New York Time DENIES Election Voter Fraud? Viva Frei Vlawg

The NYT article itself is accurate, the headline, like most online headlines, is misleading clickbait. No voter fraud? If we look I'm sure we can find at least one instance somewhere in any given presidential election. But when we read on we find what they really mean is really no evidence of voter fraud that would have impacted the result. In that they are on solid ground.

Yes, the failure is in using the words "No Voter Fraud" when what they mean is, not enough voter fraud to change the outcome. The first aspect of voter fraud (the principle of it, the wrong-ness, the crime of it in every instance is ignored in these discussions...and only the 2nd aspect (whether or not the fraud turned the election) is discussed. Why? Should we treat all crimes this way? There are other (what shall I call them?) "inconsistencies" that may or may not be fraudulent, depending on whether the inconsistencies (lost or changed ballots, for example) were intentional or merely normal human error. Not all of these will meet the legal standard of fraud, but the numbers are much higher.