that Clinton did not win the popular vote by 2.8 million. In fact, she did not win the popular vote.

According to the 2016 Census, 87.3% of registered voters turned out.
If 6% of Democratic voters stayed home because the DNC rigged the primary, then 85% of Democrats, 91% Republicans and 87% Independents voted.

2016 National
Party-ID….Dem Rep Ind

Exit Poll 36.0 33.0 31.0%
Gallup….31.0 28.0 41.0

28 Exit Poll states Party-ID 
WtdAvg 37.4 31.8 30.8%
Average 35.3 32.5 32.2
Gallup.. 31.8 28.9 39.3 (wtd average)
Gallup.. 30.0 29.6 40.4 (average)

Clinton won the recorded vote by 65.6-62.8  million (48.3-46.2%)

a) In the 28 states exit polled (110.7 million votes),
Clinton won the unadjusted exit polls by 54.9-48.2 million (49.6-43.6%).
She won the recorded vote by 54.5-50.0 million (49.2-45.2%).

b) In the 28 states after adjustments for Gallup Party-ID and voter turnout,
Clinton wins by 52.1-51.6 million (47.1-46.6%).

c) In the 23 states that were not exit polled (25.5 million votes),
Trump won by 12.8-11.1 million (50.4-43.7%).

d) The 51 state adjusted total (136.2 million votes):
Trump wins by: 64.4-63.2 million (47.2-46.4%).
Note: the analysis does not adjust the recorded (bogus) state exit poll vote shares. It does not adjust for the effects of disenfranchised or illegal voters or purged voting rolls or votes flipped at the voting machines and central tabulators.

 

2012 returning
 Voter turnout    
 Recorded    95%  95%  95%
2012 Mix Clinton Trump Other
Obama 44.12% 88% 7% 5%
Romney 40.80% 6% 90% 4%
Other 1.54% 45% 45% 10%
DNV (new) 13.54% 46.4% 41.9% 11.7%
 Match Recorded Calc share 48.25% 46.17% 5.58%
  Calc Vote 65.72 62.90 7.60
Recorded  48.25% 46.17% 5.58%
  Vote (mil.) 65.72 62.89 7.60
  Margin 2.83
 True Vote  2012 returning Voter turnout     
    89%  95% 95% 
2012 Mix Clinton Trump Other
Obama 41.33% 86% 7% 7%
Romney 40.80% 5% 90% 5%
Other 1.54% 40% 40% 20%
DNV (new) 16.32% 43% 46% 11%
Share 45.22% 47.74% 7.04%
  Vote (mil.) 61.60 65.03 9.59
  Margin   3.43

The bogus claim that Clinton won the popular vote is quoted ad nauseam by so-called “experts” in the media, academia and corrupt politicians. They are complicit in spreading this disinformation along with the fully discredited meme of a Russian “hack” designed to steal the election from Hillary. There is not one iota of proof.

I have written three books in which I cited pristine unadjusted exit polls to prove fraud. I believe they accurately represented the True Vote – up until the 2016 presidential election. Just because exit polls have proven to be accurate in the past (most recently in the 2016 Democratic primary) does not mean they were accurate in the 2016 election. The fact that Hillary won the popular recorded vote by 2.8 million does not mean she won the True Vote. They are never the same.

The “experts” still maintain the fiction that Clinton won the primary by 3 million votes. But the recorded vote is NEVER equal to the true vote. For some reason, talking heads never mention that simple fact. President Obama said it was not possible to steal an election. They think we are all stupid. Election Fraud is always an inside job.

The following states flipped to Trump from the unadjusted exit poll to the recorded vote and the Gallup-adjusted exit poll: FL MI NC PA WI
Minnesota flipped to Clinton.

California (3.77), Illinois (0.72) and New York (0.78) provided 5.27 million of Clinton’s adjusted margin in the 28 states. Trump won the other 25 states by 3.7 million votes.

Wisconsin
Trump did better in the Gallup-adjusted poll than the unadjusted exit poll and recorded vote.

