Joined: 10 May 2008
|Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:05 am Post subject: 2010 Midterms: Footprints of Election Fraud
|2010 Midterms Analysis: House Generic, Senate RV/ LV Polls, Exit Polls vs. Recorded Vote
Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll)
Nov. 22, 2010
Go here for the full analysis
The 2010 midterms are history. The typical reaction of the pundits is to promote the conventional wisdom that it was a GOP blowout of epic proportions - even bigger than 1994. Yes, the party in power nearly always loses seats in the midterms. The unconventional wisdom is that the Democrats do significantly better than the recorded vote indicates in every election. There is no reason to suspect that 2010 was any different.
As usual, the pundits quote the final exit polls as gospel and claim that they show that Obama must move to the center – as if he’s been part of the “professional left” all along. They never question the official results. That’s why they’re pundits: they know that they are paid to present the recorded vote as if it represented the will of the voters. So they avoid the subject of: systemic election fraud - otherwise they might find themselves suspended indefinitely at best.
It is standard operating procedure for the exit pollsters to force the Final National Exit Poll (and final state exit polls) to match the recorded vote.
The pundits always assume that the Final NEP returning voter mix is legitimate even though it is always forced to match the recorded vote. As usual, their implicit assumption is that election fraud was not a factor. But it always is.
Given that election fraud is systemic, what does the combination of pre-election registered and likely voter polls, preliminary and final exit polls and recorded vote data indicate? Well, we still have unverifiable elections and a strange reluctance of the Democratic leadership to do anything about it.
This analysis utilizes final likely and registered state and national pre-election polls along with preliminary and final exit polls. Likely voter (LV) polls are a sub-sample of registered voter (RV) polls. Since 2000, LV polls have closely matched the recorded vote while RV polls closely matched the unadjusted and preliminary exit polls.
House: The GOP has a 239-188 seat margin.
The 2010 Election Forecast Model predicted the following:
A 234-201 GOP House based on the final 30 LV Generic polls (the GOP led by 48.7-41.9%).
A 221-214 GOP House based on the final 19 RV Generic polls (th GOP led by 45.1-44.1%).
The Democratic margin was 6% better in the RV polls than the LV polls.
The GOP led the Final National Exit Poll by 7.2%, within 0.4% of the pre-election Generic LV poll margin.
Final exit polls are always forced to match the recorded vote.
Senate: The Democrats have a 51-47 seat margin.
The 2010 Election Forecast Model predicted the following:
A 50-48 Democratic Senate based on 37 LV polls (the GOP led by 48.1-43.5%).
A 53-45 Democratic Senate based on a combination of 18 RV and 19 LV polls (the Democrats led by 45.2-44.6%).
The Democrats did 5% better in the RV polls.
CNN/Time published the result of 18 RV and corresponding LV polls.
The Democrats led the RV poll average by 49.2-40.6%.
They led the corresponding LV polls by 46.6-45.8%.
The Democrats did 8% better in the RV polls.
As expected, the final 2010 National Exit Poll margin discrepancy from the average of 30 pre-election generic LV polls was a near-perfect -0.62%. Setting the returning voter mix to the 2008 recorded vote, the discrepancy from the 19 pre-election RV poll average was an even lower 0.07%.
The final state exit poll (i.e. recorded vote) discrepancy from the average LV poll was 1.52%. Setting the returning voter mix to the 2008 recorded vote, the discrepancy from the RV poll average was an even lower 0.83%.
The Democrats were going to lose seats in the Senate and House. They were surely going to lose in Arkansas. And they did. They were expected to hold on to CA, WA, WV, NY, DE and OR. And they did.
But IL, NV, PA, CO and WI were expected to be close. And they were. The Democrats won NV and CO. They lost WI, IL and PA. Or did they?
Obama's recorded vote margin was 52.9-45.6%. The 2010 Final National Exit Poll indicated that 45% of the electorate were returning Obama voters and 45% were McCain voters. Of course, the pundits will claim that the 7.3% discrepancy was due to millions of unenthusiastic Democrats who did not return to vote in 2010.
In 2008 the National Election Pool, a consortium of six mainstream media giants which sponsors the exit polls, decided not to release unadjusted (or preliminary) state and national exit poll data. And they won’t in 2010, either. They don’t want anyone to see the adjustments they had to make to the return voter mix and/or the vote shares in order to match the recorded vote.
In the exit polls, changes were made to the return voter mix and vote share as the polls are adjusted to match the changing vote count in real time - with no change in the number of respondents. Of course, this is standard operating procedure. Who cares if the central tabulators are being hacked in real-time?
CNN/Time provided RV and LV polling data for 18 Senate races (Table 1). Note that RV polls were not listed in the realclearpolitics.com polling averages. The Democrats led the RV polls in 11 states. They led the LV polls in 8 states (including the WV tie). They won 9.
