Youre not just imagining it: the Hillary Clinton vs Donald Trump vote totals do look rigged

[FrenchieCat]

As a political journalist, I hate empty conspiracy theories. I like to go where the bulk of the evidence is pointing. So even though I’m as shocked at Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton as anyone else, I have been unwilling to preemptively accuse the vote totals of having been rigged or altered. It’s taken me nine days of looking at the numbers and trends and patterns, but I’ve come to the conclusion that for once, the conspiracy theorists appear to have been right: this election looks rigged

Examples of why at the link
http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/youre-not-just-imagining-it-the-hillary-clinton-vs-donald-trump-vote-totals-do-look-rigged/104/

[cilla4progress]

1. I'm like you

Pretty grounded but this stinks. The NSA Director and Sen. Graham agree.

[cilla4progress]

2. Question

Were the senatorial votes also rigged?

[Coyotl]

39. Senate race states have a higher red shift. Battleground states have a higher red shift too.

The battleground states have polls with large numbers of respondents in both pre-election and exit polling. Therefore, they are more accurate, less margin of error; what they tell us is more reliable than in other states. See in the graphic how closely the two poll numbers match in the battleground. So, either the science of statistics has become flawed recently or something is very wrong. Two things could be wrong, the vote count or the science involved in polling. The statistics hasn't changed since the national average was a 1.45% red shift in 2004. Now in 2016, in the 20 Senate race states, the average is more than triple that at 4.7%, same as the mean of the four battleground states. The red shift is a multiple of the margin of error!

[Coyotl]

58. Exit polls: 2016 compared to 2004

"Another graphic, this to compare 2004 and 2016 exit polling in the 20 contested Senate race states with polling. The same Senate seats were contested. Presidential results minus exit polls equals a + shift for the percentage more Republican votes than exit polling reports. The 2004 mean was +1.9% and normally distributed, the 2016 mean was +4.7% and the trendline increases in red states. States sorted red to blue from left to right."

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/electionintegrity/CKgvhwJ6Src

[geomon666]

3. I'm sorry but I can't take anything Bill Palmer says seriously.

He's just not a legitimate journalist.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Why! Because he supported Hillary too much

And you originally supported Bernie?

[KittyWampus]

41. He talks about the African American vote as if it's the same. It isn't. It's the first vote

since Voting Rights Act repealed and new laws on the books.

[ehrnst]

18. I feel that way about Greenwald now. (nt)

[LibraLiz1973]

4. If nothing else he says is accurate

Pennsylvania was a shock. What I'd really like to know is why NO ONE is DOING anything about this?
Why aren't reporters reporting? Why aren't Democrats investigating? Why isn't Obama pushing for... something?
The defending silence from the Dems & Barack is what makes me think the results are correct. if they smelled smoke... wouldn't they be doing something?

[lake loon]

5. Pa was less of a shock for me

I live here in the Harrisburg area, and the Trump signs outnumbered the Clinton signs, like, 100-to-1. It was that bad. It was never like this in previous presidential election years.

[LibraLiz1973]

6. I am originally from Delaware County (Phila burbs)

I expected her to squeak through in PA.
Have never been so glad to have moved west as I am post election

[Grey Lemercier]

7. and the Philly machine semi collapsed. PoC turned out less

and voted for the Dem less in massive numbers vis a vis 2008 and 2012 nationwide. Combine that with high rural white turnout you get what happened.

Personally I think many lied to exit polls. Ashamed to admit a Trump vote. Not everyone of his voters was an overt racist prick, many were stealth white priviledge retainer votes.

[Fast Walker 52]

24. I do feel like a lot of people lied and were ashamed to tell people they supported Trump

I bet a lot of women, in particular.

Obviously he had a lot of loud supporters, but I bet he had a bunch that were not too proud of supporting him.

Just my feeling from living in Indiana.

That being said, I do not rule out hacking of the vote at all.

[PRETZEL]

29. I'm in Montco

same here. There were very few Clinton signs. Wasn't many more Trump signs but I'd say there was more.

Most of the signs I saw were down ticket and state rep races.

