Can't Soros or another rich Dem just buy out Diebold?

Why not? I would do it if I had a spare hundred million give or take a few hundred million, in the bank.

Repugs always go for the bucks over principle.

Buy the company and then shelve it.....

Diebolical stock has taken a dive, and has no signs of recovery. Its chairman left under a cloud. Their accounting sucks. Their promotion of GOP values is coming back to haunt them.
Who in their right or ultra-right mind would want to own them while they self-destruct ever so discretely, while doing it so neatly, pretty soon, it'll be completely, and I'll smile oh so sweetly. (sorry, entertained a nephew with Wiz of Oz last night)

BUT you bring up a great historical tactic, use an enemies own resources against them.
Corp. contracts are political animals, and Diebold would loose to another bidder. Dems in "defense" firm management jobs don't fare well, unless they "reform" and fast. this i know.

machines?

if Soros bought Diebold.

Oh good lord... it would be HIL-AR-I-OUS !!!!!!!
Little freepie heads popping like bubblewrap
pop pop pop

It's all a matter of having enough money to do it.

Then you have to go through the process of replacing the board of directors, etc. to actually take over management.

nm

That's the value of Diebold's outstanding shares:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=DBD&t=6m

great name synergy....

oh... and even more freeper self-combustion :-)
pop pop pop

http://www.fairelections.us/article.php?id=257

Surely Soros could get financing for this, with his assets. Better yet, he could put together a group of ultra-rich Dem investors for the purchase.

Only Soros, a Hungarian immigrant whose hedge fund investments have given him a personal wealth estimated at $7.2 billion, has been willing to publicly discuss his reasons for spending so much to defeat President Bush, and whether he intends to continue giving to political groups. He said in a recent interview that he regarded the 2004 election as "an exceptional" one, and that after it is over, "I hope to return to the more less-engaged, less-participatory position that I had before."

But not before setting a record for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle. Soros has now given almost $24 million to more than half a dozen groups, including $10 million to America Coming Together and its fundraising committee since Aug. 1, according to records filed Friday and data released by his office.

While ACT says it has worked hard to develop a list of hundreds of thousands of grass-roots supporters, 91 percent of contributions to ACT's 527 committee have come from donors giving $100,000 or more, according to a Washington Post analysis of ACT's donations, including ACT's disclosure report filed Friday. Separately, ACT's political action committee has collected $24 million in $5,000 or less contributions.

The founders of the biggest 527s -- ACT and The Media Fund -- vow to continue after the election. But the form and size of what survives is in doubt given the uncertainty over the future intentions of donors such as Soros, and pressure from advocacy groups, the Federal Election Commission and, until recently, the Republican Party, to diminish their power.

:shrug:

partisan ownership of voting machines is.

be fun to watch. Guess Soros would have to buy up every last supplier of voting machines. It would be SO great!

Keep the good ideas coming.

I thought I read on the DU that a Democrat was in charge now.

:shrug:

I would like to see a POLITICALLY NEUTRAL company buy Diebold, and then do everything they possibly can to ensure that whatever BBV's they sell are 1000% on the up-and-up.:thumbsup:

If Soros, bought Diebold, we'd NEVER hear the end of it from the freeps.

I just want to win honestly.:)

and count everyone's vote, Dem and Repug. I would rather lose honestly than steal an election.

Because I don't.

think the uber-rich are interested in helping the "little" guy.. they are only interested in money/power and retaining it at all costs.

mahalanobis.twoday.net/stories/391670

snip

Marvin P. Bush, one of George W. Bush's three younger brothers, is co-founder and partner in Winston Partners, a private investment firm in Alexandria, Va. Winston Partners in turn is part of a larger venture capital entity called the Chatterjee Group, headed by venture capitalist Purnendu Chatterjee.

My eyes popped out after traveling to the SEC:
Seems that the Chatterjee Group (TCG) is an affiliate of the New York based Soros Fund Management (SFM).

The Red Herring article reports that
Carlyle has counted George Soros, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Alsaud of Saudi Arabia, and Osama bin Laden's estranged family among its high-profile clientele.
Wikipedia goes even further: George Soros is also a notable partner of the Carlyle Group, investing $100 million (Wikipedia also notes that George Soros was a major investor in Harken Energy when it bought Bush's ailing oil venture).

in the last presidential campaign.

costs - it is a classic ploy to play both sides in order to keep the status quo..

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/magazines/2002/september/karatnycyk.html

It seems he has given enormous amounts of his wealth to fund democratic change in closed societies, the arts, and promote free and fair elections.

Soros has made a mark as one of a handful of wealthy moneymakers and hedge fund managers. But what has truly distinguished him has been his unique form of cause-oriented philanthropy, for which he has provided huge resources, averaging in the last decade roughly $500 million in grants per year.

<snip>

Soros's funding was effective because it assumed a centrist orientation. It was linked to a noble cause, supporting broad coalitions that worked peacefully for revolutionary democratic change. Soros's philanthropy assisted and helped bring together social democrats, liberals, conservatives, and libertarians in some of the world's most oppressive regimes.

