>Like all good conspiracy theories voter fraud comes with absolutely no concrete evidence. Possibly some individuals vote more than once but an organised campaign of multiple voting seems very unlikely. It does seem like there will be an effort to make voting harder which may hit democrat voters more. Maybe you'll be required to prove membership of an up market country club like Mar-a-Lago before you can vote. After all why should wealth creators only have the same voting power as the little people.

One line of this story is still unclear to me - back in 2000 the Diebold machines were proven to be easily hackable, and there's a track record that they were hacked. In many places they would show fewer votes on one candidate than they showed an hour before, while the other candidate would show an increase larger than the number of ballots cast meanwhile. Written in Access (!)... And yet there was a serious push to install these machines in as many places as possible, probably by Diebold's sales force and their (secretly?) paid representatives. And then this part of the story vanished. Not that I really tried to know what happened with this later, but it's a bit surprising that there were four elections after this and I haven't heard of Diebold.

Really, what happened later?