?If you were looking to invest your future pension funds with a broker would you go with a person who was granted immunity from prosecution in a felony investigation? Well, that is exactly what the State of Wisconsin and the Government Accountability Board (GAB) has done.
Kathy Nickolaus was granted immunity from conviction in exchange for her testimony in the Caucus Scandal 2002-2005, (Read “Prosser-Back to the Future yet it is her count, her vote tabulation, her method that determined that Prosser was the winner of the Spring Supreme Court Election
So, who do we trust with the numbers? What evidence is out there to suggest that Katy Nickolalus and the GAB were wrong.
Meet Richard Charnin.
Richard Charnin graduated from Queens College (NY) in 1965 with a BA in Mathematics. He has an MS in Applied Mathematics from Adelphi University and an MS in Operations Research from the Polytechnic Institute of NY. His first position was a numerical control engineer/programmer for a major defense/aerospace manufacturer. In 1976, he moved on to Wall Street as manager/developer of corporate finance quantitative applications for three major investment banks. When personal computers became available in 1982, he converted many of these mainframe application programs to spreadsheets. As a software consultant, he specialized in quantitative applications development for major domestic and foreign financial institutions, investment firms and industrial corporations.
You can learn more about the book and order it from Amazon
Now Back to the Numbers
Assuming you might rather invest your “vote portfolio” with Richard over Kathy (Madoff) Nickolaus, we can look at what evidence and analysis they each have to offer in turn.
Kathy is “would be”, convicted felon who is also the County Clerk of Waukesha County. As mentioned previously, her methodology was to keep the vote tabulation for the County on her personal lap top computer, on unique and secret software approved for her by the GAB. Because of her methods and lack of transparency in previous elections, she was called on the carpet by her own County Board to be reprimanded and ordered to alter her procedures. She did not do so. She discovered, found, or “forgot to save” 14000 votes in City of Brookfield two days after the polls closed in the Spring Supreme Court Election. Her explanation was concise, apologetic, and so suspicious it ignited national attention. It can be boiled down to two words: “human error”.
That’s it. No graphs. No detailed evidence. No procedural analysis. No spread sheets. Just “Trust me, I made a boo boo.”
Richard, on the other hand, has presented a detailed, scientific, statistical analysis that suggests that it was highly improbable if not downright impossible for Kloppenburg to have lost the election against Prosser.
I am not going to show you the impressive detail of his analysis here, but his beautiful and complete work is transparent and available on his web address below the graph.
It comes down to this:
The assumption is that just 50% of those that voted in the 2008 Presidential election returned to the polls in Waukesha to vote in the Supreme Court Election.
So, assuming 50% turnout of Obama voters and 50% turnout of McCain voters then 13% of those who voted for Obama would have had to change parties and vote for Prosser in order for Prosser to win.
So we are told, by Kathy Nickolaus’ personal computer, and “special software”, and as a result of her “human error” that Prosser “won” by some 7,000 votes in Waukesha County.
Statistically this means that 14% of the people who voted for Obama, defected to Prosser and only 1% of McCain voters defected to Kloppenburg. This scenario results in the “accepted” Prosser win by 7,000 votes in Waukesha County.
Just to show how small a 7,000 vote margin is, if only 1% fewer people had defected to Prosser thus lowering 14% to 13% – Kloppenburg wins by 9,000 votes.
The graph shows how Kloppenburg’s expected share of the 2008 Obama vote, effects Prosser’s vote. He quickly loses his vote, even though we are assuming he is getting a full 97% of the returning McCain vote. Remember that Waukesha is one of the most GOP counties in the Wisconsin. The election “results” suggest that over 12 of every 100 people that voted for Obama in the Presidential election, switched and voted for Prosser last Spring.
Two more simple Waukesha graphs.
Effect of Obama voter turnout on Prosser margin assuming Kloppenburg had 90% of …Obama voters and Prosser 97% of McCain voters.
The simple “takeaway”
1) is that in ALL realistic scenarios (Kloppenburg share at least 75% of Obama voters)
2) minimum 49% Obama turnout, Kloppenburg cuts Prosser’s margin by more than his 7500 votes – and wins the election.
And this is JUST Waukesha. Should we add more fuel to the fire and do the same analysis for Milwaukee County?
Suspicious numbers suggest robbing from Peter to pay Paul…..or Kloppenburg to boost Prosser.
HINT from Karen Smith (of Election Integrity group on face book)
“…ward by ward analyisis does show previous Democrat voters going Republican in the Supreme Court election..City of Milwaukee wards 160 thru 181 had a total of 330 recorded Republican votes in the gov race but reported 1015 Republican votes in the Supreme Court race.”
The Bottom Line
Kathy Nickolaus receives a salary as County Clerk of Wakesha County….and all we get as proof, analysis, or transparency of her “found vote” is, “whoooooops.”
Richard Charnin lives in Florida and has analyzed elections for years. He has written extensively on his findings and has worked and posted all of his professional work on the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election out of a deep concern for election integrity in the United States</strong.
He remains convinced that the Supreme Court Election in Wisconsin was stolen by Prosser.