Election Fraud Analysis

Richard Charnin

Jan.30, 2016

Updated: Feb.8, 2016

Amazon Link

KEY Election Fraud Posts

Proving Election Fraud: The PC, Spreadsheets and the Internet

Mathematical Modeling of Voting Systems and Elections: Theory and Applications

Election Fraud Analysis: A Historical Overview

Election Fraud: An Introduction to Exit Poll Probability Analysis

Perspectives on an Exit Poll Reference Text

Fixing the Exit Polls to Match the Policy

Why Won't the National Election Pool Release Unadjusted Exit Polls?

Mathematical Modeling of Voting Systems and Elections: Theory and Applications

Election Fraud: What the Media wants us to believe

To Believe Bush Won in 2004, You Must Believe...

To Believe Obama Won the Recorded Vote by 9.5 Million...

Response to the TruthIsAll FAQ (updated 4/9/12)

A Reply to Nate Silver’s “Ten Reasons Why You Should Ignore Exit Polls

Track-record: 2004-2012 forecast and 1968-2012 True Vote Model

Institutional Investor: Technology Raises Election Fraud Issues

Can Current Technology Insure Fair Elections?

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

1988-2012 Presidential Election Fraud Exit Poll Database (35 tables and  graphs)

2004: Overwhelming Statistical Proof of a Stolen Election

2016 Election fraud: Response to Joshua Holland

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/05/05/democratic-primaries-election-fraud-probability-analysis/


Introduction: Summary of the Key Points

Mathematical models 

Prove election fraud and confirm unadjusted exit polls.

True Vote (TVM) - plausible vote shares of estimated returning voter mix. 

Cumulative Vote Shares (CVS) - sorted county precinct votes.

Voter Turnout (VTM) -  registered voter turnout  vs. exit poll Party-ID (forced to match)

2012 - 2014 Governor elections Voter Turnout assumptions

Favored the Republican, therefore the Democrat must have done better than indicated.

TVM: 2012 presidential recorded vote understated Obama’s true vote.

VTM: Registered Republican percentage voter turnout was  higher than the Democrat.

Myth of 50/50 electorate

The Democrats would win every national election if votes were accurately counted.

They get an estimated 83% of the minority vote (30% of the electorate).

Therefore they need just 36% of white voters (70% of the electorate) to reach 50%.

1968- 2012: Census indicates 80 million more votes cast than recorded (uncounted). 

Adjusted Polls

Pre-election polls are biased due to the Likely Voter Cutoff Model. 

Eliminates newly registered voters and others (mostly Democratic) deemed unlikely to vote.

Unadjusted exit polls are always fixed to match the recorded vote.

Corporate media-funded pollsters always assume ZERO fraud.

Unadjusted exit polls are not for public viewing.

In 2012, just 31 states were exit polled. Why?

2002 - HAVA (Help America Vote Act)

Installed unverifiable touchscreens; central tabulators.

Only a few states have a strong auditing process.

Web / Blog

Institutional Investor: Technology Raises Election Fraud Issues

Can Current Technology Insure Fair Elections?

Why do all election forecasters,political scientists, academics and media pundits avoid discussing election fraud?


The True Vote Model

The calculation of  vote shares is based on two factors:

Voter Turnout and Vote Shares of new and returning voters.

Total voters (T) is the sum of returning voters (R) and new voters (N).  

Therefore N = T - R

Vote shares of returning and new voters are estimated based on the exit poll crosstab:

How Did You Vote in the Prior Election?

The exit pollsters always assume zero fraud and often adjust the percentage mix of returning voters and/or the vote shares to match the recorded vote. But there were more returning Bush  (phantom) voters than were alive in the 1992, 2004, 2008 elections. This is proof of election fraud.

In 2004, the exit pollsters inflated the number of returning Bush 2000 voters to 52.6 million (43% of 122.3 mil. votes) and increased  Bush shares of Kerry, Bush and New (DNV) voters.

