THE DEMOCRATIC TSUNAMI

Some in the media are making an argument that electronic vote switching could
not have occurred since the Democrats easily won the House and just barely
squeaked out a majority in the Senate. 

A recent DU poster wrote a very long, comprehensive OP in which he posed the
question: If there was malicious electronic vote switching, how come it didn't
result in a GOP win? He stated that since the Democrats won, he
"believes" it is strong evidence that there was no switching in
2000,2002 and 2004. As if the possibility of switching exists only if the GOP
won. While we were still reeling from that assertion, he delivered the final
blow to rational thought by hypothesizing that if switching did in fact occur
it was due to touch screen "miscalibration". Well, that's just
another media myth. The 2004 EIRS database documented that over 95% of reported
screen switches were from Kerry to Bush. The poster's arguments were totally
without logical foundation and only served to detract attention from good
points that were made in the OP.
 
The following analysis estimates the effects of vote switching in the 61 House
GOP seats that were in play. It also determines which seats were the most
likely candidates for fraud.

KEY MODEL RESULTS
In a fraud-free election, the model projected that Democrats would win the
House by a 242D-193R majority- a 49-seat margin. With the above fraud
assumptions factored into the model, the majority becomes 227D-208R, a 19 seat
margin. The margin as of today is 34 seats (231D-197R), with 7 undecided. Four
of the seven undecided seats are GOP-held.

The Democrats needed to win 15 GOP-held seats for House control. So far, they
have won 29. The purpose of this analysis is to estimate the number of seats
the Democrats lost due to uncounted votes and vote switching. 

THE MODEL PROJECTED THE DEMOCRATS TO WIN 40 OF 61 GOP-HELD SEATS, ASSUMING NO
FRAUD. IT ALSO PROJECTED THAT 16 OF THE 40 SEATS WOULD REVERT TO THE GOP
THROUGH A COMBINATION OF VOTE SWITCHING AND UNCOUNTED BALLOTS. 

AS OF TODAY, 16 RACES (INCLUDING 3 STILL UNDECIDED) HAVE SWITCHED. 

Based on the Monte Carlo simulation, the Democrats were on track to win at
least 40 of 61 GOP-held seats in play. In order to keep them from picking up
the 15 GOP seats they needed, the GOP had to steal at least 26 of the 40 seats.
To accomplish this, they needed to switch at least 8% of the votes. But the GOP
could not overcome the Democratic tsunami and fell at least 14 seats (29-15)
short. (note: the shortfall does not include the 7 seats still undecided). 

So why was the GOP unable to steal the 26 seats? The answer: political and
operational constraints held the maximum feasible amount of switching to 5% of
democratic votes. Anything more than that would have been highly persuasive
evidence of election fraud. The 116 pre-election Generic poll trend projected a
14% Democratic margin. How do you explain beating that?

The best the GOP could hope for was to MINIMIZE the Democratic majority in the
House, subject to the 5% CONSTRAINT.

MONTE CARLO SIMULATION MODEL ASSUMPTIONS					
(applied to all 61 elections) 

1) Uncounted ballots: 
3% of total votes cast are never counted (spoiled, lost, discarded, etc.)
75% of the uncounted votes are Democratic. The evidence for this assumption is
overwhelming: in EVERY election the majority of spoiled votes occur in
Democratic minority precincts.

2) Switched votes: 
4% of Democratic votes were shifted to the Republicans. 

3) Undecided Voter Allocation (UVA):
60% of undecided voters breaking to the Democrats is a conservative estimate,
especially in this election. Voters were extremely motivated to kick the GOP
incumbents out. In a historical study of 155 incumbent elections prior to 2006,
the majority of undecided voted for the challenger in 127 elections (82% of
155). They voted for the incumbent in 19. The other 9 were evenly split.
Democratic incumbents won ALL House and Senate elections. This was an
unprecedented landslide, much bigger than the official results indicate.

VOTE SHARES AND MARGINS: 2004 DEJA VU
The total decline in Democratic margin due to fraud was 4.9%, a combination of
uncounted ballots (3%) and vote switching (4%).

In 2004, Kerry's 51.50-48.50% 2-party margin in the 12:22am National Exit poll
was transformed to the recorded Bush 51.24-48.76% win in the Final 2pm NEP, a
5.5% decline. The Final NEP was matched to the vote count. 

