I gave you an upvote because the preponderance of your post was spot on.

I am replying to that small portion where you try to justify the thinking behind this awful 'cure' to a practically non-existent problem.

First there is no universal good policy - there is no construct that humans can articulate where someone, somewhere, is not genuinely disadvantaged by the strict application of that policy. What we perhaps need is a 'redress board' where that minuscule number of people can go to have their status reviewed wrt the strict application of that good policy.

AND - instead of spending 100's of millions of $$$$ fighting the generally great policy, those so upset about it could spend a couple of 1000 dollars going out to find these half dozen people disadvantaged and either bringing them into compliance with the policy.

For instance, there are indeed 100's of millions of dollars being spent right now fighting to invalidate this obviously great policy. Add to that the billions of dollars worth of free broadcast air time where the 'news media' spread the idiocy - and the actions of the high-tech wannabe oligarchs who take it upon themselves to silence - or punish - anyone who tried to speak the undeniable truths you yourself outlined in your post.

The "problem" simply DOES NOT EXIST - and any concerted effort to marginalize that absolute axiom is indeed siding with the purposefully evil 'interpretation' that produces all these phantom 'victims.'

quote:
I simply feel no need to rely upon ridiculous, hyperbolic arguments.

but you are giving cover for the ridiculous, hyperbolic arguments when you mention the half dozen or so actual 'victims' of a universally good policy that is being taken down by the knowingly evil proponents of election fraud.