Unadjusted 2000 State Exit Polls (and the True Vote Model) indicate Al Gore won by 5-7 million votes

[Richard Charnin]

Last edited Fri Dec 16, 2011, 07:20 PM - Edit history (1)

First there was the 2000 Judicial Coup and then the long-running media con that Bush really did win. Let's take another look.

Source article with links to 1988-2008 unadjusted state exit poll data and the 1988-2008 State and National True Vote Model (Google Doc spreadsheet workbooks):
http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/unadjusted-state-exit-polls-indicate-that-al-gore-won-a-mini-landslide-in-2000/

Al Gore won the unadjusted state exit polls (58,000 respondents) by 50.8-44.4%, a 6 MILLION VOTE MARGIN compared to the 540,000 recorded. There were nearly 6 MILLION UNCOUNTED votes - the great majority were Gore votes.

The True Vote Model, based on 1996 and 2000 votes cast, was a close match to Gore's exit poll share. He had a 50.0% True share assuming he had 75% of 8 million returning 1996 voters whose ballots were uncounted and 75% of 6 million uncounted votes in 2000.

Gore won the unadjusted exit poll in the following 11 states:
AL AR AZ CO FL GA MO NC TN TX VA
But all flipped to Bush. Gore would have won the election if he held just ONE.

The 9.8% exit poll/recorded vote margin discrepancy was exceeded in 10 states:
TX AL NC TN GA AR ID MD SC FL

The theft was a prologue of what was to come in 2004 and 2008.

In 2004, the margin discrepancy exceeded 10% in 15 states:
VT DE AK CT SC VA NJ HI NH MS PA UT MN NM OH

In 2008, the 10% margin discrepancy was exceeded in an astounding 28 states.

[Peace Patriot]

1. To those who say, "Get over it!," I say, "No way!"

I will never "get over" the theft our democracy.

And, believe me, if you "get over" one stolen election, there will be more--and there HAVE BEEN more, in an ever-escalating destruction of our country.

We are at the point where the entire country has suffered the coup d'etat of corporate-run 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting--the latest device of the Corporate Rulers and War Profiteers for oppressing us and looting us blind. I believe that that's where we have to start--by throwing these 'TRADE SECRET' voting systems into 'Boston Harbor' (so to speak). We need a REAL "Tea Party"! We need to restore vote counting to the PUBLIC venue before any other reform is possible. It is the bottom line of democracy.

[ecoalex2]

5. Tabulation

With the banning of exit polls,and the voting machine irregularities,and ease of hacking,one needs to focus on tabulation how Ohio threw the Kerry election to bush.A recap: the Ohio servers "went down" tabulation from precincts was then sent to Kentucky,in the basement of the GOP for that state.When bush went to bed,he thought he has lost.After 45 minutes having precinct data sent to Ky tabulation was sent back to Ohio. Voila,bush was ahead.The reason Mr Connel died in a suspicious plane crash was he was testifying about this when he died.

It really doesn't matter what the precinct machines vote count is,when State tabulation is where the fraud occurs.

The question is why both political parties will not agree to an audit-able verified tabulation system?

Why do both parties turn a blind eye to our sacred right to an accurate vote count?

The answer sadly is our political system is a facade for the real puppet masters behind a curtain.

Until this system is exposed,and ferreted out,we will have straw men as President,and a Congress that is a false front ,not a body of representatives.

[Peace Patriot]

6. You are so right, ecoalex2, on every point!

I especially noticed this:

"It really doesn't matter what the precinct machines vote count is,when State tabulation is where the fraud occurs."

We have to look for the fraud up the chain of 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting, to the central tabulators, to the state (and sometimes to adjacent states)!

This also is notable:

"The question is why both political parties will not agree to an audit-able verified tabulation system?"

It totally blew my mind when I realized that our Democratic Party leadership was going along with 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting. I don't think I've ever been so shocked by a political act (and that's saying something).

