RSS

Tag Archives: kerry

Response to Nate Cohn of the NY Times

Response to Nate Cohn of the NY Times

Richard Charnin
Updated: July 1,2016

Richard Charnin

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
Democratic Primaries spread sheet
From TDMS Research: Democratic 2016 primaries

Ever since the 2000 election, exit poll naysayers have stated a) Edison Research claims that their exit polls aren’t designed to detect fraud; b) the sample size is too small and c) the questions are too lengthy and complex. 

Sample size? Big enough so that the MoE was exceeded in 12 of 25 Democratic primary exit polls – a 1 in 4 trillion probability. Questions too lengthy? You mean asking males and females who they voted for? Not designed to detect fraud?  That is true;  unadjusted exit polls are adjusted to match the corrupt recorded vote – and cover up the fraud

In his recent NY Times article,  Nate Cohn reverts to classic exit poll naysayer talking points that have been debunked long ago. I thought I was done debunking their posts.

Nate must be unaware of this fact: According to a recent Harvard study, the US ranks last (#47)  in election integrity. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/land-free-ranks-dead-west-fair-elections/

According to Nate, the exit polls are always wrong. He maintains that they were wrong in the 2000 and 2004 elections and that Bush won both elections fairly; there was no fraud. It is common knowledge that Bush stole both elections. This has been proven by  the mathematically impossible exit poll discrepancies, the True Vote Model and Cumulative Vote Share analysis. Unadjusted exit polls were close to the True Vote. The discrepancies were due to corrupted vote counts, not bad polling. 

It is important to keep in mind that historical  evidence of fraud is based on a recurring pattern: The vast majority of exit polls that exceed the margin of error  favor the progressive candidate. Virtually all exit polls shift to the establishment candidate in the recorded vote. 

Nate ignores or is ignorant of the overwhelming evidence proving that the Democratic primary was stolen. He cannot refute these facts:  

 Sanders’ exit poll share exceeded his recorded share in 24 of the 26 primaries exit polled. The probability is 1 in 190,000.  

– Sanders exit poll share exceed his recorded share by more than the margin of error in 11 of the 26 primaries. The probability is 1 in 77 billion. 

Is the exit poll shift to Clinton just pure luck? Or is something else going on? Let’s review and debunk Nate’s comments.

  • I didn’t write about this during the primary season, since I didn’t want to dignify the views of conspiracy theorists. But they’re still going. The exit polls are a sufficient basis to make this determination, in the eyes of the conspiracists, because exit polls are used internationally to detect fraud. They’re supposedly very accurate.

Note the immediate use of the term conspiracy theorist; a sure sign of an Internet troll. But Nate is not a troll; he’s writing for the NY Times.

  • All of this starts with a basic misconception: that the exit polls are usually pretty good. I have no idea where this idea comes from, because everyone who knows anything about early exit polls knows that they’re not great. The 2000,2004, 2008- exit polls were biased. Kerry and Gore both lost.
  • In 2004,  the exit polls showed John Kerry easily winning an election he clearly lost — with both a huge error and systematic bias outside of the “margin of error.” The national exits showed Kerry ahead by three points (and keep in mind the sample size on the national exit is vastly larger than for a state primary exit poll) and leading in states like Virginia, Ohio and Florida — which all went to George W. Bush.
  • The story was similar in 2000. The early exit polls showed Al Gore winning Alabama, Arizona, Colorado and North Carolina. Mr. Bush won these states by between six and 15 points.  
  • In 2008 the exit polls showed a pretty similar bias toward Barack Obama.
  • The same thing happened in 1996. It was actually even worse in 1992. The exit polls had Bill Clinton winning Texas, which went to George H.W. Bush, and basically everywhere. 

Clinton won in 1992 and 1996 by far greater margins than  recorded.  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EWaKPDUolqbN7_od8sSTNMRObfUidlVPRBxeyyirbLM/edit#gid=15

The allegations are remarkably consistent. They go like this: Mr. Sanders did better in the early exit polls than he did in the final result. Therefore, Mrs. Clinton probably stole the election. The exit polls are a sufficient basis to make this determination, in the eyes of the conspiracists, because exit polls are used internationally to detect fraud. They’re supposedly very accurate and “well controlled” (where this phrase comes from, I don’t know).  Sources for exit poll error — even more than in an ordinary poll: Differential non-response, Cluster effects, Absentee voters aren’t included  Exit polls can be very inaccurate and systematically biased. 

