Just suppose...
One hundred years ago, a school was established with 50 classrooms.
When the school was founded, bylaws were written explaining how the school would operate.
One unusual feature of the school was that the students would elect the principal. The principal served for four years, and then the students voted again.
Here was their system.
Each classroom held its own election. Two candidates ran for principal, and each student in each classroom would vote for one of them.
Then, each classroom would select one person to oversee the voting and count the ballots. We'll call that person the "collector".
After the votes were counted, instead of telling the Main office the total votes, one vote would be cast for whichever candidate got the most votes in that classroom for the next principal.
That means each election a total of 50 votes"one for each classroom"would be given to the Main office, and whichever person got the most votes was the new principal for the next four years.
There was another important provision in the bylaws.
To prevent the students from being swayed by any outside influence, such as the people running for the position of principal, each classroom was autonomous under the bylaws.
The Main office had very limited authority over how each classroom conducted its election.
This was supposed to protect the classroom from outside influence, but as time went on it was discovered that this arrangement created another problem.
Every classroom was responsible for conducting its own election, determining who was eligible to vote, counting its votes, and delivering its final result to the Main office by the "collector".
For about 75 years, this arrangement worked quite well.
All of the classrooms functioned smoothly, holding elections and turning in their single vote every four years.
What ended up happening over time is that the classrooms functioned autonomously, but they also functioned with limited oversight from the Main office and little visibility into what other classrooms were doing.
They began making more of their own rules and setting different standards on things such as who could vote.
It was noticed in a couple of the classrooms that there were people in the rooms who weren't enrolled students.
Why were they there?
It was also noticed that occasionally people would appear in the room who had graduated years ago.
Students began talking among themselves.
"Who are these extra people?"
Then came the more troubling question.
"Are they voting?"
It was suspected that they were, but with the classrooms being autonomous, it was difficult for anyone outside that classroom to know exactly what was happening.
The Main office and other classrooms thought it strange that these people were there, but the bylaws were clear.
You couldn't interfere with another classroom's handling of its election.
Over time, the differences became more pronounced.
A system that had been designed to protect the integrity of the election for the next principal was beginning to reveal a weakness of its own.
The checks and balances between the classrooms and the Main office were limited, and the classrooms had broad independence in administering their elections.
There were growing suspicions that some people who were not eligible were nevertheless voting.
(end part 1)
Eff,
My point was that we are having federal elections but states are holding the elections. In the simplest form I think what Trump wants makes sense.
States should adhere to basic rules to ensure integrity.
Personally I suspect some states are very likely cheating somehow.