Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More attacks on voting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • More attacks on voting

    Romney family buys voting machines through Bain Capital investment
    Tagg Romney, the son of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney , has purchased electronic voting machines that will be used in the 2012 elections in Ohio, Texas, Oklahoma, Washington and Colorado.

    "Late last month, Gerry Bello and Bob Fitrakis at FreePress.org broke the story of the Mitt Romney/Bain Capital investment team involved in H.I.G. Capital which, in July of 2011, completed a "strategic investment" to take over a fair share of the Austin-based e-voting machine company Hart Intercivic ," according to independent journalist Brad Friedman.

    But Friedman is not the only one to discover the connection between the Romney family, Bain Capital, and ownership of voting machines.

    Truth out reports:

    "Through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Mitt Romney and his wife, son and brother are major investors in an investment firm called H.I.G. Capital. H.I.G. in turn holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic, a company that owns the notoriously faulty electronic voting machines that will count the ballots in swing state Ohio November 7. Hart machines will also be used elsewhere in the United States .

    In other words, a candidate for the presidency of the United States, and his brother, wife and son, have a straight-line financial interest in the voting machines that could decide this fall's election. These machines cannot be monitored by the public. But they will help decide who "owns" the White House."

    Both The Nation and New York Times confirm the connection between the Romney family, Solamere and the Bain Capital investment in the voting machine company, Hart Intercivic, whose board of directors serve H.I.G. Capital.

    "Mitt Romney, his wife Ann Romney, and their son Tagg Romney are also invested in H.I.G. Capital, as is Mitt's brother G. Scott Romney.

    The investment comes in part through the privately held family equity firm called Solamere, which bears the name of the posh Utah ski community where the Romney family retreats to slide down the slopes." Truth out added.

    There are also political connections between Solamere and the Romney's. "Matt Blunt, the former Missouri governor who backed Mr. Romney in 2008, is a senior adviser to Solamere, as is Mitt Romney’s brother, Scott, a lawyer," according to the New York Times.

    Voter ID and voter fraud have been top issues in the 2012 race, as have claims of Republican voter suppression . Mr. Romney's campaign has also been the subject of controversy over misleading ads, false claims, sketchy math on his tax plan, and overall vagueness on women's rights and other hot button issues.

    Raising further questions of legitimacy in the Romney campaign is an audio recording recently made public, where Mitt Romney is heard asking independent business owners to apply pressure to their employees to influence their votes. What has also been made public are the emails those employers have sent to their employees with an implied threat that if they don't vote for Romney they may lose their jobs.

    What it all says is that Mitt Romney, with the help of his family and Bain Capital connections, is more than willing to try to take the White House through illegitimate and highly unethical, if not specifically illegal means.

    With each passing day, the character and campaign methods of Mitt Romney cast an ever-darker shadow over free and fair American elections.

    Yet there is an irony in the Romney campaign that cannot be ignored. For all the noise the right-wing has made in questioning the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, there have been so many questionable efforts made to help put Romney in the White House, if he wins, there should be great dispute over whether his election could ever be called genuinely illegitimate.

    The nagging question is why, if Mr. Romney truly has the qualities that American voters want in their president, does he have to go to such great and questionable lengths to try to win the election.
    Stalin or Hitler would be proud of such tactics.
    A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

  • #2
    Slowwy thread please!
    Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
    "Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
    2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!

    Comment


    • #3
      Don't be daft. Stalin or Hitler would have you killed.
      "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a conspiracy theory, right? A conspiracy to rig the electronic voting machines without anyone being able to prove the machines were rigged?

        Comment


        • #5
          Wouldn't be surprised. Just watched the documentary Hacked Democracy and it seems pretty trivial to mess with the machines and without leaving any trace of wrongdoing for the election officials.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gribbler View Post
            This is a conspiracy theory, right? A conspiracy to rig the electronic voting machines without anyone being able to prove the machines were rigged?
            The best conspiracy theories are the ones no one can prove. That way you can keep believing in them no matter what.
            "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

            Comment


            • #7
              Alternatively, when there are very real problems with the electoral system, it's very easy to call it all a conspiracy theory to discredit those asking questions. Considering the software has been proven to be vulnerable to tampering, and the machines are in many cases left with the election officials for several days before the election, I think it's fair to say there is real cause for concern

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by gribbler View Post
                This is a conspiracy theory, right? A conspiracy to rig the electronic voting machines without anyone being able to prove the machines were rigged?
                You don't think that there's a conflict of interest with one of Romney's sons being tied to ownership of a company that is involved with the voting machines?
                A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by kentonio View Post
                  Alternatively,
                  Alternatively to what? To the notion that an unprovable conspiracy theory is a nonsense?

                  when there are very real problems with the electoral system
                  Which you haven't defined or specified.

                  it's very easy to call it all a conspiracy theory to discredit those asking questions.
                  I've "discredited" gribbler? Really? By what standard? He posited a conspiracy theory which was unprovable on his own terms. He discredited himself.

