Thought experiment:

Imagine a vaccine has been developed.  In order for the vaccine to be effective it must be cooked for exactly 60 minutes at 195 deg F (+/1 1 deg F). 

Unfortunately, the equipment monitoring the temperature was inop for the entire 60 minutes.

Do you use the vaccine even though you don't have proof that the temperature wasn't 195 deg F?

we all know that video can be faked...

I didn't say massive or widespread. All that was needed was a tiny amount of targeted fraud.

Massive, widespread fraud is not needed, nor even attempted. Out of the 3580 voter districts total in the U.S., only 19 of them controlled the outcome; in the 6 swing states, in the 2020 election. Those swing states and their key counties and districts were very easily identified and targeted leading up to the election.

That's ALL they had to target. 19 out of 3580 is one half of one percent.  0.53% to be exact.

The less massive and widespread it is, the easier to cover up and hide the evidence after the fact. You see lots of debunking of fraud claims, but most of it is debunking claims everywhere else, or generally as a whole, not those swing districts, and there were a lot of red herrings. So a lot of debunking is correct, but irrelevant.

A conspiracy theorist might even think that was deliberately orchestrated to drown out the real fraud in an ocean of fake claims and debunkings.

  Internet searches are really difficult huh?   Even this forum has a search function, and if you could figure that out you would find numerous links of such information.

But there is actual fertility decline. Levels of testosterone and sperm have significantly declined in males, and rates of miscarriage and other pregnancy loss seem to be rising among women even controlling for age.

Add in the metoo publicity “OMG he touched my boob 30 years ago, we must ruin his life!” And the pedo hysteria - don’t dare cop a feel of your 16 year old girl friend, she’s under the age of consent. I’ve seen teen boys post on anonymous boards they’re actually worried they are a pedophile because they like girls their own age or a couple years younger, which is not only biologically normal, but mandated by our nature. But the constant drumbeating about pedo in the media has them questioning their own budding urges. There isn’t much discernment in the news: If you find a 15 year old girl attractive you’re a pedo, end of story. Nothing mentioned about whether you’re a a 70 year old male or a 17 year old male.

No wonder the young guys today are terrified to even look at a woman. Phones are everywhere and there is constant danger of some misstep being blasted all over the internet. Porn is pervasive, easy to get and far safer than trying to tap an actual female.

And I won’t even get into the economic difficulties of raising children these days.

Women still want a man, after they’re done frittering away their most fertile years on a career, but because of dating apps, they now have access way beyond their local community and hence can choose only the top 5%, vastly decreasing the portion of males who will ever reproduce.

And it cuts both ways. Men tend to prefer younger women. Women focus on career during youth and suddenly get baby hunger as they approach 40 but surprise! Not many men want to start families with an “elderly primigravida”.

We are facing not only a crisis of an aging population with the Social Security Ponzi scheme, the upcoming generations won’t even have children to advocate for them in old age. People will be single and alone with not only no children, but no nieces and nephews - the backup plan of times past for spinsters and bachelors and couples with infertility problems.

A bunch of family-less old people being cared for by immigrants. And when the population collapse hits the third world immigrants - and it’s coming for them too - they’ll face the same thing. It’s our species-wide problem.

  Then why not the legislature amend the law as set forth in the constitution?  Why did judges and even governors feel they could just usurp the law?  The governor could have called a special session of the legislature, had them create a bill and he could have signed it.  So why bypass that process if everything was on the up and up?

  States make different methods to vote for those who truly can't get to the polls, and none of it is insurmountable.   But those mail in ballots have layers of security and require signatures, and must be postmarked before no later than election day.

  When the 2020 free for all mail in voting went into effect, ballots were mailed to everyone on the voter rolls.  Didn't matter living or dead or had long moved away.  Then requirements for signatures were relaxed.  Several states even accepted mail in ballots passed election day or even no post mark.

 Now enters the "ballot harvesters".  These activist would go door to door offering to pick up ballots.  Someone have several ballots mailed to their address for people that previously lived there?  No problem, the ballot harvester would take them off your hands.   See where this is going?  And it was all "legal".

Correct! This was another example of illegal election rigging that doesn’t necessarily require outright vote creation, just takes advantage of the huge proportion of mail-ins that are Democrat for whatever reason.

All of this is why I posted that Time article about the organized conspiracy (their own words) to “ensure a fair election”.  The argument that this means actual “fair” is shown to be a lie in that none of what they did helped the Republican side, only the Democrats.

Absentee Ballots can be used for military and others that can't vote in person, but a good reason and documentation is needed. We've always had them. Why loosen the standards?