[pnwmom]

13. They use a type of machine in PA that can't be audited -- no paper trail. n/t

[The Wielding Truth]

14. Exactly.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

52. How is this not seen as totally unacceptable by every citizen?

What can we do about it?

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

51. Same here.

WTF??!!

[Arkansas Granny]

8. I don't ordinarily get into conspiracy theories, but, in light of the hacking that we know occurred

with DNC emails, I would like to see some investigation into this issue.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Me neither...

[jimlup]

11. so it occurred to me that all you would have to do

would be to flip votes to "random" in heavy democratic precincts. Because we use electronic voting machines in most places now this is possible. I don't have specific understanding of the voting machine hardware and software but it seems that it would be simple enough.

What if I bought a huge magnet with me near the voting machine? How secure are the electronics to interference/hacking? We must insist on a paper trail.

If true, the evidence would available in statistical form. I have not seen a statistical study yet that leads me to suspect hacking but it may be worth exploring.

[Bonn1997]

15. Not sure about this if you look at the results. Hillary won the two biggest counties by about the...

by about the same amounts as Obama did in 2012.

[jimlup]

27. I looked briefly

and the vote totals don't seem to indicate tampering. Before proceeding with a "vote tampering" conspiracy theory I would research the vote totals carefully because that is where it would show up. You are correct, I think the vote totals I've seen indicate no tampering.

[KewlKat]

17. so you agree that it was hacked. I see you joined just prior to the election.

and we're not racists!, you hacked the wrong side.

[phylny]

19. Пожалуйста, объясните, пожалуйст

You wrote:

Of course it was falsifitsirova & #
You are most welcome, racists!

[KewlKat]

16. I couldn't agree more with the conclusion! Now what can we do about it?

The last paragraph -

In order to believe that the official vote tallies are legitimate, you have to accept that all of the above legitimately happened:

African-Americans in the south went from turning out in droves for Hillary Clinton in the primary to not caring if she won the general election.

Donald Trump got perhaps seventy percent of the same-day voting in Florida.

The polling averages were wrong for the first time in modern history.

Trump beat his poll numbers despite having spent the primary season tending to fall below them.

Clinton fell below her poll numbers despite having spent the primary season tending to beat them.

In every state where Trump pulled off a shocking upset victory, he just happened to do it with one percent of the vote.

And in an election that everyone cared particularly deeply about, no one really turned out to vote at all.


I can accept any one of the above things happening as an isolated fluke. I cannot accept all the above happening. And so for once in my evidence-driven career, I’m left to believe that the conspiracy theorists are right: the vote tallies are rigged.

[Bonn1997]

23. Some of those claims are questionable.

I'm not challenging the conclusion. I have no idea if the results were legitimate or not, and I am concerned about the issue.
But there was an RCP article showing that the pre-election polls were actually closer this year than in 2012 and a 538 article that turnout was barely down.

I can't seem to find the RCP article now but here's the 538 one.
[link:http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-voter-turnout-wasnt-way-down-from-2012/|

[Snarkoleptic]

22. Old: Clumsy Rove-era election fraud New:Sophisticated and subtle Russian hacking

Add to that voter ID laws, interstate cross-check, misinformation campaigns and outright voter intimidation and here we are.

And don't get me started on the tech. platform. Here's Bev Harris' video

and her website is a must-read-
http://blackboxvoting.org/

[Mc Mike]

25. I got this vid link from bradblog, snark.

The man who invented this "middle man / back door fractional voter architecture", allegedly for reporting "weighted results", is Jeffrey Dean. He worked for the Urosevich brothers, repug party members who created and ran the massive Diebold and ES&S voting machine companies. (Diebold keeps changing its name, it became Premier, merged with vote machine giant Sequoia, and is now called Dominion. It constantly changes name to cover its tracks.)

Jeff Dean is a convicted felon, whose convictions stem from computer hacking into banks. He was an employee of Egil Bud Krogh, the convicted repug party Nixon admin Watergate felon who ran the "plumbers unit". Krogh was an Erlichman aide who employed repug operatives G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt when they were engaging in election manipulation crimes in '72.

