The popular vote does not decide the president of the United states. Trump got less votes than Hillary in 2016.
Not what I'm talking about. 2 million votes dispersed throughout the country will not flip any states apart from maybe Georgia, but Biden isn't relying on Georgia anyway. He would still have 290 electoral college votes, ergo he still wins by 20.
Here's a question: Do you really think it would be fair and democratic for a candidate that lost by
5 million votes to still be declared the winner? Or do you think American politics need reform so the popular vote actually means something?
I don't think Trump "manufactured" the idea of rigged elections. He's using the consensus that already agrees to the existence of them as leverage to gain favor with his base. Trump is not as much of an inventor as he is a utilizer.
It doesn't matter what you think. It's an objective fact that he was the first to yell 'STOP THE COUNT' on twitter, and was also the first to mention anything about mail ballots. As you've previously demonstrated though, you suffer from Creationist Fallacy so your claims are automatically true and what you think is more important than what any evidence says.
the Biden campaign literally blocks any and all investigations that would look into the election and gather evidence
And how exactly is he meant to do that when he's not president yet?
Oh you mean like Russian hacking?
So you agree that your 'election rigging' nonsense is as idiotic as the claim that Russia is the reason Trump won in 2016?*
*Note: I'm not denying that Russia attempted to intefere, but that inteference was not the reason for Trump's victory. I'm not gonna defend Russia though considering its complete lack of respect for democracy and human rights.
I personally have trouble why people believe that the election was not rigged
I personally have trouble with your thought process. The burden of proof is on
you to prove the claim
you are making. Again, Creationist Fallacy.