You believe this because you have no idea how incredibly scrutinized the process is. There is a reason that there are Poll Watchers from both parties, including lawyers and independents to ensure that poll workers don't put their thumb on the scale.

One of the things giving rise to the distrust is that poll watchers were disallowed. It's safe to say that nobody who cares about integrity would be OK with that action.

Where are you getting that idea? You can comfortably ignore anything you hear or read from that source.

No, they literally weren't. Poll Watchers were allowed in every precinct. In fact, one of the only lawsuits the Trump admin won was one that allowed poll watchers to stand closer.

Stop just regurgitating conspiracy theories. Seriously, go volunteer to be a trained poll watcher and go watch an election and then tell me how our elections don't happen under incredible scrutiny.

> incredibly scrutinized

At best you could say there wasn't enough fraud to tip the balance, but this "no fraud," "most secure election ever" nonsense is ridiculous. People like you probably also would have claimed dependent tax credit fraud was incredibly rare (from Snopes, a "FACT CHECK" site, no less):

> https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/declaration-of-non-depende...

Oh for fucks sake, I never made such a claim and the election is incredibly scrutinized. It is the reason that we know about the handful of fraud cases that have happened. Of course no one believes that there is literally no fraud. Why do we need to be so perfectly specific that the amount of fraud that does happen is less than .0001%?

Stop being obtuse, all you are doing is eroding trust for the sake of eroding trust.

It's also hilarious how much of the fraud that does happen is perpetuated by Republicans because their party tells them that Democrats commit fraud.

“ Of course no one believes that there is literally no fraud. Why do we need to be so perfectly specific that the amount of fraud that does happen is less than .0001%?”

To be fair to the person your replying to I think that percentage you wrote is the crux of the whole thing. Quite large segments of the american population believe fraud >>0.0001% whereas other quite large segments share your view that it is ~0.0001%. And perhaps there is a segment that truly believes it is <<0.0001%.

Though I am unsure what the null hypothesis should be in this case it does seem that the probability of the reality being >>0.0001% is above zero.

Extraordinarily claims require extraordinary evidence. You have members of both parties state that the election was secure and fraud minimal. You have international observers say the same. 60+ legal challenges thrown out because of a lack of specific allegations and proof. Elections observed by both parties lawyers.

Stop with the conspiracy theorizing. There are literal billions spent on elections every year, and if there was fraud being perpetuated by one of the parties, it would be in the interest of the other party to spend massive amounts of money to uncover said fraud, and they do, and they have found nothing of substance.

In addition to private study, there have been countless academic studies that state the same.

Stop giving breath to ideas that are without evidence and which are corrosive to our democracy.

Did you intend to reply to my post? The probability of any physically possible event occurring is above zero. That is certainly not a theory. In fact that there are low probability events that are practically guaranteed to happen over a long enough period of time, such as a big earthquake on the West Coast, comet impact, etc.

That is not watch a poll watcher does.

How exactly would any party put a thumb on the scale?

There is a watcher from each party and an election worker.

The ballots are watched the entire way from opening an envelope/voting booth, counting, moving sealed and secured boxes of ballots, counting, to the end.