your analogies don't make sense
"On serial data lines, there is no such thing as "simultaneously". One of the tickets will *always* be seen before the other one."
Serial data line? Are you assuming that there is only one cashier and that tickets are scanned before a payout is made? In the scenerio I'm describing, there are multiple cashiers and desks throughout the casino, and they all seem to put the tickets in a pile without entering them into the system. Unless there is a camera processing the barcodes... which is possible, then they are just reading the payout amount directly from the ticket and handing you the cash.
"except there *isn't* an adversarial relationship between voters and councils"
But there wouldn't be such a relationship between voting machine vendors? We're not talking about a method of counting votes (or gambling) we're talking about the competition for quality of products within that method. It sounds like your point is that slot machines are inherently secure because of the relationship between users and casinos and that voting machines are inherently not secure because of an analogous relationship between voters and election comissions. That doesn't make sense at all buddy. It assumes that all vulnerabilities and attack vectors are known or can be trivially remediated... and really that's the reason why casino's could be in trouble, because they think they understand all the attack vectors and vulnerabilities. They install camera's all overthe place and only keep cash in hardened locations within the building. That's a physical security control, not an integrity control.