Richard Charnin’s 2010 Midterm House and Senate Forecast Models: RV/LV Polls and Election Fraud bit.ly/dakW23Richard Charnin (TruthIsAll) source: http://richardcharnin.com/2010ElectionForecastModels.htm October 15, 2010As we get closer to Election Day, we see a familiar pattern developing. The incessant media mantra is that the GOP is headed for a blowout win in the House with an outside chance of winning the Senate. Pre-election polls all interview
registered (RV) voters;
likely voter (LV) polls are a
sub-sample based on a
likely voter cutoff model (LVCM).
But the widely-followed realclearpolitics.com and other election sites show only the LV samples. The RV listings are being phased out. It happens in every election cycle.CNN/Time provides 16 Senate RV polls (Democrats lead by 7.7%) with the corresponding LV subsets (Democratic 1.1% margin). But RCP only shows the LVs.
The latest 10 Generic polls listed at RCP are LVs. The GOP has a 1.9% lead in the latest 15 Generic RV polls and a 6.6% margin in 22 LV polls.
In 2010, 39 of the 163 polls listed are Rasmussen LVs in which the GOP leads by 8.1%. The GOP leads by just 2.3% in the other 124 polls.
Apparently RCP believes that Rasmussen is a non-partisan pollster, since he is included in the RCP average of “non-partisan affiliated polls”.
RCP displays two 1883-sample Gallup LV Generic polls. The GOP leads by 53-41 in the high turnout model and by 56-39 in the low turnout model.
The full 3000-sample RV is not shown (GOP by 47-44). The Democrats have a 48-35% margin among the 1118 RV respondents who did not pass the Gallup LVCM.
Not a single Zogby Generic 2010 poll has been listed by RCP. The latest Zogby LV shows a 45-45 tie.
The House and Senate forecast models (below) provide a comprehensive analysis of Registered Voter (RV) and Likely Voter (LV) polls. The assumption is that the election is held today.October 8 House and Senate Forecast Summary
Average Poll Share
Dem
Projected Share (%)
Simulated Seat Proj
WinProb
Senate
Weighted Average
RV (14) &
LV (23)
LV only
Diff
Unweighted Average
RV sample
LV sub-sample
Diff
House
Latest Generic Polls
RV LV Diff
Total
2010 Generic Polls
Non-Rasmussen
Rasmussen (
LV)
Diff
Total
Polls
37
37
-
16
16
-
15
22
-
37
124
39
-
163
Dem
%
45.3
43.5
1.8
48.3
46.3
2.1
44.0
40.9
3.1
42.2
43.2
37.1
6.1
41.7
GOP
%
44.3
47.2
(2.9)
40.6
45.2
(4.6)
45.9
47.5
(1.6)
46.8
45.5
45.2
(0.2)
45.4
Dem
%
50.5
48.1
2.3
53.8
50.5
3.3
49.1
46.7
2.3
47.7
48.9
45.9
2.9
48.2
Dem
52.9
49.8
3.1
10
7
3
212
201
10
206
211
198
13
208
GOP
0%
10%
-
2 tie
2 tie
-
73%
98%
-
94%
74%
99.6%
-
88%
Registered and Likely Voter PollsThe Senate model employs simulation analysis of the latest RV and LV polls to forecast average GOP net gains, associated win probabilities and trends. The built-in sensitivity analysis displays the effects of various
undecided voter allocation and
vote-switching scenarios.
The House model provides a summary comparison of the latest RV and LV Generic polls, win probabilities and a moving average projection. As in the Senate model, the sensitivity analyses display the effect of various undecided voter and vote-switching assumptions on forecast vote shares, House seats and win probabilities. The 2010 summary table illustrates the wide difference between Rasmussen and other pollsters. The 2006-2010 Generic Poll table provides a historical context.
Democrats always do better in the full RV sample than in the LV sub-sample (see the LVCM model below). LV polls exclude millions of registered voters who actually vote — and most of them are Democrats. In addition, millions of votes are cast but never counted in every election — and most of them are Democratic as well. The good news is that proliferation of electronic voting has reduced the uncounted vote rate. The bad news is that votes can be switched, stuffed or dropped at the voting machine and/or the central tabulator where they are counted.Polling websites generally display only Senate
LV polls. CNN/Time has provided both RV and LV samples, but only the LVs are listed at
realclearpolitics.com. The Senate RV model forecast is therefore a mix of RV and LV polls. Without a full corresponding RV poll for every LV sample, a comparable analysis is difficult.
Unlike the Senate, House Generic polls have been primarily RV samples (except for
Rasmussen, which only provides LV sub-samples). But the ratio will shift to virtually all LVs as Election Day approaches.
The Likely Voter Cutoff Model (LVCM)In 2004, there were 22 million voters who did not vote in 2000. Nearly 60% of newly registered voters were Democrats for Kerry. In the 2006 midterms, a Democratic tsunami gave them control of both houses. In 2008, there were approximately 15 million new voters, of whom 70% voted for Obama. All pre-election polls interview registered voters. Likely Voter (LV) polls are a subset of the full Registered Voter (RV) sample. LV polls exclude most "new" registered voters–first-timers and others who did not vote in the prior election.
