Let's discuss a scenario: A city has 100,000 registered voters. Early voting is available for sixty days prior to the election. Turnout is strong, with 80,000 ballots cast before Election Day. Of those 80,000 votes cast, 41,000 (51.25%) were for the anti-establishment candidate (A). Following that pattern, the expectation is that with 100% voter turnout, the Election Day result, if unaltered, would be 51,250 votes for the anti-establishment candidate, thus giving him the win. This leaves 48,750 votes for the establishment candidate (B). In order to overcome the anticipated 51,250 votes in the event of a 100% voter turnout, they would have to fabricate 2,501 ballots to clear that potential hurdle. This means that, if there was 100% authentic turnout, the total turnout be 102.501% That's an awfully narrow margin to contend with. Odds are, though, that the chance of 100% voter turnout is pretty slim. However, the establishment would rather see a guaranteed win in a hotly contested election than worry with the outcome being questioned due to an excessive number of ballots cast - they can handwave that as conspiracy theories and sour grapes. So, they prepare 4,000 fake ballots. Election Day concludes. 98,000 legitimate ballots are cast, along with the 4,000 fake ballots, thus showing a 102% voter turnout with 49,980 votes (49%) for the anti-establishment candidate (A) and 52,020 votes (51%) cast for establishment candidate (B), while only 48,020 were genuine. The 4,000 fake ballots hand over a 2,040 vote margin of fraudulent victory to the establishment candidate (B), when in fact, candidate (A) won by 1,960. What early voting does is allow for those engaging in fraud to pre-count areas and find those where they can dump the minimum number of fake ballots to ensure victory. If the early voting results were showing the anti-establishment candidate winning with 60% in a given county, that makes it more difficult to overcome, so they would shift to another location and dump the fraudulent ballots elsewhere. This is why, while voting rarely matters, at least local elections aren't spread out across massive geographic territories where it's easy to disguise or dismiss fraud. State-wide elections are orders more corrupt than locals, and "national" elections are the most corrupt of all. The surprise of the Amish coming out on election day with full support of Trump in 2016 wasn't accounted for, and Pennsylvania Dems didn't prepare for that sort of groundswell of support. Look at the volume of fraud in 2020 where early voting was widespread due to "muh corona" as opposed to 2016 where early voting was minimized. They were able to commit fraud more easily in Biden's "election" than they were in Trump's. So, don't listen to the QTards.