The  differential response canard was disproved in 2004 by the exit pollsters own data:
Reluctant Bush ResponderEvaluation of Edison Mitofsky Election System 2004

Nate claims he has no idea where the  “misconception” that exit polls are accurate comes from.  They come from the experts cited below –  not from the controlled MSM. Nate calls these experts “conspiracy theorists”; his basic misconception is assuming  there is no such thing as Election Fraud. 

Nate states that the sources of exit poll errors are greater than in “ordinary” polls. His claim that exit poll non-response, cluster effect and absentee voters are not considered is false;  these factors are used in weighting the sample.  An exit poll cluster effect (typically 30%) is added to the theoretical margin of error. And of course, in an exit poll,  unlike pre-election polls, voters are asked who they just voted for.

What about sources and methods of election fraud? What is the motivation of  the MSM in forcing the unadjusted exit polls to match corrupted vote counts?

  • Exit polls can be very inaccurate and systematically biased. With this kind of history, you can see why no one who studies the exit polls believes that they can be used as an indicator of fraud in the way the conspiracy theorists do.

Nate expects rational viewers to believe that experts who study exit polls are conspiracy theorists because they have concluded that the polls are indicators of fraud. Does he truly believe these experts are delusional and/or incompetent in assuming that exit poll discrepancies (which exceed the margin of error) raise legitimate questions as to the likelihood of fraud? 

Pollsters ask males and females in foreign countries the question “Who Did You Vote For” to check for possible election fraud.  They ask the same question in the U.S. The difference is that here they essentially cover-up the fraud by adjusting the responses to match the recorded vote – and always assume ZERO fraud.

  • Why are exit polls tilted toward Sanders? Young voters are far more likely to complete the polls. Voter registration files are just starting to be updated. Sanders is a candidate with historic strength among young voters.

That is pure conjecture  and not based on factual evidence. But this is not conjecture: more Sanders than Clinton voters (young and old)  were disenfranchised. But Nate doesn’t mention that fact?  What about all of those independents and Democrats who never got to the polls because of  voided registrations, long lines and closing of polling places?

  • There are other challenges with exit polls in the primaries. Usually, the exit polls select precincts by partisanship — ensuring a good balance of Democratic and Republican precincts. This helps in a general election. It doesn’t do as much good in a primary.

Nate does not know how the precincts were selected. It’s proprietary information.   Why won’t the exit pollsters tell us which precincts were polled ? Since they don’t, we must assume they have something to hide. The pollsters (actually the MSM) do not want analysts to compare precinct votes to the exit poll response. It’s clear that they might find discrepancies which indicate a high probability of vote miscounts.

Exit poll naysayers won’t dare mention the THIRD-RAIL of American politics:  Election Fraud.  They do not even concede that election fraud is a likely cause of the exit poll discrepancies. They just assume the exit polls are always wrong and that there is no such thing as Election Fraud. How ridiculous is that?

 Election Fraud is as American as apple pie. Read what the true experts have to say who you arrogantly dismiss as Conspiracy Theorists. The true conspiracy is not a theory but a fact: the mainstream media is complicit in covering up Election Fraud.

Election experts:

Debunking exit poll naysayers:

An Open Letter to Salon’s Farhad Manjoo
An Open Letter to John Fund (WSJ): Election Fraud, not Voter Fraud
An Open Letter to Mark Blumenthal at Pollster.com
Debunking Mark Blumenthal’s Critique of the RFK Rolling Stone Article
Response to the Mark Lindeman’s TruthIsAll FAQ
A Reply to Nate Silver’s “Ten Reasons Why You Should Ignore Exit Polls
2016 Election fraud: Response to Joshua Holland 
Bob Fitrakis: flunking Joshua Holland in Stat 101

Election fraud posts since 2004:

Mathematical Modeling of Voting Systems and Elections: Theory and Applications
Why Won’t the National Election Pool Release Unadjusted Exit Polls?
Fixing the Exit Polls to Match the Policy
Avoiding Election Fraud: Forecasters. Political Scientists, Academics and the Media
Election Fraud: What the Media wants us to believe

Election Fraud: The 2016 Democratic Primaries
Democratic Primaries: Election Fraud Probability Analysis
April 4 Exit poll anomalies (continued)

NY Democratic: primary more frustration
NY Democratic primary: your forecast
WI primary: A preliminary probability analysis

Democratic primary quiz
NY Democratic primary quiz
NY Democratic: primary more frustration
NY democratic primary: your forecast
WI primary: A preliminary probability analysis

AZ primary: Voter suppression in Maricopa County
Super Tuesday: 5 Democratic primaries, exit poll discrepancies/win-probabilities
MI primary: Bernie did better than the recorded share indicates
MA Democratic primary; a stolen election

