There is some degree of fraud in every election, but there wasn't enough in Ohio to make the difference in the outcome. I am always highly skeptical of charges of fraud unless there is substaintial proof to back them up. Innocent unless proven guilty.
Exactly. There's always fraud. There's the NAACP trading crack for voter registrations, the GOP registereing voters and throwing away the forms of Demcorats, the cigarettes for votes in 2000, etc. What we're looking for is not shennanigans, but 1) Systemic fraud (resulting from a coordinated effort by one side) 2) Statistically significant fraud (widespread enough to effect an outcome that was 110,000 votes apart) and 3) Unique fraud (fraud that was not matched or exceeded by the opposition party). Ohio was legit.
