Romney assimilates voting machine companies.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**MeanGreenStompa**

I'm told Ohio might be fairly important to the election this year... So Romnid devoured the company that owns the machines and does the counting...

I wonder why they'd want to buy that company and have direct control over it?

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13221476-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 a 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 in 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.

**Alfndrate**

Ohio is always important.... Idk why, though it only takes like 9 counties out of like... 83? to turn the state from Republican to Democrat... Other than that, we are a red state.

**AustonT**

Gearing up for the loss already.
I like it.
Don't worry MGS it will be over soon.

**SilverMK2**

Sounds like something that has no way of ever going wrong

**MeanGreenStompa**

AustonT wrote:
Gearing up for the loss already.
I like it.
Don't worry MGS it will be over soon.

Hey you funny guy.

So, if Obama (history's greatest monster) had bought up the voting machines in a major swing state, let alone bought up the voting machines whilst being a candidate in the first place, you nice polite folks on the right wouldn't all be foaming at the mouth and shrieking about the muslim communist nazi takeover of America? Instead we have to ask ourselves why the Romney's would buy up voting machine company right before the election, guess it was just for the profits...

Pull the other one pal.

**daedalus**

Black-box ballot systems are evil enough. This should be illegal.

**Easy E**

In the old days, you use to have to throw a ballot machine into the river. What has the world come to.

**Frazzled**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
AustonT wrote:
Gearing up for the loss already.
I like it.
Don't worry MGS it will be over soon.

Hey you funny guy.

So, if Obama (history's greatest monster) had bought up the voting machines in a major swing state, let alone bought up the voting machines whilst being a candidate in the first place, you nice polite folks on the right wouldn't all be foaming at the mouth and shrieking about the muslim communist nazi takeover of America? Instead we have to ask ourselves why the Romney's would buy up voting machine company right before the election, guess it was just for the profits...

Pull the other one pal.

SO you're alleging that a shareholder who owns shares in another company are going to go through two boards of directors (one of which is a public company) to do what again?

**Kanluwen**

It's already shady enough to begin with that it wasn't Mitt himself, but his son who did it this time.

**AustonT**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
AustonT wrote:
Gearing up for the loss already.
I like it.
Don't worry MGS it will be over soon.

Hey you funny guy.

So, if Obama (history's greatest monster) had bought up the voting machines in a major swing state, let alone bought up the voting machines whilst being a candidate in the first place, you nice polite folks on the right wouldn't all be foaming at the mouth and shrieking about the muslim communist nazi takeover of America? Instead we have to ask ourselves why the Romney's would buy up voting machine company right before the election, guess it was just for the profits...

Pull the other one pal.

Pray tell how many counties in Ohio use machines provided by Hart?

**MeanGreenStompa**

Frazzled wrote:

SO you're alleging that a shareholder who owns shares in another company are going to go through two boards of directors (one of which is a public company) to do what again?

I allege that it represents a clear conflict of interests and opens up the possibility of manipulation of the figures.

**Grey Templar**

Thread title is misleading. Its not Mitt who is involved as is implied. its his son.

Secondly, he mearly has a controlling interest in the company. He doesn't have control over the counting of the votes.

I quite sure the Company just rents the machines out and government employees are the ones who handle the vote counts.

**Frazzled**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

SO you're alleging that a shareholder who owns shares in another company are going to go through two boards of directors (one of which is a public company) to do what again?

I allege that it represents a clear conflict of interests and opens up the possibility of manipulation of the figures.

BY who and how?

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Even the Democratic ones?

**AustonT**

Frazzled wrote:
MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

SO you're alleging that a shareholder who owns shares in another company are going to go through two boards of directors (one of which is a public company) to do what again?

I allege that it represents a clear conflict of interests and opens up the possibility of manipulation of the figures.

BY who and how?

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Even the Democratic ones?

Didnt you know through Eugenics Mittens is breeding out Democrats, that's why he supports Planned Parenthood...

**Grey Templar**

Conservatives just tend to have larger families. its not Eugenics, its culture.

**AustonT**

Epic face palm

**whembly**

AustonT wrote:
Epic face palm

This is entertaining...

Please... go on...

EDIT: oops sorry Auston... meant this for MGS...

**MeanGreenStompa**

Frazzled wrote:
MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

SO you're alleging that a shareholder who owns shares in another company are going to go through two boards of directors (one of which is a public company) to do what again?

