The NGO Project Part XLIV: CTCL in Alabama
Sweet Home Alabama
Introduction
Question: Is CTCL misrepresenting the information on the IRS Form 990 stating that the PURPOSE of the grants were to help support the SAFE administration of public elections during the Covid-19 pandemic?
Answer: It appears so given the results of both aggregate, state and county by county analysis as we will see below. It appears this is a quantifiable democrat ballot harvesting operation.
Background
This is Part XLIV in The NGO Project series which examines the role NGOs had in determinative outcomes in the 2020 Presidential Election. In prior articles, I focused on the effect the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) had on AR, AZ, CO, CT, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, LA, ME, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, NH, NJ, NE, NM, NY, OH, OK< OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WI and WY.
This article will solely focus on CTCL in Alabama (AL).
Calculation Basis
The calculation basis was previously explained in detail here. In this article, I do make one adjustment and that is to calculate the 2020DIFF factor by weighted average rather than arithmetic average.
Analysis
7 of 67 AL counties (10%) received CTCL grants.
Total votes cast in CTCL counties were ~ 469,990 (20%) and NonCTCL counties was ~ 1,853,292 (80%). To state it a different way, on a per county basis, CTCL had the opportunity to influence 20% of AL voters.
The total amount of grants to AL was ~ $1,879,003 and the value of individual grants ranged from ~ $9,500 to $1,275,000
This table includes the top 5 CTCL grants by county.
$1,855,000 of the grants (99%) were focused in the 5 counties above. The $/vote spent by CTCL in these five counties range from $1.51/vote to $12.87/vote (all parties). The vote totals in these 5 counties account for ~20% of the votes in AL.
To state that a different way, 99% of the grants were spent on 20% of the total votes cast in AL. Is that fair if this was all about a Plandemic?
The average 2016 D/R ratio for CTCL Counties was 2.500 (not weighted). The average 2016 D/R ratio for NonCTCL Counties was also 0.608 (not weighted). This is ~4x the NonCTCL county average in 2016. More bias in favor of D.
The top 5 counties in terms grants had a average 2016 D/R ratio of 2.381. This is ~4x the NonCTCL county average in 2016. More bias in favor of D.
To continue on this track, if you look at all the counties in 2016 that had a D/R ratio of less than one (R leaning counties), there were 54 (81%) counties. In total, they received ~ $0 in grants in 2020! These counties contributed ~1,662,995votes (all parties) in 2016 which is 76% of the vote total.
To put it a different way, 0% of the 2020 CTCL grants went to counties where 76% of the votes were cast in 2016 in NonCTCL counties. More bias in favor of D.
Do these facts alone confirm or disapprove my thesis that the grants were NOT used for public safety?
2020DIFF Calculated with Weighted Average
For this analysis, I used a slightly different way to calculate the 2020DIFF using a weighted average based on total votes in a county. This is what it looks like.
w = Total County Vote / Total State Vote
a = D/R2020 - D/R2016 (for CTCL Counties)
a' = a * w (per county)
2020DIFF = sum(a'1:a'n)
This method in theory permits a better correlation for D vote harvesting because it is weighted for counties with higher vote totals.
The 2020DIFF for CTCL counties is 0.126 and for NonCTCL counties it is 0.038. This means that the CTCL D vote harvesting factor in CTCL entities is 0.126-0.038 = 0.088or ~ 9%. The number of D votes harvested based on this model is “conservatively” ~22,000 D votes or a potential swing of ~ 44,000 votes. Given that Trump beat Biden by ~ 590,000 votes, CTCL spent a lot of money in AL but did not push the needle enough to flip it to Biden.
These are all of the CTCL counties. Lots of red here. But, the biggest +2020DIFF is once again associated with the biggest grant.
Noteworthy R Stalwarts
These are all of the R stalwarts in terms of -2020DIFF which indicates higher R turnout as a ratio to D between 2016 and 2020. Only ~$112,000 was spent in all of these counties (6% of the grants). This hardly seems equitable.
Conclusion
CTCL issued ~$1.9MM grants in AL and “purchased” ~ 22,000 more D votes in CTCL counties than would have occurred without CTCL grants. Because of AL strong Trump support, this one was not close.
That is ~ $86/Vote.
Not a good return on your investment if you are part of the election racketeering cabal.
All Counties
References
CTCL IRS Form 990 (revised form from Jan 2022 used)
Telegram - https://t.me/electiondataanalyzer
Truth - @ElectionDataAnalyzer
The math here is simple, try this on your own. It is a model to look for trends, not an exact science.