It is but I am not saying it's worthless. It's considered the lowest form of evidence, technically.
The fact remains... what lurker posted is in fact correct as far as anyone knows. There is no actual evidence to the contrary and all the investigations have been pretty consistent. It's simply not a problem and what problematic elements exist are unimpactful. It's a solution to a gordian knot that doesnt exist that results in a faustian bargain of less access for vulnerable folks like seniors and the disabled for political gain.
Please list all the in depth investigations so we can evaluate.
But you still ignore the perception problem.
Many Americans feel our elections are not secure, despite what the canadian medical workers say.
So what's the downside of limiting mail ins, and requiring voter ID, which is what most of the population wants anyway?
We've already gone over limiting the barriers to voting under this scenario, so why not do it?
