You can attempt a coup via either of those methods. It is more likely your intent to change the course of an election via voter fraud, but it is also possible by legally challenging the results of an election (this depends on whether or not the Constitution and laws are followed).

I agree with @AdvanceManExtraordinaire . I think that we should hear the accusations of fraud in court and either debunk them or prove them. This means actually having a court hearing where people get a fair shake (i.e. the judge looks at the evidence makes a judgment).

This also means that the decision cannot be predetermined or be just a show.

Well, the court wouldn't be overturning the will of the people if the illegal votes are removed and the results change or the election in a state has to be thrown out because there was too much fraud to say the election results are accurate when there is no way to remove fraudulent votes.

Though I do understand that the courts are supposed to make sure that the laws are followed and prevent mob rule or even just majority rule (i.e. we are a democratic republic).

If we are using coup to mean military take over rather than illegally gaining power, then yes.

I don't think laches is a convincing argument when PA took 6 years to review an election based change and ruled on its legality. I also don't think special circumstances allow you to do illegal things. If that were the case, you would have seen it quite frequently done without any reference to the law.

Ah, ok.

That makes more sense. I am waiting for a good argument myself.

Also, as far as the Kamala Harris thing goes, I am pretty sure an election would be held for her seat.

@Dedkraken , could you give some specific sources for those who would like to see what you are talking about?

@Dedkraken , for some arguments that information is useful. According to Wayne county's official results they published that is roughly the right number. I counted 172k that were absentee ballots that were cast in precincts that had 0 registered voters.

That is what their official results say.

Their county website has an election result pdf. I will need to go find it if you would like the link.

N/A is the voter turnout.

If the link has been labeled as unofficial, I have not seen that statement or report.

That looks right, but I need to look at it in detail to verify.

If that is the case, why wasn't this fixed after the primaries?

Preventing this issue seems very easy since the initial program should already take mail-in ballots into account. Why leave the issue unfixed? Why not replace the pdf with a corrected pdf?