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: bkcraun who wrote (67356)	11/9/2000 9:53:21 PM
From: JLIHAI	Respond to of 769667

Your assertion about the Section 6 specification was backed up on the news tonight as well. On the news they referred to it as a loophole which allowed the "confusing" ballot. The ballot appeared in the newspapers, with instructions. Jai

To: bkcraun who wrote (67356)	11/9/2000 9:59:08 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

>>>Section 6 (6) “Voting squares may be placed in front of or in back of the names of candidates and statements of questions and shall be of such size as is compatible with the type of system used...” Now please shut up about the ballots being "illegal"<<< Again, is what you're quoting the 1973 Act itself or an amendment to it? Additionally, doesn't the law also state that the candidates are to be listed according to results from the previous election? In which case, the Democrats should be listed second and their punch-hole should be listed second. How is it that the Reform Party candidate got to have its punch-hole listed second? The ballot is clearly, and will be proven in a court, illegal.