Illinois and Pennsylvania flipped from the Democrats in the RV polls to the GOP.
The average GOP 1.2% LV poll margin exceeded the RV average by 6.3%.
The average GOP LV margin exceeded the recorded average by 1.6%.
The average GOP recorded margin exceeded the RV average by 4.6%
Competitive states: 18 Exit Polls vs. Recorded Vote (Table 2)
The average GOP 4.2% recorded margin exceeded the average exit poll margin by 2.9%.
The average GOP 6.3% LV poll margin exceeded the average recorded margin by 2.1%.
CO and WA vote primarily by mail. The Democrats won both.
WI, PA and IL vote primarily by machine. The GOP won all three.
Obama won the 2008 recorded vote by 9.5 million. But his True Vote margin was at least twice that; his recorded share understated his True share by 4-5%. If the 2010 NEP returning vote mix is adjusted to match the 2008 recorded share, the Democratic share is within 1% of the GOP - matching the pre-election RV polls. The adjusted 53/45% mix includes the discount for unenthusiastic Democrats who did not return to vote in 2010.
In 1998, Oregon implemented voting by mail. This was probably as a result of the 1992 presidential election in which it had the highest exit poll discrepancy (13.6%) of any state. In 1996, 10% of votes cast were uncounted. Oregon had it wrong in 1992 and 1996.
In 2000, Oregon exactly matched Gore’s recorded margin (Nader had 6%). Oregon had it right in 2000.
In 2004, Oregon and Colorado were the only battleground states in which Kerry improved his share over Gore. His 51.4% Oregon share closely matched the unadjusted 52% state exit poll aggregate, unlike the other Battleground states. Kerry did 3.1% better in Oregon than nationally. Bush won the recorded vote by 50.7-48.3%. Oregon had it right in 2004, just like it did in 2000.
The evidence is overwhelming that the 2004 election was stolen. The Oregon recorded vote confirms it. Exit pollsters have not released the unadjusted 2008 exit polls so we can’t compare them to the recorded vote shares. But we have the 2008 National Exit Poll. It’s a smoking gun, just like it was in 2004 and 2006. The NEP indicates an impossible 103% turnout of living Bush 2004 voters, a 450% turnout of living third-party voters and 12 million more returning Bush than Kerry voters. Since an impossible returning voter mix was necessary in order to match the recorded vote, the recorded vote had to be impossible as well. It is therefore a certainty that Obama did much better than his recorded 52.9% share indicates.
In 2008, Oregon voted 56.7% for Obama, matching the National True Vote Model. Unadjusted exit polls have not been released. Oregon had it right in 2008, just like it did in 2004 and 2000.
As a battleground state, Oregon should be representative of the True national electorate.
In 2010 the Oregon senate race was never in question. Senator Ron Wyden led by 20% in the pre-election LV polls. He had a 57% recorded share, matching Obama’s 2008 share. How does one explain the 25% discrepancy from the GOP 52-45% national margin?
Oregon had it right in 2010, just like it did in 2008, 2004 and 2000. Since the 2000 election, Oregon’s recorded vote has consistently matched pre-election polls and the unadjusted national exit polls. Is this unique track record due to the fact that Oregon mandates hand counts of optically scanned ballots in randomly selected counties as a check on the central tabulators machine counts? The historical evidence strongly suggests that Oregon’s random hand-counts are a deterrent to Election Fraud.
Consider the close senate races the Democrats lost. How did they differ from Oregon?
Wisconsin gave Obama 56.2% in 2008, closely matching his Oregon share (56.7%).
But the popular progressive Sen. Russ Finegold lost by 5% in a traditionally progressive state. He trailed the final RV poll by 3% (within the 4% pre-election poll margin of error).
How does one explain the 5% loss and Wyden’s 20% win in Oregon? Was it because Wyden was a popular incumbent? So was Finegold. Or was it due to unverifiable touch screens (DRE) and/or the central tabulators that miscounted the Optiscan ballots?
Illinois: Obama 61.9%
Giannoulias lost by 2%. He led the RV polls by 42-38 and the LV polls by 43-42. Was the loss due to unverifiable DREs and rigged central tabulators that miscounted the Optiscan ballots?
Pennsylvania: Obama 54.5%
The progressive Sestak lost by 2% He led the RV polls by 47-43 and trailed the LV polls by 49-45. He led the exit poll at 1015pm but fell behind at 117am as the poll was being matched to the vote with no change in respondents. Was the loss due to unverifiable DREs and rigged central tabulators that miscounted the Optiscan ballots?
How come these battleground states red-shifted to the GOP but Oregon did not? Is Oregon no longer to be considered a battleground state, but rather a Democratic stronghold? If so, does it have anything to do with the fact that it’s the only state which mandates randomly chosen counties for hand-counts of optically-scanned paper ballots as a check on the central tabulators?
