This is an interesting thread. I'm fairly convinced that you are as you say running like total crap, however I'm not convinced that you're running as bad as you're making out. Here's my thoughts:
In your first post, you show a graph with 15 games played and an error in the EV line, which you've then taken and extrapolated across all of your tournament results. This is a faulty assumption to make. You can see just by looking at the graph that although the EV line is below your winnings line despite no all-ins, it does rise closer to the winnings line after some of the tournaments you've played, so the error may well balance itself out to some extent. Even if that weren't the case, the margin of error varies from game to game regardless, so you may well have unintentionally taken a sample from a few games where the error was high, and then assumed it was that value for the rest of your games, when it was actually much lower for the others on average, and may even have a net error of zero overall (unlikely based on the sample you've shown, but possible).
The set-ups bit is also debatable. You can use the same criteria both for and against, but your playing style and your ability to read your opponents is going to make a difference in some of these situations. You get it in with JJ on JA5 and he flips over AA, fair enough, but according to your own criteria if you were playing a super tight guy who only bets with the nuts, you had JT and the board runs out AA2JJ and he bets all three streets and you get it in on the river, you'd presumably count that as a setup against you, but it's possible to get away from it. If you get it in bad and suckout, do you still record it as a setup? Or if they suck out on you? If so you should be removing these too because they should be reflected in your EV line. In addition, the assumptions you make about cashing having lost due to a setup are going to be subject to variance regardless, the most accurate way to go would be to look at your chip EV in the given situation, assuming you double up.
I assume that you then use your personally adjusted ITM% for the simulator, which doesn't show the figure for where you're actually at because the ITM% stats that you've given are erroneous.
Now don't get me wrong, seriously, you've said you're running 470 BI below EV over 32000 games according to HEM, I believe that, and I sympathise with you because that alone is pretty soulcrushing, I'd go nuts if it was me. And maybe you're running fairly bad in coolers too. But I think to take some data, make fairly bold assumptions about it, and then say you're 1838 BI under is not going to be correct, for reasons I, and a few others, have said.
All things said, I wish you the best of luck if you continue grinding, and hope you go on an outrageous heater sometime soon 
