Did you know that the unified party achieved a result of 124 seats, ahead of the Democratic party's 123 seats in terms of the same-day vote alone?

While suspicion that the last 4.15 general election was a total illegal election continues, conclusive evidence is drawing attention again. In the system that predicts election results through open surveys of broadcasting stations, there is a situation that makes them suspicious of election manipulation.

Since it is legally forbidden to conduct an open investigation in advance voting, broadcasters conduct investigations only for the same-day voting. The broadcaster's expected results, which appear far earlier than the official results, are prepared based on the survey of the same-day voting.

Most statisticians agree that in the case of a referendum with a sample of more than 10 million people, it is a natural phenomenon that pre-voting and same-day voting show almost the same voting patterns. When it comes to voting on the day alone, the Unified Party has 124 seats and the Democratic Party has 123 seats, with the Unified Party taking the lead. However, in the pre-voting, the Democratic Party took a whopping 204 seats and the Unified Party took 43 seats. That is the point of suspicion of fraudulent elections or manipulation.

Then, what was the result of the survey conducted by the three broadcasting companies in a situation where an open survey of pre-voting was prohibited? Surprisingly, all three broadcasters are predicting that the Democratic Party will occupy 153 to 178 seats. Despite the fact that the unified party recorded more votes in the same-day voting. Moreover, how did the three broadcasting companies predict the overwhelming victory of the Democratic Party side by side in a situation where they did not know any results for the pre-voting and exit investigations for pre-voting were also prohibited? This point also raises suspicion of election manipulation or fraudulent elections.

There was also a preliminary correction value, but even if the result of the pre-voting was corrected in the result of the voting exit survey on the day, it was evaluated that the Unified Party prevailed in the voting on the day, but it was not understood how the Democratic Party was corrected to dominate the pre-voting. The point of controversy is where the number of predictions of election results according to the exit survey of broadcasters was provided. The suspicion adds to the credibility when looking at the age groups of voters for pre-voting and same-day voting.

The voters in their 60s or older, with the dominant conservatives, voted 3.61 million votes, accounting for the largest proportion of the pre-voting. Turnouts in their 30s and 40s, which are said to be progressive, are not so high, with 1.49 million and 2.07 million votes, respectively. It is said that it makes no sense by common sense that the Democratic Party received more than 80% of the votes in advance in the pre-voting where the floating conservatives showed the highest turnout.

In this election, it is said that it is correct to interpret that the voting was completed early in the pre-voting, which is expected to be less crowded to avoid voting on the day of the elderly due to the influence of the COVID-19.

An official of the NEC (National Election Commission) said, "Pre-voting exit investigation is prohibited under the Election Act."

On the same-day voting, while the Unified Party showed the dominant result, many broadcasters who did not know the result of the pre-voting received the same vote nationwide in the pre-voting, so that the final result of the Democratic Party's victory was accurately matched like pincers.

Focusing on the large online community, "The fact that the three broadcasting companies predicted the Democratic Party's overwhelming victory only with the exit survey of the same-day voting in a situation where it is impossible to investigate the exit of the pre-voting, it is certain that someone provided the data to correct the results,” a claim comes out. If someone did not provide the source, the three broadcasters could not produce such prediction results only with the same-day voting exit survey without any data.

Meanwhile, while 130 lawsuits have been filed for fraudulent elections in the April 15 general election, claims have been raised that the Central Election Commission, a party to the lawsuit, is trying to destroy evidence by touching the evidence in the lawsuit in the name of relocating servers and maintaining election equipment. Therefore, the Supreme Court's clear and fair judicial procedures are required.

Fn투데이는 여러분의 후원금을 귀하게 쓰겠습니다.

Seyoung In 다른기사 보기