My fear is that Trump may get the popular vote according to exit polling, but Kamala will be named the winner, and the schism between the two tallies will be pronounced enough that a huge blow up might result, with each side claiming victory.
That's actually what happened in 2004, but in reverse in terms of party: the Democrats fought the roll-out of the electronic voting machines (because they couldn't be audited or leave a paper trail) and the Republicans wanted them. As a result, there was the greatest discrepancy in history between the exit polls and the "official" popular vote -- but only in the states with those electronic voting machines, always favoring Dubya -- while the exit polls, usually favored John Kerry, the Democrat. (Even the Diebold voting machine creator said
publicly that he would help the Dubya campaign any way he could. And the final vote came down to Ohio, the home of Diebold).
The quasi-liberal media gasped that night -- and then never mentioned it again.
So Dubya stole both elections and served two terms.
I'm
not a Trump fan and have never voted for him. And, yes, the man is full of hot air... But if there's a problem at the polls, and a schism between the exit polls and the final count, the media will be loath to report the ugly implication (as they were even when a Democrat was robbed, as in 2004) and will only focus on Trump's indignant reaction to it; and they'll call it "conspiracy theories" (which may not be entirely theories).
If so, what a mess.
The establishment -- the deep state -- doesn't want Trump because he's a live wire and gives away the game too easily (although he almost always gives them what they want in the end). While Kamala is more compliant (while verbalizing concerns for the working class she doesn't feel at all, to help shmooze the public, as most of the Dems do nowadays). And that deep state has so many ways to undermine the elections.
Either way, we're screwed. Again. The only question this time is how volatile the public's reaction will be.
