> The verification process has to be trustworthy and not some opaque process that needs a lot effort in order to challenge it if people think there was something wrong.
Aside from someone who lost a major election making wild claims, what is not trustworthy? Every step of the election process has checks and requirements for strict observation (by opposing party representatives). The effort required to challenge should be proportional in significance to the interruption being requested. AFAIK that's basically how it is now. Want to challenge a vote? Easy. Want to challenge a lot of votes or put a hold on the results until you've had a chance to go digging? That needs to take enough effort that only those with more than a conspiracy theory will attempt it.
> Of course the people who feel represented by the current party in power are likely to trust how the state government handles this process
Eh, I think this is actually pretty peculiar to just one of the parties. I've never worried about the elections tally when our county clerk was Republican (which has been most of my life). Messing with the votes is a daunting task. Go look at the actual process in your locality, I bet it's the same.
> challenging the process has been frowned upon as somehow anti-democratic
Not true. Conspiracy theories, "I think it's fraudulent because my guy lost", these absolutely ARE anti-democratic. They are intended to tear down the system, not strengthen it. Come with evidence, then you can strengthen the process.
Aside from someone who lost a major election making wild claims, what is not trustworthy? Every step of the election process has checks and requirements for strict observation (by opposing party representatives). The effort required to challenge should be proportional in significance to the interruption being requested. AFAIK that's basically how it is now. Want to challenge a vote? Easy. Want to challenge a lot of votes or put a hold on the results until you've had a chance to go digging? That needs to take enough effort that only those with more than a conspiracy theory will attempt it.
> Of course the people who feel represented by the current party in power are likely to trust how the state government handles this process
Eh, I think this is actually pretty peculiar to just one of the parties. I've never worried about the elections tally when our county clerk was Republican (which has been most of my life). Messing with the votes is a daunting task. Go look at the actual process in your locality, I bet it's the same.
> challenging the process has been frowned upon as somehow anti-democratic
Not true. Conspiracy theories, "I think it's fraudulent because my guy lost", these absolutely ARE anti-democratic. They are intended to tear down the system, not strengthen it. Come with evidence, then you can strengthen the process.