2004 National Exit Poll (adjusted to match the recorded vote)

2000        Voters        Mix        Kerry        Bush        Other Turnout

Gore        45.25        37%        90%        10%         0%        93.4%

Bush        52.59        43          9         91         0        109.7 (Bush had 50.5 million votes in 2000)

Other          3.67          3        64        14        22        97.7

DNV        20.79        17        54        44         2        -

Total        122.3        100%        48.27%        50.73        1.0%        

Votes        (mil)     122.3    59.03    62.04    1.22      

2004 True Vote Model (includes 3.4 million uncounted votes)

2000        Voters        Mix        Kerry        Bush        Other        Turnout

Gore        52.13        41.5%        91%        9%        0%        98%

Bush        47.36        37.7        10        90        0        98

Other          3.82          3.0        64        14        22        98

DNV        22.42        17.8        57        41        2        -

Total        125.7        100%        53.6%        45.4%        1.0%

Votes        (mil)     125.7    67.4      57.1      1.25      

Vote share calculations:

Kerry = 53.6% = .415*.91 +.377*.10 + .03*.64 + .178*.57

Bush = 45.4% = .415*.09 +.377*.90 + .03*.14 + .178*.41

Run the numbers: 1968-2012 National Presidential True Vote Model 

1988-2008 Presidential Elections: The Smoking Gun Probability

The Democrats won the recorded vote by 48-46%.

They won the state and national unadjusted exit polls by 52-42% - an 8% discrepancy.

135 of 274 state exit polls exceeded the margin of error (only 14 expected)

131 of 135 moved from the poll to the vote in favor of the Republican.

Sensitivity Analysis

Calculate probabilities that N of 274 state presidential exit polls exceed the average exit poll margin of error (MoE).  

For example, the average theoretical MoE for the 274 polls based on sample size is  2.77%. Adding the standard 30% cluster factor, the average exit poll MoE over the 6 elections is 3.60%.

N=135 exit polls deviated by at least 3.60% from the recorded vote.

The probability is ZERO: 1.2E-83.   That’s 83 zeros to the right of the decimal.

If the average MoE was 5.54% (based on an impossibly high 100% cluster factor) the probability would be 2.3E-35 (ZERO).

Cluster Factor

Avg MoE

N Polls > MoE

1988

1992

1996

2000

2004

2008

Prob

0%

2.77%

172

13

35

29

23

32

40

1.0E-123

10%

3.05%

159

13

33

26

20

28

39

1.5E-108

20%

3.32%

151

13

31

23

19

26

39

4.1E-100

30%

3.60%

135

12

27

19

17

23

37

1.20E-83

40%

3.88%

128

12

27

18

15

22

34

9.21E-77

50%

4.16%

118

11

23

17

12

21

34

3.25E-67

60%

4.43%

112

10

22

17

11

19

33

1.17E-61

70%

4.71%

105

9

21

16

10

17

32

2.35E-55

80%

4.99%

93

9

18

14

8

16

28

5.03E-45

90%

5.26%

87

9

17

13

8

15

25

4.18E-40

100%

5.54%

81

9

14

12

7

15

24

2.30E-35

Forcing the exit poll to match the recorded vote is standard operating procedure.  Actual exit poll data is adjusted in all exit poll categories (crosstabs).

The number of returning Republican voters in 1972, 1988, 1992 and 2004 was adjusted in the National Exit Poll to match the recorded vote.  The pollsters implied impossible turnout in the “Voted in the Prior Election” crosstab.

For example, the adjusted 2004 National Exit Poll indicated that 43% (52.6 million) of the 2004 electorate were returning Bush 2000 voters. But he had just 50.5 million votes in 2000.  Approximately 2 million died (1% annual mortality).

Therefore at most 48.5 million could have  returned in 2004. But the National exit poll indicated that 52.6 million returned. In other words, there had to be 110% turnout of living Bush 2000 voters. Impossible.

If 47 million (97% of living Bush 2000 voters) returned in 2004, simple arithmetic proves that there were at least 5.6 million (52.6-47.0) phantom Bush voters.

2000: Myth of a Close Election

Bush stole the election, He won Florida by a  bogus 537 votes. The recount was aborted by the Supreme Court. Bush was “selected” by five Republican justices..

Gore won the national recorded vote by 540,000 - but did much better than that.

He won the unadjusted state exit polls by at least 5 million votes (50.7-45.6%).

Gore won the unadjusted FL Exit Poll (1816 respondents, 3.0% MoE) by 53.4-43.6%. There is a 97% probability that he won by at least 200,000 votes.

Gore won the unadjusted National Exit Poll (13,108 respondents) by 48.5-46.3%, or 2.5 million votes.

