Wellllll...
Whether or not that's actually true has some legitimate grounds for dispute.
Exit polls are not a proof of fraud, but they one for the best ways of detecting it because they are cheap and easy. Other ways would include looking at similar demographic precincts using different voting machines or examining vote share by precinct size.
Exit polls alone might be explained by a few unknown factors mucking up results. But exit polls are not the only thing indicating fraud in this election, and yes those other factors also point to fraud.
First, a normal election (Utah). No exit polls shifts, no controversies.
Missouri, exit poll shift of 2.0% towards Clinton. Note the regular swings until around ~300,000. Within the margin of error, but still a pro-Clinton shift..
Ohio, exit poll shift of 5.0% towards Clinton. Outside the margin of error of 3.1% by a significant amount. Note the linearity.
Massachusetts, exit poll shit of 4% towards Clinton. Margin of error was 3.5%. Again, linearity.
New York. Exit poll shift of 5.9%, far exceeding the margin of error at 3.5%, completely unlikely for a state of this size. We would expect fewer, but more glaring compromises (IE, a clear breakpoint, higher curve/less linearity) to account for the difficulty in compromising so many machines. The results.
.
What is "real evidence?" Would a programmer, under oath, testifying that he programmed vote-flipping software count? Do you need Diebold memos that talk about how easy it is edit the logs, even without a password?
I'm not really sure what you are asking for. Are you willing to wait for someone to be caught red-handed tampering with machines? With some machines, the vote could be changed without even being in the room by an inexperienced hacker.
.
If you want real proof that person X voted for candidate Y and their vote was swapped to candidate Z, then you want exactly what I want: an audit. Specifically, either a random audit or an audit targeting areas that rely on outdated voting machines.
.
If you are interested, the last time a major review of voting systems was done, the source code was found "inadequate to ensure accuracy and integrity of the election results."
See also:
Look at this detailed comment outlining similar patterns in the 2008 primaries.
If you want a "real source," here's an in-depth report on exit polling and election fraud allegations.
And remember:
You're out of conspiracy theory and into factual events when states suspend board of elections members for disrupting an election (New York).
You're out of conspiracy theory and into factual events when an audit of your board of elections after the primary finds evidence of election fraud (Chicago).
You're out of conspiracy theory and into factual events when your caucus officials hold votes prior to the time published on the agenda for the day, before check-in time has concluded, then proceed to go against the rules by not responding to motions on the floor throughout the day and ignore dissent on motions (Nevada).
