Richard Charnin’s 2010 Midterm House and Senate Forecast Models: RV/LV Polls and Election Fraud bit.ly/cbsrMx11/01 Charnin Midterms Model: The Fraud Component
Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll) source: http://richardcharnin.com/2010ElectionForecastModels.htmNov 1, 2010The Fraud ComponentSince 2000, LV poll projections have closely matched
recorded vote-count shares, while
RV poll projections closely matched
unadjusted and
preliminary state and national
exit polls.
In each election, the final exit polls were "forced" to match the recorded vote-count. .
In 2004 and 2008, the Final National Exit Poll required impossible returning-Bush-voter turnout in order to match the recorded vote. Since pre-election LV poll predictions also matched the recorded vote, what can we conclude?Pre-election:
Fraud factor = Registered voter (RV) projection – Likely voter (LV) projection (i.e. recorded vote)SenateFraud factor =
3.9% = 54.3 – 50.4
Each additional
1% vote-switch results in a
1-seat gain for the GOP
(Table 5).
HouseFraud factor =
3.0% = 53.3 - 50.3
Each additional
1% vote-switch results in a
4-seat gain for the GOP
(Table 7).
Post-election:
Fraud factor = Unadjusted exit poll – Final exit poll (forced to matched the recorded vote) (Note: The mainstream media (
National Election Pool)
did not release unadjusted-state or
un-forced preliminary-national
exit polls in 2008, and they won’t in 2010, either.
Table 5
GOP Forecast Sensitivity to Undecided Voter Allocation and Vote Switch
Undecided Voter Allocation and Vote-Switch increments applied to RV poll projection (zero fraud)
RV&LV
RV/LV – Undecided Vote Allocation to GOP
40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
VoteSwitch GOP
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
3.0
3.9
5.0
6.2
7.3
3.6
4.7
5.8
7.0
8.1
4.3
5.2
6.5
7.7
8.7
4.9
6.1
7.3
8.5
9.4
5.6
6.7
8.0
8.9
9.8
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
44.0
44.9
46.0
47.2
48.3
44.6
45.7
46.8
48.0
49.1
45.3
46.2
47.5
48.7
49.7
45.9
47.1
48.3
49.5
50.4
46.6
47.7
49.0
49.9
50.8
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore