We've already had one election settled in the courts, although in the end it didn't matter. After the Bush v Gore election The New York Times led aconsortium of news organizations and spent a bloody fortune going over every single ballot cast in Florida (which settled the win in the Electoral College) and George W. Bush won it by a couple of hundred votes.
He won even the four Democratic counties the Democrats had requested be recounted.
The only way Gore could have won is if all the rejected ballots (by people who couldn't follow directions, i.e. no signature, etc.) had been given to Gore.
At the time I thought The New York Times project would further divide the country, but in the end it was a good thing.
Counting every vote is imperative, if, that is, it's a valid vote, i.e. it's a registered voter, signed, the rules were followed.
I'm actually one of those people who think mail in voting could work against Democrats. You have to be able to read and understand the directions. If you moved you have re-register in your new location etc. etc. I see how so many people can't get their insurance coverage correct or follow directions for getting a driver's license, and I've always believed in person voting is the way to go. I don't believe in digital voting either. Too easy to hack.
New York State used to have these big, clunky, metal machines. You showed up with your ID, showed it, signed your name next to the signature you initially posted when you first voted there, or they compared it to your ID signature, and you went in and just pushed levers. No way to get at the vote or change it. At the end of the time, the vote totals were engraved there. They should bring them back. New is not always better.