Reply #6: EIRS is a large sample with over 1000 reports in some counties but its [View All]

[berniew1]

still only a sample. Most were not aware of the EP system and how to contact them, and not all who were aware would report. Also many voters are not comfortable with computers and would not know whether there was a problem when they voted, and some were in hurry after long lines and didn't do much review.

For those who used touch screens: how likely do you think people voting would be of late switches on the review screen such is documented to have been occurring on some machines?

Another issue is assessing a multiplying factor for the reported EIRS cases. Its clear that they were for a fraction(likely small) of total problem(as noted by comments from EP volunteers and poll workers interacting with the voters). But the only concrete data I have for assessing this is more detailed local monitoring results like the TrueVoteMD data in Maryland, and reports to Supervisor of Election offices which I have for a couple of counties.
The more comprehensive monitoring of TrueVoteMD for 6% of Maryland precincts found many more cases of things such as touch screen switching and other machine problems(factor of over 100) than the EIRS cases had reports for from the same areas.