In 2006, there was a 6.6% decrease in Democratic margin from the pre-election
Generic poll trend line to the Final NEP. The difference is further
confirmation of fraud. The 116 Generic Poll trend line projection 51.84D-38.60R
is equivalent to 57.3D-42.7R (2-party), a 14.6% margin. In the Final National
Exit Poll, updated 11/08 at 1pm on CNN, the 2-party average was 54.0D-46.0R, an
8% margin. The Final 2006 NEP was matched to the recorded vote.

In 2006, the Simulation Model pre-fraud and post-fraud forecast of 61-GOP held
seats resulted in a 4.9% decrease in the average Democratic margin. It declined
from 51.25D-48.75R pre-fraud to 48.80D-51.20R post-fraud. The 4.9% decline was
far below what was needed by the Republicans to win the House.

Summarizing the Democratic 2-party decrease in margin:
2004: 12:22am National Exit Poll to the recorded vote: 5.5%
2006: Pre-election Generic Poll trend line to the Final NEP: 6.6%
2006: Forecast Model of 61 GOP-held seats, pre-fraud to post-fraud: 4.9%

__________________________________________________________

Model Forecast (61 GOP-held seats)
Seats Won:    Dem	GOP		
No Fraud 	 40	21 (242D-193R)		
Fraud	        25	36 (227D-208R)

Actual         29    28 (231D-197R)
Note: 4 of the 7 undecided seats are among the 61 GOP-held.

Simulation Model Input Assumptions:
Polling MoE:3.0%	
Undecided Voter Allocation to Dems (UVA):60% 

Simulation Output:
Expected Democratic Win: 40 seats	

Probability Analysis 1: 
Democrats win at least N seats for various UVA
UVA	50	55	60	67	75		
N	Probability 
38	15	57	92	100	100		
40	0	8	40	92	100		
42	0	0	2	27	88		

Probability Analysis 2: 
Democrats win at least N seats assuming 60% UVA
N	36	37	38	39	40	41	42
Prob	100	98	92	72	40	11	2

House	Seats:						
Dems	238	239	240	241	242	243	244
GOP	197	196	195	194	193	192	191

The following table shows the relationship between the percentage of votes
switched and the number of races stolen. The 4% vote-switching assumption
equates to 15 stolen seats. The model indicates that with 7 races still
undecided, the 4% vote switching scenario is close to the actual result (see
"ACTUAL ELECTION RESULTS" below). 
 	
Votes% 0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Races	 1	4	8	14	15	18	21	22	26	29	33	35

These are the 15 seats where fraud was most likely to have occurred:
IL-6, OH-15, NM-1, NY-29, CT-4
PA-6, KY-4, NC-8, OH-2, IL-10
OH-1, FL-13, CO-4, AZ-1, FL-24
__________________________________________________________

PRE-ELECTION POLLS, PRE AND POST-FRAUD PROJECTIONS

UND - undecided 
SwPr - projected switch from Dem to GOP
SwAct - actual switch from Dem to GOP

	Pre-electionPoll	        Projection	Dem	      Proj. (fraud)   Actual 	
HOUSE	         Dem	GOP		Dem	GOP	Prob		Dem	GOP	Dem    GOP    Win  SwPr SwAct
	Avg	46.5	45.7		51.2	48.8	99%		48.8	51.2	50.0	50.0	29	16	16
															
1	AZ 1	38	41		50.6	49.4	78		48.2	51.8	45.3	54.7		Yes	Yes
2	AZ 5	48	46		51.6	48.4	98		49.1	50.9	52.6	47.4	Yes	Yes	
3	AZ 8	53	41		56.6	43.4	100		54.0	46.0	56.3	43.8	Yes		
4	CA 4	43	50		47.2	52.8	0		44.9	55.1	47.4	52.6			
5	CA 11	48	46		51.6	48.4	98		49.1	50.9	65.0	35.0	Yes	Yes	
 
6	CA 50	41	55		43.4	56.6	0		41.2	58.8	41.2	58.8			
7	CO 4	43	44		50.8	49.2	85		48.4	51.6	48.3	51.7		Yes	Yes
8	CO 5	42	51		46.2	53.8	0		43.9	56.1	42.7	57.3			
9	CO 7	54	38		58.8	41.2	100		56.1	43.9	56.7	43.3	Yes		
10	CT 2	48	47		51.0	49.0	90		48.6	51.4	50.5	49.5	Yes	Yes	

11	CT 4	51	44		54.0	46.0	100		51.5	48.5	48.5	51.5			Yes
12	CT 5	46	43		52.6	47.4	100		50.1	49.9	56.0	44.0	Yes		
13	FL 13	49	47		51.4	48.6	97		48.9	51.1	50.0	50.0	UND	Yes	Yes
14	FL 16	48	41		54.6	45.4	100		52.0	48.0	50.5	49.5	Yes		
15	FL 22	50	48		51.2	48.8	94		48.7	51.3	52.0	48.0	Yes	Yes	

16	FL 24	43	45		50.2	49.8	60		47.8	52.2	43.0	57.0	UND	Yes	Yes
17	ID 1	38	34		54.8	45.2	100		52.2	47.8	47.4	52.6			Yes
18	IL 6	54	40		57.6	42.4	100		54.9	45.1	48.0	52.0			Yes
19	IL 10	48	46		51.6	48.4	98		49.1	50.9	47.0	53.0		Yes	Yes
20	IL 14	42	52		45.6	54.4	0		43.3	56.7	40.0	60.0			

21	IL 19	36	53		42.6	57.4	0		40.5	59.5	40.0	60.0			
22	IN 2	50	47		51.8	48.2	99		49.3	50.7	54.0	46.0	Yes	Yes	
23	IN 8	53	43		55.4	44.6	100		52.8	47.2	61.0	39.0	Yes		
24	IN 9	46	46		50.8	49.2	85		48.4	51.6	55.1	44.9	Yes	Yes	
25	IA 1	49	42		54.4	45.6	100		51.8	48.2	56.1	43.9	Yes		

26	IA 2	48	50		49.2	50.8	15		46.8	53.2	51.0	49.0	Yes		
27	KS 2	na			na	na	na		na	na	52.0	48.0	Yes		
28	KY 3	52	44		54.4	45.6	100		51.8	48.2	51.5	48.5	Yes		
29	KY 4	45	42		52.8	47.2	100		50.3	49.7	45.3	54.7			Yes
30	MN 1	47	50		48.8	51.2	6		46.4	53.6	53.0	47.0	Yes		

31	MN 2	42	50		46.8	53.2	0		44.5	55.5	40.6	59.4			
32	MN 6	42	49		47.4	52.6	0		45.1	54.9	45.7	54.3			
33	NV 3	39	46		48.0	52.0	0		45.7	54.3	49.5	50.5			
34	NH 1	40	49		46.6	53.4	0		44.3	55.7	51.0	49.0	Yes		
35	NH 2	46	47		50.2	49.8	60		47.8	52.2	54.1	45.9	Yes	Yes	

36	NJ 7	43	46		49.6	50.4	30		47.2	52.8	54.1	45.9			
37	NM 1	53	44		54.8	45.2	100		52.2	47.8	50.0	50.0	UND		Yes
38	NY 3	44	51		47.0	53.0	0		44.7	55.3	44.0	56.0			
39	NY 19	49	47		51.4	48.6	97		48.9	51.1	51.0	49.0	Yes	Yes	
40	NY 20	53	42		56.0	44.0	100		53.4	46.6	53.0	47.0	Yes		

41	NY 24	53	42		56.0	44.0	100		53.4	46.6	54.5	45.5	Yes		
42	NY 26	46	50		48.4	51.6	2		46.0	54.0	48.0	52.0			
43	NY 29	53	42		56.0	44.0	100		53.4	46.6	49.0	51.0			Yes
44	NC 8	48	44		52.8	47.2	100		50.3	49.7	50.0	50.0	UND		Yes
45	NC 11	48	43		53.4	46.6	100		50.9	49.1	54.0	46.0	Yes		

46	OH 1	48	46		51.6	48.4	98		49.1	50.9	47.0	53.0		Yes	Yes
47	OH 2	48	45		52.2	47.8	100		49.7	50.3	49.0	51.0	UND	Yes	Yes
48	OH 15	53	41		56.6	43.4	100		54.0	46.0	49.0	51.0			Yes
49	OH 18	53	33		61.4	38.6	100		58.6	41.4	62.0	38.0	Yes		
50	OK 5	37	59		39.4	60.6	0		37.4	62.6	37.8	62.2			

