Certainly giving all Americans easier access to vote is a problem for dumb asses like you that must be dealt with. Your whole shtick is anti-democracy. You want a one party system where the leader operates as a fascist dictator.
Name one president, in the last 27 races, to lose while winning Florida and Ohio. Thats right. Nixon lost to Kennedy, who stole the election through Illinois. So yah, unless you steal it, whoever wins Florida and Ohio is expected to win.
Seems fitting that you'd lump Nixon and Trump together like this . Biden got 4 million more votes then Trump yet you think it's a steal. It would have been a steal if he won.
A President with an approval rating below 50 is expected to lose. Only 1 president out of 5 who lost the popular vote got a second term.
No im comparing the only two times a candidate appears to have lost having won Florida and Ohio in the last 27 cycles. Stolen both times. So i guess im lumping Kennedy and Biden although not sure to what extent each candidate was personally involved in the theft. Campaigns and parties have a lot to do with it. Nixon went on to be elected some years later, as well may Trump if the theft succeeds. The difference is Trump is an incumbent much loved by his base, and may have more allies than you currently believe. But not just allies, actual law and order that he is willing to exercise. If law and order prevails, the coup will fail miserably.
With the number of combinations of ways to reach 270 or whatever the number was in the past the FL OH mix is just coincidence. A President who the people didn't vote for winning by a fluke EC victory losing the next time is logical.The people never wanted them as president and corrected their mistake the next time around. A President the American people did not approve of losing their re-election is logical.The people of Fl and OH having to vote for a President to win or its fraud is not logical and absurd.
Its one of several statistical outliers that are raising red flags toward probable cause (for a massive recount under watchful, trusted, eyes). Just as logical would pick up same EC votes as before. You are just as likely, if not more, to be making something out of cooincidence. The people? The EC actually favors older, more vested people with more skin in the game who have been in the country longer. This is something i fully agree with. Enfranchisment has gradually spread out from landed men to unlanded youth of all three genders. Based on ten year census data, the EC protects from a certain kind of jerrymandering. If you can change it through the lawful means (constitutional amendment) more power to you. But i would argue and vote agsinst changing it.
Oh yah, dont even talk to me about "the people" while everyone under 18 is still unrepresented, even though the national debt saddles them with a lifetime of taxes. Of course, you cant expect children to vote, but in a representative republic we can expect their parents to vote for them. Nope, dont talk to me about "people", or the EC, until you start agitating for representation for that demography (O-17 yr old)