The candidate who "won" in 2016 employed repug party Watergate criminals Roger Stone and Paul Manafort. Drumpf and Stone's buddy, bircher infowars Alex Jones, was strongly involved in the 2016 campaign.

Bradblog is unimpeachable as a source, in my estimation. So are Mark Crispin Miller, RFK Junior, FreePress.org. But when you view the fraction magic video in youtube, you'll see that on the right side of the screen where youtubes related offerings are, bircher Jones videos will pop up, featuring an alleged interview Jones did with Bev Harris.

I'm not sure if it is her in the vid, I listened but couldn't tell. If it is her, she is a bad person and on the side of the people who stole the vote, or she is not very bright in terms of current events, and is easy to fool.

The man from TN who talks about the "double" architecture seems to be good.

[Snarkoleptic]

40. Speaking of "main in the middle" attacks.

Here's the story of the mysteriously deceased guy who did Bush's dirty work-
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/2319:new-court-filing-reveals-how-the-2004-ohio-presidential-election-was-hacked

The filing also includes the revealing deposition of the late Michael Connell. Connell served as the IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove. Connell ran the private IT firm GovTech that created the controversial system that transferred Ohio's vote count late on election night 2004 to a partisan Republican server site in Chattanooga, Tennessee owned by SmarTech. That is when the vote shift happened, not predicted by the exit polls, that led to Bush's unexpected victory. Connell died a month and a half after giving this deposition in a suspicious small plane crash.

Additionally, the filing contains the contract signed between then-Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell and Connell's company, GovTech Solutions. Also included that contract a graphic architectural map of the Secretary of State's election night server layout system.

Cliff Arnebeck, lead attorney in the King Lincoln case, exchanged emails with IT security expert Stephen Spoonamore. Arnebeck asked Spoonamore whether or not SmarTech had the capability to "input data" and thus alter the results of Ohio's 2004 election. Spoonamore responded: "Yes. They would have had data input capacities. The system might have been set up to log which source generated the data but probably did not."

Spoonamore explained that "they [SmarTech] have full access and could change things when and if they want."

[Mc Mike]

42. I remember that info about the SMARTech - GovTech operation, and Connell's 'accident'.

Same outfit accidentally 'lost' millions of congressionally subpoenaed e-mails from Rove and Gonzales over the felony firings of 9 US attorney generals. The repugs were really upset about lost e-mails, during the recent election, though.

I see that creep Blackwell is working for dRumpfenfuhrer's transition team, and that his orange nazi scammer boss had deleted tons of subpoenaed e-mails in a bunch of criminal cases against him. Odd, because usually repugs are so moral and consistent.

I wasn't around here when the Bev H / Andy S trouble occurred. I read a lot of her stuff over the years. As I said, Bradblog is a good source to me, and I got the fraction magic vid there. The man from TN who did the "double" expose seems good, but if she has any positive interactions with bircher jones, she's definitely problematic.

The info looks good, I would just find Bev far less trustworthy if that IS her getting interviewed by that pig.

[Snarkoleptic]

43. But Hillary had e-mail...or something...wait...look over here!

Gotta hand it to these authoritarians, they sure can manipulate the sheeple.

[Mc Mike]

55. Why manipulate the sheeple when you can manipulate the machines

that 'truthfully' report what the people think and believe?

[Lil Missy]

28. I thought Bev Harris turned out to be a crackpot.

[bigmonkey]

32. Being a crackpot does not equal being wrong about everything.

As I recall, when she turned out to be crackpotty, lots of people dropped the whole issue of whether the machinery was easy to hack. Just because someone is untrustworthy does not mean everything they say is wrong, rather that what they say can no longer be taken on their authority alone. As someone I read recently said (no citation, unfortunately) confusion is an authoritarian tool, and dropping lines of investigation that have merit, simply because they are associated with untrustworthy sources, produces confusion.

[Lil Missy]

35. Point well taken

[ramapo]

26. Nonsense

There are many million reasons why Hillary lost. Millions did not bother to vote. Obama voters flipped. In retrospect she ran a crappy campaign.

