While I think you're arguing in bad faith, at least there's some interesting discussion in the replies. I think it's an interesting thought experiment to figure out how to do mass voter fraud though:

> How are we even detecting wholesale voter fraud? What's the method to detect when someone with access to the voter rolls slips an extra crate of ballots into the count, or fills out and mails in thousands of ballots in the names of people who never asked them to?

The mere act of bringing in a "create of ballots" is going to be incredibly tricky. You have to obtain the valid ballots somehow: steal them, get some printed, or print them yourself. If you print them, you have to perfectly replicate the design, type of paper, etc. Then you have to physically get the box into the building, into the right room, with the proper security seals or whatever is used.

But let's pretend security is crazy lax, and/or several people are involved AND somehow not one of them is caught or a whistleblower. This is already a stretch -- as the number of people involved goes up, so do the chances one gets caught and/or one is a whistleblower.

If we add the ballots without it adding up to the number of names crossed off the voter rolls list, that's going to be a giant red flag of voter fraud happening. Either this has happened and no one has noticed (one one has ever thought to check this?), or.. it hasn't happened.

With access to the voter rolls we could inject names, but of course that leaves a paper trail. Thousands of names of people that don't exist or are deceased or are from the wrong place would appear and would have all voted. We could also figure out how many deceased people are on the list and have them vote, but this too leaves a paper trail. While there's some reporting of incidences of deceased people voting, it appears to mainly be clerical errors [1] and certainly doesn't appear to be at the scale of thousands needed to sway the vote, so likely this also hasn't happened.

Casting any significant number of ballots for legitimate voters ahead of time would be likely to result in lots of people showing up to find out they've "already voted" and being turned away. Once again, this either has happened and thousands of people quietly walked away saying "oh well" and not going to the media.. or it hasn't happened.

With access to the rolls, we could look up who didn't vote, and cast votes for them. We'd need to be able to cross out names after the polling has closed, then make sure our crate has a matching number of ballots to the people that didn't vote and physically get it in to the count room. And of course, this would show up in the type of analysis this article is doing: it would look exactly like the Russian election results at the start. This also doesn't appear to be the case, at least for 2016.

All of this work would allow some fraction of voting fraud to happen at ONE polling station. If we pick the right station in the right district (where the security and scrutiny is likely to be higher) we could maybe even have a meaningful effect, but for all that work and risk (of jail time) there's no guarantees. We'd need to do it at multiple polling locations, but unfortunately most of the work involved doesn't really scale: we we just need more and more people involved in the conspiracy.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/08/tech/michigan-dead-voter-fact...