I allege that it represents a clear conflict of interests and opens up the possibility of manipulation of the figures.

BY who and how?

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Even the Democratic ones?

Of H.I.G.’s 22 American directors, 21 donated to Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign. One person made no political donations at all; one person donated to both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama; the remaining 20 directors donated exclusively to Mitt Romney in 2012.
Links to H.I.G.’s American directors:

Tony Tamer – Bain alum; Romney bundler; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Sami Mnaymneh – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign as well as Barack Obama’s campaign

Douglas Berman – Bain alum; Romney bundler; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

John Bolduc – Bain alum; Romney bundler; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Rick Rosen – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Brian Schwartz – bundler for the Romney campaign; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Timothy Armstrong – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

John Black – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Dave Blechman – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Peter Cornetta – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Marc Kramer – No known donations to presidential campaigns

Chris Laitala – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Elliot Maluth – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

William Nolan – Bain alum; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Michael Phillips – Bain alum; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Matt Sanford – Bain alum; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Lewis Schoenwetter – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Richard Stokes – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Neil Tuch – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Bret Wiener – donated exclusively to Mitt Romney’s campaign for 2012; donated initially to Mitt Romney and then to Barack Obama during the 2008 election

Rob Wolfson – donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

Jeff Zanarini – Bain alum; donated to Mitt Romney’s campaign

**Redbeard**

Frazzled wrote:

BY who and how?

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Even the Democratic ones?

First, it's software that essentially counts and logs. An intern programmer could do this. As a result, it doesn't take any huge conspiracy to rig anything, it takes one guy.

Check out code, make evil change.
Compile code, put in location where it'll be written onto the machines.
Undo change, check code back in.

But, there are still ways to pick that up. I think the real issue isn't that the machines will operate incorrectly, it's that the company that sets up the machines can do interesting things with distributing them, not having enough in some critical locations, or something of that nature. I'd think it should be much easier to under-order production and then plan where gets shorted than it is to change code and binaries that leave a trail and get audited.

Afterall, if on the day of the election, several minority districts only end up with half the machines they need to count everyone's vote, it might look bad, but it's not a felony. And I think this is how

**daedalus**

Frazzled wrote:

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Or, you'd just need one programmer who likes money more than honesty, or genuinely toes the party line that much. I could find you five of those at my company who'd probably do something like that by the end of next week, and I doubt I'd set off red flags.

**Frazzled**

Redbeard wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

BY who and how?

Again you're going through two boards of directors, therough executive management, all the way down to programmers to perform felonies on a galactic scale? You think all of them are going to do that?

Even the Democratic ones?

First, it's software that essentially counts and logs. An intern programmer could do this. As a result, it doesn't take any huge conspiracy to rig anything, it takes one guy.

Check out code, make evil change.
Compile code, put in location where it'll be written onto the machines.
Undo change, check code back in.

But, there are still ways to pick that up. I think the real issue isn't that the machines will operate incorrectly, it's that the company that sets up the machines can do interesting things with distributing them, not having enough in some critical locations, or something of that nature. I'd think it should be much easier to under-order production and then plan where gets shorted than it is to change code and binaries that leave a trail and get audited.

Afterall, if on the day of the election, several minority districts only end up with half the machines they need to count everyone's vote, it might look bad, but it's not a felony. And I think this is how

I can guarantee no on on the Board of directors knows how to program their clocks much less a computer program.
You're still alleging a massive conspiracy from two different boards of directors TO MULTIPLE FELONIES. Thats absurd on its face.

**kronk**

Programming can be back tracked and emails from executives can lead to jail time.

But appropriating fewer machines to key locations is just a screw up (nothing illegal about incompetence) that could lead to long ass lines and discourage voters.

I'm not saying I believe that, though.

**MeanGreenStompa**

AustonT wrote:

Pray tell how many counties in Ohio use machines provided by Hart?

I think 2, how many 'mistaken votes' would it take to make it contentious in what's cited as a vital swing state? I'm also not sure what kind of counties those are and whether they would be more likely minorities/working class populated or populated by white professionals.

I remain convinced that a presidential candidate and his family should not own significant financial and managerial influence over the people gathering the votes.

Not from either bloody side.

**daedalus**

Frazzled wrote:

I can guarantee no on on the Board of directors knows how to program their clocks much less a computer program.
You're still alleging a massive conspiracy from two different boards of directors TO MULTIPLE FELONIES. Thats absurd on its face.

