We know the 2000 election was the subject of tampering because we saw it on TV. The 1960 election was also because FBI director J. Edgar Hoover had wiretap evidence proving it. That evidence was later forwarded to the new Attorney General Robert Kennedy, with whom it languished and died.
The 1968 election was also a probable victim of vote fraud, as asserted by investigative journalists/brothers James and Kenneth Collier (now deceased), in their widely banned book: Votescam: The Stealing of America. They claimed that during the time after the Kennedy assassination, a shadow government was controlling media, elections and even exit polls. The numbers would seem to support that claim.
As to the 1880s, observe in the chart below the 1880, 1884 and 1888 elections. They were all within 1%. Specifically, the 1880 election was within .02%, the 1884 election .26% and the 1888 election .83%. Note: The 1880 margin is so small that it may be difficult to observe on the chart.
The odds that an election would be within these narrow margins are:
1880 election 11.01% divided by .02%, or 550.5 to 1
1884 election 11.01% divided by .26%, or 42.3 to 1
1888 election 11.01% divided by .83%, or 13.3 to 1
The odds that these three narrow elections could have occurred sequentially are: 550.5 X 42.3 X 13.3 = 309706 to 1. That's almost a third of a million to 1, that these three elections of narrow margin could have occurred in a row. To lend context to that figure, consider that the "casual association" (odds) between cigarette smoking and lung cancer is only 4.2 to 1.
The odds these narrow elections could have sequentially occurred, coupled with their occurrence shortly after the introduction of the confidential vote and during the introduction of the secret ballot, would have to lead any person of reason to the obvious conclusion; it was at this point orchestrated, grand scale election fraud began in the United States and that vote secrecy played the major role in its occurrence.
Think something like that couldn't have happened? That things are being stretched here just to make a point? Think again, because it did happen, just 4 years earlier in the election of 1876, but this time it was the documented theft of the electoral vote.
Meet "Devil Dan" Sickles
History would record his being a one-legged Union General of little note and "disreputable", former U.S. Ambassador. He lost his leg at Gettysburg and found himself in Washington D.C. the night of the 1876 election. On returning late from the theater, he decided to drop in on the vote counting and noticed that though the Democrat Samuel Tilden was far ahead of Republican Rutherford B. Hayes in the popular vote, there were still three states that had not reported in; South Carolina, Louisiana and Florida.
All three states were solidly Tilden in popular vote, but all three (southern) states were also controlled by governors who were all solidly Republican. By itself a curious circumstance, given the fact that the south had just been beaten into subjugation by the north and that the Republican party was considered the north's political flagship. In any case, together the three possessed the three electoral votes needed for a Hayes win.
Smelling ill-gotten victory, Sickles attempted to confer with the Chairman of the Republican National Committee, one Zachariah Chandler, who had retired in defeat to his hotel room around 6PM. There he proceeded to assuage his loss in collaboration with a bottle of whiskey, to the extent that Sickles best efforts could not rouse him from his drunken stupor.