“tens of millions of Americans believe” voter fraud is real “despite the consensus among independent academic and journalistic investigations” that it “is rare and extremely unlikely to determine a national election.”
Where exactly does one begin? Let's go with "consensus" once again being re-defined. Even if the consensus is accurate and fraud is "rare," that does not discredit the belief that it is also real. Rare things are still things, no?
'Extremely unlikely' based on what? 2000, '04, and '16 were all very close elections. We've seen state and congressional offices tip on 'ballot harvesting,' which defying all statistical odds, always benefits the Dem candidate. You don't need too many instances of that to impact a key state and sway the national outcome.
“tens of millions of Americans believe” voter fraud is real “despite the consensus among independent academic and journalistic investigations” that it “is rare and extremely unlikely to determine a national election.”
Where exactly does one begin? Let's go with "consensus" once again being re-defined. Even if the consensus is accurate and fraud is "rare," that does not discredit the belief that it is also real. Rare things are still things, no?
'Extremely unlikely' based on what? 2000, '04, and '16 were all very close elections. We've seen state and congressional offices tip on 'ballot harvesting,' which defying all statistical odds, always benefits the Dem candidate. You don't need too many instances of that to impact a key state and sway the national outcome.