https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/24/28_mil...
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/p...
Coordination on that scale is completely impossible to pull off without detection. This just isn't a feasible attack.
There's a virtually zero chance that a group effort involving thousands of people isn't uncovered before the attack happens.
But that is getting ahead of ourselves. The problem isn't how do you solve duplicate voting, it is how do you detect it. That is a solved problem, already, and the answer is that there are very few attempts at voter fraud in a vote-by-mail system.
Now, the electronic machines are a whole 'nother matter. I would fight hard against my state implementing such a disaster. Vote by mail is great.
Of course cyber hacking is likely easier, but it’s not fair to fully dismiss even possibility of other attacks.
Election hacking is an actual, imminent national security threat. Intelligence agencies are scrambling to prevent or mitigate it right now.
In-person voting fraud on the other hand, as a meaningful threat, is entirely hypothetical.
Imagine if, at the height of the Cuban missile crisis, someone said “ok Soviet missiles within reach of the east coast is a threat; but what if vegan extremists blew up the white house tomorrow? Theoretically it could happen, so let’s not dismiss the threat!” That’s how different those two threat profiles actually are.
Last elections were decided by 80k votes, in a country with 250M eligible voters. With such a tight margins we have a lot of valid attack vectors, not only most obvious hacking ones.
Effective organizations are (and should be) able to deal with many risks at once. Do you think that during Cuban missiles crisis all other investigations stopped, and 100% of CIA, FBI, Police, Army etc focused on Cuba?
In person voter fraud--the kind stopped by requiring poll workers to check ID--isn't one of them. You would need thousands of coordinated attackers to change 80k votes. It's just not a feasible attack.