Resp.l

Gore

Bush

Nader

Other

13,108

6,359

6,065

523

161

48.51%

46.27%

3.99%

1.23%

The 2000 True Vote Model matched the Unadjusted State Exit Poll aggregate.

Voted '96

Turnout

Mix

Gore

Bush

Other

New/DNV

17,732

16%

52%

43%

5%

Clinton

48,763

44%

87%

10%

3%

Dole

35,464

32%

7%

91%

2%

Perot/oth

8,866

8%

23%

65%

12%

Total cast

110,825

100%

50.68%

45.60%

3.72%

110,825

56,166

50,536

4,123


Monte Carlo 2004 Electoral Vote Simulation

State projections based on final pre-election polls adjusted for undecided voters.

5000 simulated election trials

Kerry wins: 51-47%  (5 million votes)

Expected electoral votes: 337

Electoral Vote Win Probability: 98%

2004 National Exit Poll

(forced to match recorded vote)

GENDER

Mix

Kerry

Bush

Other

Female

54%

51%

48%

1%

Male

46%

45%

54%

1%

Total

100%

48.3%

50.7%

1.0%

2004 National Exit Poll: How  Voted in 2000

Impossible 110% living Bush 2000 voter turnout in 2004

2000

Turnout

Mix

Kerry

Bush

Other

Alive

Turnout

DNV

20,790

17%

54%

44%

2%

-

-

Gore

45,249

37%

90%

10%

0%

48,454

93%

Bush

52,586

43%

9%

91%

0%

47,933

110%

Other

3,669

3%

64%

14%

22%

3,798

97%

Total

122,294

100%

48.27%

50.73%

1.00%

100,185

94%

59,031

62,040

1,223

Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll: 13660 respondents voted for  Kerry

Resp.

Kerry

Bush

Other

13,660

7,064

6,414

182

share

51.7%

  47.0%

1.3%

Unadjusted 2004 National Exit Poll (12:22am vote shares))

2000

Voted

Mix

Kerry

Bush

Other

DNV

23,116

18.38%

57%

41%

2%

Gore

48,248

38.37%

91%

8%

1%

Bush

49,670

39.50%

10%

90%

0%

Other

4,703

3.74%

64%

17%

19%

Total

125,737

100%

51.8%

46.8%

1.5%

125,737

65,070

58,829

1,838

2004 True Vote Model

(based on 2000 state exit poll aggregate)

2000

Voted

Mix

Kerry

Bush

Other

DNV

22,381

17.8%

57%

41%

2%

Gore

52,055

41.4%

91%

8%

1%

Bush

47,403

37.7%

10%

90%

0%

Other

3,898

3.1%

64%

17%

19%

Total

125,737

100%

53.6%

45.1%

1.4%

      Votes

67,362

56,666

1,709


Swing vs. Red Shift

Exit poll naysayers said that there was no correlation (zero slope) between the red-shift in the 2004 state exit polls and vote swing from 2000 to 2004. They claimed this disproved the 2004 election fraud argument.

But they were comparing apples and oranges. The naysayer argument was based on a false premise:  the 2000 and 2004 recorded votes represented true voter intent.

When Vote swing based on the 2000 and 2004 True Vote (e.g. the unadjusted exit polls) is plotted against the 2004 exit poll red-shift, the negative  slope clearly indicates fraud.

Try out the 1988-2008 State and National True Vote Model 

Bush stole OH in 2004 by 50.8-48.7%.  What was the True Vote?

Click the INPUT sheet tab. Enter: 2004, OH and calculation CODE (1-4).

Then click on the MAIN sheet tab to view the results.


Urban Legend

It was a counter-intuitive myth that in 2004 Bush improved over his 2000 vote in Democratic Urban locations while he actually declined in rural Republican areas. This article by  Michael Collins was a breakthrough in the analysis of the 2004 stolen election.  

According to the National Exit Poll, Bush made incredible gains in the cities over his 2000 vote share. The gains were large enough to offset his drop in core support in rural areas and give him a 3% victory. This is an implausible anomaly and proof that votes were stolen in big cities and suburbs.

New York is a perfect example of where Bush stole votes in 2004.

2008: Obama landslide

 Unadjusted National (61-37%) and state polls (58-40%) confirmed by TVM

Total

Resp.

