|
|
|
|
|
by pjc50
1759 days ago
|
|
The thing is, the line of reasoning that electronic voting is fundamentally not securable to a sufficient public standard was being advanced a lot before the election, and has a lot of evidence to support it. E.g. here's sci am on 2016: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/election-sec... Contesting only elections that don't go your way and providing dubious or nonsense evidence (see various thrown out lawsuits) is simply subverting the process and the electorate. If they're unusable, then they're unusable everywhere : and the election needs to be run without them. > When the entire election in a district is run by officials from a single political party, with unlimited access to the voting machines This probably shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, hyper-polarisation has. |
|