1988-2008 unadjusted Presidential Exit Polls: 52-42% Democratic margin

1988-2012 Presidential Election Fraud Exit Poll Database
2004: Overwhelming Statistical Proof of a Stolen Election
Election Fraud Analysis: A Historical Overview
Election Fraud: An Introduction to Exit Poll Probability Analysis
Perspectives on an Exit Poll Reference Text

2014 Governor Election Models: TVM, CVS, VTM, Census votes cast
A Compendium of Election Fraud Links
Avoiding Election Fraud: Forecasters. Political Scientists, Academics and the Media

Footprints of Election Fraud: 1988-2008 State Exit Poll Discrepancies
Monte Carlo Simulation: 2004 Presidential Pre-election and Exit Polls
An Electoral Vote Forecast Formula: Simulation or Meta-analysis not required
The unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll: closing the book on “False Recall”
True Vote Graphics

Unadjusted Exit Poll Probability Analysis Links
Election Fraud: Uncertainty, Logic and Probability
A Model for Estimating Presidential Election Day Fraud
2000-2012: Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Simulation
2004: Simple Arithmetic Proof that Bush Stole the election

2004: The “Game” Debate
Why did the Networks Cancel Exit Polls in 19 States?
2000: Unadjusted Exit Polls indicate Gore won by 51-45% (5-7 million votes)
2004: True Vote Model Sensitivity Analysis: Kerry Landslide
A Conversation about the 2004 Election

Simple Numerical Proof of 2004 Election Fraud
Returning 2000 and New Voters: Proof that Kerry Won
Online Book: Confirmation Of a Kerry Landslide
2008: To believe Obama by just 9.5 million-votes,,,

Proof that Obama won by much more than 9.5 million votes
2008 Unadjusted Exit Polls Confirm the True Vote Model
1988-2008 State Uncounted Votes and Exit Poll Analysis
The True Vote Model:  A Mathematical Formulation

True Vote Model: Probability Sensitivity Analysis
An Introduction to the True Vote Model
Election Fraud Quiz
Election Fraud Quiz II

 

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

2004 Stolen presidential election vs. 2016 Democratic primaries

2004 Presidential election vs. 2016 Democratic Primaries

Richard Charnin
Updated 8/26/2016

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 post compares the stolen 2004 presidential election and the 2016 Democratic primaries. There were 50 states exit polled in 2004  and 26 primaries polled in 2016 .
View the 2016 Democratic primaries spreadsheet.

In 2004, Bush won the recorded vote by 50.7-48.3%, a 3 million vote margin. 
Kerry won the National Exit Poll by 51.7-47.0%, a 6 million margin.
View the 7:33pm 2004 National Exit Poll (not for on-air use)

The following states flipped from Kerry in the exit poll to Bush:
CO FL IA MO NM NV OH VA. Kerry needed FL or OH to win.

2004: average exit poll margin of error (MoE) was 3.43%
2016: average exit poll MoE was 3.52%

2004: 23 of 50 exit polls (46%) exceeded the MoE.
2016: 12  of 26  (46%) exceeded the MoE.

2004: 22  of 50 (44%) exceeded the MoE for Kerry. Probability: P= 1 in 600,000 trillion.
2016: 11 of 26  (42%)  exceeded the MoE for Sanders. P= 1 in 76.8 billion.

2004: 42 of 50  (84%) shifted to Bush in the vote.  P= 1 in 1.7 million.
2016: 24 of 26  (92%) shifted to Clinton in the vote. P= 1 in 190,000.

DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY EXIT POLLS

Margin of error, Sanders 2-party  Recorded Vote, Exit Poll, Discrepancy, Probability

