That doesn't really help, though. With "marks on paper" voting, you don't have to deal with the hanging chad problem, but you get whole crops of people who don'

That doesn't really help, though. With "marks on paper" voting, you don't have to deal with the hanging chad problem, but you get whole crops of people who don't fill the bubbles completely, or who partially mark two different bubbles, or a whole litany of other potential ambiguities. I still agree that paper isn't vulnerable to the mass-scale undetectable vote-rigging that electronic machines have the potential to be! But it does have its own weaknesses: people who decided to switch to electronic definitely had credible reasons in mind at the time.