Obama

McCain

Other

Votes

17,836

10,873

6,641

322

Share

100%

61.0%

37.2%

1.8%

Final 2008 NEP (17836 resp)

(forced to match recorded vote)

GENDER

Mix

Obama

McCain

Other

Male

47%

49%

49%

2%

Female

53%

56%

43%

1%

Share

100%

52.87%

45.59%

1.54%

Votes(mil)

131.463

69.50

59.94

2.02

 Unadjusted 2008 National Exit Poll

Voted

2004

2008

Exact match to TVM & unadj state

2004

Implied

Votes

Mix

Obama

McCain

Other

DNV

-

17.66

13.43%

71%

27%

2%

Kerry

50.18%

57.11

43.44%

89%

9%

2%

Bush

44.62%

50.78

38.63%

17%

82%

1%

Other

5.20%

5.92

4.50%

72%

26%

2%

Total

131.46

100%

58.00%

40.35%

1.65%

Votes

131.463

76.25

53.04

2.17

Adjusted 2008 National Exit Poll

Voted

2004

2008

Impossible returning Bush voters

2004

Implied

Votes

Mix

Obama

McCain

Other

DNV

-

17.09

13%

71%

27%

2%

Kerry

42.53%

48.64

37%

89%

9%

2%

Bush

52.87%

60.47

46%

17%

82%

1%

Other

4.60%

5.26

4%

72%

26%

2%

Total

131.46

100%

52.87%

45.60%

1.54%

Votes

131.463

69.50

59.95

2.02


Cumulative Vote Shares: 2010 Wisconsin Senate

Milwaukee County is the poster child for CVS. It shows up in every Wisconsin state-wide "election". In 2010, an estimated 61,000 Feingold votes flipped to Johnson.

 Racine is second on the GOP list: an estimated 19,000 votes flipped from Feingold to Johnson.


Wisconsin Walker Recall

Counter-intuitive decline in Democratic Cumulative Vote shares

2014 Wisconsin Governor

Walker won by 52.2-46.7%.

Burke won the CVS by 50.2-48.7%. She won the TVM by 51.6-47.3%.

Burke won the VTM by 50.5-48.4% assuming 81.6% GOP vs. 77.0% Dem turnout.

2012

Record

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Burke

Walker

Other

Turnout

Obam

52.8%

1,621

1,588

1,112

1,112

46.7%

91.0%

8.0%

1.0%

70%

Romny

45.9%

1,411

1,383

968

968

40.6%

7.0%

93.0%

0.0%

70%

Other

1.3%

39

39

27

27

1.1%

48.0%

48.0%

4.0%

70%

DNV

-

-

275

11.6%

50.0%

45.5%

4.5%

Margin

Total

3,071

3,010

2,107

2,382

Share

51.6%

47.3%

1.0%

4.3%

77.6%

Votes

1,230

1,127

25

103

Record

46.7%

52.2%

1.1%

-5.5%

Vote

1,112

1,242

27

-130

CVS-10%

50.2%

48.7%

1.1%

1.5%

Vote

1,195

1,160

27

35

Burke Vote Share Sensitivity Analysis

Burke

Burke share of New voters (DNV)

Burke

Burke share of returning Obama voters

Share of

46%

48%

50%

52%

54%

Share of

87%

89%

91%

93%

95%

Romney

Burke Vote Share

Romney

Burke Vote Share

9.0%

52.0%

52.2%

52.5%

52.7%

52.9%

9.0%

50.6%

51.5%

52.5%

53.4%

54.3%

8.0%

51.6%

51.8%

52.1%

52.3%

52.5%

8.0%

50.2%

51.1%

52.1%

53.0%

53.9%

7.0%

51.2%

51.4%

51.6%

51.9%

52.1%

7.0%

49.8%

50.7%

51.6%

52.6%

53.5%

6.0%

50.8%

51.0%

51.2%

51.5%

51.7%

6.0%

49.4%

50.3%

51.2%

52.2%

53.1%

5.0%

50.4%

50.6%

50.8%

51.1%

51.3%

5.0%

49.0%

49.9%

50.8%

51.8%

52.7%

Margin (000)

Margin (000)