Primary MoE Sanders Vote Exit Poll Discrep. Prob of Fraud
AL 3.9% 19.8% 25.9% 6.1% 99.9%
AR 4.0% 31.0% 33.3% 2.3% 87.3%
AZ            (Yavapai Cty) 3.9% 40.9% 63.0% 22.1% 100.0%
CT 3.6% 45.6% 47.2% 1.7% 81.3%
FL 3.0% 34.1% 36.0% 2.0% 90.2%
GA 3.4% 28.3% 33.8% 5.5% 99.9%
IL 3.5% 49.1% 51.2% 2.0% 87.5%
IN 3.5% 52.8% 55.4% 2.6% 92.9%
MA 3.5% 49.3% 53.3% 4.0% 98.7%
MD 4.1% 33.3% 33.4% 0.1% 52.7%
MI 3.3% 50.8% 53.2% 2.4% 92.2%
MO 4.4% 49.9% 51.9% 2.0% 81.0%
MS 3.4% 16.6% 21.3% 4.7% 99.7%
NC 3.0% 42.8% 43.7% 0.9% 72.3%
NH 2.6% 61.4% 60.4% -1.0% 22.7%
NY 3.5% 42.1% 48.0% 5.9% 100.0%
OH 3.1% 43.1% 48.1% 5.0% 99.9%
OK 4.5% 55.5% 50.9% -4.6% 2.1%
PA 3.5% 43.6% 45.1% 1.5% 80.6%
SC 3.1% 26.1% 31.3% 5.2% 100.0%
TN 4.0% 32.9% 35.5% 2.6% 90.0%
TX 3.5% 33.7% 37.9% 4.2% 99.1%
VA 3.3% 35.4% 37.4% 2.0% 88.4%
VT 2.3% 86.3% 86.5% 0.2% 55.5%
WI 3.0% 56.7% 63.6% 6.9% 100.0%
WV 4.7% 51.4% 57.4% 6.0% 99.4%
Average 3.52% 42.8% 46.3% 3.6% 97.6%
Probability that at least n of 26 Exit Polls exceed the margin of error for Sanders
n P=1 in
1 2
2 7
3 38
4 266
5 2,415
6 27,384
7 378,644
8 6,280,036
9 123,437,142
10 2,850,178,375
11 76,829,636,415

Inline image

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Election Fraud: What the Media wants us to believe

Richard Charnin
Jan.23, 2016

Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts

Election Fraud and the Media

The media wants you to ignore the Unadjusted exit polls because they claim that they do not represent the actual vote counts.

The media maintains that ADJUSTED exit polls will always converge to the recorded vote count which they want you to believe is always accurate.

The media claims that the unadjusted exit polls have been shown to be grossly inaccurate in all presidential elections since 1988. And the pattern has persisted in congressional and primary elections.

The media claims that the recorded votes are official and  tell us how people really voted and that we should not believe the unadjusted exit polls. Systemic election fraud is a myth. If it were true, the media would have reported it, just like they reported on Acorn.

The National Election Pool claims that the number of states exit polled in 2012 was cut to 31 because of lack of funds and expect us to believe this canard.

The media lauds voting machines, claiming they are faster and more accurate than humans. But the media does not tell you that programmers know how to code 1+1 =3.

Even though we cannot view the proprietary software code, we should accept the Diebold machine counts as being accurate. The fact that the code is proprietary does not mean that there is something to hide.

Media pundits, pollsters and academics ignore election fraud, implicitly assuming that the Fraud Factor is ZERO – an unscientific, faith-based rationale for adjusting exit polls to match the recorded vote.

The media wants you to believe that the exit polls are always wrong:
Recorded Vote = Unadjusted Exit poll + Exit Poll error
Final Exit Poll = Recorded Vote

The media does not want you to know that the recorded vote is fraudulent:
Recorded Vote = Unadjusted Exit Poll + Fraud Factor

The corporate media says that in 2008, Obama won the recorded vote by 9.5 million with a 53% share. But the media never mentioned that the unadjusted state exit polls indicated that Obama won by 23 million votes with a 58.0% share. Or that he won the National Exit Poll of 17,836 respondents with 61% and a 30 million vote margin.

In 2004, the corporate media claimed that Bush was the winner by 3.0 million votes and that the exit polls “behaved badly” and misled us into believing that Kerry was the winner by at least 6 million votes (52-47%).

In 2000, the media failed to mention that the unadjusted state exit polls showed that Gore was a 50-46% winner by 5 million votes – not his 540,000 recorded margin. And that Gore had at least 70% of 175,000 uncounted, spoiled ballots in Florida.

These facts have NEVER been disclosed by the media:
1) In 1988-2008, 135 of 274 unadjusted state exit polls exceeded the margin of error, of which 131 red-shifted to the Republican. The joint probability of this occurrence is ONE in TRILLIONS.  That’s ZERO.

2) The unadjusted 1988-2008 State and National exit polls showed the Democrats won by 52-42%. They won the recorded vote by just 48-46%. The probability is ZERO.

The media claims it is all just “voodoo math” by conspiracy theorists. But the media never did the math  since it would reveal that state and national unadjusted exit poll discrepancies from the recorded vote results in ZERO probabilities – proving systemic election fraud.

The media would rather maintain the myth of fair elections than actually investigate..

