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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (116586)	11/10/2000 1:24:22 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Jim - RE: "1.Truth is that the same ballot was used in 1996." Are you sure about this? It was the EXACT same type of format as in 1996? A link would be preferable. If so, do you know how many incompetent people's vote was thrown away in 1996 because they couldn't vote properly? Heheh, I spelled incompetent wrong the first time I submitted this. ;)

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (116586)	11/10/2000 1:34:43 AM
From: Andrew Shih	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

8.Buchanan got 8,000 votes in PB county in 1996, 3,000 in 2000. Dems were saying no way could Buchanan get 3,000 in PB County. He got 8,000 in 1996 on less of a turn out. Hmmm...where did you get this info? This kind of stuff makes me want to puke. If true, I guess the media is even more liberal than I thought!

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (116586)	11/10/2000 1:51:41 AM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Buchanan got 8,000 votes in PB county in 1996, 3,000 in 2000. Dems were saying no way could Buchanan get 3,000 in PB County. He got 8,000 in 1996 on less of a turn out. I think that was a republican primary. If there were 8000 republicans that refused to vote for their mainstream candidate (Dole) in 96, I think it is possible that 3500 might vote for Buchanan rather than Bush in 2000. The premise that these 3500 were all Democrats that voted mistakenly just can't be proven. They could be predominantly disenfranchised republicans. I guess it would be interesting to look at the Buchanan county by county breakdown in the 96 republican primary and compare it to the Buchanan distribution in 2000 allowing for some increase due to additional reform party registrants. Did it also show a disproportionate number of the Buchanan vote in PB county?? If so, I think the democratic claim might lose credibility. I would think this stuff should be available. THE WATSONYOUTH