The point is that since we can do better than 95% accuracy with electronic touch screens, we should. Why settle for less?
That’s exactly the point that I’m trying to make. Certain people at certain voting locations were not allowed to cast votes based on various technicaliities, despite the fact that the rules clearly stated that it was legal for them to vote. The obvious solution is that these people should have been allowed to cast their ballots, and an organized board would them decide which ones were valid and which ones weren’t.
Nobody has said that they don’t personally think that such standards are reasonable. But you still haven’t explained where you’re getting the authority to remove voting rights based on such a test. And you also haven’t answered my original questions: Who writes this test? Who decides what standards are appropriate? How is the test administered? And who pays for it?
If that post meets your definition of logical, I would hate to see a post that you consider to be illogical. :rolleyes: