The fraud is made manifest in a combination of three forms: a) illegal aliens, b) "malfunctioning" electronic ballots, and c) programming voting machines to input votes for Hillary as a float rather than an integer.
I don't think I have to explain illegal aliens and duplicate voters.
For the ballots however, counties in Texas and Florida, among other states, reported that Trump's name would either be changed to Hillary at the moment before submission, remove his name completely, or mark down Hillary's name on a straight republican ticket. Many people would probably catch this discrepancy, but some don't, and those are votes for Hillary the fraudulent nature of which cannot be proven without confirming with the voter what choice he made--a logistical nightmare.
Certain machine brands were caught inputting votes for Hillary as a floating point value, a decimal number, whereas Trump's were inputted as integers, whole numbers, as they're supposed to be. Provided the fractional value is small enough, it would give her further padding of, at least, one additional vote for every ten votes, but was probably closer to 1.2 (anymore than that would produce a noticeable discrepancy). In a general election, a would-be cheater has discrepancy window of between 1 and 2 percent before he (she) will get caught (primaries are far more lenient, offering a 5-10% window). That means Hillary's cheating ceiling is between 1.210 million and 2.420 million. Aside from the fact that only a fractional amount of those numbers are required to steal the popular vote, it's important to note that Trump achieved his electoral landslide with the barest of margins at 106 thousand plus votes spread across multiple states. As such, similar margins could have been realized in NV, CO, NH, and MN with either an absence of the large amount of fraudulent votes or an increase of votes that Trump would have otherwise had were it not for the Soros-owned voting machines (he owns Smartmatic).
And then, of course, there were the assholes in Browered and elsewhere who was caught destroying Trump ballots.
Democrats don't have to try and steal the popular votes most of the time of course since California will always give it to them. But they have to assure that the fraudulent votes they manage to sneak by the scrutiny will be evenly divided among the states--within the 2 percent margin of course.
I would add though, that this election is particularly unusual in the level of turnout motivated by Trump. So California or no, it's not improbable to assume that Hillary's now 500 thousand vote popular lead would be erased were she not attempting to operate within a fraudulent margin.
