1 It's a lot of complexity designed (supposedly) to make it easy to vote. Voting should not be easy. Lazy people are typically too lazy to be sufficiently well informed to cast legitimate votes. It will make a lot of money for some computer companies, but for all of its complexity, it is no more secure than a paper ballot and a bottle of purple ink.

2 Secure? Don't make me laugh. Anything connected to the internet can be compromised, and will be.

3 You made a number of nice points there. I did a hunt on the theme and found mainly persons can believe your blog .smm panel 

4 I'm still with Bill on tis, at least to a large degree Dana.

One example in this article: they say people won't be able to double vote because they would ahve to provide two sets of fingerprints to the DMV. I can't speak for other states but here in Missouri we have never had to provide fingerprints for an i.d.

I suppose you have to for the Federal Real I.D., perhaps, but then that opens a whole new set of problesm, nationalizing the vote.

It may be this is a better system than  we have now, but I rather suspect it will be just as hackable as any other system. The author seems more interested in promoting the idea than in looking at the cons here - which suggests to me he may own some stock in the company or whatnot.

My view on things is the less complicated, the less nationalized, the better.

We were told electronic voting would solve the problems of vote fraud too and it only  made them worse.

Again, I am not saying this is necessarily bad, or that it won't work for certain, but I like to err on the side of caution.

And again, if it's so great why is it being considered in D.C.?

5 Bill, I agree; there are too many people who have no business voting who get to water down the votes of the informed.

My wife's nephew has a genetic disorder and is mentally retarded. I imagine his I.Q. is below 80, possibly below 70. But HE votes - and for the Democrats - every election. He has no business voting and cancels MY vote out.

Voting should be available for most people but should require a minimum of effort. We don't want to encourage everyone to vote precisely because so many people are woefully ignorant and subject to demogoguerie.

Which suits the Demo-Left just fine.

You will notice most Communist countries stressed voter participation. They used to brag about having 96% turnout and the like. Well, bully for them! That you only had one choice was immaterial.

Here in America we have TWO choices, usually both bad. The end result has traditionally been lower turnout. That is preferable to high turnout and a bad choice any day.

6 Two choices? Nominally perhaps. In the last California US Senate race both choices were Democrat females. I should add that they were both very nasty Democrat females.

7 Bill, do you mean there is any other kind of Democratic woman?

8 Dana, please do not make comments like that when I am drinking coffee. My budget for new keyboards is limited.

9 Bill, Dana has a very ornery habit of making people spit coffee on their keyboards. I've had to replace numerous boards thanks to him!

My recommendation is to not read Dana with coffee in your mouth - or to forego it altogether until you are done!

10 You guys are drinking COFFEE while reading this blog? Tim I can understand because he works during the day, but Migod, you deserve your drowned keyboards. I work pretty late in the evening at this and have Bourbon handy. And I'm proud to say I've never spit it out on anything (brag, brag).

11 Maybe we should start the bourbon first thing and cut out the middle-man Dana?  I know NOTHING would get me to spit out good bourbon!

Maybe Bill and I should switch to Irish coffee...

12 Thanks for this post and this informations ! 
John From Pomme de tech