 
 

Tags: , , , , ,

2004 Presidential Election Fraud: Overwhelming Statistical Proof that it was Stolen

2004 Presidential Election Fraud: Overwhelming Statistical Proof that it was Stolen

Richard Charnin
Oct.30, 2015

Look inside the books: 
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy 
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts
LINKS TO WEB/BLOG POSTS FROM 2004

It has been shown that 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. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc&usp=sheets_web#gid=7

2004 Adjusted National Exit Poll (recorded vote)

2000 Turnout Mix Kerry Bush Other Alive Turnout
DNV. 20.79 17.0% 54.0% 44.0% 2.00% - -
Gore 45.25 37.0% 90.0% 10.0% 0,00% 48.45 93%
Bush 52.59 43.0% 9.00% 91.0% 0.00% 47.93 110%
Other 3.67 3.00% 64.0% 14.0% 22.0% 3.798 97%
Total 122.3 100% 48.3% 50.7% 1.00% 100.19 94%
Votes (millions) 59.03 62.04 1.22

But Bush had just 50.5 million recorded votes in 2000, so the number of returning voters was impossible. It indicated a 110% turnout of living 2000 Bush voters in 2004.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x2WCPJautd_eZPIfkmW9W9vD2p1Zu0ZlvgqV_gUwLNM/edit#gid=13

Note that Gore won by 544,000 (bogus) recorded votes (48.4-47.9%). He won the unadjusted National Exit Poll by 48.5-46.3%. He won the aggregate of the unadjusted state exit polls by 50.8-44.4%.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc&usp=sheets_web#gid=4

The following analysis is additional confirmation that the election was stolen.

In the 2004 National Exit Poll, there were 13,660 respondents (51.7% said they voted for Kerry and 47.0% for Bush). Kerry led throughout the exit poll timeline, from 8349 at 4pm to the final 13660 respondents.

But the NEP was forced to match recorded vote by switching 471 (6.7%) of Kerry’s 7,064 respondents to Bush. The average within precinct discrepancy (WPD) was a nearly identical 6.5%. The True Vote Model indicates that Kerry had 53.6%.

There is a conflict between the unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll in which voters were asked who they voted for (Kerry had 51.7%) and the number of returning voters in the 2004 ‘How did you vote in 2000’ crosstab (adjusted to 43% of the 2004 electorate for Bush and 37% for Gore).

Confirmation that Kerry won easily
No matter how you slice and dice the numbers, Kerry is the clear winner:

Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll (13660 respondents)
Sample. Kerry Bush Other
13,660. 7,064 6,414 182
Share. 51.71% 46.95% 1.34%

Of the 13,660 (1% MoE), 3182 (2% MoE) were asked who they voted for in 2000:
1221 (38.4%) said Gore, 1257 (39.5%) Bush, 119 (3.7%) Other, 565 (18.4%) Did not vote.

Kerry had 51.7% in both the
– unadjusted National Exit Poll (13660 respondents).
– 12:22am Voted in 2000 crosstab category, assuming 38.4% of 2004 voters were returning Gore voters and 39.5% were returning Bush (as per the 3182 respondents).

But consider these returning 2000 voter scenarios:
Assuming returning 2000 voters were proportional to the…
1. 2000 Recorded vote.. Kerry had 52.4%
2. 2000 Total votes cast… Kerry had 53.1%
3. 2000 Unadjusted National Exit Poll… Kerry had 53.0%
4. 2000 True Vote: Unadjusted state exit poll aggregate… Kerry had 53.6%
(True Vote: plausible 2000 returning voter mix)
2000 Turnout Mix Kerry Bush Other
DNV.. 22.4 17.8% 57.0% 41.0% 2.0%
Gore. 52.1 41.4% 91.0% 8.00% 1.0%
Bush. 47.4 37.7% 10.0% 90.0% 0.0%
Other. 3.8 3.1% 64.0% 17.0% 19.0%
Total 125.7 100% 53.6% 45.1% 1.3%
Votes Cast...... 67.36 56.67 1.71

Note: In the 2008 National Exit Poll (17,836 respondents), 4,178 were asked how they voted in 2004. The results confirmed the 5-7% Kerry margins shown above:
Kerry had 1815 (50.2%), Bush 1614 (44.6%), Other 168 (5.2%), Did not vote 581 (13.4%)

2004 National Exit Poll Timeline
Kerry led all the way at each point in the timeline- from 8,649 to 13,660 respondents.
But the National Election Pool funds the exit pollsters. The NEP did not want the public to know that Kerry won the True Vote. So they adjusted the National Exit Poll to conform to the stolen election recorded vote. The Timeline, in conjunction with the impossible number of returning 2000 Bush voters, is a powerful confirmation that the will of the voters was compromised just like it was in 2000. Bush stole both elections.

