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.
Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: abuelita who wrote (13818)11/10/2000 1:50:35 AM
From: Cactus Jack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 65232
 
Rose,

Good observation. It will be interesting to see how "legal" is determined; my guess is that the legality of the ballot itself -- approved by appropriate officials of both major parties in the county -- will be exceedingly difficult to overturn.

I've seen several people today refer to a Florida law requiring that the box to be marked when selecting a candidate must be to the right of the candidate's name; my understanding is that this provision applies only when "marking" (i.e. with a pen) a box. In Palm Beach County, to the contrary, they used an electronic ballot, in which the box is punched out of the ballot rather than marked with a pen, thus permitting electronic counting of the ballots. My understanding is that electronic ballots are governed by a different provision of the law which does NOT specify that the box must be to the right of a candidate's name. If so, the ballot appears to be legal on its face.

We'll find out soon enough (I hope).

jpgill



To: abuelita who wrote (13818)11/10/2000 2:59:08 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 65232
 
Hi Rose,

Even if the ballot is deemed illegal, how do you allow a select group of people to vote a second time, with full knowledge of the results of the rest of the voting in the country & allow this select group to determine the next president of the USA?

BTW, if there were so many folks having problems as are now being alleged, why are there few instances of voters & polling officials alerting people on their way in to vote of the potential problem? I have watched a number of interviews of people saying they talked to people in the polling stations after they voted & that is when they learned they may have voted for the wrong candidate. Did it not occur to any of these people to alert officials in the polling station of the perceived problem so others would not make the same mistake?

How could all these people learn about this problem, after the fact, from other voters with the exact same concerns, in the polling station, yet there are almost no instances of these same people taking any affirmative action to alert anyone else before they voted? How did some 20,000 people end up with the same problem when so may now claim it was such a hot topic in the polling stations?

How do you address every other grievance, real or perceived, anywhere else in the country? There are at least 5 other states that had extremely close final results. Will each & every real & perceived grievance be resolved there?

Why can't I be allowed to vote a second time? As I explained in a post yesterday, my district went to a new touch screen system that was very easy to deselect your original choice by simply touching the screen after you made your selection. How many people in PA accidently vote for the wrong guy? Where does it stop?

IMVHO, the time to question the validity of a ballot ended on Monday, the day before the election..... after that point..... CAVEAT EMPTOR..... it becomes the responsibility of the voter to exercise due caution, be prepared beforehand & ask for assistance at the polls to have their vote count.

Any remedies to correct any problems should be to make sure that this does not occur in a future election. Allowing a select group of people determine the next president is not in the best interests of the people of the USA. IMVHO, there is just now way to legally determine who should be in this select group.

Ö¿Ö