Tag Archives: late votes

Election Fraud 2012: The Third-party Vote

Election Fraud 2012: The Third-party Vote

Richard Charnin
Jan. 14, 2013

In previous posts, we have noted the dramatic 7% difference between Obama’s Election Day and late recorded vote share in both 2008 and 2012. This analysis shows that third-party late shares were more than double the Election Day shares – a virtual statistical impossibility.

In 2008, there were 121.21 million votes recorded on Election Day; Obama led by 52.34-46.31% (1.35% to third-parties). There were 10.16 million late votes; Obama led by 59.16-37.48% (3.36% to third-parties).

In 2012, there were 117.46 million votes recorded on Election Day; Obama led by 50.34-48.07% (1.59% to third-parties). There were 11.68 million late votes; Obama led by 57.99-38.29% (3.72% to third-parties).

Are late votes representative of the electorate as a whole? One check is to weight (multiply) the late state vote shares by the total state vote.

2008 Weighted Late Vote Shares:
Obama 57.4- McCain 38.6- Other 4.0%
The third-party late share is within 0.6% of the 3.36% recorded late share.
Obama had 58.0% in the state exit poll aggregate and the True Vote Model (within 0.6% of his weighted late share).

2012 Weighted Late Vote Shares:
Obama 54.0- Romney 41.8- Other 4.2%
The third-party late share is within 0.5% of the 3.7% recorded late share.
Obama had 56.1% in the 2-party True Vote Model (within 0.3% of his weighted 2-party late share). Only 31 states were exit polled in 2012. Unadjusted polling data is unavailable.

So what do the third-party numbers indicate? Consider that:
– Obama’s 2008 late vote shares closely match the 2008 state exit polls (within 1%).
– Obama’s 2008 and 2012 late vote shares closely match the True Vote Models (within 1%).

Third-party 2008 and 2012 late state vote shares
– closely match the late recorded shares (within 0.5%).
– were more than double the Election Day shares.

Therefore, since the Obama and third party weighted late shares were a close match to the late recorded shares, it is likely that the increase in the third party late share over the Election Day share was caused by a combination of a) vote flipping on Election Day from third parties to McCain and Romney, b) higher third party provisional and absentee voting rates, c) discarding of absentee and provisional Obama ballots which increased third-party late vote shares.

If 50% of the difference in third party late vote shares and Election Day shares was due to vote flipping, then approximately one million (1%) of the votes recorded on Election Day were flipped from the third-parties to McCain and Romney.

Election Day and Late Vote shares
(weighted by total state vote)

Obama McCain Other Calculated
52.87% 45.62% 1.51% Total Votes
52.34% 46.31% 1.35% Election Day
52.25% 46.51% 1.24% Election Day Weighted
59.15% 37.47% 3.34% Late Recorded
55.80% 40.90% 3.30% Late Weighted
58.00% 40.30% 1.70% Exit Poll & True Vote Model

Obama Romney Other Calculated
51.03% 47.19% 1.78% Total Votes
50.34% 48.07% 1.59% Election Day
50.68% 47.70% 1.62% Election Day Weighted
57.99% 38.29% 3.72% Late Recorded
54.00% 41.80% 4.20% Late Weighted
55.00% 43.00% 2.00% True Vote Model (exit polls n/a)

Early and Election Day shares required to match the recorded vote
(Obama 55% early share based on media estimates)
(votes in millions)
.........................Votes Pct Obama Romney Other Margin
Early/Election Day.......117.45 91.14% 50.34% 48.07% 1.59% 2.27%
Late......................11.68 8.86% 57.99% 38.29% 3.72% 19.70%
Total....................129.13 100.0% 51.03% 47.19% 1.78% 3.84%

..........................Votes Pct Obama Romney Other Margin
Early voting..............40.03 31.00% 55.00% 43.41% 1.59% 11.59%
Election Day..............77.42 60.14% 48.00% 50.41% 1.59% -2.41%
Late Votes................11.68 8.86% 57.99% 38.29% 3.72% 19.71%
Calculated Share.........129.13 100.0% 51.06% 47.17% 1.78% 3.89%

Recorded Share........................ 51.03% 47.19% 1.78% 3.84%
Total Votes (mil)..................... 65.90 60.94 2.30 4.96