The Washington Post displayed the 2004 National Exit Poll at 12:22am. Note that returning Nader voters (3% of the 2004 electorate) are missing in the 2000 presidential vote category. Since Kerry won at least 64% of returning Nader voters, not including them in the crosstab reduced his total vote share margin from 3.7% to 1%. Was this just an oversight?

11/02/04 3:59pm, 8349 respondents
Kerry 51.0%; Bush 47.0%
http://www.richardcharnin.com/US2004G_3737_PRES04_NONE_H_Data-1.pdf

11/02/04 7:33pm, 11027 respondents
Kerry 50.9%; Bush 47.1%
http://www.richardcharnin.com/US2004G_3798_PRES04_NONE_H_Data.pdf

11/03/04 12:22am, 13047 respondents
Kerry 51.2%; Bush 47.5%

Unadjusted National Exit Poll (13660 respondents)
Data Source: Roper Center (UConn)
Sample. Kerry Bush Other
13,660. 7,064 6,414 182
Share. 51.71% 46.95% 1.34%

2000 Turnout Mix Kerry Bush Other
DNV... 23.12 18.4% 57.0% 41.0% 2.0%
Gore.. 48.25 38.4% 91.0% 8.00% 1.0%
Bush.. 49.67 39.5% 10.0% 90.0% 0.0%
Other.. 4.70 3.70% 64.0% 17.0% 19.0%
Total...100.0%.... 51.7% 46.8% 1.46%
Votes...125.7..... 65.07 58.83 1.838

Unadjusted State Exit Poll Aggregate, 76000 respondents
Kerry 51.0%; Bush 47.6%
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc#gid=7

Final National Exit Poll, 13660 respondents (adjusted to match the recorded vote).
Bush 50.7%; Kerry 48.3%
http://www.richardcharnin.com/US2004G_3970_PRES04_NONE_H_Data.pdf

Washington Post National Exit Poll, 12:22am, 13,047 respondents
The 2000 Presidential Vote category is missing the critical 3% who were returning Nader voters. Kerry won Nader voters by 64-17%. The exit pollsters also avoided the simple math calculation for total vote shares. This table includes returning Nader voters and the vote share calculation:
Kerry 51.2%; Bush 47.5%; Nader 1.3%
2000 Presidential vote:
2000... Mix Kerry Bush Nader
DNV.... 0.17 0.57 0.41 0.02
Gore... 0.39 0.91 0.08 0.01
Bush... 0.41 0.10 0.90 0.00
Nader.. 0.03 0.64 0.17 0.19
Total.. 100% 51.2% 47.5% 1.3%

 
1 Comment

Posted by on October 30, 2015 in 2004 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Using True Vote Model Sensitivity Analysis to Prove that Kerry won the 2004 Election

Using True Vote Model Sensitivity Analysis to Prove that Kerry won the 2004 Election

Richard Charnin
Feb. 8, 2012
Updated: Jan. 17, 2016

It never ends. The media still wants us to believe that Bush won the 2004 election by a 3 million vote margin (50.7-48.3%). They call researchers who proved that the election was stolen “conspiracy nuts”. But they have never debunked the overwhelming evidence that the election was a massive fraud.  Even after inflating Bush exit poll vote shares and turnout, a True Vote sensitivity analysis shows that Kerry won all plausible scenarios. It’s time for the media to tell the truth. Kerry won a landslide. The election was stolen, just as like it was stolen from Gore in 2000.

The pundits resorted to claims that the exit polls “behaved badly”, Bush voters were “reluctant to be interviewed” by the exit pollster, returning “Gore voters lied” about their past vote and there was no correlation between “vote swing and the exit poll red-shift”.   US Count Votes did a comprehensive analysis of the 2004 exit poll discrepancies which disproved the exit pollster’s reluctant Bush responder (rBr) hypothesis.

A comprehensive spreadsheet analysis of  discrepancies between state and national unadjusted exit polls and recorded votes is overwhelming proof that election fraud is systemic.  The Democrats won the 1988-2008 presidential exit polls  by 52-42%, but just 48-46% in the official recorded vote.

The 2004 National Exit Poll (NEP) displayed on corporate media election websites indicates that Bush was the winner – until one takes a closer look. As we all should know by now, exit polls are always forced to match the recorded vote – come hell or high water.  In other words, they always assume zero election fraud.

The 2004 NEP indicates that 52.6 million (43%) of the 2004 electorate were returning Bush 2000 voters and 45.1 million (37%) were Gore voters. As we have shown numerous times before, this is an impossible scenario.