I'm trying to figure out which part, specifically, makes it absurd.

I'm not saying it's happening, merely that it's not outside of the realm of possibility. The situation is certainly not lending itself to not showing a conflict of interest.

**Redbeard**

Frazzled wrote:

I can guarantee no on on the Board of directors knows how to program their clocks much less a computer program.

Really? Not one member of the board of directors of what is obviously a tech company might have a tech background? I mean, I don't know who they are, but I think that's a big claim to make.

You're still alleging a massive conspiracy from two different boards of directors TO MULTIPLE FELONIES. Thats absurd on its face.

The second point I was trying to make is that no board of directors needs to be involved. Do you think that the board of directors (who, according to you, don't know how to program) are doing code reviews? That's far more absurd.

Likewise, "underestimating" need is not a felony, and it's a hard paper trail to prove that said underestimations are deliberate.

**MeanGreenStompa**

Frazzled wrote:
I can guarantee no on on the Board of directors knows how to program their clocks much less a computer program.
You're still alleging a massive conspiracy from two different boards of directors TO MULTIPLE FELONIES. Thats absurd on its face.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/15ohio.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&

Also, you seem to be back in brick wall territory Fraz, there is every way to pull off a crime within a company without the entire board or even any of the board being aware.

**daedalus**

Actually, yeah, there were also all those controversies and flaws with the Diebold machines that they made every last effort possible to keep buried, such that California got too spooked to even use their machines anymore. Take that, along with the observation that Diebold machine ran voting in swing states had a particular knack for always winding up Republican. Of course, you only hear people talking about stuff like that at places like infowars, so your mileage may vary.

But then there was the nasty Diebold fraud thing where a bunch of the top executives got fined for misrepresenting company earnings. That DID come to the light of day: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/02/dieboldsec-fraud-settleme_n_598627.html

So, yeah, I guess if the tampering DID in fact occur with their machines, then there would be multiple felonies there.

**Frazzled**

kronk wrote:
Programming can be back tracked and emails from executives can lead to jail time.

But appropriating fewer machines to key locations is just a screw up (nothing illegal about incompetence) that could lead to long ass lines and discourage voters.

I'm not saying I believe that, though.

Thats an interesting idea... (runs off and makes a phone call).

OK, Q I thought the machines themselves were owned by the various state governments no? I know Texas is, we lost a bunch in a fire. I have an alibi. I was er walking my dogs...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

I can guarantee no on on the Board of directors knows how to program their clocks much less a computer program.

Really? Not one member of the board of directors of what is obviously a tech company might have a tech background? I mean, I don't know who they are, but I think that's a big claim to make.

You're still alleging a massive conspiracy from two different boards of directors TO MULTIPLE FELONIES. Thats absurd on its face.

The second point I was trying to make is that no board of directors needs to be involved. Do you think that the board of directors (who, according to you, don't know how to program) are doing code reviews? That's far more absurd.

Likewise, "underestimating" need is not a felony, and it's a hard paper trail to prove that said underestimations are deliberate.

If you're alleging one person can do it, they don't need the company. In fact thats the wrong thing to do. You just pay off a programmer, which anyone can do. Ask the Daly Machine. They'll tell you how.

**MeanGreenStompa**

Frazzled wrote:

If you're alleging one person can do it, they don't need the company. In fact thats the wrong thing to do. You just pay off a programmer, which anyone can do. Ask the Daly Machine. They'll tell you how.

Buying the company and filling it's board of directors with your cronies and underlings does aid inaction and how 'failsafe' your processes are. Along with facilitating direct and legal decision making processes like voting machine placements, voting machine upkeep and accuracy testing.

Hardly much consolation to the other side to say 'well, guess our company didn't do a great job' when your owning company's major investor's are now the first family and will 'remember' your board of directors for their contributions and 'contributions'...

**Chongara**

These are brave men ensuring that people will vote for the candidate they really want, even if they press the wrong button. We can't allow the election to be decided by people making mistakes.

Carry on true american heroes, it's thanks to you that we will again have a true american president.

I remain convinced that a presidential candidate and his family should not own significant financial and managerial influence over the people gathering the votes.

Romney isn't a candidate, he's the president. They just haven't done had his election yet. Stop getting stuck on formalities.