Consider races the Democrats won. How are they similar to Oregon?
Washington: Obama 57.4%
Murray won by 52-48%, matching the RV poll margin. Voting is nearly 100% by mail.
Colorado: Obama 53.7%
Bennett won by a slim 48-47%. He led RV polls by 5%.Voting is by mail and optical scanners.
California: Obama 61.9%
Boxer won by 52-42%. She led the RV polls by 53-37, LV 50-45. Voting is by mail and optical scannners.
New York: Obama 62.8%
Gillibrand won by 62-36%, a close match to the 60-33 RV poll. Optical scanners replaced levers.
Schumer won by 65-33%, a close match to the 63-30 RV poll.
Washington now votes virtually 100% by mail. Colorado and California also had a high percentage of mail-in paper and absentee ballots. Is it just a coincidence that in these states the Democrats won by margins similar to Obama? In NY, both senate candidates exceeded Obama’s recorded share by 3-4%.
In 2004, election fraud in California and New York accounted for approximately 2.3 million of Bush’s 3.0 million “mandate”. But 2010 was not a presidential election; there was no incentive for the GOP to pad the national vote in solid Democratic states.
The Democrats lost close elections that were ripe for fraud (WI, IL and PA). The states had these factors in common:
1) Unverifiable DRE’s
2) No mandated random hand-counts of machine-counted optical scanned ballots.
3) Progressive candidates
4) The GOP led the final LV polls
5) Democrats led the final RV polls (IL,PA) and were close in WI
6) Late exit poll shift to the GOP
7) In the senate exit polls, a percentage is given for returning “Other” and “DNV” – but the vote shares are missing. Why?
The Democrats won in states that had 100% paper ballots (OR, WA) with mandated random hand recounts or those which encourage vote by mail (CO, CA).
In 2000, there were 180,000 uncounted ballots in Florida, the vast majority for Gore.
In 2002, Georgia Sen. Max Cleland lost despite a solid lead in pre-election polls. Georgia was the first state to vote exclusively with DRE touch screens.
In 2004, Kerry won the state unadjusted exit poll aggregate by 52-47%. But Bush won the recorded voteby 2.4% - a 7.4% margin (WPE) differential.
In 2006, 18,000 votes mysteriously vanished in Florida's 13th congressional district. There was no investigation.
In 2008, Obama won the New Hampshire primary hand-counts, but lost the machine counts by the same margin. The media reported Hillary’s “miracle” win.
We had a hint of what we knew was coming in 2010. In the Massachusetts special election for Ted Kennedy’s seat, Martha Coakley won the hand-counted ballots but lost the machine counts. She conceded long before the votes were counted.
In the South Carolina Democratic primary, Vic Rawl easily won the hand-counted paper ballots, but unknown Alvin Green won the machine counts. In a pitiful post-election “investigation”, Green was the chosen candidate despite the overwhelming evidence of fraud.
In Jan. 2005, exit pollsters Edison-Mitofsky released the 2004 Election Evaluation Report in response to the 2004 exit poll controversy, but it also included unadjusted exit poll data for 1988-2004. The data revealed that the massive 2004 exit poll discrepancy was not an aberration. The pollsters concluded that although their 2004 survey design was near-perfect, the 6.5% within precinct discrepancy (WPE) was due to reluctance on the part of Bush voters to be interviewed. This theory was refuted by the exit pollsters own data which showed just the opposite: Bush voter response was greater in Bush strongholds than in Kerry strongholds. But the full report showed much more than that.
In the five presidential elections from 1988-2004, there were 238 state presidential exit polls, 194 of which red-shifted from the Democrat to the Republican. Of the 108 exit polls that exceeded the 2% margin of error, 99 red-shifted to the Republicans. Of the 65 that exceeded a very conservative 3% MoE, all but one red-shifted to the GOP. At the 95% confidence level, one would expect 12 of the 238 polls to exceed the MoE and be evenly split between the Democrat and the Republican. The probability of the shifts magnitude and direction were less than 1 in 10^30. The bulk of the discrepancies were in strong Democratic states (4.9 WPE) and the Battleground states (3.8 WPE). In GOP red states, the average WPE was just 2.3. Why the miscounts?
Prior to 2004, they were primarily due to millions of uncounted votes in each election (70-80% Democratic). The HAVA-blessed unverifiable DRE’s only caused some of the damage; the rest was due to central tabulators which aggregated votes cast on DRE’s optical scanners, mechanical levers and punched cards. Virtually 100% of the votes are tallied on the central computers. Optical scanners have the virtue of a paper ballot, unlike the other voting machines – but the paper ballots are never counted (the 2008 MN senate election was an exception).