Are we not falling into the trap of assuming fraud every time elections don't go our way?
My far worse fear is that the regime doesn't even need to rig elections because the population is so pliant and institutions are so corrupt that even the election of a Trump is no threat to the regime.
That isn't clear at all, considering the number of outstanding ballots. Yes, there do seem to be some shenanigans going on there.
Focusing on 'voter fraud' (which does exist, of course, but not nearly to the extent as is claimed by people here) distracts from the other ways in which they have gotten quite good at rigging elections legally. Like with Zuckerbucks, mail-in voting, that sort of thing.
The problem is that for a presidential race, you only need fraud in a couple swing states, and the evidence suggests that that should be very manageable.
I'd worry more about the ballot harvesting and the mail-in voting than about the fraud. Unfortunately, with the Dem victories, election integrity legislation is DOA in states like Pennsylvania.
Are we not falling into the trap of assuming fraud every time elections don't go our way?
My far worse fear is that the regime doesn't even need to rig elections because the population is so pliant and institutions are so corrupt that even the election of a Trump is no threat to the regime.
That isn't clear at all, considering the number of outstanding ballots. Yes, there do seem to be some shenanigans going on there.
Focusing on 'voter fraud' (which does exist, of course, but not nearly to the extent as is claimed by people here) distracts from the other ways in which they have gotten quite good at rigging elections legally. Like with Zuckerbucks, mail-in voting, that sort of thing.
I'd worry more about the ballot harvesting and the mail-in voting than about the fraud. Unfortunately, with the Dem victories, election integrity legislation is DOA in states like Pennsylvania.