THE FBI INTERVENTION SWUNG ELECTION TO TRUMP IN THE LAST WEEK
Key findings of this analysis of 2016 Exit Poll data for last week deciders versus late October deciders:
1. Among those who had decided by late October, Clinton was winning by the equivalent of 4.7 million votes, or 3.5 percent representing 272 electoral votes according to the Exit Poll.
2. If 17 million late deciders had represented the entire 132 million electorate, Trump would have won by 13.7 million votes, or 10.3 percent worth 361 electoral votes.
3. The magnitude of this switch in voting behavior was unprecedented. In the prior three Presidential elections the switch ranged from 2 to 11 points and favored the incumbent party 2 out of 3 elections.
4. This switch was consistent throughout the nation, red states/blue states; large states/small states, and battleground/not battleground.
5. Again, thinking of the 17 million last week deciders as if they had been the entire 132 million electorate: While there was a catastrophic shift equivalent to 14.5 million votes away from Clinton, only 3.9 million of these went to Trump. The remaining 10.6 million went to third parties.
6. The only plausible explanation for something that could shake the electorate so suddenly, pointedly and universally is the FBI intervention.
RECOMMENDATION
Exit polling data now makes clear that the FBI intervention in the election turned a solid Clinton victory into a narrow Trump electoral college win. The FBI intervention was broader than the Comey letters on October 29th and November 6th . It included numerous FBI leaks though the last eleven days of the election and the establishment of a clique within the FBI dedicated to defeating Clinton. The statistical and public information possibly points to the effort by at least some part of the FBI to launch a Hail Mary pass in last minute desperate attempt to throw the election to Trump. This raises serious questions about whether the FBI as an agency took sides in the 2016 election. These questions are serious enough to warrant the immediate call for an Independent Counsel by President Obama and AG Lynch. An Independent counsel is necessary because we cannot expect the FBI to investigate itself without a conflict of interest.
The Independent Counsel should be charged with investigating the activities of the FBI and other parties as necessary during the 2016 election campaign commencing with the date of the nomination of the Democratic nominee. They should investigate whether this intervention was done intentionally to tip the close election toward Trump. The Independent Counsel should issue a complete report with findings and recommendations to the American people upon completion of the investigation.
Statistical Evidence of the Effect of the FBI intervention on the 2016 election
The 2016 election was two separate elections. The first Presidential election concluded at the end of October at the time of the first Comey letter. The second election finished on November 8th after a final, all-out eleven-day intervention by the FBI. The timing of voters’ decisions on which candidate to vote for was tracked by exit polls www.cnn.com/... . While Aaron Blake wrote that this late break in four key states was decisive in Trumps electoral college win ( www.washingtonpost.com/... ), applying the same exit poll data across the country gives a far more chilling result. The nationwide breadth, depth and consistency of this effect leave little doubt that it was a dramatic and decisive event that changed voter behavior. The only late October event that could have caused this is the FBI intervention in the election. This conclusion is consistent with a more detailed and personal analysis I shared here www.dailykos.com… of the effect of the FBI on the Florida outcome.
For twenty-eight states, accounting for 81 percent of the total vote, the Presidential Exit Polls asked when the respondent made their decision and for whom they decided to vote. Using the National Vote Tracking Report ( docs.google.com/... ), the election was recalculated on a state-by-state basis. Three scenarios were compared: the winner as of the end of October, the winner during the last seven days, and the current leader based on tabulated votes through this morning. These scenarios are laid out in Figure 1 below. To make data comparison easier and to get more standardized measures of Clinton and Trump Support, the full 132 million final electorate was used in each scenario.
Stunningly, the FBI intervention dramatically changed the results of the election. The current vote tabulation shows Clinton with 63.5 million votes compared with Trump’s 61.9 million, for a lead of 1.6 million votes, or 1.3 percent of the total cast. (Clinton’s lead will likely continue to grow for weeks.) As has been reported Trump leads in the electoral vote by 290 to 232 with Michigan yet to be decided.
Where the election stood at the end of October is quite different. If the end of October electorate had been the final electorate, Clinton would have been on her way to a solid victory with 65.8 million votes versus 61.1 million for Trump, a margin of 3.5 percent, and an electoral vote win of 272 (with Michigan essentially tied). This victory was similar in scope to President Obama’s 2012 victory.
The true scope of the breadth and depth of the election switch to Trump is measured by comparing this end of October state of the election with what happened in the last week. If those who decided in the last week had been the entire electorate, Trump would have been on his way to a popular and electoral vote landslide. Specifically, we can compare the late deciders to the end of October deciders by applying their presidential preference percentages to the total vote (132 million). According to those who decided in the last week (17 million voters, or 13 percent of the electorate), the change in voting behavior was unprecedented in American Presidential History. In the prior three elections, the late deciders were from 2 to 11 points different than the late October deciders. In 2016, they were 13.8 percent different between the major party candidates and 21.8 percent different if third party candidates are included. Surprisingly, if the late deciders had been the entire electorate, they would have represented a 111 Electoral vote switch to Trump when compared with the late October electorate and a 71 electoral vote switch to Trump when compared with the final electorate.
The switch of Clinton voters to third party candidates has been unreported to this point ( For instance see Bump here ( www.washingtonpost.com/... ) and Plouffe here ( www.nytimes.com/... ). The Figure below shows that Clinton’s drop from 49.7 percent to 38.8 percent between the Late October and last week deciders was accompanied by a huge rise from 5.5 to 16.1 percent for third party votes. In many states, there were large switches to Stein. While small, her percentage share of the vote in the two groups doubled or tripled in ME 1-4, MI 1-4, MN 1-3, MO 1-3, NH 0-4, NJ 1-2, OH1-3, SC 1-4, TX 0-2, VA 0-2. In many states Johnson’s share of the vote increase by 1 to ten percentage points: GA 2-7, IN 4-14, KY 2-5, IA 7-12, ME 2-14, MI 3-6, MN 3-8, MO 2-11, NV 7-15, NH 3-6, NJ 1-5, NC 2-11, PA 1-6, SC 2-7, TX 3-9, VA 2-6. While we won’t know the characteristics of these last week third party deciders until more exit pool data is released, it is clear that this phenomena also documents the broad and sudden nature of late break. It happened all over the country. The break from Clinton to third parties almost certainly exceeded the break from Clinton to Trump or third parties to Trump.
Conclusion.
A clear picture is described in this exit poll data. The FBI picked Clinton’s pocket at the finish line. Only an Independent Counsel can determine if this was the intent of the FBI anti-Clinton clique and if there was any coordination with the Trump campaign.
FIGURE 1: FBI INTERVENTION CREATED TWO ELECTIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Tot Vote (millions)
|
Current Tot Vote Pct
|
Current EV (MI not called)
|
Clinton
|
63.5
|
48.0%
|
232
|
Trump
|
61.9
|
46.7%
|
290
|
Other
|
7.0
|
5.3%
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decided Prior to Last Week Tot Vote (in millions)
|
Decided Prior to Last Week Tot Vote Pct
|
Decided Prior to Last Week EV (MI tied)
|
Clinton
|
65.8
|
49.7%
|
272
|
Trump
|
61.1
|
46.2%
|
250
|
Other
|
5.5
|
4.2%
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decided Last Week Tot Vote (in millions)
|
Decided Last Week Tot Vote Pct
|
Decided Last Week EV
|
Clinton
|
51.3
|
38.8%
|
177
|
Trump
|
65.0
|
49.1%
|
361
|
Other
|
16.1
|
12.2%
|
0
|