True Vote............................. 55.00% 43.00% 2.00% 12.00%
2-party .............................. 56.1% 43.9%

Obama Election Day Share
..... 48.0% 52.0% 56.0%
Early... Total share
56% 51.37% 53.77% 56.18%
55% 51.06% 53.46% 55.87%
49% 49.20% 51.60% 54.01%
........ Margin
56% 5.82 12.04 18.25
55% 5.02 11.24 17.45
49% 0.22 6.43 12.65

(votes in thousands)
..........................Votes Pct Obama Romney Other Margin
Early voting............4,245 50.00% 52.00% 47.14% 0.86% 4.86%
Election Day............4,063 47.85% 47.60% 51.54% 0.86% -3.94%
Late Votes................182 2.15% 52.70% 37.55% 9.75% 15.15%

Calculated Share........8,490 100.00% 49.91% 49.04% 1.05% 0.87%
Recorded Share........................49.91% 49.04% 1.05% 0.87%
True Share............................50.69% 48.26% 1.05% 2.43%

(votes in thousands)
..........................Votes Pct Obama Romney Other Margin
Early voting............1,395 25.00% 57.05% 41.54% 1.41% 15.51%
Election Day............4,132 74.04% 48.40% 50.19% 1.41% -1.79%
Late Votes.................54 0.96% 59.38% 33.59% 7.03% 25.80%

Calculated Share........5,581 100.00% 50.67% 47.86% 1.47% 2.81%
Recorded Share........................50.67% 47.86% 1.47% 2.81%
True Share............................53.97% 44.56% 1.47% 9.42%

Track Record: Election Model Forecast; Post-election True Vote Model

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

2006 Midterms: Regression Generic Poll Trend Model
Projected Democratic share: 56.43%
Unadjusted National Exit Poll: 56.37%

2008 Election Model
Projected: 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 Election Model
Obama Projected: 51.6% (2-party), 332 EV snapshot; 320.7 expected; 321.6 mean
Adjusted National Exit Poll (recorded): 51.0-47.2%, 332 EV
True Vote Model 56.1%, 391 EV (snapshot); 385 EV (expected)
Unadjusted State Exit Polls: not released
Unadjusted National Exit Poll: not released

1 Comment

Posted by on January 14, 2013 in 2012 Election


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

A Model for Estimating Presidential Election Day Fraud

A Model for Estimating Presidential Election Day Fraud

Richard Charnin
Jan. 1, 2013

Given 1) early voting (mail-in or hand-delivered paper ballots) and 2) late vote (absentees, provisional ballots) and 3) the total recorded vote, what is the Election Day vote share required to match the recorded vote?

This 2012 election fraud analysis shows that Obama’s Election Day vote share was 3% lower than his total recorded share (a 6% discrepancy in margin). It is a strong indicator that votes were stolen on Election Day. Obama’s late vote share was 10% higher than his Election Day share.

In 2012, there were 11.677 million late recorded votes (9.0% of the total). The late vote for each state is the difference between the current and Election Day votes. Obama had 60.2% of the two-party late vote and 51.96% of the total two-party vote.

In 2008, Obama had 59% of 10.2 million late votes compared to 52.4% of votes cast early or on Election Day. Is it just a coincidence that he also won the 2008 unadjusted state aggregate exit polls by a nearly identical 58.0-40.5% and the National Exit Poll by 61.0-37.5%? In 2012, there were just 31 adjusted state polls; the unadjusted state and national poll results have not been released.

But is the late vote a legitimate proxy of the True Vote? To find out, we need to weight (multiply) each state’s late vote share by its total vote. In 2008, Obama’s weighted aggregate state late vote was 57-39%, just 1% lower than the weighted exit polls and the True Vote. In 2012, it was 54-42%, closely matching the 56% two-party True Vote model share.

In 2008, approximately 30% of total votes were cast early. Early vote rates for each state were set to the 2008 rate. Early vote shares were based on information supplied to the media. If the early vote estimate was not available, the assumption is that Obama did 2-3% lower in early voting than late.

Obama’s True Vote margin is estimated to be 15.7 million (56.1-43.9%).

