Completely agree that’s an untenable system they’ve adopted. I’m just not sure if what they’re doing in those cases was enough to overcome a 10K-vote (or more) deficit. Instead, I think eyeballing ambiguous (for whatever reason) ballots and ‘discerning the will of the voter’ like a mystical soothsayer could only tilt a very close election, like the recounts you mention.
I still think their bread & butter techniques were largely dependent on the mail-in balloting and vote harvesting elements that were so prevalent in this pandemic election.
I recall that there was at least one state where an incredibly high percentage of votes were “adjudicated.” I seem to remember a number around 60%. And in all of the swing states, the adjudicated percentages were unusually high. That creates a playground for fraud that would have plenty of potential to flip an election, even if it wasn’t remotely close.
“ Instead, I think eyeballing ambiguous (for whatever reason) ballots and ‘discerning the will of the voter’ like a mystical soothsayer could only tilt a very close election, like the recounts you mention.”
You need to look at the bigger picture.
There is evidence that ballots in Republican strongholds were adjucated at a far higher rate than those in Democrat strongholds. Adjucation allows a poll worker to cast the vote however they want. If you intentionally force adjucation in select areas, you can make huge changes.