Clearly, such coalitions cannot persist in perpetuity. Once a tyranny unravels, and democracy and open society take root, normal democratic interest-group politics intrudes and policy differences rend the once-unified fabric of democratic movements. Soros was influential because he focused primarily on deploying his resources at these transcendent moments, and then assisting democratic forces in the early years when the institutional, civic, and cultural architecture of a liberal democracy needs to be shaped. His philanthropy was truly non-partisan, and it deepened support for and understanding of his aim of open societies. To be sure, Soros's network of foundations was not the only Western institution offering assistance to democratic forces trying to topple dictatorships peacefully. In the early 1980s, other U.S. organizations like the congressionally funded National Endowment for Democracy and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, as well as the Catholic Church, the West German government, and the AFL-CIO, played crucial roles in assisting democratic forces in the Communist bloc and around the world. Nevertheless, Soros was preeminent among private philanthropists seeking to bring freedom to Central and Eastern Europe. Some of his earliest grantees are now influential figures in their countries' independent civic life. Many have also served in key positions in government as ministers and sub-ministers throughout Central and Eastern Europe.

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/magazines/2002/september/karatnycyk.html

with focus on uprooting tyrannical governments (hence his opposition to B*sh's re-election) qualify him, in my opinion.

Not only the scale of Soros's philanthropy has made it so effective, but its precise focus and approach. Soros has been most influential when addressing the transcendent issue of helping to topple tyrannies and replace them with societies rooted in the rule of law and democratic accountability.

His early ventures into philanthropy were conventional and unremarkable: support for the arts, for scholarship on his former homeland Hungary, and for the restoration of New York's Central Park. But by the mid-1980s, as his fortune grew, he began to direct his attention to the cause of promoting openness in countries governed by closed, authoritarian systems. His growing wealth, and the growing political ferment in the Communist world, allowed him to focus his energies on giving practical expression to the views of his intellectual mentor, Sir Karl Popper, and his influential work The Open Society and Its Enemies.

<snip>

Soros remains a man of enthusiasms, able to launch new initiatives and redirect resources at lightning speed. In some sense, he has operated as the de facto chief program officer in his vast network of foundations. This personal engagement means that Soros, who travels the world constantly and regularly meets with civic, political, and intellectual leaders, is able to respond quickly to emerging needs and, more importantly, to emerging opportunities. I witnessed this in Warsaw in the summer of 2000. Soros had helped support the World Forum on Democracy, a meeting of civic leaders, democratic activists, and intellectuals. One of the democratic opposition leaders was Alejandro Toledo, who was the chief political opponent to Peru's authoritarian ruler Alberto Fujimori. Toledo represented a mass movement that was pressing for free elections and an end to state domination of the media. Within weeks of their discussion, Soros had quietly provided a grant of $1 million to support Toledo's campaign of mass protest marches and to sustain a network of opposition to the increasingly repressive Peruvian government. When a videotape scandal broke that proved the government's complicity in bribing legislators and the media, Toledo's movement was ready to press for change. Today, Alejandro Toledo is the democratically elected President of his country, and Fujimori is living in exile in Japan as Peruvian authorities press for his return to face criminal charges. Former State Department official Morton Abramowitz puts it well: Soros is "the only man in the United States who has his own foreign policy and can implement it."

Soros not only has been integral to many of the most important political changes of the last half-century; he also has been a key force for popularizing the objective of achieving a world of liberty. He has achieved his greatest influence in advancing the ideas of open society because his work has been largely free of partisanship, that is, he has sought to promote open systems and not to focus on specific policies.

snip>

Soros may not, as some have suggested, be a fully paid-up CIA agent. But that his companies and NGOs are closely wrapped up in US expansionism cannot seriously be doubted.

So why is he so upset with Bush? The answer is simple. Soros is angry not with Bush's aims—of extending Pax Americana and making the world safe for global capitalists like himself—but with the crass and blundering way Bush is going about it. By making US ambitions so clear, the Bush gang has committed the cardinal sin of giving the game away. For years, Soros and his NGOs have gone about their work extending the boundaries of the "free world" so skilfully that hardly anyone noticed. Now a Texan redneck and a gang of overzealous neo-cons have blown it.

As a cultivated and educated man (a degree in philosophy from the London School of Economics, honorary degrees from the Universities of Oxford, Yale, Bologna and Budapest), Soros knows too well that empires perish when they overstep the mark and provoke the formation of counter-alliances. He understands that the Clintonian approach of multilateralism—whereby the US cajoles or bribes but never does anything so crude as to threaten—is the only one that will allow the empire to endure. Bush's policies have led to a divided Europe, Nato in disarray, the genesis of a new Franco-German-Russian alliance and the first meaningful steps towards Arab unity since Nasser.

Soros knows a better way—armed with a few billion dollars, a handful of NGOs and a nod and a wink from the US State Department, it is perfectly possible to topple foreign governments that are bad for business, seize a country's assets, and even to get thanked for your benevolence afterwards. Soros has done it.

snip>

http://www.mindfully.org/WTO/2003/George-Soros-Statesman2jun03.htm