>>>Were there a lot of states with results that didn't match polling in 2012? ISTR that, in fact, the results almost exactly matched the polling.
>>>
>>>Hmmm. Perhaps in the future we should just let the polls decide the election and not bother voting. The polls do not mean much as we saw in the 2016 election.
>>
>>Historically, in the modern era of polling, polls have done a pretty good job of predicting the vote. In particular, exit polls have been quite accurate. In fact, when we (the US and other western countries) look at elections in other countries, when the results are widely different from the exit polls, we tend to suspect funny business.
>>
>
>Question: what is the difference between that last statement and the ridiculous line from Trump that, "if I lose PA, it's because it was rigged?"

The obvious difference is that one argument is based on comparing two sets of data, whereas the other is baseless and preposterous. One of the many other differences is that one argument is raising a question as to why it happened (fact, past tense), the other is meant to be a self fulfilling prophecy... an on and on.
*