> I presume Maybe you should study how elections are actually implemented instead of making assumptions. I suggest watching the talk I linked to in my top-leve

> I presume Maybe you should study how elections are actually implemented instead of making assumptions. I suggest watching the talk I linked to in my top-level post. > this scanning may also be under suspicion Obviously. Hence why it's important to recount the paper ballots by hand. This is also why about half of the states require confirming the reliability of the optical scanners with a random sampling of hand counts. > At some point perhaps the solution will pay for itself No, it won't. Computers per-voting-booth are always going to be a lot more expensive than an optical scan tabulator per-site. Also, because a computer+printer solution involves a lot more devices, you will need a larger amount of testing by hand recount. You are increasing the workload.