Descartes’s proof of the cogito

That is, since Descartes tried to base reality on something that cannot be doubted, since it is hypothetical (although I have never met a person who does not think at all - it seems that every person, no matter who they are, thinks at some level) can it be doubted - he lost the proof?

Regarding the second part of the question:
Why can't the deceptive demon attack logic?? Isn't that all his claim is that maybe the answer to 1+1 is dictated to me by the deceptive demon?

You need to distinguish between a reasonable argument and a proof. If you are looking for probability, there is no need for a cogito. Everyone understands that it exists even without proof. Descartes tried to bring an argument that forces us to reach this conclusion with certainty. What I argued is that there is no certainty here. You keep saying that there is a high probability and no one argues that they think from time to time. Indeed, that is true. To the same extent, there is a high probability that I exist. I have not met anyone who argues about that either.

I asked you the question of who is the demon deceiving? If I do not exist (as you want to claim), then the deceiving does not exist because there is no one being deceived. And in any case, there is no reason to assume that there is a deceiving demon. Therefore, I exist. Prov.

I don't want to argue anything. Just asking to understand.
I didn't understand your response that the deceptive demon cannot attack ”logic”? What did you mean by the term “logic”?

If you make an argument against logic, you have destroyed the possibility of discourse in general (because it takes place within logic). Yes, the argument of a deceiving demon about logic is nothing more than an oxymoron. This is Descartes' cogito argument itself, that even if you think that a demon is deceiving you, you are thinking, and hence that you exist and that there is thinking (=logic).
Likewise, the deceiving demon cannot be a reason to deny my existence because then he has no one to deceive.