Total Votes Recorded = Early Vote + Election Day Vote + Late Vote

In order to determine the Election Day vote, a simple trial and error (goal-seeking) procedure was used by adjusting the Election Day share until the total share matched the recorded vote. This is analogous to the exit pollsters stated procedure of adjusting the exit poll to match the recorded vote in each demographic cross tab by changing weights and/or vote shares. The National Exit Poll forced a match to the recorded vote in a number of elections by adjusting actual exit poll results using mathematically impossible weightings (millions more returning voters from the previous election than were alive to vote in the current election).

In this analysis, we use actual early and late recorded vote data to determine the Election Day 2-party share required to match the total recorded vote. We use “goal-seeking” to determine the fraud component that the media ignores.

On Election Day, Votes cast on optical scanners and DREs are vulnerable to miscounts on the central tabulators.

Percent of total vote: Early 52%; Late 2%
To match his 2-party share (49.3%), Romney needed 51% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 25%; Late 4%
To match his 2-party share (48.4%), Romney needed 51% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 36%; Late 2%
To match his 2-party share (51.1%), Romney needed 70% on Election Day.

North Carolina (zero late vote?)
Percent of total vote: Early 60%; Late 0%
To match his 2-party share (47.3%), Romney needed 51% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 45%; Late 27%
To match his 2-party share (38.1%), Romney needed 46% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 53%; Late 29%
To match his 2-party share (54.9%), Romney needed 60% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 14%; Late 4%
To match his 2-party share (48.0%), Romney needed 51% on Election Day.

New Mexico
Percent of total vote: Early 62%; Late 2%
To match his 2-party share (45.1%), Romney needed 48% on Election Day.

Percent of total vote: Early 53%; Late 1%
To match his 2-party share (53.1%), Romney needed 58% on Election Day.

National Vote – forced to match the recorded share
How Voted (2-party)………….Votes Pct Obama Romney
Early voting (paper)…………40.6 32.0% 55.0% 45.0%
Election Day…………………75.0 59.1% 49.0% 51.0%
Late Votes (paper)…………..11.2 8.9% 60.2% 39.8%

Recorded Share……….126.8 100.0% 51.9% 48.1%
Total Votes (mil)………………………… 65.85 60.98

…….. Obama Election Day %
…….. 49.0% 52.0% 56.0%
Early Obama Share
56.0% 52.2% 54.0% 56.4%
55.0% 51.9% 53.7% 56.1%
49.0% 50.0% 51.8% 54.1%
56.0% 5.7 10.2 16.2
55.0% 4.9 9.4 15.4
49.0% 0.0 4.5 10.5


Posted by on December 7, 2012 in 2012 Election


Tags: , , ,

2000-2008 Late Vote Anomalies

2000-2008 Late Vote Anomalies

Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll)
Updated: Dec. 24, 2011

This analysis has been updated to include the 2008 unadjusted state exit polls.

The unadjusted exit poll data source is the Roper site:

In the last 3 elections, the average Democratic late vote share was 7% higher than the vote share recorded on Election Day.

On Election Day 2000, 102.6 million votes were recorded; Gore led by 48.3-48.1% (50.1% of the 2-party vote). Gore had 55.6% of the 2.7 million late 2-party votes, an 11.0% increase in margin. There were 6 million uncounted votes.

On Election Day 2004, 116.7 million votes were recorded; Bush led by 51.2-48.3%. Kerry had 54.2% of the 4.8 million late 2-party votes, a 10.4% increase in margin. There were 4 million uncounted votes.

On Election Day 2008, 121.21 million were recorded. Obama led by 63.4-56.1m (52.3-46.3%). There were 10.16m late votes recorded after Election Day. Obama won these late votes by 59.2-37.5%, a 7% increase in his Election Day share and 15% increase in margin. The final recorded vote total was 131.4 million. Obama won by 69.5-59.9m (52.87-45.62%).

It is logical to assume that the late votes were accurate because
1) They were cast using paper ballots, not on unverifiable DREs
2) Since the winner was known on Election Day, there was nothing to gain by manipulating late votes recorded after Election Day.

The unadjusted exit poll discrepancies from the recorded vote were far beyond the 1.2% exit poll margin of error. But the state exit polls were generally very close to the late recorded vote shares. The largest percentage deviations were in states with a relatively small number of late votes – as to be expected. Assuming that the late votes were fairly representative of the total state electorate, then the late votes can be viewed as super exit polls with thousands more respondents than corresponding state exit polls in which 1000-2500 voters are interviewed.

