According to the exit polls conducted by Edison Research and reported by show that in North Carolina, there was a 5.8 point discrepancy in favor of Donald Trump, which would have awarded him the state. In Pennsylvania, there was a 5.5 point anomaly to Trump, a 4.8 percent swing to him in Wisconsin, and 2.7 point swing to him in Florida, taking him over the line in these three states as well.
If Hillary Clinton had won these states, she would be declared the winner of the 2016 presidential election.
In other countries, exit polls are considered a very accurate measure of voter intent and a clear indicator of election fraud, and have at times been used to prove fraud and force a new election, as the Ukraine had to do back in 2004. Unlike opinion polls, they are known to be accurate to within a very small margin of error.
Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at NYU, and author of “Fooled Again: The Real Case for Electoral Reform” has noted that the American public generally demurs from placing importance on exit polls due to a long history of elections veering from the exit poll data. In fact, in America, a practice is made of “correcting” the exit poll data so it better matches the voter count, going under the assumption that voter count is correct.
There were other anomalies around the electronic machines too. Miller is particularly concerned with the 90,000 voters in Michigan who appeared to choose to “undervote” — that is, they did not vote for president, but they voted down ballot for all the other positions. In a state that was awarded to Trump by only 0.3 of a percent, these votes were crucial.
Add to that the voter purges and other voter suppression techniques, it’s little wonder that the United States electoral system comes dead last in the western world. The that American elections are less fair and secure than countries like Mongolia, Tunisia, Rwanda, and Brazil.
Miller asked in a press release, “Did 90,000 non-white workers, and ex-workers, in that state all cast those undervotes to mount that protest or were their ballots changed without their knowing it?”
Pointing to the deafening silence from the Hillary campaign itself, but also its many famous surrogates and endorsers, Miller wondered where “all the other lefty stars who worked so hard to get us all to vote for Hillary” have gone “in the face of ever-mounting evidence that Trump ‘won’ this election just as Hillary ‘won’ her party’s nomination: through rampant vote suppression and computerized election fraud.”
“With millions disenfranchised, coast to coast, through purges of the electronic voter rolls, and voter caging, and voter ID requirements, and partisan interference by election officials, and the deliberate placement of too few machines in certain precincts, and volleys of disinformation on the times and places to go vote—and as the exit polls suggest widespread manipulation of the vote counts throughout the swing states—why are we not hearing anything at all about it?” he said, going on to list the vast array of celebrities who were vocal during the campaign for Hillary, but are now conspicuously silent.
Dr. Jill Stein, Green party candidate and vocal campaigner for fair elections is also voicing her concerns. She told “These discrepancies have come to our attention and we have some people who are looking at them, so stay tuned.”
Dr. Stein confirmed that she too felt it strange that the Hillary campaign has declined to speak up about these exit poll anomalies around the electronic voting states, but pointed out that that has been a pattern of the Democrats. “We’ve been here before. Al Gore, and John Kerry for that matter, would not pursue the discrepancies in those elections either. Also from my understanding, there was still hundreds of thousands of uncounted mail-in votes that were not counted in Wisconsin when it was declared. There’s a bunch of funny things.”
Dr. Stein wondered if Hillary’s own spotty record in the exit polls was to blame.
“You can’t help but wonder, for example, that because there were such huge discrepancies in the primaries, like up to twenty points or something like that, where Bernie was just way ahead and then lost,” she said. “There were some really big discrepancies and maybe Hillary feels like she can’t raise questions because her own record is a little tarnished on this? I don’t know, we’ll see.”
Mark agrees. “First of all, few ever question the official outcomes of elections, however strong the evidence of theft; and Hillary’s not in a position to contest her “loss” to Trump, since she herself would not have been her party’s nominee if not for serial election theft throughout the primary season,” he said.
Considering the outpouring of anger from Hillary supporters over the result and their many efforts to challenge the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s win, it would appear a given that the Democrats would pursue these exit poll anomalies which, if proven correct, would almost certainly give Hillary the presidency.
The silence about this avenue of pursuit from the Hillary camp is deafening.
“Have they ever pursued fraud like that? I don’t think they ever have; they all back away from it,” Dr. Stein told . “It’s only the Greens who take up these cases you know and just for the sake of election integrity, and we’ve been losing them anyhow, but I think it’s very important for the public to have our guard raised about this stuff.”
The Green Party are campaigning for ranked voting and hand-counted paper ballots among other measures to bring up the standard of American elections.
Dr. Stein remains hopeful that there will be movement in this area soon. “I know that people are poring over these numbers right now, and I’m hoping there will be some light to shed on this soon.”