Unadjusted Exit Poll: Clinton 48.2-44.3% (118,000 votes)
Recorded Vote: Trump won 47.2-46.3% (23,000 votes)

CNN Adjusted Exit Poll: 35Dem-34Rep-31 Ind
Trump wins: 48.5-46.3% (67,000 votes)

Gallup Adjusted: 30.1Dem-31.9Rep-38.1Ind
Trump wins: 49.8-44.5% (157,000 votes)

WI Gallup Clinton Trump Johnson Stein
Dem…. 30.10% 91.0% 7.0% 1.0% 1.0%
Rep….. 31.85%  6.0% 90.0% 3.0% 0.0%
Ind….. 38.05% 40.0% 50.0% 6.0% 2.0%
Share 100.0% 44.5% 49.8% 3.5% 1.06%
Votes.. 2,976. 1,325. 1,482…105.. 32

Scroll to row 150 to view the state data: adjusted and recorded Party-ID and vote shares. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=857963642

 
2 Comments

Posted by on September 29, 2017 in 2016 election, Election Myths

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2016 Pre-election Polls in 16 Battleground states were biased for Clinton

Richard Charnin
Sept.15, 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 Exit Poll
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
LINKS TO  POSTS
Last 3 Elections: Exact Forecast of Electoral Vote

In 16 battleground states, Trump won the recorded vote by 48.0-45.9%, a 2.1% margin. Clinton led the pre-election polls by 44.5-44.1%, a 0.4% margin.

When undecided voters are allocated (UVA), Trump leads the 16-poll average 46.6-45.3%. Using the Gallup National Voter affiliation survey (40Ind-32Dem-28Rep) to derive each state’s Party-ID, Trump leads 48.9-43.1%.

Clinton won the 16 unadjusted exit polls 47.4-45.6%, a 1.8% margin.

There was a 2.5% average margin discrepancy between the pre-election 16-poll average and the corresponding recorded vote average. The 4.6% difference between the 2.5% discrepancy and the 2.1% national recorded margin is an indicator that the pre-election polls were biased for the Democrats.

In 10 final National pre-election polls, Clinton led 46.8-43.6%, a 3.2% margin. She won the National recorded vote by 48.3-46.2%, a 2.1% margin.

Summary of 16 Battleground states:
Unweighted averages:
Clinton won the pre-election polls by 44.5-44.1%.
Clinton won the unadjusted exit polls by 47.4-45.6%
Trump won the recorded vote by 48.0-45.9%.
Trump won the UVA-adjusted polls by 46.6-45.3%.
Trump won the Gallup Party-ID adjusted polls by 48.9-43.1%.

Weighted averages (56.8 million votes):
Clinton won the pre-election polls by 45.0-44.7%.
Clinton won the unadjusted exit polls by 47.5-46.1%
Trump won the recorded vote by 48.4-46.1%.
Trump won the UVA-adjusted polls by 47.0-45.7%.
Trump won the Gallup Party-ID adjusted polls by 48.5-43.9%.

Battleground Exit poll discrepancies:
Recorded vote:3.9%; UVA:3.1%; Pre-election polls:1.4%; Gallup:7.6%
UVA: Undecided Voter Allocation: Trump won the recorded vote by 48.0-45.9%.

Trump likely won the national vote by 48-44% (5 million votes).

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/08/28/2016-true-vote-models-in-confirmation-party-id-and-returning-2012-voters/

Real Clear Politics (RCP)is the data source for the pre-election polls:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/state/

View the data and calculations for the 16 state polls, recorded votes, unadjusted exit polls and undecided voters: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10dlTnin814phKJWjYdkG-ujNKak3zo6ywIP0u0-TGFg/edit#gid=1579502018

