What If the 2020 US Presidential Election Abnormalities Changed the Outcome?
- Lynn Matthews
- Dec 22, 2025
- 3 min read
A Reasonable Thought Experiment
The 2020 US presidential election was unique. A once-in-a-century pandemic forced states to overhaul voting procedures on short notice. Turnout hit 66.7%—the highest since 1900. Mail-in ballots more than doubled compared to 2016. Rules were changed through court orders, consent decrees, and administrative guidance, often without new legislation.
No major audit, recount, or court has found widespread fraud sufficient to overturn the certified results. Yet the election featured numerous procedural deviations from long-standing norms, especially in the six battleground states decided by a combined total of fewer than 312,000 votes.
This article is not claiming the election was stolen. It is simply asking a neutral question that millions of reasonable people—left, right, and center—still wonder about:
Is it possible that these abnormalities affected enough votes to alter the outcome?
Let’s look at the evidence and explore the “what if.”
The Votes That Vanished in 2024
In 2020, Joe Biden received approximately 81.3 million votes. More votes than President Obama received.
In 2024—a normal election year with no pandemic restrictions—Kamala Harris received about 75 million votes: roughly 6.3 million fewer.
The drop was not spread evenly. It was concentrated in safe Democratic strongholds:
Los Angeles County: nearly 800,000 fewer Democratic votes
New York City: over 600,000 fewer
Chicago/Cook County and other urban centers: hundreds of thousands fewer
Trump gained only marginally in these areas. The massive 2020 surge appeared—and largely disappeared—with the COVID-era rules.
What if that record turnout was driven primarily by temporary pandemic measures rather than a permanent shift in voter behavior?
The Key Abnormalities of 2020
Several practices departed sharply from pre-2020 standards:
Rule changes bypassing full legislative processes:
In Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, ballot receipt deadlines were extended, signature requirements relaxed, and other procedures altered via court rulings or secretary-of-state guidance rather than new laws.
Mass unsolicited mail-in voting
Many states automatically mailed ballot applications—or actual ballots—to every registered voter.
Thousands of unsupervised drop boxes
Drop boxes proliferated with varying levels of monitoring and security requirements.
Large-scale ballot harvesting
In states allowing it, third parties could legally collect and return unlimited numbers of ballots.
Dramatically lowered signature-verification standards
Rejection rates for mismatched signatures plummeted after new guidance and consent decrees.
Documented chain-of-custody gaps
In Fulton County, Georgia alone, court records later revealed over 315,000 ballots lacked required poll-worker signatures.
Restricted access for poll observers
COVID protocols limited partisan watchers in some counting centers.
Each change was defended as necessary to protect public health and expand access. Together, they created a far more decentralized and less uniformly overseen process than any previous modern election.
A Plausible “What If” Scenario
No grand conspiracy or hacked machines are required.Imagine aggressive but entirely legal get-out-the-vote operations in Democratic-leaning urban areas of the six battleground states:
Canvassers use public voter files to target low-propensity households.
They register new voters door-to-door.
When mail ballots arrive, organizers offer to “help” by collecting and dropping them off—perfectly legal in several states.
Drop boxes receive thousands of additional ballots delivered by the same small group of people.
Relaxed verification standards mean far fewer ballots are rejected.
Extended deadlines allow late-arriving ballots to count.
If these efforts netted an extra 50,000 votes in Pennsylvania, 20,000 in Georgia, 30,000 in Michigan, and proportional gains elsewhere, the electoral map changes.The raw numbers existed in 2020. The temporary rules provided the opportunity.Is that scenario possible? The evidence suggests yes.
Restoring Trust: Simple, Proven Reforms
We don’t need to relitigate the past to agree the system can be better.
Countries like France (population 68 million) and Canada still hand-count paper ballots on election night with high turnout and little controversy.
Common-sense ideas that could eliminate most doubt:
Make in-person voting on Election Day the default, with photo ID.
Strictly limit absentee/mail-in ballots to those with a verified need (military, disability, documented travel).
Prohibit third-party ballot collection except by immediate family or designated caregivers.
Use hand-marked paper ballots (or simple scantron sheets) counted publicly by bipartisan teams, with live-streamed transparency.
If we can secure banks, casinos, and international borders, we can secure elections.
The goal isn’t to declare 2020 illegitimate. It’s to ask honest questions so future elections leave no room for reasonable doubt.
Because in a democracy, trust shouldn’t have to be taken on faith.
— Wecu Media, December 2025
Comments