Huge Discrepancy Between Exit Polls & Reported Results in NY Democratic Primary Election

CNN Exit Poll reported a four point difference between Sanders & Clinton with a 2.6 percent margin of error yet the reported results are 57.9 Clinton – 42.1 Sanders.  Exit polls have repeatedly shown Sanders wins in prior states (Massachusetts, Missouri, Illinois, Arizona) yet the results consistently do not match the final results even when the same polls are accurate predictors on the Republican side.  Read the full analysis on Richard Charnin’s blog by clicking on the picture below:

This entry was posted in New York, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Huge Discrepancy Between Exit Polls & Reported Results in NY Democratic Primary Election

  1. may says:

    it’s not just cnn. right at 9pm fox news exit polls also predicted a tight dem race and described the possible sanders upset as “a huge story”. you can watch megan kelly & brett baier talking about it in the first 1 minute of this video:

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Peggy James says:

    If one looks at the size of Bernie’s crowds, and the enthusiasm expressed in campaigning for him, and the individual donations in comparison to Clinton’s, and the hours spent in long lines formed for him, it is obvious there is voter fraud going on in many states.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. Anne Albanese says:

    Of course, there are voting irregularites. H Clinton is involved. 21st century Boss Tweed at work in Tammany Hall.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. Pam humienny says:

    And yet is CNN, Fox, MSNBC even investigating it. Journalists, my ass.
    I’ve switched to Free Speech TV

    Liked by 4 people

  5. Randy Sieg says:

    You can bet there is fraud and voter suppression involved…

    Liked by 2 people

  6. TracieLynn says:

    Nate Silver was predictin 53-47 shortly after that CNN poll.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Lee says:

    Something smells in Demark!!!

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Lee says:

    Something smells in Demark!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Roberta Iannini says:

    It is Sanders moral obligation to look at this . we give him money and time .

    Liked by 3 people

  10. melinda says:

    Let’s just hope the national poll that’s been accurate since 1975 predicting the presidential elections and picked Bernie to win is right! Hopefully, he can still have a chance!!

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Pat C. says:

    So what’s going to be done about it?

    Liked by 2 people

  12. I live in East Harlem. I went to my poll at 11am. In the short time I was there six people voted. The poll was open 15 hours. Only 204 votes were tallied. I also I absolutely am suspicious of the tally, 2-1 for Clinton. Add up the numbers of people on the street for Sanders, and those for Clinton. 2-1? No way.

    Liked by 2 people


    Liked by 2 people

  14. Linda Foutz says:

    We Bernie supporters , know we won!
    We also will never give up!
    Bernie is the best thing to happen in this country!

    Liked by 1 person

  15. traucins says:

    Note that Bernie supporters will NEVER VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON… Reports that say different are out and out bullshit! People who support Sanders are fundamentally against everything she stands for. The overwhelming majority have pledged to vote with a write-in for Sanders or to vote Green or Independent party. A few would even rather see Trump in the WH over that backstabbing lying witch. #BernieOrBust

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Sherrie Augusta says:

    You have to remember those polls were rigged also. I heard from many people and myself included who tried to vote for Bernie and it would not let us. It would however allow Hillary’s name to go through, Anyone who gives in and vote Hillary is rewarding her for taking away their democracy and criminal activity.They are confirming that super pacs is the way to go and with money you can have anything you want. Well we didn’t get 6.6 million dollars so go to hell Hillary.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. lobdillj says:

    I was among those at the forefront doing simulation and analysis of various options for auditing elections in which a known fraction of the votes cast were cast on electronic voting machines. It was clear, and every researcher so stated, that in close elections it is IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE FRAUD.
    That being the case, every honest researcher has agreed that the only way to eliminate the ability to throw an election using electronic voting or electronic tabulating is to prohibit these methods and mandate paper ballots hand counted in public at each voting station after the polls close. Voting by mail or by early voting with paper ballots must be designed to keep ballots together, uncounted and in certified custody until the polls close on election day. Then they must be hand counted in public.

    We do not have such a process today, and that was the intent of the framers of the Holt Election Reform Bill. Both political parties are happy with a process that can secretly adjust the election vote counts as desired leaving no hard evidence of fraud. And that is what we have today…regardless of who “wins”.

