The most disturbing aspect of the quasi-fascist rally for former President Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden wasn't the vulgar and abusive rhetoric from stand-ins like comedian Killer Tony's remarks about Puerto Rico being a "floating garbage island," and Black Americans carving watermelons on Halloween, despite how disgusting those comments are.

For many American analysts, the real terrifying threat was Trump's and Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson's assertion that they have a "little secret" to overturn the presidential election results. As Congressman Dan Goldman warned, Trump and Johnson might try to go to the House of Representatives to nullify the certification of the electoral votes and deliver it to the Republican majority in the House, which would hand the election to Trump.

This is the scenario that could play out: Trump supporters in battleground states could challenge the allocation of electoral votes in a bid to make it impossible for one or more counties or states to certify the electoral votes on time, preventing both candidates from receiving the necessary minimum of 270 electoral votes, and throwing it into the House of Representatives for a so-called "emergency election," where each state gets one vote, likely giving Republicans the advantage with a majority of 26 state delegations, unless Democrats change this in the upcoming elections.

While most states award their electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in their state, the Constitution does not require them to do so. According to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, each state has the right to decide how to appoint its electors. In many states, this allows one or more electors (so-called "faithless electors") to cast their votes for a candidate other than the candidate who received the most popular votes in their state. This has happened nearly 100 times in history, though it has not changed the final outcomes so far. It may be different this time, according to researcher Miles Mogulescu in an article published by the platform "Common Dreams."

According to the laws of 15 different states, a faithless elector's vote is not counted and an alternative is appointed in their place. But in 19 states, their votes are counted. Some of these states have enforcement mechanisms, but others, including Pennsylvania, do not have such mechanisms.

In July 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Chiafalo v. Washington that the state may "punish an elector for violating their pledge and voting for someone other than the presidential candidate who won the popular vote in their state," but they are not required to do so.

Analysts provided more details about what might happen in the anticipated attempt to overturn the results, stating that Harris winning — for example — all the safe blue states, along with just the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania would give her 270 electoral votes to Trump’s 268, which is the minimum needed for her to win. But the surprise could come through a faithless elector or through a judicial challenge aimed at nullifying some electoral votes, in which case neither candidate would obtain a majority in the Electoral College, throwing the choice of the next president to the House of Representatives. Each state gets one vote, and unless this election changes that, Republicans retain a majority of states. Thus, Republicans in the House would deliver the elections to Trump.

At the same time, there are numerous court cases that could alter the course of the election, especially if the election is so close that it comes down to Pennsylvania.

While Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his allies in key battleground states are casting doubt on the voting process, alleging that Democrats and election officials are "cheating" days before Election Day, one political strategy expert noted that election deniers learned one lesson from their attempts to overturn the 2020 results.

Kyle Miller of the Democracy Protection Organization stated, "We saw this in 2020, and I think the lesson that Trump and his allies have learned since then is that they need to plant these ideas early."

A spokesperson for Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris's campaign said last Thursday, "This week, we see that Donald Trump is clearly worried about losing the election. How do we know that? Well, we know that because he is ramping up his baseless claims of election fraud and irregularities."

Trump and his allies have exploited some incidents as evidence that Democrats are trying to steal the election.

Trump and his fellow candidate, Senator J.D. Vance (Republican from Ohio), continue to spread the "big lie" that Trump did not lose the 2020 election, and both have expressed doubts about accepting the loss if Harris is declared the winner.

The former president stated he would only accept the results if he found them "fair and lawful," and told attendees at a rally last September that "the only way we will lose" is if Democrats resort to cheating.

Vance said in October he would accept the results in Pennsylvania, a primary focus for election deniers in 2020, only if "only legitimate American citizens vote," referring to the push by Republicans including House Speaker Mike Johnson (Republican from Louisiana) this year to claim that voting by non-citizens is widespread in American elections, despite being prohibited by federal law.

Earlier this year, House Republicans in the U.S. passed a bill to prevent non-citizens from voting, legislation experts say is designed to spread a false narrative that could then be used to deny election outcomes.

David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, told The Guardian: "This will be one of the key false claims, but among many other false claims, if Trump loses the election. And it will be false, but it could still be dangerous because it may incite his supporters to believe that a completely safe election was stolen."

In Michigan, the New York Times reported last Wednesday that a "well-organized network of election denial activists" exaggerated a small glitch in the voting report, making it appear as though one voter's name had been used to cast multiple votes. The error was quickly corrected, but the far-right site Gateway Pundit claimed it had a "bombshell" report about absentee ballots in the state.

As The Guardian reported last Friday, dozens of polls conducted by Republican-aligned groups in the days leading up to the election showed Trump with a decisive lead, contrary to widely respected nonpartisan polls that consistently showed Trump and Harris in a tie.

The Republican-aligned groups issued 37 polls in recent days, according to a study by the New York Times, all showing Trump ahead except for seven.

A poll conducted by the Trafalgar Group showed Trump winning by three points in North Carolina, while a poll conducted by CNN showed Harris winning by one point in the battleground state.

Trump told his supporters at a campaign event in New Mexico on Thursday that he is "leading significantly in the polls, in every poll."

With 63% of Republicans believing earlier this year that Trump is the true winner of the 2020 election, Trump's claims about the polls may be enough to rally significant support for another attempt to overturn the election results after November 5, experts say.

Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg told The Guardian: "It is essential for Donald Trump's efforts if he tries to cheat and overturn the election results that he has data showing he was winning the election somehow. The reason we criticize this is that Donald Trump needs to go into Election Day with a set of data showing he is winning so that if he loses, he can say that we cheated."

Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent from Vermont) stated on Friday that it is almost certain Trump will declare victory on November 5, and that he is setting the stage to accuse Democrats of "stealing votes."

According to a report issued by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), at least 35 election officials who have refused to certify elections since 2020 now serve on election boards.

Democracy advocates say that recent polls conducted in favor of the Republican Party, baseless claims about illegal voting, and intense focus on minor flaws in the voting process are likely to be used to Trump's advantage.