9.0%

119.6

130.6

141.6

152.6

163.7

9.0%

52.7

97.2

141.6

186.1

230.6

8.0%

100.3

111.3

122.3

133.3

144.3

8.0%

33.3

77.8

122.3

166.7

211.2

7.0%

80.9

91.9

102.9

113.9

124.9

7.0%

14.0

58.4

102.9

147.4

191.9

6.0%

61.5

72.6

83.6

94.6

105.6

6.0%

-5.4

39.1

83.6

128.0

172.5

5.0%

42.2

53.2

64.2

75.2

86.2

5.0%

-24.7

19.7

64.2

108.7

153.2

 Cumulative Vote Shares -Final

Counties

Total

Burke

Walker

Other

Burke

Walker

Other

Top 15

1,573

773

782

21.0

49.2%

49.7%

1.3%

Other 57

809

343

456

6.4

42.4%

56.4%

0.8%

Total

2,382

1,116

1,239

27.4

46.9%

52.0%

1.1%

 Cumulative Vote Shares  at 10% of the vote

Burke

Walker

Other

Total

Burke

Walker

Other

Chg

Top 15

864

688

19.5

1,573

54.9%

43.7%

1.2%

-5.8%

Other 57

339

460

6.4

809

41.9%

56.8%

0.8%

0.5%

Total

1,203

1,148

25.8

2,382

50.5%

48.2%

1.1%

-3.6%

 


Wisconsin 2014 Voter Turnout Model

Registered

3005

Split

Reg

Turnout

Votes

Burke

Walker

Other

Votes

2382

Dem

43.0%

1,292

77.0%

995

95%

4%

1%

Other

1.15%

Rep

41.0%

1,232

81.6%

1,006

7%

92%

1%

Turnout

79.3%

Ind

16.0%

481

79.3%

381

49%

49%

2%

Total

100.0%

3,005

79.3%

2382

50.5%

48.4%

1.2%

Sensitivity Analysis

Burke

Dem

Turnout

% Ind

71.3%

73.3%

75.3%

77.3%

79.3%

Burke

51.0%

47.8%

48.9%

49.9%

50.9%

52.0%

49.0%

47.5%

48.6%

49.6%

50.6%

51.6%

47.0%

47.2%

48.2%

49.3%

50.3%

51.3%

Margin (000)

51.0%

-75

-26

23

72

121

49.0%

-91

-42

8

57

106

47.0%

-106

-57

-8

41

91


Florida 2014 Governor

Scott (R) won by 65,000 votes (48.2-47.1%).  

Crist won the CVS by 51.1-45.1%. He won the TVM by 49.7-45.6%.

VTM (000)

Split

Reg

Turnout

Votes

Crist

Scott

Other

Dem

38.8%

3,372

66.0%

2,226

91%

6%

3%

Rep

35.0%

3,042

71.0%

2,159

10%

88%

2%

Ind

26.2%

2,277

68.4%

1,557

46%

45%

9%

Total

100%

8,691

68.4%

5941

49.8%

46.0%

4.2%

TVM

2012

Record

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Crist

Scott

Other

Turnout

Obama

49.9%

4,198

4,114

2,468

2,468

41.6%

91.0%

5.0%

4.0%

60%

Romney

49.0%

4,124

4,042

2,425

2,425

40.8%

9.0%

88.9%

4.0%

60%

Other

1.0%

88

86

52

52

0.87%

46.0%

46.0%

8.0%

60%

DNV

-

-

996

16.8%

46.8%

45.2%

8.0%

Margin

TOTAL

8,410

8,242

4,945

5,941

Share

49.7%

45.6%

4.7%

4.2%

Votes

2,954

2,707

280

247

Obama Returning Voter Turnout

Crist

Crist share of returning Obama voters

Romney

58%

59%

60%

61%

62%

Share of

87%

89%

91%

93%

95%

Turnout

Crist Vote Share

Romney

Popular Vote Win Probability

58%

49.6%

49.9%

50.2%

50.5%

50.9%

11.0%

94.6%

99.6%

100.0%

100.0%

100%

59%

49.4%

49.7%

50.0%

50.3%

50.6%

10.0%

85.9%

98.5%

99.9%

100.0%

100%

60%

49.1%

49.4%

49.7%

50.0%

50.3%

9.0%

70.6%

94.8%

99.7%

100.0%

100%

61%

48.9%

49.2%

49.5%

49.8%

50.1%

8.0%

50.3%

86.3%

98.5%

99.9%

100%

62%

48.6%

48.9%

49.2%

49.5%

49.8%

7.0%

30.0%

71.2%

95.0%

99.7%

100%

Margin

58%

235.0

271.4

307.8

344.2

380.5

59%

204.5

240.8

277.2

313.6

350.0

60%

173.9

210.3

246.7

283.1

319.5

61%

143.4

179.7

216.1

252.5

288.9

62%

112.8

149.2

185.6

222.0

258.4

Illinois 2014 Governor

Rauner won the election by  50.2-46.3%.  But Quinn won the True Vote.