Bush had just 50.5 million recorded votes in 2000. Gore had 51.0 million. Approximately 5% (2.5 million) of Bush 2000 voters died, so at most 48 million returned to vote in 2004.

But 100% turnout is impossible; therefore had to be fewer than 48 million returning Bush voters. Assuming 98% turnout, 47 million returned in 2004. That is 5.6 million less than the 52.6 million indicated in the Final 2004 National Exit Poll. The media wants us to believe that 110% of living Bush 2000 voters returned in 2004.

Where did these mysterious phantom Bush voters come from? What does that tell us about the Final? And since the Final was forced to match the recorded vote, what does that tell us about the recorded vote?

The True Vote Model

Unlike the impossible Final 2004 NEP, the 2004 True Vote Model determines a feasible (i.e. mathematically possible) and plausible (likely) number of returning Bush and Gore voters. An estimated 98% of living 2000 voter turned out in 2004.

Note: There were 6 million uncounted votes in 2000 (approximately 75% for Gore). Therefore, Gore’s True Vote margin was at least 4 million. But we will be conservative in assuming that he won by just 540,000 recorded votes.

Even if we use the bogus 2000 recorded vote  as a basis for returning Bush and Gore voters and apply 12:22am NEP vote shares, Kerry is the clear winner of the Base Case scenario. He has 52.2% and a 7.3 million vote margin – with a 97% win probability.

Note that Kerry won the unadjusted National Exit Poll (13660 respondents) with a 51.7% share. The Final NEP (also 13660 respondents) has Bush winning 50.7-48.3% (the recorded vote).

Let’s use the 2000 unadjusted state exit poll aggregate (Gore had 50.8% and won by 6 million) as a basis for calculating the 2004 True Vote. Kerry’s True Vote is 54.3%. He wins the base case scenario by 12.8 million votes with a 100% win probability.

The base case assumes an equal 98% turnout of living Bush and Gore voters. Let’s assume that only 90% of Gore voters and 98% of Bush voters return. Kerry is still the winner by 10 million with a 53.2% share. He also wins the worst case scenario by 3.8 million with 50.8%.

Exit poll naysayers insist that Kerry’s  early vote shares were inflated and that the Final shares listed on CNN should be used: Kerry’s 57% share of new voters is reduced to 54% and his 10% share of returning Bush voters cut to 9%. We’ll do better than that. 

View the True Vote Model sensitivity analysis tables. In the worst case scenario, Kerry has just 53% of new voters and 8% of Bush voters.  Kerry is still the winner by 5.9 million votes with a 51.6% share and a 94% win probability.

This refutes the media myth that Bush won. Let us count the ways:
1. Adjustments made to the National Exit Poll in order to match the recorded vote were impossible (required that 110% of living Bush 2000 voters return in 2004).
2. Kerry is a 52.2% winner assuming 98% of living Bush and Gore 2000 voters turned out in proportion to the 2000 recorded vote.
3. Kerry is a 54.3% by 12.8 million votes assuming the 2000 True Vote as the basis for returning voters.
4. Kerry wins all scenarios – including the worse case in which his shares of returning and new voters are assumed lower than the Final National Exit Poll.
5. Even assuming 98% Bush / 90% Gore turnout, Kerry wins all scenarios.

A statistical analysis of 49 Ohio 2004 exit poll precincts was produced by Ron Baiman and Kathy Dopp at U.S. Count Votes.

Over 40% of Ohio’s exit polled precincts had statistically significant discrepancies. This is over four times the number of expected precincts with significant discrepancy.
• 45.1% (22 of 49) of Ohio’s polled precincts have significant discrepancy when calculations assume that official vote counts most accurately estimate actual vote share, and
• 40.7% (20 of 49) of Ohio’s polled precincts have significant discrepancy when calculated by assuming that exit poll results are a better estimate of real vote share.

Ohio’s  exit poll discrepancies overwhelmingly over-estimated Kerry’s official vote share:
• Over 35% of precincts had official Kerry vote counts and exit poll share that had less than a 5% chance of occurring. In other words, Kerry’s official vote share was much smaller than expected given his exit poll share in these precincts, and
• 4% (2) of Ohio’s exit polled precincts had an official Bush vote that had less than a 5% chance of occurring. In these precincts Bush official vote share (assumed to be one minus their Kerry share) was much smaller than expected, given Bush’s exit poll share.

RFK Jr wrote the landmark article: Was the 2004 Election Stolen

Will any media pundits, election analysts or political scientists  come  forward to refute the massive evidence of fraud and prove that Bush really did win a fair election? Don’t hold your breath. Job tenure is everything.

