Also rights come with responsibilities. If you can't sing your signature in a consistent way, than maybe you should not vote by mail in ballot. Vote in person.
Most up to date stats on the rejection rates that I found. 0.6% vs 6.4% in Georgia.
https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Analysis_of_...
Continuing to attempt to use it to push misinformation after being informed is not acceptable.
The election results have been finalized/certified. Therefore its reasonable to assume that the number of rejected ballots is now known. (How could it be otherwise. ) So I'm going to go with the Tabulation website over a fact check article from last month.
The total number of rejected ballots is not known because it isn't necessary to count rejected ballots to determine the election result (ie: they are simply not included in the count).
Again, stop spreading misinformation. Continuing to do so would be malicious.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-georgia-rejecte...
In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND STATE OF WISCONSIN
Page 5 aND 6.
"Georgia argues that the “[r]ejection rates for signatures on absentee ballots remained largely unchanged” as between the 2018 and 2020 elections, referring the Court to Wood v. Raffensperger, No. 1:20- cv-04651-SDG, 2020 WL 6817513, at *10 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 20, 2020) (“Wood”). Georgia Br. 4. Georgia’s reliance on Wood is misplaced because the analysis therein related to rejection rates for absentee ballots—as opposed to the mail-in ballots analyzed by Dr. Cicchetti"
"Indeed, in 2018, the rejection rate for mail-in ballots was actually 3.32% or more than twenty times higher than the rejection rate for the absentee ballots that Georgia incorrectly compares to dispute"
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163493/2020...
The item you've linked (the filing by the Texas AG against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin) is weird.
It seems to think there's some serious difference between mail-in and absentee voting in GA. In GA, the term absentee voting encompasses both early voting and mail in voting. The only absentee voting that has signature verification is the mail-in component (IDs are checked instead for early voting).
And it appears to make the same "error" you've continued to make: it conflates rejection for signature mismatch and rejection for all reasons, when the signature mismatch rejections are a subset of all reasons.
That said: even if they were accurate, we'd still need to examine how may signature match failures result in detecting actual fraudulent voting, and how many signature match failures don't (ie they are false positives that serve to disenfranchise voters).
It turns out that the vast majority (97%) of ballots rejected due to signature match issues are likely valid. IOW: we'd disenfranchise 32 people for every case of fraud occurring. I have personal doubts that the rate for fraud was even that high (3% of the % of ballots rejected for sig mismatch), as you'd expect some type of criminal charges resulting from it.
Even assuming the 3% of sig rejects number, because that's already a % of sig rejects, it comes out to 3% of 0.2% (the actual number of sig mismatch rejections). This is 0.006% of the total vote.
Additionally, signature match checking disproportionately rejects votes from specific groups, while accepting votes from other groups. In other words, having a signature check (or making it "stricter") allows tuning which demographics you accept votes from. Allowing this type of targeted disenfranchisement is not good