Quinn won the CVS by 55.2-41.8%. He won the TVM by 53.8-42.8%.

CVS - 10%

County

Quinn

Raunier

Grimm

Quinn

Raunier

Grimm

Change

Top 15

1695

1030

73

61.5%

35.9%

2.6%

10.5%

Other 87

252

535

40

33.5%

64.6%

1.9%

3.1%

All 102

1,947

1,565

114

55.2%

41.8%

3.1%

8.8%

VTM

Split

Reg

Turnout

Votes

Quinn

Rauner

Grimm

Dem

47.0%

2,687

60.0%

1,612

91%

7%

2%

Rep

35.0%

2,001

68.0%

1,361

7%

91%

2%

Ind

18.0%

1,029

63.4%

653

40%

53%

7%

5,716

63.4%

3626

50.3%

46.8%

2.9%

TVM

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Quinn

Rauner

Grimm

Turnout

Obama

57.6%

3,019

2,959

1,775

1,775

49.0%

90.0%

8.0%

2.0%

60%

Romney

40.7%

2,135

2,092

1,255

1,255

34.6%

7.0%

91.0%

2.0%

60%

Other

1.7%

89

88

53

53

1.5%

43.5%

43.5%

13.0%

60%

DNV (new)

-

-

543

15.0%

45.0%

45.0%

10.0%

Margin

TOTAL

5,244

5,139

3,083

3,626

True Share

53.8%

42.8%

3.4%

11.0%

69.1%

Vote (000)

1,952

1,552

122

400

Uncounted

Total

Quinn

Rauner

Grimm

TVM

3626

1,952

1,552

121

Recorded

46.4%

50.3%

3.4%

-3.9%

Uncounted

108

81

23

3.6

Vote

1,681

1,823

122

-142

Cast

3734

2,033

1,575

125

CVS @ 10%

54.4%

42.5%

3.1%

11.9%

Share

54.5%

42.2%

3.4%

Vote

1,973

1,541

112

431

Kentucky 2015 Governor

Conway led in the pre-election polls.

Bevin won by 53.5-43.8%

KY registration is strongly Democratic 53.4D-38.8R.

Conway won by 49.3-47.0% assuming 40% Democratic turnout and 45.7% Republican.  Conway won the CVS by 49.1-46.8% and the TVM by 48.8-47.5%.

Split

Voters

Turnout

Votes

Conway

Bevin

Curtis

Dem

53.4%

1,227

40.0%

491

88%

9%

3%

Rep

38.8%

892

45.7%

407

4%

92%

4%

Ind

7.8%

179

42.4%

76

42%

51%

7%

2,298

42.4%

974

49.3%

47%

3.7%

Massachusetts 2014 Governor

Baker (R) won by 48.5-46.6%.

Registered  Democrats far outnumbered Republicans (35-10%).

Coakley won by 55.7-39.5% assuming just 60% Democratic turnout vs. 86% Republican and an equal  47% split of Independents. She won the CVS by 56.0-40.6% and the TVM by 55.6-39.5%, a triple confirmation.

Split

Reg

Turnout

Votes

Coakley

Baker

Other

Dem

35.3%

1,147

60.0%

688

91%

5%

4%

Rep

10.9%

354

86.0%

304

9%

87%

4%

Ind

53.8%

1,749

66.1%

1,156

47%

47%

6%

3,250

66.1%

2149

55.7%

39.4%

4.9%


Maryland 2014 Governor

Hogan (R ) won by 51.0-47.2% in a strong  Democratic state 

Brown won the CVS by 52.9-45.5%. He won the TVM by 56.4-41.9%.