Simulation forecast trends are displayed in the following graphs:

State aggregate poll trend
Electoral vote and win probability
Electoral and popular vote
Undecided voter allocation impact on electoral vote and win probability
National poll trend
Monte Carlo Simulation
Monte Carlo Electoral Vote Histogram

Election Model Forecast; Post-election True Vote Model

2004 (2-party vote shares)
Model: Kerry 51.8%, 337 EV (snapshot)
State exit poll aggregate: 51.7%, 337 EV
Recorded Vote: 48.3%, 255 EV
True Vote Model: 53.6%, 364 EV

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

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

 
1 Comment

Posted by on February 7, 2012 in 2004 Election

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

2004 Election Fraud Polling Analysis: Confirmation of a Kerry Landslide

Election Fraud Analysis: Confirmation of a Kerry Landslide
Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll)

In 2005, I wrote this free book online, posting as TruthIsAll:
2004 Election Fraud Polling Analysis: Confirmation of a Kerry Landslide

In 2012, I wrote this book on the 1988-2012 elections: 
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts

2004 Election Fraud Polling Analysis: Confirmation of a Kerry Landslide
Introduction: To believe Bush won in 2004, you must believe…
1. When Decided
2. Bush Approval Ratings
3. The Final 5 Million Recorded Votes
4. The Final Exit Poll: Forced to Match the Vote
5. Within Precinct Discrepancy
6. New Voters
7. Party ID
8. Gender
9. Implausible Gore Voter Defection
10. Voter Turnout
11. Urban Legend
12. Location Size
13. Sensitivity Analysis
14. Did Kerry Win 360 EV?
15. Election Simulation Analysis
16. Exit Poll Response Optimization
17. Florida
18. Ohio
19. New York

Appendix
A. Election Model: Nov.1 Projection
B. Interactive Monte Carlo Simulation: Pre-election and Exit Polls
C. 1988-2004 Election Calculator: The True Vote
D. The 2000-2004 County Vote Database
E. Statistics and Probability: Mathematics of Polling

More recent 2004 analysis adds to the confirmation:
The 2004 National Exit Poll Switched 6.7% of Kerry responders to Bush
Using True Vote Model Sensitivity Analysis to Prove that Kerry won the 2004 Election
2000-2004 Presidential Elections County True Vote Model
The True Vote Model: A Mathematical Formulation
Fixing the Exit Polls to Match the Policy

The Democratic Underground “Game” Debate proved that the 2004 election was stolen.

1988-2008 State Unadjusted Exit Poll Data
1988-2008 State and National True Vote Model
2004 Pre-election and Exit Poll Simulation Model
The Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll: Closing the Book on the False Recall Myth
Vote Swing vs. Exit Poll Red-Shift: Killing the “Zero slope means No Election Fraud” Canard
Exposing Election Myths: Facts and Graphs

 
1 Comment

Posted by on July 24, 2011 in 2004 Election

 

Tags: , , , ,

Exposing Election Myths: Facts and Graphs

Exposing Election Myths: Facts and Graphs
Richard Charnin

Since 2004, media pundits, misinformationists and naysayers have attempted to debunk the work of analytic researchers which prove systemic election fraud beyond a reasonable doubt. This post exposes and disproves the most common myths.

View the graphs here:http://richardcharnin.com/GraphExposeMedia.pdf

Election Myths

1 2004 presidential election: no evidence of election fraud.
2 Bush 48% approval: does not indicate he stole the election.
3 Pre-election polls: did not match the exit polls.
4 “Election Model”: assumptions were not valid.
5 Pre-election polls: Bush led them in 2004.

6 Exit polls: are not random samples.
7 Reluctant Bush responder: explains the exit poll discrepancies.
8 Urban Legend: Bush did better in 2004 than 2000 in Democratic strongholds.
9 Vote Swing (2000-2004) vs. 2004 Exit Poll red-shift: zero correlation means no fraud.
10 Gore voter false recall: explains the 2004 Exit Poll anomalies.

11 Exit poll discrepancies: unrelated to voting methods.
12 Adjusted National Exit Poll: is proof that Bush won.
13 Exit poll timeline: Bush won late voters.
14 Mid-term Generic polls: not good predictors.
15 2008 Primaries: Hillary and Obama split the vote.
16 2008 Obama: had 52.9% and won by 9.5 million votes.

Track Record:2004-2012 Forecast and True Vote Models https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zRZkaZQuKTmmd_H0xMAnpvSJlsr3DieqBdwMoztgHJA/edit

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on July 14, 2011 in Election Myths

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis