Why is it necessary to prove massive voter fraud when it doesn’t take MASSIVE FRAUD to steal an election? ?

Question

By most popular accounts, Trump lost by approximately 7 million votes which is a big number by itself, but not big compared to the record number of votes cast. It’s a little over 4 percent. In 2016, Hillary won the popular vote by only a couple percent. Neither difference was massive any way you look at it. And, when you look at the states being disputed which decided the election, the percentage drops to 1% or less of the total vote count. Why criticise people in doubt of the results? It’s not like they’re any different than Stacey Abrams who claimed Georgia Republicans cheated by purging 309,000 voter registrations in 2019. In light of the upcoming Senate runoff election, Democrats want 198,000 registrations restored. Is it more important to notice legitimate voters could have restored their own registration easily or that 111,000 purged registrations were illegal, invalid or duplicates? Another curiosity is why the 198,000 Dems want restored couldn’t or didn’t bother to reregister for the Presidential election last November? Confusing? It seems like one group of cheaters are calling another group of cheaters, CHEATERS!! If the U.S. wants unquestioned election legitimacy then it’s about time voter registration rolls are monitored constantly, just like everything else is. And, ballots should be counted twice every election, once by Democrats, once by Republicans at the same time in the same rooms and then compared. Expensive? Maybe. Is it worth the price? Definitely.

Answer 1

Massive is not a legal term.



The legal requirement is that you have to prove a sufficient level of fraud to call into question the election result.



In a real close election, say 10-50 votes, it doesn't take much fraud to steal an election.  But in the presidential election, the closest state was around 10,000 votes.  That is a massive amount of votes in relative terms, especially when you consider that most studies of election fraud suggests that the total amount of fraudulent votes nationally in a given election cycle is substantially less than 10,000 votes.  Given that the best estimates place the level of fraud at about 0.0003% of the vote, you would expect to find less than 1,000 fraudulent votes nationally in the recent presidential election.  (A typical voter fraud case involves the relatives of a politician claiming to reside in the right district when they actually live in the neighboring district.  That might be enough if the family is large enough and the race is close enough, but is really stupid since most races aren't that close.)



As far as the purges of registration rolls, you are assuming that the voters were notified that they were being purged.  If you don't get notice, the first time that you learn that you are no longer registered is when you show up to vote by which time it is too late to re-register.  



Currently, ballots are counted by machines which are publicly tested before and after the election to assure that they are counted accurately.  (Amazingly, even though the tests are publicly announced, nobody other than the designated Republican and Democrat representatives ever shows up, but millions will whine after the election that the machines must be crooked.)



When recounts occur, you have both Democrats and Republicans as part of the counting teams.  Each member of the counting team gets to look at the ballot and tallies the votes.  Then at the end of counting that precinct, they compare their numbers to see if they agree (which is recounts take so long and are so damn expensive).  



The voter rolls are monitored as constantly as they can be.  But, it takes time to get death certificates after a person dies and not everybody does proper change of address notices with the post office when they move.  You can't adjust the voter rolls based on information that you do not have.

Answer 2

All of this is for show. A game for Mr. Trump to scam many many folks,  either the unsuspecting or the willing to  prove something to him.

Answer 3

unrelated to personal finance. And there is foam coming out of your mouth.

Answer 4

Lots of words but still no evidence? You cannot even prove a small amount of voter fraud, let alone massive and widespread voter fraud.