>As I've said elsewhere, it's as if I put a ballot box outside my house, got enough votes based on my own rules, and then declared whomever got enough votes in my contest the winner. That's great, but for it to be a legitimate election, the law has to be followed.
>Again I'm hardly alone in this. Polling shows widespread bipartisan belief that the election was irregular.
The implication here seems to be that because the election was "irregular", that it wasn't legitimate. But what does "irregular" mean, and should the irregularities be the basis for overturning/ignoring the results of the election? For instance, the election happened in a pandemic. That's arguably pretty "irregular", and probably had a material impact on the results. Should the results be tossed on the basis of that alone? In other comments you mentioned other objections, like counting votes that turned up late, but it's not clear that tossing out those votes would make the election more legitimate. What's more irregular, sticking to the letter of the law exactly, and letting all the pandemic disruptions affect campaigning/turnout, or adding accommodations?
The irregularity is not following the written law when conducting the election and instead making up rules.
These were not mistakes. The secretaries of state announced that they were going to ignore election law. That should not be tolerated. It's an attack on democracy of the highest order.
>Again I'm hardly alone in this. Polling shows widespread bipartisan belief that the election was irregular.
The implication here seems to be that because the election was "irregular", that it wasn't legitimate. But what does "irregular" mean, and should the irregularities be the basis for overturning/ignoring the results of the election? For instance, the election happened in a pandemic. That's arguably pretty "irregular", and probably had a material impact on the results. Should the results be tossed on the basis of that alone? In other comments you mentioned other objections, like counting votes that turned up late, but it's not clear that tossing out those votes would make the election more legitimate. What's more irregular, sticking to the letter of the law exactly, and letting all the pandemic disruptions affect campaigning/turnout, or adding accommodations?