Trump will be inaugurated. We have one direction to go and that is forward.

How we resist his vile policies and make sure he is held accountable to those that we need to support. Covering all Americans for less with a really great health plan is top of my list. I don't think there is a chance in hell that Trump has any intention of doing this but he made the promise.

Forget the conspiracy theories. We've got a country to save from itself.

[bigmonkey]

31. Conspiracy theory is a dismissive term, and unworthy of the gravity of the situation.

This is not nonsense. If the machinery is effectively hacked, then everything else must necessarily be of secondary importance until the machinery is trustworthy. That is not the same as saying everything else is of no importance, of course there is still politics in a fatally-compromised system. Intelligent opposition can proceed on more than one front at a time.

[uponit7771]

34. No, math is more factual than our opinions... compounded voter suppression sense 2006

... is one of them and the numbers bear out above one percent.

You can't ADD the years of suppression the percentages have to be compounded relative to the amount of minority voter increase ... so the numbers stay proportional

[uponit7771]

33. 1, "It is statistically suspicious that in every state...... he won it by right around one percent"

It is statistically suspicious that in every state where Donald Trump pulled off an upset, he won it by right around one percent

[closeupready]

36. So why did Hillary concede the race?

[bigmonkey]

37. She wanted to "preserve confidence in the system".

My quotes, I'm not quoting her. I've been thinking about this at least since 2004. It first became an issue for me when I saw Bev Harris, who later became crackpotty, demonstrate to Howard Dean how easy it was at that time to alter election results. Nothing came of it, and he's no dummy, and was in charge of the DNC then. Her later crackpot status doesn't obviate the validity of that demonstration.

Since then, the question is, how come the Democrats never bring this up at a high level? My conclusion is that they think that undermining citizen confidence in the system is worse than losing elections. Perhaps they decided to work inconspicuously to improve the situation (they have, somewhat), and lately were hoping that this most recent election was so clearly Clinton's that they could blow by the problem and correct it with a Democratic congress, without letting on how corrupt the election process had been.

About ten years ago I did some research on Smedley Butler, and his investigated, substantiated testimony to Congress that a fascist group had tried to recruit him for a takeover of the U.S. government during FDR's tenure. Even though those hearings definitely took place, and were reported in the papers, the actual Congressional testimony is very difficult of access - minimal, practically suppressed. My take-away from that experience is that when actual subversion is discovered in the U.S., the un-discussed, customary pattern in official circles is to cover it up as much as possible, to (my quotes again) "preserve confidence in the system". This pattern might be repeating itself right now.

Retro-fitting that to the Smedley Butler case, I like to imagine that Roosevelt called a meeting with J.P.Morgan and his co-conspirators, and gave them a choice: support the New Deal, or hang. No need to confront them in public.

[closeupready]

38. Interesting theory, I appreciate it. You've reminded me that

I have several history books to get to (Titan, the First Tycoon, etc.), and I think I might try attacking one of them this weekend. Thanks again.

[Hekate]

45. Thank you for this info

[mountain grammy]

47. Interesting.. thanks.

[Mc Mike]

57. Alternatively to your 'preserving confidence' idea

In this system we live under, the President who we elect is not the top power in the land, but is instead at the top of the servant class for the actual power groups. The top power is the 8 financial groups laid out in James Stewart Martin's book All Honorable Men. They are: Mellon, Morgan, DuPont, Rockefeller, Kuhn-Loeb, the Cleveland group, the Chicago group, and the Boston group.

Those people own all the mass media outlets in the country via the media ownership consolidation laid out by FAIR and Project Censored. They own all the opinion polling companies, which are chock full of repug connections. They're the actual owners behind the repug owned and controlled electronic voting machine companies.

We won in '06, '08, '12 because the virulent repug elements in that big 8 saw the extremely high level of revulsion Americans felt towards them -- a revulsion that their fascistic and corrupt repug party servant class created -- and knew they couldn't get away with a steal. So they settled for a shave in Dem support numbers. We win when our candidates can overcome the lying propagandic messages from the media controlled by the power groups, and those groups monitor actual public opinion and see 80-90% actual public displeasure with their repug party servants and goals.