 Trump Pre-elect UVA Recorded Exit polls
True Vote
AZ 46.3 48.3 48.1 46.9 50.7
CO 40.4 44.3 43.3 41.5 48.9
FL 46.6 48.1 48.6 46.4 48.0
GA 49.2 50.0 50.5 48.2 52.6
IA 44.3 47.6 51.2 48.0 52.1
ME 39.5 44.5 44.9 40.2 48.6
MI 42.0 45.4 47.3 46.8 47.1
MN 39.0 40.8 44.9 45.8 46.5
MO 50.3 52.0 56.4 51.2 51.4
NV 45.8 47.2 45.5 42.8 47.1
NH 42.7 45.9 46.5 44.2 51.1
NC 46.5 49.2 49.9 46.5 46.3
OH 45.8 48.3 51.3 47.1 50.1
PA 44.3 47.2 48.2 46.1 45.6
VA 42.3 44.6 44.4 43.2 48.4
WI 40.3 42.9 47.2 44.3 47.4
AVERAGE 44.1 46.6 48.0 45.6 48.9

No automatic alt text available.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 15, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

2016 True Vote Models in Confirmation: Party-ID and Returning 2012 Voters

2016 True Vote Models in Confirmation: Party-ID and Returning 2012 Voters

Richard Charnin
Aug.28, 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 Exit Poll
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
LINKS TO  POSTS
Last 3 Elections: Exact Forecast of Electoral Vote

Pollsters no longer ask the question “How did you vote in the last election”? Why? Because posing the question provides an analyst with data to indicate election fraud.

In 1972, 1988, 1992, 2004 and 2008, in order to match the recorded vote (SOP), the exit pollsters (who work for the MSM) required a greater turnout of Bush voters from the prior election than were still alive. This is a MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY. If the exit poll is impossible, the recorded vote it was forced to match must also be impossible. That is proof of fraud. It’s why the exit pollsters (the MSM) no longer ask the question “Who Did You Vote for in the Last Election”?

The Exit Poll Smoking Gun: “How did you vote in the last election”?

These 2016 models calculate a true vote estimate for each state.
Model 1: Obama and Romney voter turnout in 2016.
Model 2: Gallup Party-ID voter affiliation. Used in the 2016 forecast model.

Base case vote shares were identical in each model. The shares were forced to match the recorded vote assuming equal 95% turnout. To calculate the True Vote, returning Obama voter turnout in 2016 was adjusted to 89%. The assumption is that 6% of Obama voters were Bernie Sanders 2016 primary voters who did not return to vote in the presidential election.

Important note: Since the vote shares were forced to match a likely fraudulent recorded vote (the Mainstream Media was heavily biased for Clinton), the following results are conservative. Trump probably did at least 2% better than indicated in the base case calculations. View the sensitivity analysis.

So how can we determine Obama and Romney returning voter turnout in 2016? Where can we get that information? Why don’t the exit pollsters provide the data? Should we just guess or estimate turnout based on historical elections? I chose the latter.

Using the prior 2012 vote as a basis, a voter mortality estimate is factored in. Approximately 4% of voters pass between each election (1% annual mortality). The simplest approach is to assume an equal 95% turnout of Obama and Romney voters still living. Now we have a plausible approximation of the (unknown) mix of returning voters. Since we know the current election recorded vote, the number of new 2016 voters who did not vote in 2012 can be calculated: DNV = 2016 total vote – returning 2012 voters.

The first step is to force the candidate shares of returning voters to match the recorded vote assuming equal 95% turnout.

In the True Vote calculation, the percentage of returning Obama voters was lowered to 89% to reflect disenchantment among Bernie Sanders’ primary voters who did not vote in the general election or voted for Jill Stein or Donald Trump.

To view the sensitivity of the True Vote to Trump shares of returning Obama and Romney voters, a matrix of total vote shares is calculated in 1% increments around the Trump base case estimate. There are 25 vote share scenario combinations in the 5×5 matrix. Corresponding matrices of Clinton shares and vote margins are also included. The base case is in the central cell.

