With your Russian example there is a paper trail. There is a timestamp when that occured and if the machines that receive the ballots timestamp the receipt of t

With your Russian example there is a paper trail. There is a timestamp when that occured and if the machines that receive the ballots timestamp the receipt of the ballot and the location with scanner #, it's pretty easy to pinpoint the infringements. As for throwing away ballots, again, in the USA there should be video evidence of such possibilities. I was helping out in Denver for one of the elections, might've actually been 2012 or 2016. They had cameras everywhere and they should. Paper > paperless. Seriously, there are reports/studies about this. It's common sense. You don't contrast how paper is better than paperless. Are both flawed? Yes but one is a dumpster fire of issues where the other can be fully audited and accounted for.