The winning candidates staff up their administrations with appointees who represent the different members of the big 8's interests, represent the coalition of certain elements within that big 8 who backed the winner. The 8 aren't monolithic, they operate against each other, and each individual one of the big 8 has factions within them that disagree internally.

Occasionally, you'll see a cabinet level shake up in a presidential admin, where someone resigns or gets forced out. Li'l bush's Treasury Sec Paul O'Neill came from Alcoa (a Mellon man), was forced out and wrote a tell-all book about li'l bush. He was replaced by John Snow from the railway industry (a Rockefeller man). That was a loss for the Mellon faction, but a few weeks after O'Neill's last day, Tom Ridge was named as first Cabinet Level Sec of Homeland Security. Ridge came from the Mellon's hometown, and had run the Mellon's home state as gov.

Huey Long ran as a Depression-era populist, since his assassination he's been slammed as a dangerous proto-fascist demagogue. But in his stump speeches he regularly named Morgan, Mellon, and Rockefeller as the main enemies of the people who's votes he was trying to get. After he was murdered, a bunch of right wing liars tried to pin the assassination on 'FDR bumping off the competition'. But one of Huey's aides, Sidney Songy, made open claims that a group from Standard Oil (Rockefeller) was actually behind Long's murder.

Thanks for your post, big m. I enjoyed reading it.

[Hekate]

44. Kick and Rec

[lonestarnot]

46. Why are we so fucking stupid to just sit back and take this?

[mountain grammy]

48. Republicans do this, I'm sure of it

They get power and use it to get more. Voting riights? Gone. Democracy? gone.

[BzaDem]

49. This article is pure nonsense.

He claims turnout dropped significantly, and that this is somehow a red flag. This is forgetting that millions of votes are still being counted. 2016 turnout will almost certainly exceed 2012 turnout in terms of absolute voters. (Nor would it actually be a red flag if turnout did go down.)

He then spends much of his article making comparisons to the primary electorate. The primary electorate is much smaller than the general electorate. Direct comparisons don't make sense.

Finally, he says polling averages have never been this wrong. The reality is quite the opposite. Polls were more wrong in 2014 and 2012 than they were in 2016. HRC will likely win the popular vote by 1.5-2 points when all the votes are counted, which is quite similar to the +3.3 average of the pre-election polls. Polls of the Midwestern swing states were off by a bit more, but these differences were not out of the ordinary (and were exacerbated by a lack of high quality polling in the midwest close to election day). In 2012, the polling averages understated Obama's support by 3 points, and in 2014, the polling averages understated Republicans by 3-4 points.

[tomp]

50. greg palast interview from truth dig

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/investigative_reporter_greg_palast_gop_stole_2016_election_20161116

suggests the real issue is uncounted votes.

[pbmus]

53. It has been obvious from the get go..

Basically, the selling of this election is happening as we speak by none other than those who go on tv and say that the Trumpster is our president and we cannot do anything but give him a chance...pure unadultered bs, law states that the winner must win fairly, not by rigging, stealing, altering, falsifying in other words hijacking this election.

WAKE UP and tell your rep to grow a set...

[C Moon]

54. I got that feeling when I was watching the election from 538.

they kept scrambling around trying to explain reasons for Clinton leads, suddenly becoming Trump wins.
I saw Florida go from what looked to be a Clinton win, to 120,000 votes suddenly appear for Trump and put him over the top.
It went that way all night. I finally turned it off when Clinton went from 80-some% to 60%.

[heaven05]

56. Rove taught all how to rig an election

this one probably had Roves invisible hands all over it. Not a peep out of the POS in the election cycle. We will have to literally fight to regain a semblance of a true vote in our so called democracy that has been ours in the past. Our modern electoral system has never really been without big money influence, so we never had that true a vote. But now many are going to have to literally fight for our lives against the forming cadres of brownshirts carrying out the coming edicts of the NNPA. Yes, our militarized police forces are already in place. The others are starting to try to attack, harass, intimidate ALL not white. Good luck ameriKKKa.