> I’m not using this example of fraud to prove that the entire electoral system is broken You could have fooled me. Your previous comment contained no such qua

> I’m not using this example of fraud to prove that the entire electoral system is broken You could have fooled me. Your previous comment contained no such qualification, leaving an open ended implication which seemed to be intentional. Most people responding to this example are pointing out the problems with it, and they don't seem to have any issue being quite frank about how this evidence doesn't show fraud, doesn't show systematic error, doesn't show that the election outcome would be different. No one interested in the facts should be willing to take that as a starting point and proceeding to entertain this kind of meandering, open ended, unprovable and vague speculation that you seem to want to steer the conversation toward.