I believe that many of the court battles revolved around issues like "standing", not whether there was any substance to the matter. So it's not really fair to put any value in whether the accusations were "proven in court" because the courts never focused on the accusations themselves.
I have no real desire to work through all of this again. It was 4 years ago. Alas, all of your numbers aren't so convincing to me. As we saw with this last go around, you could find numbers from pollsters that predicted either outcome. So I don't know where you got them and I'm not interested in parsing whatever you have to say.
I do know that many of the "merits" you cite were never litigated. Were there any cases where the court granted discovery? So how can anyone guess at what a court would decide about the matter? Many of the news articles I read at the time suggested that the courts were just not interested in opening up cans of worms.
