>>23916853 (PB)

You missed the point. Individual validation is a nice feel good.Electionvalidation is a whole other matter. All individuals would have to conduct an audit and in some way, count all the votes. How the individual voted matters. How the system counted and/or manipulated all other ballots also matters. And this skirts on the problem of the vote not being secret. Whatever scheme is used to "protect" the ballot, there is someone out there who will hack it.

This "solution" dates back quite a while now. It is as invalid then as it is now. Someone once pointed out that when a system is implemented, it is now static. Hackers will find a way to get into it because of that. I don't remember the person's name but protecting systems security involved LIVE monitoring. A non-static system would be a nightmare to validate. Conundrum.

This is not a new idea. Technology is not the cure for everything. Voting needs to be done with paper ballots, human counted with witnesses, and very strict paths after that.

And can we get over the MSM demanding an answer before the last vote is even cast? This isn't a ball game. We don't need to handle time outs, etc for the sake of network commercials.

Complete the vote in ONE day, yes. A well organized, hand counted system isn't going to take that long but the results won't be MSM instantaneous. Declare the national election a holiday, get people engaged and only use any type of mail in ballot for very, very special cases.

Remember back in the day the disabled were used to usher in electronic voting- and they did not want any paper but got forced to produce some of that. Then voter ID somehow became "racist." What next?

Can one completely eliminate cheating in an election? Probably not. But the scale of possible election fraud with electronic voting-any kind of electronic voting- is off the charts. As we have recently witnessed.