As global elites continue to reel from the election of right-wing libertarian

Javier Milay in Argentina, pundits are racking their brains over how it happened.

How did Milay do it? What differentiates the election in Argentina from

elections in say Brazil or the United States or anywhere in between?

Was it Milay's stance on social issues? Was it

Argentina's presently soaring inflation? Was it his blunt talk? Was it his funny hair?

I've got a simpler answer.

Two words.

Paper ballots.

Last month, the Buenos Aires Herald reported that city residents would be required to vote on paper

ballots after electronic voting machines caused all sorts of chaos and confusion in the primaries leading to a federal judge

striking them down and returning to voters the right to elect candidates the old

fashion way.

What's the argument for electronic voting?

The only argument is that it makes the process faster

and more efficient, except it doesn't because the machines break and then the pipes burst and then

vote counting takes days and weeks even, especially when the vote count starts to look bad for liberals.

Paper ballots gave Argentinians their answer on election day.

It was an answer that the liberal elites don't like. It was an answer that

the Argentinian people might not have gotten had computers allowed the count to

drag on behind an opaque electronic veil of safety. The only advantage that electronic

vote on behind an opaque electronic veil of secrecy.

...