Five Democratic Primaries: Exit Poll Discrepancies and Win Probabilities.

[nc4bo]

Commentary is from my FB friend Bob Lamb.

DUers good at diciphering numbers and statistics, please comment!

Here's what he said:

In-depth analysis using exit polls of how Clinton's vote totals were padded in five states (North Carolina, Missouri, Illinois, Ohio, and Florida), which gave her undeserved wins in Illinois and Missouri and, more important, an extra 102 pledged delegates. In earlier analyses, this happened in Massachusetts (which flipped the state to Clinton) and Michigan as well. There is absolutely no excuse for this in an alleged democracy.

Now here's the chart and Richard Charinin's comments are in the link:

[IMG][/IMG]

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/03/16/five-democratic-primaries-exit-poll-discrepancies-and-win-probabilities/

Effects of Election Fraud on the Delegate count

Officially, HRC has 8,653,327 votes (58.6%), Bernie has 6,115,550 (41.4%).

Applying the approximate 6.6% exit poll discrepancy (972,168 of 14,768,877 total votes), HRC has 8,167,189 votes and Bernie 6,601,688 (55.3-44.7%).

Clinton leads by 306 delegates (1119-813). Applying Clinton’s adjusted 55.3% share of the current 1932 delegates, she leads by just 204 (1068-864). Super delegates are excluded.

Clinton’s votes appear to have been padded in the RED states to increase her delegate count.

(Bolded emphasis is mine) More at the link.

[lostnfound]

1. Note to all: this doesn't mean that Hillary herself knew it

Lots of people have a stake in who gets elected. It is not necessary to believe that Hillary was personally involved, in order to worry about the integrity of the election.

Thank you for putting this together. As a person who watched with dismay at the voting patterns in 2004, it is my strong opinion that central tabulators and evote machines in general can be tools for election fraud.

On edit:
It's much more important to root out problems with election integrity than it is to turn into finger-pointing at the candidate, without evidence.

[Blue Meany]

2. If the discrepancy is with exit polls then any

fraud or glitch would have to come from the voting process or the counting. Any consistencies among these five primaries (e.g., the same vendor) that would suggest an explanation? If not, then perhaps we should look just at Ohio to see if there were any complaints or problems.

I do think that Hillary has benefited in the primary from Republican voter suppression, as well as the incompetence which has caused long lines and ballot shortages, but that doesn't make her campaign responsible. The most suspicious primary is Arizona, which coincided with a hack of the Sanders database and which seemed to mainly affect his supporters. But I think this is be looked at seriously by the state, and with the use of digital forensics, they may be able to track down the culprits.