    We will reap what the crooks have sowed.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. oregonstu says:

    The discrepancies between exit poll numbers and official vote counts has been going on for years, and even though this is definitive evidence of mass electoral fraud, we can expect that it will continue to be ignored by the corporate media and our corrupt politicians in both parties. Even Bernie Sanders cannot bring himself to go beyond the pale to directly confront this issue, so our chances of gaining any traction here are not very good, sad to say.

    I see another recent event that shows much greater promise of exposing the mass fraud that has been going down in this country, however. I have been watching the developments with the NYC BOE on their pathetic process to verify and count affidavit ballots that were cast in the recent primary. As most people know, we are talking about roughly 40,000 affidavit ballots out of 126,000 purged voters in Brooklyn alone. It is clear that the BOE is dragging their heels and making excuses for the purges and mysterious mass party affiliation changes that were experienced by thousands of Brooklyn Democrats.

    The bottom line is that even if the BOE was operating with complete transparency and integrity (it obviously is not), there is a very short statutory window of time allowed for voters to challenge illegitimate denial of their right to vote, and an inadequate period of time provided for the BOE to investigate and document the number of individual complaints that they have been deluged with, even though the number of complaints represents only a small fraction of purged voters.

    It is perfectly obvious that little will be gained with this process, and equally obvious that we are extremely unlikely to see anything but a whitewash of this purge resulting from the “investigation” being supervised by a Clinton Superdelegate.

    There is one line of inquiry that seems crucial to me that is not being mentioned by government officials or the corporate media, and I think it is safe to assume that this is one key aspect that will get swept under the rug if Sanders supporters do not get involved and begin to gather information to do our own independent investigation.

    We know that there were entire buildings and whole blocks of people who were purged, which gives the lie to the BOE claim that individuals were only purged for such reasons as changed addresses, voluntarily changed party affiliation, failure to vote in previous elections (inactive voters), etc. If that was the case, how could it be that all voters in specific geographic swaths – whole buildings and entire contiguous blocks, were removed from the list of registered voters? This is a HUGE red flag here, people!

    We know that the Clinton campaign and her corporate benefactors had access to the data base of Sanders supporters, including their addresses. It seems reasonable to surmise that there were significantly higher concentrations of Sanders supporters among the purged voters than there were among the other voters in the same precincts who were allowed to vote, but thus far we have no proof of that, and as stated above, the official “investigation” is not likely to even raise that question as a possibility, let alone look for evidence of it. They have already called this purge an “accident”, and there is no reason to expect that they will change that presupposed conclusion.

    Here is what I believe needs to be done: first, we need to get the list of purged voters. This should be a matter of public record, there is no conceivable reason that this should be kept secret. With the list of purged voters in hand, the next step would be to do a survey of a substantial RANDOM SAMPLE (this is an important point, it has to be done properly to yield accurate results) of those 126,000 voters to determine what percentage of them are Sanders supporters.

    If it turns out that there are significantly higher percentages of Sanders supporters among those who were purged relative to those in the same districts who voted, we have prima facie evidence that this was not an accidental, random purge, but a purge deliberately that targeted Sanders supporters – which of course is a MAJOR FELONY. THIS evidence would be solid grounds for filing a motion to nullify the entire NY primary election, and also open a path to bring the broader issue of exit poll/vote count discrepancies into the public eye.

    Another component of this “investigation” that is being ignored by officials and the media is the curious sale of an extremely run down brownstone a year and a half ago for an eye popping 6.6 million dollars by the same elections clerk – Diane Rudiano – who has been suspended for “accidentally” purging these Brooklyn voters. And the buyer? A developer by the name of Dana Lowey Luttway, daughter of Nita Lowey, ANOTHER Clinton superdelegate! Tell me something doesn’t absolutely REEK here!

    I am willing to do what I can to help this process, but I am all the way across the country in Oregon. We need some dedicated occupy activists and NYC Sanders supporters willing to engage with the Mayor’s office, the NY attorney General’s office, and the BOE – boots on the ground in NYC. We also need a team of good lawyers willing to do some pro bono work to help reclaim democracy in America. Any volunteers?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s