You have correctly laid out the matter of the unconstitutional last minute rules changes which had to be voted on by legislatures, but were not. This appears to have little significance to you for some reason, as you insist on depressing your prediction of Trump's success.
Then you stomp further on your "WAG" prediction without taking into account the action taken by TX.
"Safe harbor" and "Electoral College" can vote and select all they want, but if the election of 1876 is any indication and the USSC Throckmorton decision (1878) set precedence for USSC, if an election is being actively challenged for fraud, the USSC can take all the time it needs to get to the bottom of it, and allow electors to be awarded on the basis of their findings
Your predictions are either pathologically uninformed, or you are simply nothing more than a professional black pill suppression pollster like all the other "pros."
Get lost.
LOL. I said I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not "pathologically uninformed." Your accusation is laughable. "Professional black pill suppression pollster?" How do you even come up with that nonsense? Too funny. "Get lost." Wow. Anyway, as a non-lawyer, I simply mentioned my WAG for Trump's chances, so it's not a "prediction" as you mindlessly claim. Reading comprehension! I'm concerned about the SCOTUS. The three leftists will rule against Trump. I'm extremely skeptical about Roberts. And very concerned that one (or more) "Republican" justices will also side against Trump. Plus a large majority of Americans don't even know, or are barely aware, that Trump is challenging the election and so they just assume Biden will be inaugurated on January 20.