Split

Reg

Turnout

Votes

Brown

Hogan

Other

54.9%

1,644

54.0%

888

89%

9%

2%

25.7%

770

66.1%

509

5%

94%

1%

19.4%

581

57.9%

336

47%

51%

2%

2,995

57.9%

1,733

56.2%

42.1%

1.7%

Note the disparity between election day voting and early, absentee and provisional voting

   

Votes

Total

Brown

Share

Hogan

Share

Other

Share

Early

305,594

164,219

53.74%

136,781

44.76%

4,594

1.50%

Election Day

1,342,837

608,476

45.31%

710,854

52.94%

23,507

1.75%

Abs/prov

84,746

46,195

54.51%

36,765

43.38%

1,786

2.11%

Total Recorded

1,733,177

818,890

47.25%

884,400

51.03%

29,887

1.72%

Early/abs/prov

390,340

210,414

53.91%

173,546

44.46%

6,380

1.63%

CVS @ 10%

1,342,837

667,390

49.70%

652,619

48.60%

22,828

1.70%

Adj. Total

1,733,177

877,804

50.65%

826,165

47.67%

29,208

1.69%


Michigan 2014 Governor

Snyder (R) won  by  51.0-46.8%. To match the recorded vote, 1) Snyder needed  19% of returning Obama voters, 2) Independents increased from 19% (registered) to 31% (Party-ID), and 3) Snyder won Indies by 64-33%. All implausible.

Schauer (D) won the true vote by 52.4-45.3%.

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Schauer

Snyder

Other

Turnout

Obama

54.1%

2,565

2,514

1,508

1,508

48.1%

91.0%

7.0%

2.0%

60%

Romney

44.6%

2,115

2,073

1,244

1,244

39.6%

7.0%

91.0%

2.0%

60%

Other

1.3%

60

59

35

35

1.1%

48.0%

48.0%

4.0%

60%

Did Not Vote (new)

-

-

351

11.2%

48.0%

48.0%

4.0%

Margin

TOTAL

4,740

4,645

2,787

3,138

Share

52.4%

45.3%

2.2%

7.1%

66.2%

Vote

1,645

1,422

70

223

Exit Poll

Party-ID

Pct

Schauer

Snyder

Other

Democrat

39%

88.4%

9.6%

2%

Republican

30%

7%

91.0%

2%

Other

31%

33%

64.0%

3%

Share

100%

46.8%

50.9%

2.3%

Vote

1,469

1,597

72

Registration

Pct

Schauer

Snyder

Other

Democrat

44%

92.1%

5.9%

2%

Republican

37%

7%

91.0%

2%

Other

19%

49%

48.0%

3%

Vote

100%

52.4%

45.4%

2.2%

1,645

1,424

69


Vermont 2014 Governor

Shumlin (D) won a squeaker 46.4-45.3%. But it should not have been so close.

Registered Democrats led Republicans by 47-31%.

Shumlin won the True Vote by 54-40%

Model Assumptions

  1. Shulin had just 86% of returning Obama voters and 4% of Romney voters.
  2. Equal 60% turnout
  3. Equal 42% share of Independents.

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Shumlin

Milne

Other

Turnout

Obama

66.1%

198

194

107

107

54.9%

86.0%

11.0%

3.0%

55%

Romney

31.0%

93

91

59

59

30.4%

4.0%

93.0%

3.0%

65%

Other

2.9%

9

8

6

6

2.8%

40.0%

40.0%

20.0%

65%

DNV (new)

