Probably why we are now getting election requirements that require a paper trail for all electronic voting. Diebold even tried a lawsuit in MA because they were rejected in favor of another company that provided that trail.
In Boston we still use the old mechanical machines where you flip the switch next to the name, I feel more comfortable with them than the touch screens. Knowing how software can be, I just don't trust it in this way, much like voting over the internet.
I find all this hillarious.
In Australia, we have always just used paper voting where a mark is made next to the name. Counting is done by humans and is monitored carefully. The paper vote is retained and can be recounted if necessary.
Whilst this SOUNDS like it would be a lot harder to do manual voting and counting in the US, given the amount of effort that has been outlaid to create an software system it seems like someone didn't do an appropriate study of voting as automation targets.
Automation does also make voting fraud a LOT easier (if you have control of the system)
What I don' get about the US is the low voter turn out from what I have read it seems to be 30-40% which can be a big factor in elections.
In Australia its compulsory to vote, if you don't you get fined. Usually 0.5% fail to show up and another 1% fail to vote correctly (ie. vote does not count) so the outcome is determined by 98.5%+ of the population.
Also we have an independent government body which over sees the voting process called Electoral Commission. What amazed me is the fact that in the US counting procedures vary not only from state to state but from county to county. I realise that the US is 15x bigger than Australia by population, but surely a consistent voting system could be applied for all US counties.