This is the problem w/the voting system market in a nutshell- election official buys controversial voting machine; machines fails (or security experts find it can be manipulated); election official defends janky machine because his reputation is tied to it mcall.com/opinion/mc-opi…
Not in all cases (see CA TTBR or EVEREST study) but it's way more often than should be. This translates to a failed market. Instead of demanding better products, the customers (election officials) defend inferior products rather than acknowledge the machines are no good...
The voting machine market is already broken - there's no oversight or regulation, but on top of that the market is twisted by these instances which dilutes any pressure for vendors to be held accountable for their lousy, insecure machines. In other industries vendors lose...
...customers, or worse, get sued. But that doesn't happen in this industry. In fact, in some cases election officials have been retaliated against BY the voting machine vendors for raising questions about the machines' reliability and security. Ask @Ionsancho1 or Bruce Funk.
