I AM REPOSTING MICHAEL GREEN'S INSIGHTFUL ANSWER TO RICHARD CHARNIN'S QUESTION: WHY DIDN'T CNN UPDATE ITS ELECTION WEBSITE TO INCLUDE THE 4.15 MILLION VOTES THAT CAME IN AFTER ROMNEY CONCEDED?

---

I am reposting Richard Charnin’s good analysis of the late-counted votes, but with enlarged fonts and separated line to make it readable.  Richard’s point is simple but should be made explicitly.  After Romney threw in the towel and there was no longer any active motivation to rig the remaining vote count, that remaining vote count gives us a better estimate and view of the actual voting distribution; this in turns gives us an excellent estimate of the extent of the routine fraud, notwithstanding the sampling bias (hah!) in the late-counted votes.  Richard asks why CNN has not updated its figures.  The better question is why CNN, the mainstream media generally, and the Obama DOJ does not leap to attention and bring the brigands to justice.  The answer is that the fraud that Richard and others have uncovered is and remains in the realm of state crimes, i.e., crimes done by elements of the rulings class with ties to the intelligence and finance community, often using their resources to organize lower level troops at the grounds level, that are too deep and long-standing to challenge without an overt war within the ruling class that risks involving the people directly, a contingency that all parties agree is to be avoided at all costs.  The problem is not and has never been that the upper levels of power of the "Democratic" party do not know what is happening; they know very well.  But their means of exercising their power, and exercise it they have been doing, avoid democratic process and participation at all costs.

Regards,  Michael Green

The CNN 2008 Election site shows Obama winning by 66.88-58.43 million votes, an 8.55 million margin. The final recorded vote was 69.50-59.95, a 9.55 million margin, exactly 1.0 million higher. Why has CNN not updated the 2008 Election website to include the final 4.15 million votes?

Obama had 63.1% of the final 4.15 million votes. He had 52.9% of the full 131 million recorded.

What is the MoE for a 4 million polling sample? {Hint: just about zero.}

Blogger's clarification: MoE stands for Margin of Error.. Think about this!  At the end of a proof, the mathematician writes "Q.E.D."

From: Richard Charnin

To: ElectionIntegrity@googlegroups.com

Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 12:03 PM

Subject: [ei] Re: The Late Recorded Votes: A confirmation of the True Vote?

The CNN 2008 Election site shows Obama winning by 66.88-58.43 million votes, an 8.55 million margin. The final recorded vote was 69.50-59.95, a 9.55 million margin, exactly 1.0 million higher. Why has CNN not updated the 2008 Election website to include the final 4.15 million votes?

Obama had 63.1% of the final 4.15 million votes. He had 52.9% of the full 131 million recorded.

What is the MoE for a 4 million polling sample?
On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:34:38 PM UTC-5, Richard Charnin wrote:

The CNN 2008 Election site shows Obama winning by 66.88-58.43 million votes, an 8.55 million margin. The final recorded vote was 69.50-59.95, a 9.55 million margin, exactly 1.0 million higher. Why has CNN not updated the 2008 Election website to include the final 4.15 million votes?

On Saturday, November 10, 2012 12:12:28 PM UTC-5, Richard Charnin wrote:

The Late Recorded Votes: A confirmation of the True Vote?

http://richardcharnin. wordpress.com/2012/11/09/the- late-recorded-votes-a- confirmation-of-the-true-vote/

Richard Charnin

Nov. 10, 2012

In the 2000, 2004, and 2008 elections, the late votes recorded after Election Day showed a dramatic increase in Democratic vote shares. 

2000- 102.6 million votes recorded on Election Day. Gore led 48.3-48.1%. 

Gore had 55.6% of the 2.7 million late votes.

2004- 116.7 million votes recorded on Election Day. Bush led 51.6-48.3%. 

Kerry had 54.2% of the 4.8 million late 2-party votes.

2008- 121 million votes recorded on Election Day. Obama led 52.3-46.3%. 

Obama won the 10.2 million late votes by 59.2-37.5%.

http://uselectionatlas. org/RESULTS/data.php?year= 2012&datatype=national& amp;def=1&f=0&off=0& amp;elect=0">Dave Leip’s US Election Atlas

provides updated state votes which are included in the https://docs.google.com/ spreadsheet/ccc?key= 0AjAk1JUWDMyRdDQzLWJTdlppakNRN DlMakhhMGdGa0E#gid=29">2012 Forecasting model.

I am calculating the incremental changes in the vote count on a  daily basis. Check the updates right here.

Nov.8 - Obama led by 50.34-48.07% (117.45 million recorded votes)

Nov.9 - he led by 50.43-47.97% (119.58 million recorded)

Nov.10- he led by 50.51-47.87% (122.20 million recorded)

Obama leads by 54.65-42.96% in the 4.75 million late votes.

The True Vote Model indicated that he had an approximate 55% True Vote. A coincidence? 

The late votes can be viewed as a proxy for the unadjusted exit polls -  a very big exit poll with millions of respondents who told the pollster exactly how they voted. Of course, we won't see the unadjusted exit polls until years later. And 19 states were not even exit polled this time. All we have is the National Exit Pol which is always forced to match the recorded vote. It shows that Obama was a 50-48% winner. But all the demographic crosstabs were forced to conform to the recorded vote. I included them in the 2012 Presidential True Vote /Election Fraud Forecast Model in which I calculated total vote shares.

As is the case in every presidential election since 1988, the Democrat Obama did much better than the recorded vote. If they are to be believed, the Late Votes are  another confirmation of systematic election fraud. Let’s see what happens as the recorded votes continue to come in.

Why would the late votes always show an increase in the Democratic vote share?

- Could it be that since the winner has been decided, there is no longer an incentive on the part of the perennial vote thieves to continue switching late votes? Plausible.

- Could it be that the late votes are paper ballots (provisionals, absentees) and not from DREs? Absolutely. 

- Could it be that the late votes are coming in from Democratic strongholds? Maybe some, but surely not all.

You decide.