Do you have any evidence of fraud?

The problem with electronic voting is that it's either impossible or extremely unlikely to prove either way. Germans and many others have banned them for that reason.

Usually unprovable hypothesis are discarded.

So the unprovable hypothesis that the election was legitimate and all votes were cast legitimately and accurately should be discarded

Not really. Definitely not when it comes to voting. Before Trump the idea of voting machine fraud and the impossible task to be certain of integrity of the elections was fairly non conspiratorial idea.

I've never seen voting machines but I remember reading constantly about US southern states using them and the suspicions. As I said many democratic nations have banned them.

Just show evidence the electronic voting was rigged in Brazil and we can all move on.

I don't have such evidence and I don't claim it, but I do claim using machines it's impossible to prove otherwise which is a problem in democracy.

Even if there is 0 rigging or fraud whatsoever, the mere possibility that there could have been such hurts trust in the democratic process.

They're the ones who have to demonstrate the system is secure and trustworthy.

"They" have done it multiple times. You're not satisfied, apparently. Show the evidence.

Of course I am not satisfied. This "we're going to invite other institutions to look at the system" bullshit did not convince me at all. Show me the source code so I can verify myself, so I can post it here to get other smart people to look at it. Show me the proof that said source code is running in every voting machine and vote counting computers.

The electronic voting system is auditable though:

https://portal.tcu.gov.br/en_us/imprensa/news/tcu-audits-bra...

There are many valid criticisms against this system. It not being opensource, it's audit process being very restrictive etc... There is a nice presentation following a conclusion of a vulnerability test that highlight many of the issues: https://youtu.be/4MgsGdbtf6o

But this impossibility you claim is just nonsensical.

I find that silly, what do you mean there's no paper record? Each machine has a print out of the total votes it has in it. These machines are also not connected to the internet. And lastly, he sure didn't have a problem with the machines for the several years he was in office, right? Only now that someone was polling better than him. I find the Brazilian electronic voting machines to be better than how we do it in the US.

If the printing can’t be verified by the person right after voting, it’s useless.

He did have a problem with the machines for a long time, and so did other candidates and parties. It was them who changed their stance to avoid being on the same side as Bolsonaro.

> If the printing can’t be verified by the person right after voting, it’s useless.

I don't agree with that. I'm curious about where a person can verify that their vote is actually the one counted? Because you can't in the US (whether by mail or in person).

Don't get me wrong, I think and individual printout would be great! And even better if you could go online (or somewhere) and verify that the vote counted was the one that you have a receipt for. I just don't think these improvements justify Bolsonaro's claims.

What claims? He basically agrees with you. An individual printout that allows one to verify that the vote matches what the machine displays, and that allows for a recount to ensure physical and digital counts match.

Would you not support him even if the other option was a criminal?

Yes, he is right about the problems of a nonexistent paper trail of votes.

How is that different from paper polls? Once you deposit the ballot you don't keep any record of your vote.

One of the reasons for the vote being secret and not leaving the ballot is to avoid people being coerced to vote for any particular candidate.

In Brazil we have the concept of electoral corrals. This is a known and wide practice, although it was much worse in the past. Electoral courts and processes have been fighting this since the early days of Brazilian democracy.

In a nutshell, this is when someone who holds a certain amount of power over many individuals (an employer, a farmer, a community leader, a church pastor, etc) exercises this power in order to coerce people into voting for their favoured candidate even if it goes against the individual's best interests and preference.

They would make people prove that they voted for candidate A, or get fired, expelled from the community, perhaps even fear for their or their family's lives.

These practices still happen and have increased massively this year compared to previous elections, but they're still lower than they used to be.

If people left the ballot with proof of whom they voted for, it would be much easier to coerce them.

With a secret vote being enforced the way it is, individuals still have the choice to agree with their superiors but cast whatever vote they want.

It's not perfect. Like I mentioned, the problem still exists, but it's reduced.

Like other commenters have already said though, the ballots are auditable (and audited).

I would rather our systems and processes keep improving rather than going back to worse ways just because what we have now is not perfect.