At first I felt so goddamned alone! I felt utterly abandoned by the leaders of the party that I had been loyal to, and voted for, and donated to, and worked for, for half a century. And then I thought: "All right then, we're on our own. We, the people of the United States, have no one protecting our interests. We have to do it ourselves."

Maybe that's a good thing to learn. This is OUR country. This is OUR democracy. And this is OUR voting system, by which we transfer a portion of OUR sovereignty, temporarily, to our government representatives, to act in our interests. WE must restore transparent vote counting. WE must restore our own sovereignty. No one in office is going to do it for us.

I soon realized also that I was not alone. A whole lot of wonderful people were going through the same realization. In fact, one of our first gatherings was here at DU in the old election fraud forum. But, my Lord, it was a chilling moment for me, before I realized that there were others and sought them out.

Just in case you don't know: The Anthrax Congress, which did this to us (fast-tracked 'TRADE SECRET' voting counting all over the U.S.), did NOT mandate 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting. This coup d'etat was engineered by corrupt lobbying. There is NO federal law that we have to use these machines to vote (not yet anyway). Power over the voting system still resides at the local/state level, where ordinary people have more potential power. (For instance, your local county registrar of voters might live right down the street from you.) Thus, it is still possible to throw these machines into 'Boston Harbor' (so to speak) at the state/local level. But it will take a widespread citizen movement, all over the country.

I tell you this because it gives me hope--and that is hard to come by, once you realize how rigged, and how riggable, the election system has become. There IS a way to reverse this horror!

I should also say that everyone should STILL VOTE--for several reasons, but primarily because we should never, ever, EVER give up on our right to vote. The other reasons have to do with how the system is being played by the riggers. A big turnout, for instance, forces them more into the open. They have to take more risks and arouse more suspicions. So I am FOR voting, despite what I know about the system. But voting alone is not enough. We have to restore vote counting to the PUBLIC venue. And only then will we have a fighting chance at critically needed reforms.

[Richard Charnin]

7. Bob Fitrakis on the latest Ohio evidence: a new court filing

Bob was interviewed on OpEd News.

"In the new court filing in the King-Lincoln-Bronzeville case, instead of us and others being dismissed as "conspiracy theorists," people can make up their own minds. They can look at the architectural map showing how J. Kenneth Blackwell, then-Ohio Secretary of State, allowed private contractors to outsource the Ohio 2004 presidential vote count on election night to a private company, SmarTech, in Chattanooga, Tennessee".

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Bob-Fitrakis-on-New-Eviden-by-Joan-Brunwasser-110728-924.html

[Richard Charnin]

2. Correction: Gore won MN and NM

I misread the numbers.

[Sancho]

3. I'm glad to see Richard back...

I don't know the history at DU, but I read his book and I've followed his models. Even though the "legal" proof may not be there, and even though the statistical evidence is post hoc and based on sparse data - Richard presents some discrepancies in the data that defy easy explanations. Some may reject anything unproven as suspect. Some may create ct's. Some may create weird explanations (reluctant responders). Objectively, elections should not have unexplained discrepancies.

One reason that I got involved with DU was when I personally witnessed a DRE apparently flipping votes in Florida. Regardless, I think confidence in our voting is essential for future elections; and Richard clearly advocates a transparent and verifiable process.

Hopefully, the pot shots will be few and the rational discussions will be many.

[Wilms]

4. I agree with the points raised in your first paragraph.

Charnin's numbers don't prove anything. But neither do the "official" exit poll numbers which his work helps to underscore.

And he rightly points to a major discrepancy in NY in 2004. He wrongly pointed to the lever machine as the culprit despite being shown how that can't be the issue. He does, rightly, take issue with the computerized tally of the individual lever machine totals. But that's NOT the lever machines fault. Those numbers should be derived by a manual aggregation at the election district level, then at the county, then at the state---as should be the case with opscan sub-totals.