He's basically saying that users are too stupid and system is too corrupt to use a version of electronic voting that works. A working version involves verification using a receipt with a hash of your encrypted vote against one that is publicly posted. Cryptographically signing the vote would also fix voting eligibility problems. Ensuring the system isn't corrupted would require a publicly verifiable zero-knowledge proof.

When he was talking about physical voting he mentioned securing ballot boxes for transport. Transporting ballot boxes to some other location for counting is such a terrible idea that I wonder if it is done intentionally to open opportunities for cheating.

You count the ballots in the same polling room they were cast in after the poll closes. Have the same people who ran and observed the poll do the counting. That is how countries with secure, auditable voting systems do it.

Aside from that he is right about everything. With electronic voting issues like chain of custody and auditability go out the window. Nothing can be trusted.