SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : G&K Investing for Curmudgeons

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Apollo who wrote (7750)11/8/2000 3:56:23 PM
From: tekboy  Read Replies (3) of 22706
 
I see no mention of the potential influence of having St. Louis urbanites likely to vote for Gore, allowed to vote past the time when the polls should have been closed.

that's because Bush still took Missouri. If the outcome had gone the other way, you can bet the Republicans would be challenging it.

I also see no mention of the amazing timeliness of publicizing GW's driving while intoxicated infraction, for which he was fined, from > 20 years ago, and the possible influence of this event on some voters.

a) it was true, so it's influence is entirely legit. b) it only could come out so late because the drunk driver in question covered it up for twenty years. c) there's no evidence whatsoever that Gore's campaign had anything to do with the revelation.

In general, though, your bottom line is correct. For the outcome to be reversed (in FL or anywhere), the irregularities would have to be large and consistent (i.e., significantly one-sided), which is unlikely to be the case...

ctb/A
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext