The Unlikelihood of Election Fraud and Why It’s Politically Unwise to Challenge It

Many believe that there is a chance of overturning the election due to alleged fraud. However, the reality is that such a scenario is both highly improbable and politically suicidal for those in power. This article delves into the reasons why election officials such as Governors Ducey and Kemp would not be fighting to overturn the election, explore the challenges in proving fraud, and discuss the political and legal implications of pursuing such an action.

The Political Suicidality of Challenging Election Results

Even if there is a theory of election fraud, it would be extremely risky for political figures, such as Governors Ducey and Kemp, to take up the challenge. The pressure to protect their power and maintain political respect makes it highly unlikely for them to engage in such a politically perilous action. Instead, these officials would likely focus on certifying the election results to ensure their political continuity.

No Evidence of Fraud Proven

The assertion that there is a significant chance of fraud in the election is essentially unfounded. Democrats manipulated the election by implementing nationwide mail-in voting, which created numerous opportunities for fraud. However, it is nearly impossible to prove such large-scale deception.

Practical Challenges and Legal Constraints

Complications in proving voter fraud include:

Legal constraints: Calling up voters to verify their ballots would violate laws designed to protect voter security. Lack of evidence: The discarded outer envelopes make it impossible to compare signatures. Legal barriers: Courts are unlikely to order comprehensive investigations unless there is compelling evidence of fraud. Comprehensive claims: Even if some individuals claim to have witnessed fraud, the statistical analysis and evidence from the election results must be considered.

Without significant and irrefutable evidence, any attempts to challenge the election results would be met with skepticism and potential legal backlash.

Statistical Evidence and Conclusion

The statistical evidence from the 2020 election results, such as:

Unusually high voter turnout compared to previous elections Abnormally high number of mail-in ballots rejected by vote counters Unusually high number of provisional ballots Politically dissonant results between public polls and election day enthusiasm

These points, among others, strongly suggest that the Democrats may have engaged in unfair practices to secure victory. Nevertheless, the election will be certified, and Biden will likely become the President. This does not change the fact that the Democrats used voter fraud.

The Role of Mail-in Voting in Manipulating Results

Despite the refusal to certify the election results, the Democrats succeeded by exploiting the mail-in voting system’s lack of transparent measures to prevent fraud. The success of their strategy can be attributed to:

The extremely difficult proof of fraud The manipulation of public opinion, particularly due to the unprecedented political enthusiasm for Joe Biden The procedural irregularities during the certification process

Ultimately, while the exact extent of fraud remains unclear, the evidence strongly indicates that the Democrats' strategic use of mail-in voting created a favorable bias for their candidate.

Conclusion

The election is unlikely to be overturned due to a lack of substantial evidence of fraud. Although Governors Ducey and Kemp have no vested interest in contesting the results, the Democratic Party's efforts to secure the victory by exploiting mail-in voting methods underscores the need for reform in voter security and election transparency.