Late Votes and the True Vote Model indicate that Obama may have won by 16 million votes
Richard Charnin
Nov. 26, 2012
Just like in 2000, 2004, and 2008, the Democrat Obama did much better in the 2012 Late Vote than he did on Election Day. But why should 2012 have been any different?
Obama had to overcome the 4-5% fraud factor. In every election, the Late Vote has closely matched the True Vote Model and unadjusted exit polls. This analysis shows that Obama must have done much better than his 50.8-47.5% margin of 126.87 million votes, of which 9.4 million were recorded after Election Day.
We do not have the 2012 state and national unadjusted polls. In fact just 31 states were exit polled. All we have are the adjusted polls that are always forced to match the recorded vote.
The usual suspects will attempt to thrash this analysis and call it another "conspiracy theory". But they cannot refute that it confirms the conclusion that systemic election fraud reduced the 1988-2008 Democratic unadjusted exit poll (52-42%) and True Vote (53-41%) to the recorded 48-46% margin.
Pundits and naysayers are quick to accept the recorded result as gospel as they do in every election. They will say that Obama won by a solid 4 million vote margin. But once again, a true Democratic landslide was denied.
Based on the historical record, late votes recorded after Election Day closely matched the unadjusted state exit polls. But exit poll naysayers cannot use the bogus faith-based canard that exit poll respondents misrepresented how they voted or that the discrepancy was the result of a differential exit poll response in which Democrats were more anxious to be interviewed than shy, grumpy Republicans.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
1
