I think you have no clue about what you are talking about and little to no understanding of how votes are counted. Oh and just what are these counties you are talking about.
I'm as curious as......necessary. For instance I'm curious why people like yourself so readily accept assertions without proof, why you reject all of the State certifications of the elections as well as Barr's DOJ investigation that led him to conclude that stop the steal was bullshit.
And I'm curious why you're NOT curious enough to dig deeper. Would you agree that bellwethers are bellwethers until they no longer are, that things change? All you had to do was turn on your Google Machine and insert... Biden lost 18 of the 19 bellwether counties which predicted the presidential winner since 1980. And you would've found the article I've pasted below.
Note the correlations between educational levels and voting. Ominously for Trump and Republicans I doubt that 'highly educated suburbs' are going to become less so.
The Trump era made us rethink a lot about politics and elections in America, including the counties that are useful barometers of the national political environment. And like so many electoral trends, demographics play a major role in explaining why these once-bellwether counties finally missed the mark in 2020.
These former bellwether counties are much whiter and less college-educated than the country as a whole. For instance, Washington County, Maine — the median bellwether county in terms of its share that’s non-Hispanic white — is 89 percent non-Hispanic white, which is much higher than the overall U.S. population that identifies as such (60 percent). It is also not as educated: Just 22 percent of adults 25 or older have a bachelor’s degree or higher, which is substantially lower than the 32 percent who have a college degree nationwide.
That Trump did so well in the remaining 19 bellwether counties in 2020 should come as no surprise, then. Trump remained very strong with white voters without a college degree in 2020, helping him win Iowa and Ohio by comfortable margins and remain competitive in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. In total, Trump won 18 of the 19 former bellwether counties, winning the average such county by 13.7 points in 2020. And as was true in 2016, those counties voted substantially to the right of the nation.
In fact, they became even more Republican — the average bellwether county from 1980 to 2016 voted 18.2 points to the right of the nation. Ultimately, of course, Trump’s strong performance in these counties didn’t matter because of Biden’s gains in the more highly educated suburbs of Milwaukee, Grand Rapids and Philadelphia.
But it’s not just demographic trends driving the loss of bellwether status. Increased political polarization is another reason why fewer counties are consistently indicative of presidential results in recent years. In fact, according to David Wasserman of The Cook Political Report, just 303 counties were decided by single-digit margins in 2016, compared to 1,096 counties that fit that description in 1992. The fact that there are fewer swing counties means that there are fewer potential bellwether counties.
In the end, only Clallam County retained its streak this year. However, its bellwether status is by no means guaranteed in future elections. As we’ve seen in the past two presidential elections, bellwether streaks can be suddenly ended thanks to America’s continually evolving political and demographic trends. Moving forward, it is entirely possible that there will be no single county that consistently indicates the results of a national election.
So, what can we ultimately say about the impact of COVID-19 on the 2020 election? Most likely, it worked against Trump. Had there been no pandemic, he may have still lost the popular vote, but considering how close the election was, he may have had a decent chance of winning the Electoral College.Yet the damage to his prospects was far from enormous, and that may have been mitigated somewhat by polarization. Indeed, a better response on Trump’s part that either helped reduce the spread of the disease or limit its economic impact could well have secured his reelection bid.
Knock yourself out.
Exhaustive fact check finds little evidence of voter fraud, but 2020’s ‘Big Lie’ lives on.
PBS https://www.pbs.org › newshour › show › exhaustive-fa... Dec 17, 2021 — ... without evidence that widespread voter fraud led to a stolen election. A new reporting project from the Associated Press shows that is false ...
Widespread election fraud claims by Republicans don't ...
Brookings https://www.brookings.edu › articles › widespread-elect... Nov 22, 2023 — There is minimal evidence to suggest that the few fraudulent votes benefitted Democratic candidates. In Georgia, Heritage has reported no cases ...
Voter data expert hired by Trump campaign says 2020 ...
The Hill https://thehill.com › homenews › campaign › 4385239-... Jan 2, 2024 — Ken Block, whom the Trump campaign hired in 2020 to find voter fraud in the election, penned an op-ed Tuesday stating unequivocally that the ...
Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud
AP News https://apnews.com › article › barr-no-widespread-electi... Jun 28, 2022 — ... voting irregularities before the 2020 presidential election was certified, despite no evidence at that time of widespread fraud. That ... Missing: '20? ?| Show results with: '20?
Republicans Increasingly Realize There's No Evidence Of ...
Forbes https://www.forbes.com › Business Mar 14, 2023 — Republicans Increasingly Realize There's No Evidence Of Election Fraud—But Most Still Think 2020 Election Was Stolen Anyway, Poll Finds · Topline.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
