We live in a democratic republic where barely 15% of eligible voters vote in primaries and maybe 1/2 vote in general elections. Those numbers would be a disgrace in other democratic countries where over 90% of eligible voters vote and in some countries voting is required under penalty of law. I seriously doubt there is much concern about illegal voting. Confirmed cases of voter fraud run far less than 1%.

@TyKC very true. Lots of disenfranchised voters out there don’t participate. It is a big problem and our two party (only) system is so polarized that 1% makes a difference. 1% of voter fraud becomes a problem when it exceeds the margin of error and then those 100-10,000 votes can shift a state’s slated electors. According to the AP (https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-arizona-phoenix-elections-9638adedbe826b31b5d172ba3a1c7c3a) Biden won Arizona by 10,000 votes (.3%) of votes cast. IF fraudulent votes accounted for more than 10,000 in one direction (or total of fraud and errors) was more than that those slated electors change. By contrast NY is 3:1 d to r registrations and 1% of votes being fraud has 0 impact in the slated electors.

@RitBorg There is no way that there could be that level of voter fraud in any state. .3% is a massive amount of voter fraud. The number of confirmed voter fraud cases in the last several years in the US is 44 cases out of about 1 billion votes cast. That's why Trump supporters quickly turned to election fraud as the primary source of fraud, where election officials changed votes or didn't count votes etc. There was simply no way that voter fraud in itself could have accounted for the amount of fraud to overturn an election. But claiming election fraud, which no lawsuit filed did claim, has it's own set of issues when it comes to overturning election results. It would be very difficult to overturn election results in this country given how our elections are run. Al Gore lost Florida to Bush by about 500 votes. He did not prevail, even though he only asked for a simple recount.

[pbs.org]

@TyKC PBS is not comparing apples to apples. Mail in voting is “new” and the rejection rates of unsolicited mail-in ballots was much lower than requested absentee ballots (. [ballotpedia.org].

How about ballot harvesting (https://nypost.com/2020/09/27/project-veritas-uncovers-ballot-harvesting-fraud-in-minnesota/) where people unknowingly had their votes stolen? It is illegal and it happened. The person that was arrested was caught by a journalist but there wasn’t a concerted effort by “officials” to investigate this and it would be much more prevalent due to mail in-unsolicited ballots).

Add into this voter turnouts being more than 100% of registered voters ( [judicialwatch.org] ) in some polling districts (this was not the case in any state overall but did happen in smaller regions) issues with efficacy of ‘same day voter registration’, and lack of two-party oversight in the counts (https://www.conservativedailynews.com/2020/11/judge-orders-philadelphia-counting-center-to-allow-republican-observers/ ). Leading to videos like the Georgia video with the container of ballots being pulled out from under a table after everyone was told to leave (nd

The most troubling thing to me as a Libertarian is that If our elections are so flawless and secure, why was meaningful observation not occurring and why was there no debate allowed about unsolicited ballots?
What we did in NY was to allow anyone who wanted to vote absentee due to Covid the opportunity to Request a ballot. That way everyone could be as safe as they wanted to and there was no possible error or people getting ballots at former addresses or being stolen from mailboxes etc.

Then add to this all of the above the whistle blowers testifying to USPS back- dating ballots (project Veritas).

In light of the evidence of all of the manipulations and non-normal proceedings of this election, it would appear the extent of the problem was beyond 44 votes nationwide. (Assuming the dominion machines were perfect and always matched the counts of backup paper ballots which they didn’t match recount values). As a data scientist, when I run something like a count on a static amount it always comes back the same and doesn’t change each time I press count. I believe the Bejing Biden won, but I think saying “nothing to see here” blatantly wrong. Comparing Bush v Gore and the hanging chads to mail in ballots isn’t even close to apples and apples. And I think that sweeping any audits/ security discussion under the rug will only lead to further distrust in our institutions. Not finding fraud while conveniently not looking isn’t evidence of a secure election.

@RitBorg Mail-in voting is not new. I live in Washington State and we've been voting entirely by mail for years along with five other States. The link [ballotpedia.org] you provided goes nowhere, so I can't comment on it. The claims made in (https://nypost.com/2020/09/27/project-veritas-uncovers-ballot-harvesting-fraud-in-minnesota/) have been debunked by the factcheckers as are the claims in (https://www.conservativedailynews.com/2020/11/judge-orders-philadelphia-counting-center-to-allow-republican-observers/ ) (see links below). As far as what Judicial Watch claims. This has been going on for years. It's nothing knew. States must give voters an adequate opportunity to maintain their right to vote. So as always happens, there can be more voters registered than those who can actually vote. There are laws in every State that govern this. It takes time for all this to be fleshed out.

Most of the problems with claims of voter fraud is a massive misunderstanding of how our elections work. This was abundantly clear in the lawsuits that were filed that challenged the election results. Each State elects a SOS whose job it is to conduct elections in accordance with the laws passed by the State where the elections are conducted. There are State election officials who report to the SOS. All of them must pledge to conduct the election in accordance with the election laws of the State. When an SOS certifies election results, he or she is attesting that the election was fair and conducted in a manner consistent with the laws of the State. That doesn't mean that there were no irregularities. It means that the SOS is satisfied that whomever won, would have won the State regardless. If fraud is alleged, then someone must have committed the fraud or have covered it up. This is a crime and the people who committed the crime must be brought to justice. Of course, they are innocent until proven guilty, so they are allowed to have their day in court. If an SOS certifies an election, then he or she has certified that there has been no fraud or that the number of cases he or she needs to investigate is insignificant to the results. All the allegations of fraud brought by the Trump campaign and associated supporters wanted the courts to disenfranchise millions of voters without due process. The courts simply were not going to do that. They were not going to throw out massive numbers of votes cast by voters who believed and did cast a legal vote according to the laws as they understood them at the time. All the allegations of election fraud have to be adjudicated in a court of law. Trump wanted the legislatures of some States to declare him the winner. This would have been completely unconstitutional.

[brennancenter.org]

[usatoday.com]

[conservativedailynews.com]