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: PartyTime who wrote (67958)	11/10/2000 8:14:04 AM
From: Joseph F. Hubel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

The court may hold that it has been common practice to disallow defective ballots in the past and that the percentage disallowed in this election is not disproportionate to previous elections. It may hold to that position if they find the percentage of defective ballots as compared to correctly completed Gore votes is not off scale. I'm certainly no expert, so I'm just speculating. I still go back to my example of the egg and of a battle fought. Both sides go in and the rest is up to fate, for lack of a better word. There are too many variables in any election. To change the un tampered outcome makes as much sense as cancelling or re casting an election due to weather. I do fault the many and varied casting methods used throughout the USA and support a universal ballot. Unless there is "extreme" justification, I view meddling in an election as "Opening Pandora's Box" JFH