The Wisconsin recount effort did not have any effect on the outcome. It did confirm a lot of what I wrote in Election Attitude – How Internet Voting Leads to a Stronger Democracy. The naysayers are concerned about the integrity and accuracy of using Internet voting. They refuse to compare it to the paper based system we have today.

The administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, Michael Haas, said, “The biggest reason for these small differences between the unofficial results on election night, the counties’ original canvasses and the recount results is human error.” He went on to say, “Some voters do not follow the instructions and mark their ballots correctly for the machines can count them.  In the tight deadlines to report the results, election officials make math mistakes, we forget things, we accidentally transpose numbers.” See the full story at Final Wisconsin recount tally strengthens Trump’s victory

Internet voting would not be done on a central server, which surely would draw many hackers. It would be done at the state, county, and jurisdiction level. Significant effort is needed for vendors and election officials to prepare for Internet voting, but it can be done. It be done with the security, privacy, and verifiability we all want. Now is the time to begin planning pilots. Several successful pilots have been conducted in Arizona, Utah, and West Virginia. Alabama will be allowing military citizens overseas to vote using the Internet in 2018. We should all be urging our election officials to begin planning.