2016 Presidential State Election Model Summary
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10dlTnin814phKJWjYdkG-ujNKak3zo6ywIP0u0-TGFg/edit#gid=667189511

Recorded Vote
Clinton: 48.25-46.17% (2.83 million votes)
Trump: 306 Electoral Votes

Model 1
(returning 2012 voters)
2012 recorded vote: Obama 51.03-Romney 47.19% (4.98 million)
2016 voter turnout: Obama 89%, Romney 95%
Trump: 47.8-46.7% (1.51 million votes)
Trump: 323 Electoral Votes

Model 2
Gallup National Voter Affiliation Survey: 32D-28R-40I (state adjusted)
1. Trump and Clinton split the undecided vote:
Trump: 46.8-45.8% (1.35 million votes)
Trump: 307 Electoral Votes

2. Trump had 75% of the undecided vote:
Trump: 48.1-44.5% (4.97 million votes)
Trump: 352 Electoral Votes

The National Model
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10dlTnin814phKJWjYdkG-ujNKak3zo6ywIP0u0-TGFg/edit#gid=1768941212

Vote share sensitivity analysis (Model 1)
-Best case: Trump had 92% of returning Romney voters and 9% of Obama voters
Trump by 49.4-45.0% (5.98 million votes)
-Base case: Trump had 90% of returning Romney voters and 7% of Obama voters
Trump by 47.8-46.7% (1.51 million votes)
-Worst case: Trump had 88% of returning  Romney voters and 5% of Obama voters
Clinton by 48.3-46.1% (2.97 million votes).

Mathematical Proof: the 2004 election was stolen
The 2004 National Exit Poll was impossible as it was forced to match the recorded vote (Bush 50.7-48.3%) using an impossible number of returning Bush 2000 voters. It indicated that 52.6 million (43% of the 2004 electorate) were returning Bush 2000 voters and just 45.3 million (37%) were returning Gore voters. But Bush had just 50.5 million recorded votes in 2000. It indicated an impossible 110% turnout of living 2000 Bush voters in 2004.

2004 Election Fraud
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2015/10/30/2004-election-fraud-overwhelming-statistical-proof-that-it-was-stolen/

2004 Spreadsheet 1
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc&usp=sheets_web#gid=7

2004 Spreadsheet 2
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x2WCPJautd_eZPIfkmW9W9vD2p1Zu0ZlvgqV_gUwLNM/edit#gid=13

 
2 Comments

Posted by on August 28, 2017 in 2016 election, True Vote Models

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

2016 True Vote Model- California

Richard Charnin
Aug. 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
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
LINKS TO  POSTS
Last 3 Elections: Exact Forecast of Electoral Vote

2016 True Vote Model- California

Clinton won the recorded vote: 61.7-31.6% (4.27 million votes). But election fraud was rampant.

Consider that in 2012, Obama beat Romney by 60.2-37.1% (3.0 million votes) in California. Do you believe that Clinton beat Obama’s margin by 1.2 million? If you do, there’s a bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in.

Clinton won the True Vote by 55.0-37.8% (2.44 million votes).
The 1.8 million True Vote discrepancy from the recorded vote comprised nearly 2/3 of her bogus 2.8 million vote national margin.

Media shills insist that Clinton won by 3 million votes. It has become their Mantra, along with the debunked Russian “collusion”.  THE RECORDED VOTE IS NEVER EQUAL TO THE TRUE VOTE. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FRAUD-FREE ELECTION.

California True Vote Model
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=633901715

There are eleven counties in California with more registered voters than voting age adults in the county. The counties include San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego. Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog organization, has sent a letter to California Secretary of State Alex Padilla on behalf of the Election Integrity Project, noting that there are 11 counties in the state with more registered voters, and alleging that the state may be out of compliance with Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/10-11-california-counties-registered-voters-voting-age-adults-democrat/

