[yoz-y]

For me the biggest issue with voting that is not a "paper ballot cast in a sealed secure room" is that there is no way to guarantee that the person is voting for the party they like. This is because somebody could break into your home and coerce you to vote for some party, they will also be able to verify that you have voted as they have instructed you. With a secure room they can maybe pressure you to vote one way or other, but in the end they can not verify it. Unless they can hack the electronic system and reverse the ID->vote link. This problem disappears with paper ballot (if it is reasonably secured, in my country at some point you received a ballot for every party and only cast the one you liked, the third party could ask you to bring them all the other ballots as proof)

[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

Also, whether it is actually possible with an electronic system or not: It is really important that the (below) average voter actually understands that it is impossible for anyone to figure out who they voted for.

[yoz-y]

I wonder about biometrics though. How expensive would it be to connect the national fingerprint database with a ballot scanner of some sort?

[emilecantin]

Paper ballots are handled by multiple people, not just the voter. Even if you manage to filter out all the volunteers, getting access to the actual ballots might prove difficult, as they're handled quite publicly.

[yoz-y]

Filtering the volunteers should be quite easy as they will be the only people who have prints on more than one ballot. Depending on what happens to ballots after one could grab them once they are no longer under heavy public scrutiny.