                  I bet there's a conspiracy involving every poll booth worker on the planet to elect every candidate in the history of man. The truth is out there!
                  "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Zevico View Post
                    Alternatively to what? To the notion that an unprovable conspiracy theory is a nonsense?
                    What are you calling a conspiracy theory? That the machines have been shown to be vulnerable to tampering and that the systems in place do not adequately monitor for that? How about the complete lack of any form of results verification if the machine is faulty or is tampered with?

                    This isn't a partisan issue, the voting machines have genuine and quite frightening vulnerabilities which should concern any American.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kentonio View Post
                      What are you calling a conspiracy theory? That the machines have been shown to be vulnerable to tampering and that the systems in place do not adequately monitor for that? How about the complete lack of any form of results verification if the machine is faulty or is tampered with?
                      Possible, but no evidence of same has been displayed or which has been proffered, at least of which I am aware. Specificity is important. Every law or system is open to abuse: the question is how this system is more or less vulnerable than any other. It's a question that can't be answered in the abstract, and certainly not by posting that a presidential candidate owns shares in a company that produces them. That fact in and of itself proves nothing. I mean, if he was a majority shareholder or had a substantial holding then this carping would have a vague, "Mr Moneybags is out to ruin the country" plausibility. But the fact that the quantum of his shareholding isn't mentioned means that I'm willing to bet it's pretty insubstantial.

                      This isn't a partisan issue, the voting machines have genuine and quite frightening vulnerabilities which should concern any American.
                      Unspecified vulnerabilities and unspecified issues. Get to the specifics, man.
                      "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I want someone to explain to me how this is NOT an example of conflict of interest.

                        Please?
                        A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          In most cases, a shareholder with a low percentage shareholding in a company could no more affect its decision-making process than Joe Blow off the street.

                          Also, a shareholder does not have any control over the day to day running of the company. All he can do is appoint directors (with the concurrence of the majority of shareholders). Here it seems that, via a separate company, HIG Capital, in which they have a "substantial holding" the Romneys indirectly have a stake in the financial success of a polling machine company. It is not clear what this "substantial holding" in HIG Capital is--2% or 50% or anything in between could be substantial. For starters, I'd like to know what his "substantial holding" in HIG. Obviously the lower the holding the less any financial stake and indirect say in the running of HIG Capital Romney has.

                          In any case it is said that this poses a 'conflict of interest.' On the one hand he's running for President. On the other, he supposedly has an interest in orchestrating a vast criminal conspiracy to fraudulently win the election, never mind the incredible risks that would involve. That would be recklessness of a kind that would never wash. You can't have conspiracies of this scale: simply put, word leaks out. You know the saying: two can keep a secret if one is dead.

                          Now apply that to a criminal conspiracy enveloping HIG Capital, its employees, and then also Hart Intervic and its employees, right down to the Hart Intervic engineers who make these machines, as this conspiracy appears to involve asking them to make deliberately faulty machines and risk their own careers for the sake of a paycheck, all so a man whose shareholding is twice removed from their company can win a Presidential election. That's pretty darned unlikely.

                          And lastly, it's pretty damned unlikely to suppose that anyone would seriously engage in such a conspiracy in a democratic country where Presidents and their staff can get impeached for committing serious crimes.
                          Last edited by Zevico; October 21, 2012, 05:08.
                          "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by gribbler View Post
                            This is a conspiracy theory, right? A conspiracy to rig the electronic voting machines without anyone being able to prove the machines were rigged?
                            I wouldn't say the conspiracy theory has been proved, not by a long shot, but I'd also say having partisan political actors so interested in taking ownership stakes in the companies that build voting machines is an extremely worrying thing. We need to keep a fire wall between interested political actors and the machines which count the vote just to removal all temptation and the appearance of anything being misused.

                            Clearly that is currently not happening.
                            Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I don't think Romney is doing anything wrong, but the arguments Zev makes are all wrong. Presidents have done things which put them at risk of being impeached before, there have been examples of voter fraud and tampering with votes before, and electronic systems have been compromised by small groups of people (even as small as 1) before.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X