This is complete misinformation, so your whole belief and argument is based off something that is entirely incorrect.
To examine 1 point of your misinformation in more detail:
The Bellwether Counties Claim
There has been a lot of research debunking this claim, but I will go with a study that was from BEFORE the 2020 election:
"Presidential election forecasting has historically focused on the study of bellwethers at the level of the state, likely due to the fact that presidential candidates win electoral college votes based upon the winner of the popular vote in each state. However, states can be difficult to study due to their large sizes and diverse political environments, leading these authors to examine whether bellwethers can also be studied at the finer resolution of individual counties. To do so, the popular vote winner of each county for every presidential election from 1980 through 2016 was tabulated and mapped, yielding 19 true bellwether counties for the period. These counties were geographically clustered in the Midwest and in the Northeast. Demographically, the bellwether counties tended to be
whiter, older, less educated, have lower median incomes, have a lower percentage of workers in the labor force, and have higher rates of vacant housing than the country as a whole. Finally, numerical bellwether scores for all 3142 counties in the US were computed based upon the number of elections in which each county voted for the winner of the election. Counties with the highest bellwether scores were also disproportionately found in the Midwest and in the Northeast."
August 2020 Study link
In other words, these "bellwether" counties were older, whiter, more rural, and less economically representative than the country as a whole. Those are precisely the kinds of areas that shifted heavily Republican in the Trump era.
So bellwethers weren’t "predictive". They were simply counties whose past voting record matched the winner by coincidence, and whose demographic profile made them increasingly misaligned with national voting trends.
Utlimately, Bellweathers are not a predictive model that can be used as evidence that the 2020 eleciton was stolen
A great comparison to using the Bellweathers as proof, and an example of why it's a terrible idea to do that, is that I can just then say, well why don't we look at and consider the Lichtman keys? These are considered way more predictive than Bellweathers. In fact, Lichtman keys can be considered predictive, while Bellwethers are retrodictive. And the results of the Lichtman keys are:
Retroactive results: The keys correclty retrodict every single election except 1960. 30/31.
Predictive results (1984-2024): 9 out of 11. With one of those incorrect being the 2000 election where it was extremely close (and one which Democrats at least won the popular vote), The other one that was incorrect was the
2024 election outcome.
So if you are willing to use something like bellwethers as evidence that the election was stolen, can't I use that same logic, and use the keys (a far better predictive model) to say
this is evidence that Trump stole the 2024??? And look how after Harris lost, she didn't start running a campaign saying that Trump stole the election, further weakening the integrity of Democracy in America. Harris, and the left didn't start running a mass media campaign to convince their voters that the elections are no longer secure, and that Trump and republicans are stealing elections. The only reason more damage has not been done to Democracy in the US is because Democrats are not doing a fraction of the insane things that Trump and Republicans are doing.
And this is the core issue: Republicans are willing to erode the public’s faith in democracy using misleading claims, and once that door is opened, every future election becomes vulnerable to the exact same tactic. If losing parties can simply declare fraud without evidence, democracy cannot function. There is not anything that Trump is doing or saying that cannot be done by any losing party in the future by using misleading statistics to convince their voterbase.
And to be clear, the burden of proof matters here. If you are going to tell millions of people that elections are rigged, that the system is corrupt, and that Democrats stole an election, then you need an extremely high standard of evidence. Bellwether trivia does not meet that standard. Misleading statistics do not meet that standard. Conspiracy-level speculation does not meet that standard. Having all your court cases fail does not meet that standard. Convincing a large portion of your voter base that elections are illegitimate has serious, long-term consequences.
The push by Trump and his allies to spread misinformation about the 2020 election is a direct attack on democratic stability. It has led a significant portion of the population to believe, incorrectly, that the election was stolen. Meanwhile, if you want to see genuine attempts at election interference, you should read the January 6th Committee Report. The evidence is overwhelming: Trump represents the most serious threat to American democracy in a long time.