2008: The Final 10 million late recorded votes

Obama won the state unadjusted exit poll aggregate by 58.0-40.5% – a close match to his 59.2% late recorded share. There were 83,000 exit poll respondents. The National Exit Poll (17,836 respondents) is a subset of the state exit polls. Obama won the unadjusted NEP by a 61-37% margin and had a 58.0% share in the True Vote Model.

Obama’s late vote closely matched the unadjusted exit poll in the following states. He had…
64.5% of New Jersey’s 224,000 late recorded votes and 63.8% in the unadjusted exit poll.
67.9% of Maryland’s 277,000 late votes and 67.2% in the exit poll.
70.7% of New York’s 584,000 late votes and 71.5% in the exit poll.
54.6% of Ohio’s 500,000 late votes and 56.3% in the exit poll.
51.6% of Florida’s 405,000 late votes and 52.1% in the exit poll.

68.9% of Illinois’ 183,000 late votes and 66.3% in the exit poll.
47.5% of Mississippi’s 77,000 late votes and 48.4% in the exit poll.
49.7% of Tennessee’s 19,000 late votes and 47.7% in the exit poll.
49.1% of South Carolina’s 117,000 late votes and 47.6% in the exit poll.
46.2% of Kansas’ 32,000 late votes and 46.1% in the exit poll.

2004: The Final 5 Million Recorded Votes

There was a 12% difference in margin between the initial 116.2 million 2-party recorded vote (Bush 51.5-Kerry 48.5%) and the final 4.8m (Kerry 54.3-Bush 45.7%). This resulted in a 0.5m decline in the official Bush margin (3.5 to 3.0m). This red flag indicates that since the election was decided at the 116m mark, election fraud was no longer necessary. Late votes (absentees, etc.) became irrelevant when Bush was declared the winner. The media reported that Bush won by 3.5m votes; they still quote that initial margin today. Edison-Mitofsky matched the Final Exit Poll to the initial 117m recorded votes.

Kerry won the unadjusted state exit poll aggregate by 51.1-47.6% (76,000 respondents). He won the National Exit Poll (13660 respondents) by 51.7-47.9%.

Assuming that Kerry’s 53.0% share of the 5.0m late votes is representative of the 122.3m recorded total, his vote total is 64.8m. Adding his 75% share of the 3.4m documented uncounted votes brings his final total to 67.4m (53.5%). This is quite close to the True Vote Model which determined that he won by 53.6-45.1%. The model accounted for total votes cast in 2000 (recorded plus uncounted) , assuming 5% voter mortality and a 98% turnout of 2000 voters in 2004. The 12:22am Composite NEP vote shares were used in the calculation.

There was a 0.72 correlation between the late state vote shares and the exit polls. For states which had more than 40k late votes, the correlation statistic was a much stronger 0.93, as one would expect.

This is further evidence that the “pristine” exit polls were close to the True Vote, namely:
1) the high correlation between state exit polls and late vote shares
2) the small discrepancies between the exit polls and the late vote shares
3) the consistent pattern of a higher Kerry share of late votes compared to initial recorded votes

How does one explain the discrepancies between the initial and late recorded state vote shares? Kerry’s late vote share exceeded his initial share in 38 states (15 of 19 battleground states). Corresponding vote discrepancies were significant in the East but near zero in the Far West, strongly suggesting election fraud in early-reporting, vote-rich battleground states. A false impression was created that Bush was winning the popular vote while the state and national exit polls indicated that Kerry was winning big. In the Far Western states there was virtually no difference between the 15.6m initial and 3.3m late recorded vote shares; Kerry was a steady 53% winner. But the Far West average exit poll WPE was 6.4%, indicating a 56% Kerry share. Was vote-padding still in effect?

Not a single media pundit has ever noted the following:
1) Final state exit polls and a mathematically impossible National Exit poll were adjusted to match the recorded vote.
2) Unadjusted “pristine” state exit polls were close to the True Vote.
3) Final 5 million recorded votes were close to the True Vote.

1 Comment

Posted by on December 24, 2011 in Uncategorized


Tags: , , ,

Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis