You've dismissed the potential benefits, so it's a hard argument to make, but I very much like the idea of the style of machine that let's you pick electronically, then prints a paper ballot displayed to you - you accept it and it goes into the same sort of secure container ballots always have, or you reject it and it is trashed.

We get the benefits of electronics with the benefits of a tried and tested paper ballot system. We no longer have people arguing over stray pencil marks or trying to cross out mistakes.

We even get some extra checks on the paper system: today, if there is a discrepancy between the count of people coming to vote and the number of ballots we don't know which is wrong - this would introduce a third number to compare against.

Electronic voting machines were rushed in following the whole "hanging chad" thing, and were done terribly, with credible accusations of corruption involved (see Diebold, who are still out there under a different name) when a better ballot design process would have done the trick, but that doesn't mean we cant get some benefits from electronics, so long as we put accuracy and verifiability first.

At some point we will want voting from home (outside of mail in) and I'd rather shake out bugs gradually than expect some future generation to get it right the first time