The so-called "bullet ballots" and too many voting for president only

[Igel]

57. I don't think that's the claim at all.

The claim is that there are a lot of people who voted for Trump but did not vote for specific other (R) candidates and the difference between the two--which nobody could ever vote differently on--is proof of single-vote ballots.

That's very different from saying they didn't vote for *any* other candidate. In fact, to show that a significant number of people *did* split the tickets is strong counterevidence.

So, as a thought experiment--purely imaginary, let's magine if you had a state in which the (D) Senate candidate got more votes than Harris.

Say, maybe, Arizona:
Gallego (D) 1,671,985
Harris (D) 1,578,856

Obviously, if such a thing happened, that would entail certain far-out possibilities. Maybe the Harris campaign was subverted and provided, on the QT, 90,000 ballots that simply could not be marked for Harris. Or maybe Gallego's folk provided bullet ballots to replace real ballots! Uh-oh. Because we have to assume nobody could vote against Harris and for Gallego--that's simply impossible.

Except those are the results from https://decisiondeskhq.com/results/2024/General/races/arizona-president-all-parties-general-election (and the Senate tab at that site). So it's not a thought experiment, it's just counterevidence that Must Not Be Named.