Related CA posts:
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/smoking-gun-approximately-15-of-bernies-votes-were-flipped-to-clinton-in-california/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/01/01/more-clues-on-election-fraud-from-humboldt-cty-ca/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/11/19/implausible-california-exit-poll-and-reported-vote/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/12/25/california-four-election-scenarios-which-one-do-you-believe/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2017/02/05/california-primary-vote-timeline-indicates-it-was-stolen-in-early-voting-before-5pm-on-june-7/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/07/10/confirmation-bernie-won-california-by-at-least-100000-votes/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/07/06/california-primary-bernie-leads-in-vote-counts-since-election-day/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/07/02/bernie-landslide-in-ca-humboldt-cty-open-source-system/
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/smoking-gun-approximately-15-of-bernies-votes-were-flipped-to-clinton-in-california/

 
2 Comments

Posted by on August 22, 2017 in 2016 election

 

Tags: , , , ,

2016 National Exit Poll vs. True Vote Model: How did you vote in the 2012 election?

Richard Charnin
July 9, 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 2008 presidential election was the last one in which the National (NEP) and state exit polls asked “How Did You Vote in the Last Election?”. A plausible reason is that the question provided clear proof of fraud in all elections from 1988-2008. The How Voted crosstab matrix required more returning Bush voters than were still alive in order to match the bogus recorded vote in 1992 (119% turnout), 2004 (110%) and 2008 (103%). Conversely, the True Vote Model, which used a feasible estimate of returning voters, confirmed the unadjusted, pristine state and national exit polls.

Since the “How Voted” question was not asked, we can derive a crosstab to match the 2016 recorded vote using assumptions for 2012 returning voter turnout and 2016 vote shares.

General Assumption: 1% Annual voter mortality

2016 Estimated National Exit Poll assumptions
Equal 96% turnout of living 2012 Obama and Romney voters.
Clinton wins 87% of returning Obama and 7% of returning Romney voters.
Trump wins 7% of returning Obama and 88% of returning Romney voters.
Trump wins new voters by 48-47%.
Clinton wins by 2.9 million recorded votes, 48.3-46.2%.

2016 True Vote Model assumptions
Voter turnout: 92% of living Obama voters and 96% of Romney voters
Clinton wins 82% of returning Obama and 7% of returning Romney voters
Trump wins 10% of returning Obama and 88% of returning Romney voters
New voters: Trump and Clinton 45% tie
Trump wins the base case scenario by 3.6 million votes, 47.8-45.1%.

2016 TVM rationale
– 96% Romney voter turnout vs. 92% for Obama: approximately 2.5 million living Obama voters were angry Sanders voters who did not vote.
– Clinton’s 82% share of returning Obama voters: approximately 2.6 million Obama voters were angry Sanders voters who defected to Jill Stein, Trump and Johnson.

NATIONAL EXIT POLL – is always forced to match the recorded vote
“HOW VOTED IN 2012” was not asked in the 2016 NEP.
It would have looked something like this…
2016….. Mix Clinton Trump Other
Obama…. 44.6% 87% 7% 6%
Romney… 41.2% 7% 88% 5%
Other…… 1.5% 45% 45% 10%
DNV….. 12.6% 47% 48% 5.4%

Total…. 100% 48.3% 46.2% 5.5%
Vote…. 136.2 65.7 62.9 7.6

TRUE VOTE
2012….. Mix Clinton Trump Other
Obama…. 42.7% 82% 10% 8%
Romney… 41.2% 7% 88% 5%
Other…… 1.5% 45% 45% 10%
DNV…… 14.5% 45% 45% 10%

Total…. 100% 45.1% 47.8% 7.1%
Vote…. 136.2 61.5 65.1 9.7

Sensitivity analysis
The tables display Trump’s total vote share and margin over a range of 25 scenarios of his  shares of returning Obama (8-12%) and Romney voters (86-90%). He wins 24 of the 25 scenarios. In the worst case scenario, Trump loses by 1 million votes (46.9-46.1%). In the best case, he wins by 8 million (49.5-43.5%). Trump wins the base case scenario by 3.6 million votes, 47.8-45.1%.

View the spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9Y3ae2uyW8SUxVUnnOt9ZyvheAxa0fAhesAw_nhciM/edit#gid=1768941212

 
 

Tags: , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis