A study done on the Democratic primary is pointing to signs of election fraud in multiple states. Two statisticians studied exit polls and other data and compared them to actual election results. Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan from Stanford University in California published the study on June 7, the day the last six states held their primaries and caucuses.
The study comes on the heels of multiple accusations of election fraud hurting or costing Bernie Sanders a victory in several states where state and local election authorities have come under scrutiny for questionable behavior.
Geijsel and Barragan compared states that used “hard paper evidence” of votes versus states that did not use paper ballots and noted “it is possible to detect irregularities in the 2016 Democratic Primaries” using this method. They also compared election results with exit polls, noting that, in 2008, voting irregularities were not at the same level as they have been in 2016.
The study authors discovered significant anomalies between election results and exit polls, where data indicated lower support for Clinton than what the actual vote tally showed. These types of discrepancies did not occur in either the Republican primaries or in the 2008 Democratic primaries.
The authors theorized that in states without paper voting trails, the differences in exit polls and election results would be bigger, and their study confirmed this.
“While the effect size of 0.71 is quite substantial, and suggests a considerable difference between exit polls and outcomes, we expected that this difference would be even more exaggerated in states without paper voting trails. Indeed, the effect size in states without paper voting trails is considerably larger: 1.50, and yields more exaggerated support for the Secretary in the hours following the exit polls … In contrast, the effect size is much smaller in states with paper trails.”
In other words, it’s easy to rig elections when no hard copies exist to prove otherwise.
Several states where Clinton seemingly beat Sanders experienced an unusual amount of irregularities, voter disenfranchisement, and exit polls that did not match election results.
According to CounterPunch, the state of Illinois experienced widespread discrepancies and even election fraud where poll workers were seen manipulating paper ballots to match voting machine tallies. Lora Chamberlain, a leader for Who’s Counting, an organization that works with the Illinois Ballot Integrity Project, expressed her surprise and dismay at what she saw during an audit of early voting machines.
“…what we saw was not an audit … I was watching the hand count of the early voting machines … they had to erase 21 votes for Bernie Sanders and add 49 Hillary Clinton votes.”
In Arizona, where the polling locations were reduced by two-thirds and where voters waited up to five hours to cast their ballots, allegations of hacking and fraud ran rampant. Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan ultimately acknowledged that voter suppression and election fraud occurred, including instances where people’s party affiliation had been mysteriously changed, rendering them disqualified from voting in the closed primary.
In Arizona specifically, the Bernie Sanders campaign had stopped using the electronic GOTV (Get Out TheVote) app on their smartphones and instead had begun using hard copy printouts to register new voters. This was due to suspicions that Sanders’ records had been hacked, and supporters were targeted for removal from the voter rolls.
According to the Justice Gazette, more than one million Arizona voters were disenfranchised, most of whom were Bernie Sanders supporters. Election analyst Tyler Pedigo predicted a Sanders win in Arizona and big losses for Clinton in Utah and Idaho. Pedigo’s predictions for Utah and Idaho were correct. Arizona, however, went to Hillary, indicating possible election fraud and rigging.
This, despite the fact that exit polls, along with Pedigo’s analysis of Sanders’ support across multiple voting spectra, indicated strong support for the Vermont senator.
New York also experienced massive election fraud and voter disenfranchisement, according to complaints. In California, which saw a huge increase in new voter registrations, the race was called for Clinton even though more than two million mail-in ballots have yet to be counted (as of June 10).
Notable author and election expert Richard Charnin has indicated a strong possibility of election fraud based on the discrepancy in exit polls and actual vote totals. In a recent blog post, he illustrated how recent polls, Sanders’ strong approval ratings, and election results show a strong correlation to possible fraud. In 13 out of 14 states that held caucuses, Charnin said, Sanders won with an average of 65.4 percent.
Because of all the unusual issues voters faced during the Democratic primaries, the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity has filed a lawsuit against the DNC alleging election fraud and vote rigging in multiple states.
The Geijsel and Barragan election fraud study appears to have confirmed what the average voter has suspected for months. Simply put, the studies, the Democratic Primary process has been rigged against Bernie Sanders from the very start.
[Photo by Cliff Owen/AP Images]