What you are witnessing is a Dem campaign to discredit the machines, and these machines do come close to nonrepudiation.
What they really want is the option to easily manipulate the vote count. What they really want is the old computer punch card ballots.
"These voting machines are the most accurate way to count the votes in the history of mankind."
Perhaps. But only if everyone involved has the best of intentions.
If you think anyone is capable of foul play, these machines are far more vulnerable than traditional mechanical or paper based systems.
This is simply because your typical poll worker is not capable of recognizing fraud on an electronic machine that would be obvious to anyone with older techniques of voting.
I have programmed computers professionally for 30 years. I have no faith in these machines. You will find that the faith in these machines is inversely proportional to the amount someone knows about computers, computer security and the validation of software.
Try it yourself. Find someone with even ten years experience in programming computers (not in voting machines) and ask them what they think about the machines we have today.
This is a case where "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." does not apply. Just because Dems suspect it should not make you reflexively support it.
Elections require even more transparency than criminal trials. Yet we tolerate proprietary and secret software on our voting machines. People should rightly be skeptical of such an arrangement even without the numerous exploits that have already been discovered and documented.
Current systems do not even use code signing for the executables (allowing the software to be changed without notice to anyone, compare that to installing a driver on Windows) nor do they encrypt and protect the data that is transferred as well as the browser you are using right now when you pay for a pizza on the web.
Don't take a politician's (of any stripe) word for it. Ask someone who might know.