My point is that nothing in her excerpt related to the original sourced article which reported that

A) there was no systemic failure of touch screen voting, it had nothing to do with the actual voting process.

B) they experienced a temporary problem in the pre voting process of uploading voter data so that the correct data from the voter's ID would pull up the correct jurisdictional ballot for the machine. As only a few machines were effected and those machines were corrected within a few minutes it almost certainly was the result of a corrective soft ware patch that wasn't uploaded properly.

C) the most egregious omission is that this contract was part of a process that we all want done, creating paper ballots and a paper trail. This was an important second test (the first one done on a more limited roll out yielded zero problems) of a new process that will produce a paper ballot and paper trail.

I was suspicious that there would be a) such a quick diagnosis of a problem and b) that there would be identical problems in both Georgia and PA.

When I read the detailed report in the AJC article it was clear that the facts in the local paper were not being reflected in Bradblog report or the OP.

The allegations simply were not true.

It isn't just a "boy cries wolf" scenario, which would be bad enough on such a serious subject as it will undermine people's interest because they will have found that earlier similar reports were untrue, but it is especially reckless to make accusations about election results being the result of a "failed system" when the Democrats way out performed expectations. Breitbart and the GOP in Kentucky would love to report about massive systemic failures and the Democrats didn't really win because of "system failures" in the voting machines, which the local article didn't indicate.

I will match your condescending "your are bright enough" with this "you are bright enough to not just take the OP at face level and click to the article quoted and click through the "interpretation" to read the original source material which paints a completely different than that in Bradblog or the OP.

I think that it is such an important issue that Democratic discussions of it should be accurate and clear, that we should not read local news reports with a preconceived conclusion in mind and then distort the facts to fit what we think, that is what Fundamentalists do when they read the Bible and what Republicans do when they try to cook up allegations of wide spread voter fraud. The methodology is shameful regardless who does it and creates an emerging cloud of Nihilism that tries to paint everything as part of a compromised system that is beyond hope, which in this case is particularly ironic because the good people of Georgia appear to be preparing for a complete paper ballot system by the Presidential Primaries. When put in context the AJC article was a positive article about the election system there taking a major step forward. Nihilism is Trump's religion. His aim is to paint everything as having questionable facts, limitless interpretations, relative moral ambiguity and all of the normal systems need to be handled by a strong man. There is nothing in the AJC that suggests that a single vote was incorrectly made or reported. That is not a "failure". Trying to publish that it is a failure is nothing more than a lazy epistemology with an attempt to twist facts to support a predetermined conclusion, classic Nihilistic nonsense.