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.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (86772)12/13/2000 12:17:48 PM
From: Freedom Fighter  Read Replies (1) of 132070
 
Nadine,

>>If county-by-county recount standards are a good reason not to do recounts, how can using modern voting equipment in the suburbs but 30 year old Votomatics in the cities be constitutional? How can that not violate equal protection?<<

It's actually very simple to see the difference if you aren't rooting.

One was in place before the election and one was being cherry picked and determined in the heat of battle by people with party affiliations that had different and constantly changing views. The legal issue was never about trying to get an accurate and complete count. It was about getting to a process that was unbiased and doing it before a deadline mandated by law. Maybe Gore had more votes, but he didn't have them in a way that met standards that weren't open to bias, were consistent and fair to all voters, and could be counted in time. No doubt Bush had a motive to prevent a recount even if it could be done properly. He already won on the unbiased votes. But he was on the fairer ground IMO and the courts.

Wayne
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News