I don't believe that this election was stolen, because I think that the assumption has to be that it was legitimate--unless and until solid evidence to the contrary surfaces (as in 2000).
That said, I think that it is just as foolish to contend that there is no chance of a stolen election as it is to contend that this election must have been stolen.
Clearly, this election COULD have been stolen. Just as clearly, nobody has proven that it WAS.
Do you realize how hard it is to prove a negative?
In general, it is not especially difficult to prove a negative. It's not relevant anyway, as I have clearly stated that the burden of proof is on those who claim the election
was stolen.
I have a problem with those who dismiss such claims without considering them, or who pretend that only a lunatic would entertain the possibility of a stolen election--even though we know of numerous voting irregularities.
