The NGO Project Part XXXIX: CTCL in KS
Ad Astra per Aspera - To the Stars through Difficulties
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 XXXIX 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 AZ, CO, CT, GA, IA, IL, IN, ME, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NH, NJ, NE, NM, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WI and WY.
This article will solely focus on CTCL in Kansas (KS).
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
25 of 105 KS counties (24%) received CTCL grants.
Total votes cast in CTCL counties were ~ 815,031 (58%) and NonCTCL counties was ~ 557,272 (42%). To state it a different way, on a per county basis, CTCL had the opportunity to influence 58% of KS voters.
The total amount of grants to KS was ~ $2,285,628 and the value of individual grants ranged from ~ $5,000 to $856,000
This table includes the top 5 CTCL grants by county.
$2,095,382 of the grants (91%) were focused in the 5 counties above. The $/vote spent by CTCL in these five counties range from $1.20/vote to $5.40/vote (all parties). The vote totals in these 5 counties account for ~49% of the votes in KS. Johnsons and Sedgewick are by far the biggest grantees with ~1.7MM of the state total.
To state that a different way, 91% of the grants were spent on 49% of the total votes cast in KS. Is that fair if this was all about a Plandemic?
The average 2016 D/R ratio for CTCL Counties was 0.430 (not weighted). The average 2016 D/R ratio for NonCTCL Counties was 0.284 (not weighted). This means that CTCL grants were provided to more D leaning counties. The top 5 counties in terms grants had a average 2016 D/R ratio of 0.952….big time D areas for sure. 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 103 (98%) counties. In total, they received ~ $1.9MM in grants in 2020. This is ~ 83% of the total 2020 CTCL grants in KS. These counties contributed ~1,085,534 votes (all parties) in 2016 which is 92% of the vote total.
To put it a different way, 98% of the 2020 CTCL grants went to counties where 92% of the votes were cast in 2016 in NonCTCL counties.
The top R leaning counties in 2016 that received CTCL money in 2020. They received only $25,000 in grants. Is that a coincidence?
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 0.159 and for NonCTCL counties it is 0.056. This means that the CTCL D vote harvesting factor in CTCL entities is 0.159-0.056 = 0.103 or ~ 10%. The number of D votes harvested based on this model is “conservatively” ~38,000 D votes or a potential swing of ~ 76,000 votes. Given that Trump beat Biden by ~ 201,000 votes, CTCL spent a lot of money in KS but did not push the needle enough to flip it to Biden.
These are all of the CTCL counties.
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 ~$25,000 was spent in all of these counties….a pittance.
Conclusion
CTCL issued ~$2.3MM grants in KS and “purchased” ~ 38,000 more D votes in CTCL counties than would have occurred without CTCL grants. Because of KS strong Trump support, this one was not close.
That is ~ $60/Vote….one of the highest totals in the nation.
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.