51	PA 4	47	51		48.2	51.8	1		45.9	54.1	52.5	47.5	Yes		
52	PA 6	49	44		53.2	46.8	100		50.7	49.3	49.0	51.0			Yes
53	PA 7	52	44		54.4	45.6	100		51.8	48.2	57.0	43.0	Yes		
54	PA 8	50	47		51.8	48.2	99		49.3	50.7	50.5	49.5	Yes	Yes	
55	PA 10	47	38		56.0	44.0	100		53.4	46.6	53.0	47.0	Yes		

56	TX 22	36	28		57.6	42.4	100		54.9	45.1	55.3	44.7	Yes		
57	VA 2	43	51		46.6	53.4	0		44.3	55.7	49.0	51.0			
58	VA 5	35	61		37.4	62.6	0		35.5	64.5	40.4	59.6			
59	VA 10	42	47		48.6	51.4	3		46.2	53.8	41.8	58.2			
60	WA 8	45	51		47.4	52.6	0		45.1	54.9	50.0	50.0			
61	WI 8	51	45		53.4	46.6	100		50.9	49.1	51.0	49.0	Yes		
															
.
__________________________________________________________

ACTUAL ELECTION RESULTS AND PRE-ELECTION POLL NUMBERS FOR 61 GOP SEATS
SORTED BY DEMOCRATIC WIN PROBABILITY
.
Result: 29 Dem, 29 GOP, 3 Undecided
Note: The Dem total includes KS-2 which is not in the following table
.
.......Poll	Dem	GOP	Prob	Winner
11/05  Avg   46.5   45.7    79%	29D
.
Group 1: 8 Dem, 4 GOP, 1 UND
.
1	CO 7	54	38	100.0%	Dem
2	OH 18	53	33	100.0%	Dem
3	IL 6	54	40	100.0%	GOP
4	TX 22	36	28	100.0%	Dem
5	AZ 8	53	41	100.0%	Dem
.
6	OH 15	53	41	100.0%	GOP?
7	NY 20	53	42	100.0%	Dem
8	NY 24	53	42	100.0%	Dem
9	NY 29	53	42	100.0%	GOP
10	PA 10	47	38	100.0%	Dem
.
11	IN 8	53	43	100.0%	Dem
12	ID 1	38	34	100.0%	GOP
13	NM 1	53	44	100.0%	UND
.					
******FRAUD ALERT********************************				
.
Group 2: 16 Dem, 10 GOP, 1 UND
.
1	FL 16	48	41	100.0%	Dem
2	IA 1	49	42	100.0%	Dem
3	KY 3	52	44	100.0%	Dem
4	PA 7	52	44	100.0%	Dem
5	CT 4	51	44	100.0%	GOP
.
6	NC 11	48	43	100.0%	Dem
7	WI 8	51	45	100.0%	Dem
8	PA 6	49	44	100.0%	GOP?
9	KY 4	45	42	99.8%	GOP
10	NC 8	48	44	99.8%	GOP
.
11	CT 5	46	43	99.6%	Dem
12	OH 2	48	45	98.8%	GOP?
13	IN 2	50	47	96.8%	Dem
14	PA 8	50	47	96.8%	Dem
15	AZ 5	48	46	95.1%	Dem
.
16	CA 11	48	46	95.1%	Dem
17	IL 10	48	46	95.1%	GOP
18	OH 1	48	46	95.1%	GOP
19	FL 13	49	47	92.6%	GOP?
20	NY 19	49	47	92.6%	Dem
.
21	FL 22	50	48	89.2%	Dem
22	CT 2	48	47	84.9%	Dem
23	CO 4	43	44	79.5%	GOP
24	IN 9	46	46	79.5%	Dem
25	AZ 1	38	41	73.2%	GOP
.
26	FL 24	43	45	58.2%	UND
27	NH 2	46	47	58.2%	Dem
.
*******END FRAUD ALERT***************************				
.					
Group 3: 4 Dem, 15 GOP, 1 IND

1	NJ 7	43	46	34.0%	GOP
2	IA 2	48	50	20.5%	Dem
3	MN 1	47	50	10.8%	Dem
4	VA 10	42	47	7.4%	GOP
5	NY 26	46	50	4.9%	GOP
.
6	PA 4	47	51	3.2%	Dem
7	NV 3	39	46	2.0%	GOP
8	MN 6	42	49	0.4%	GOP
9	WA 8	45	51	0.4%	UND
10	CA 4	43	50	0.2%	GOP
.
11	NY 3	44	51	0.1%	GOP
12	MN 2	42	50	0.0%	GOP
13	NH 1	40	49	0.0%	Dem
14	VA 2	43	51	0.0%	GOP
15	CO 5	42	51	0.0%	GOP
.
16	IL 14	42	52	0.0%	GOP
17	CA 50	41	55	0.0%	GOP
18	IL 19	36	53	0.0%	GOP
19	OK 5	37	59	0.0%	GOP
20	VA 5	35	61	0.0%	GOP
.

OH-15: Rep. Deborah Pryce (news, bio, voting record), a member of the House
Republican leadership, leads Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy race by 3,536 votes.
Thousands of provisional ballots will be counted beginning Nov. 19 — a day
later than normal in deference to the Ohio State-Michigan football game Nov.
18.

NM-1: Republican Rep. Heather Wilson (news, bio, voting record) led Democrat
Patricia Madrid by fewer than 1,500 votes out of more than 200,000 cast, with
about 3,700 ballots remaining to be qualified and tallied.

NC-8: Rep. Robin Hayes (news, bio, voting record), a Republican, had a 449-vote
lead over Democrat Larry Kissell. About 1,500 provisional ballots remained to be
counted.

OH-2: Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Republican who called decorated Vietnam veteran Rep.
John Murtha (news, bio, voting record) a coward, was ahead of Democrat Victoria
Wulsin by about 2,300 votes. Counting provisional and absentee ballots could
take nearly two weeks.

FL-13: A recount began Monday in the contest for the seat Rep. Katherine Harris
(news, bio, voting record) gave up to make her failed Senate run. The Associated
Press has declared a winner in that race: Republican Vern Buchanan, who leads
Democrat Christine Jennings by about 375 votes, or less than 0.02 percent.

WA-8: GOP Rep. Dave Reichert led Democrat Darcy Burner by about 3,500 votes,
but many ballots in this heavily vote-by-mail state remained to be counted.

FL-24: Clint Curtis (D) is contesting the election with Tom Feeney (R). Curtis
has testified under oath that in 2000 he was approached by Feeney to develop
vote-switchin software. Curtis has passed a polygraph test. 

http://progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?a...



These FACTS are never discussed in the media.
- election fraud
- undecided voters break for the challenger, especially if the incumbent is unpopular. Bush was at 48%.
- Many newly registered voters are not included in LV (likely voter) polls.
- Since 1988, Democrats have won 60-70% of new voters. In 2008, Obama had 71%+.
- MILLIONS of mostly (70-80%) Democratic votes are uncounted in every election
- The 2004/2006/2008 Final National Exit Polls indicated there were millions of returning phantom Bush voters from the prior election (more than were alive).
- The Final National and State exit polls are always FORCED TO MATCH the recorded vote.
- By definition, the RECORDED VOTE never reflects the TRUE VOTE since millions of votes are UNCOUNTED in EVERY election.
- Uncounted votes alone provide overwhelming evidence that elections were stolen in 1968, 1988, 2000 and 2004.
- 1968: 6 million net uncounted votes.
Nixon won the recorded vote by 500,000.
- 1988: 10.6 million net uncounted votes. Bush won the recorded vote by 7m.
- 2000: 5.4 million net uncounted votes. Gore won the recorded vote by 540,000.
- 2004: Nearly 4 million uncounted votes.
Bush won the recorded vote by 3.0 million.
Kerry won the True Vote by 10m.
Approximately 5 million were switched from Kerry to Bush on UNVERIFIABLE voting machines.

- 2006 midterms: Democrats won by more than double the recorded 52-46%% margin.
10-20 House seats were stolen.

- 2008: Obama won by more than double his recorded 9.5m margin.

1988-2008: the average Democratic TRUE VOTE margin was reduced from 10% to a 4% RECORDED MARGIN by Election Fraud.

VOTER FRAUD was virtually non-existent.