-

-

23

11.8%

40.0%

40.0%

20.0%

Margin

TOTAL

299

293

171

194

Share

54.3%

40.2%

5.5%

14.1%

Vote

105

78

11

27

Registration

Split

Voters

Turnout

Votes

Shumlin

Milne

Other

Dem

47.0%

152

59.9%

91

90.0%

5.0%

5.0%

Rep

31.0%

100

59.9%

60

6.0%

89.0%

5.0%

Ind

22.0%

71

59.9%

43

42.0%

42.0%

16.0%

324

59.9%

194

53.4%

39.2%

7.4%


2014 Fair Governor Elections (matched the True Vote)

CO:  Dem 49.1-46.2%

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Hickenlooper

Beauprez

Other

Turnout

Obama

51.5%

1,324

1,297

908

908

45.6%

90.0%

5.0%

5.0%

70%

Romney

46.1%

1,186

1,162

814

814

40.8%

7.4%

87.6%

5.0%

70%

Other

2.4%

61

60

42

42

2.1%

48.5%

48.5%

3.0%

70%

DNV

-

-

229

11.5%

49.0%

48.0%

3.0%

Margin

TOTAL

2,571

2,520

1,764

1,993

Share

50.7%

44.6%

4.7%

6.1%

77.5%

Vote

1,010

889

94

121

OR Dem 49.9-44.1%

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Kitzhaber

Richardson

Other

Turnout

Obama

54.2%

970

950

713

713

48.5%

87.0%

8.0%

5.0%

75%

Romney

42.2%

755

740

555

555

37.8%

5.0%

90.0%

5.0%

75%

Other

3.6%

64

63

47

47

3.2%

50.0%

45.0%

5.0%

75%

DNV

-

-

154

10.5%

44.0%

46.0%

10.0%

Margin

TOTAL

1,789

1,753

1,315

1,469

Share

50.3%

44.2%

5.5%

6.2%

Vote

739

649

81

91

PA Dem 54.9-45.1%

2012

Recorded

Votes

Alive

Return

Votes

Pct

Wolf

Corbett

Turnout

Obama

52.0%

2,992

2,932

1,613

1,613

46.5%

92.0%

8.0%

55%

Romney

46.6%

2,681

2,628

1,445

1,445

41.7%

16.0%

84.0%

55%

Other

1.4%

81

79

43

43

1.3%

55.0%

45.0%

55%

DNV

-

-

369

10.6%

55.0%

45.0%

Margin

TOTAL

5,754

5,639

3,101

3,470

 Share

56.0%

44.0%

11.9%


2014 Senate Exit Polls: Where are the Minority Vote shares?

NC 2014

MoE

2783

respondents

2.41%

Reported

Hagan

Tillis

Haugh

Whiite

74%

33%

62%

4%

Black

21%

96%

3%

1%

Hispanic

3%

na

na

na

Asian

1%

na

na

na

Other

1%

na

na

na

Share

95%

44.6%

46.5%

3.2%

Recorded

100%

47.3%

48.8%

3.7%

Adjusted

Hagan

Tillis

Haugh

Whiite

74%

33%

62%

4%

Black

21%

96%

3%

1%

Hispanic

3%

70%

20%

10%

Asian

1%

70%

20%

10%

Other

1%

70%

20%

10%

True share

100%

48.1%

47.5%

3.7%

Recorded

100%

47.3%

48.8%

3.7%

AK 2014

MoE

1826

respondents

2.98%

Reported

Begich

Sullivan

Other

Whiite

78%

45%

49%

6%

Black

3%

na

na

na

Hispanic

5%

na

na

na

Asian

6%

na

na

na

Alaskan

8%

57%

38%

5%

Share

86.0%

39.7%

41.3%

5.1%

Recorded

100%

47.3%

48.8%

3.7%

Adjusted

Begich

Sullivan

Other

Whiite

78%

45%

49%

6%

Black

3%

94%

4%

2%

Hispanic

5%

50%

47%

3%

Asian

6%

50%

47%

3%

Alaskan

8%

57%

38%

5%

Share

100%

48.0%

46.6%

5.5%

Recorded

100%

45.6%

48.8%

5.6%

CO 2014

MoE

994

resp.

4.04%

Reported

Udall

Gardner

Other

White

80%

45%

50%

5%

Black

3%

na

na

na

Hispanic

13%

na

na

na

Asian

1%

na

na

na

Other

3%

na

na

na

Share

80%

45.0%

50.0%

5.0%

Recorded

100%

46.0%

48.5%

5.5%

Adjusted

White

80%

45%

50%

5%

Black

3%

95%

5%

0%

Hispanic

13%

60%

40%

0%

Asian

1%

60%

40%

0%

Other

3%

60%

40%

0%

Share

100%

49.1%

47.0%

4.0%

Recorded

100%

46.0%

48.5%

5.5%


Mathematicians

 - Beth Clarkson,  PhD,  analysis of 2014 cumulative vote share anomalies: How Trustworthy are Electronic Voting Systems in the US

- G.F.  Webb of Vanderbilt University: Statistical study reveals a correlation of large precincts and increased fraction of Republican votes: Precinct Size Matters: The Large Precinct Bias in US Presidential Elections

- Francois Choquette and James Johnson: anomalies in the 2012 primaries: 2008/2012 Election Anomalies, Results, Analysis and Concerns

- Kathy Dopp is an expert on election auditing: Were the 2014 United States Senatorial and Gubernatorial Elections Manipulated? 

 Open Source HUMBOLDT Software: http://www.esdi-humboldt.eu/open-source.html

Blog: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/

Book: Matrix of Deceit