Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (66978)	11/9/2000 6:49:26 PM
From: SecularBull	Respond to of 769667

TLC, that's the winning post of the evening, imho. Hit the nail squarely on the head. Good job. LoF

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (66978)	11/9/2000 6:53:14 PM
From: TH	Respond to of 769667

I should have read your post, because you addressed my question. Agree, good post. And nicer than mine. TH

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (66978)	11/9/2000 6:53:50 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Neither can win a mandate out of this ... it's almost like the best shot is by winning through conceding? ... consider that whoever is president next year gets to preside over the market meltdown of 2001/2 ... ? ... wherein 'no gain' = pain in 2004

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (66978)	11/9/2000 7:06:58 PM
From: Srexley	Respond to of 769667

That is a great post, tastes like chicken. My posts not nearly as eloquent, but I feel exactly the same way you do regarding the vote and the shenanigans by Gore. I think I will give up posting on this topic also. Can't change anyone's minds, and it is so infuriating to me that a big chunk of people who live in our country (don't want to call this group Americans) feel people should get to re-vote when they do it wrong the 1st time. Doesn't seem to matter whether it's Clinton lying to judge or Gore wanting people who are for him to vote twice. Anything for the dems to remain in power seems to be ok. Its sad. Very sad. Have a great day. I'm going to play with my dogs to see if they can cheer me up. Hope & prey it works out for Bush. Scott

To: Don Pueblo who wrote (66978)	11/10/2000 9:28:37 AM
From: microhoogle!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

TLC, If Gore gives up and concedes, it will simplify things a whole lot. But, from his point of view - why should he? It has been a close election, with mandate in his favor (so far and it could change) and is missing Florida's electoral college votes based on some technicality. Even if he were to concede, his supporters would not agree to the outcome. They will start coming out with bumper stickers, "Bush stole Presidency" "Bush not my President" .... and so on. How can he effectively govern under such circumstances when people feel that they have been robbed of their fair choice just because of technicality and the constitution does not address such a situation. Constitution is a wonderful piece of work, and anything that's missing in constitution is addressed/interpreted by either the courts or ammended by the congress. This case fairly belongs to the courts. When courts give final verdict, I think that it should be respected by either of the candidates. What has complicated the matter is that popular vote (so far, and this could change after all ballots have been counted) has gone in favor of Gore. It is a different story that you had it with Clinton, there are other people who have had it with Bushes and few of grizzly republican geezers (Dick Armey, Tom Delay, Dan Burton, Hideous Hyde, Jessie Helms come to mind). It all depends on how passionate one is about candidates. Keep in mind Gore had at one point conceded when the outcome seemed to indicate that Bush is winning regardless of the irregularities in the voting in Palm Beach. Now those votes are making a huge difference, he is contesting it, and with good reason. People need to be very clear who and why they are putting an individual in office. Meanwhile, it would be better for Bush not to count chickens before they are hatched by discussing openly the transition team.