[jonathanmo]

"some areas are experimenting with electronic voting machines, but those machines make it easy to substitute a name on the ballot only hours before an election. Should a party be allowed to do that if polls show a candidate is about to lose?"

To me, this is a key point in the drive for "election reform."  The technology is available for "instant candidate change," and with the New Jersey Court paving the way, a candidate could drop out pretty much any time before the polls opened and it would be "fair."  Absentee ballots, pretty much held in disregard anyway, would be eliminated and replaced with some form of electronic voting (internet related).  Candidates could be rotated in and out during the campaign season, depending on the polls.  "Dummy" candidates could be placeholders until the "real" candidate is sprung on in the waning hours.

And it wouldn't matter what laws were passed against such activity....because it wouldn't be "fair."

[Stultis]

"Dummy" candidates could be placeholders until the "real" candidate is sprung on in the waning hours.

When, per campaign finance "reform," third party orgs can't expose their records or negatives in the mass media.