Most pollsters use the Likely Voter Cutoff Model (
LVCM), a series of questions regarding past voting history, residential transience, intent to vote, etc. Since students, transients, low-income voters, immigrant new voters, etc. are much more likely to give "No" answers than established, wealthier, non-transient voters, Republicans are more likely to exceed the cutoff than Democrats. A respondent who indicates “yes” to four out of seven questions might be down-weighted to 50% compared to one who answers “yes” to all seven.
bit.ly/a8UYRbThe LVCM assigns a weight of
zero to all respondents falling below the cutoff, eliminating them from the sample.
But these potential voters have more than a zero probability of voting. The number of "Yes" answers required to qualify as a likely voter is set based on how the pollster wants the sample to turn out. The more Republicans the pollster wants in the sample, the more "Yes" answers are required. This serves to eliminate many Democrats and skews the sample to the GOP.
Pollsters Are Paid To Predict the Recorded Vote - Not the True VoteThe media/pollster drumbeat of a “horse race” is largely based on the LV polls. The focus on LV polls conditions the public to expect a recorded vote which in fact will surely understate the True Democratic share. The pollsters discount the RV sample, fully expecting that their LV projections will be a close match to a fraudulent recorded vote — but they never mention the F-word. They know that votes are miscounted in every election. And so their final LV-based poll predictions are usually quite accurate. Pollsters are paid to predict the recorded vote—not the True Vote.As Election Day approaches, the MSM gradually phases out RV polls for LV polls which lowball the projected Democratic vote share. And so the general public is prepared for the fraudulent recorded vote-counts that the MSM knows are coming.Since 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?The media cites low Democratic enthusiasm in the 2010 midterms, but turnout will exceed the LV sub-sample. Unfortunately, most pollsters won’t provide RV samples in the two weeks prior to the election. The media will gush on how close the final
LV predictions came to the vote but ignore the real reason:
systemic election fraud.
The Fraud ComponentHistorically, projections based on final pre-election LV polls underestimated voter turnout and yet closely matched impossible final exit polls and fraudulent recorded vote counts. Projections based on final pre-election RV polls (adjusted for undecided voters) were a close match to the unadjusted preliminary exit polls and the True Vote.Pre-election Model:
Recorded vote share = LV poll projection = RV poll projection + Fraud component
Post-election Model:
Recorded vote share = Final Exit Poll = Unadjusted Preliminary Exit Poll + Fraud componentSenate:Projected GOP
LV (Recorded) Share (CNN/Time
RV &
LV):
LV Poll Projection = 49.5 = 46.2 +
Fraud component
Fraud component =
3.3%.
Assuming the RV projection represents the True Vote (zero fraud):
Each additional
1% vote-switch results in a GOP gain of
2 seats (
Table 5).
Projected GOP House Vote Share:Share = 53.3 = 50.9 +
Fraud component
Fraud component =
2.4%Assuming the RV projection represents the True Vote (zero fraud):
Each additional
1% vote-switch results in a GOP gain of
4 seats (
Table 7).
Undecided Voters, Turnout and Election FraudIn 1988, 11 million votes were
uncounted; in 2000, 6 million; in 2004, 4 million; in 2006, 3 million.
In 2004, 2006 and 2008, projections based on final pre-election LV polls closely matched fraudulent recorded vote count shares. Projections based on the final pre-election RV polls closely matched the unadjusted exit polls. Undecided voters typically break heavily for the challenger. In each of the last three elections, the Democrats were the challengers, but many pollsters
did not allocate accordingly. Democratic voter turnout was
underestimated by the pre-election LV polls (
see 2004 Final Pre-election Polls).
bit.ly/d2yEQh bit.ly/claROe bit.ly/aW4gYXFinal exit polls are
always "forced" to match the recorded vote count, (i.e. the final pre-election LV polls). The underlying assumption is that the recorded vote count is correct (i.e. zero fraud). In
2004 and
2008, the
Final National Exit Polls required an impossible turnout of returning Bush voters (
110% and 103%, respectively). In the 2004
Final NEP (13660 respondents), the
Bush vote shares were increased dramatically over the 12:22am
Preliminary NEP (1% MoE, 13047 respondents).
For 2008, the NEP media consortium of news outlets FOX, CNN, AP, ABC, CBS and NBC has suppressed results of fifty-one unadjusted-state and three un-forced preliminary-national exit polls. bit.ly/bAc6OK bit.ly/amsJiB bit.ly/bRhlz4 bit.ly/diYEJ5 bit.ly/a2j7xl bit.ly/bsL7lk bit.ly/dfIPTIOnce again, as in every election cycle, the media avoids the real issues. Martha Coakley won the hand-counts in Massachusetts for Ted Kennedy’s seat but lost to Scott Brown; Vic Rawl won the absentee vote but lost to unknown Alvin Greene in the South Carolina Democratic Senate primary; Mike Castle won the absentee ballots but lost to Christine O'Donnell in the Delaware GOP Senate primary. But there has not been a peep about any of this in the mainstream media. Apparently, we must just accept the conventional wisdom that even though the votes have vanished in cyberspace and can never be verified, they were not tampered with. The media lockdown is not limited to past stolen elections.
The MSM prepares us for election fraud by listing final pre-election LV polls and ignoring RV polls.