(05-26-2021, 04:07 PM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote:

(05-26-2021, 04:04 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: A couple of suspect anecdotes aren't proof of widespread fraud but the Trumplican's willingness to believe conspiracy theories does prove why I was wrong to think they'd really accept the election results. Q.E.D.

Just curious, what constitutes “widespread” for you?

Well, since you asked... the dictionary definition is "found or distributed over a large area or number of people".

That's pretty general, so I'll add that it must be something that happens in more than just a vanishingly small fraction of a percentage of cases. Attempts at voter fraud are pretty rare but they do happen so we get a sense for how common it is. The answer is: not very. Historically, the perpetrators have been caught, cases documented and charges filed.

The issue with the voter fraud conspiracy theory in the last election is it requires...well, a massive conspiracy which would be unprecedented and extraordinary. So something besides anecdotes from likely biased sources is required. Where are the connections? Where's the smoking gun?

---