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: Trio who wrote (68210)	11/10/2000 10:26:44 AM
From: Mr. Palau	Respond to of 769669

You are right. Not every random problem that occurs during an election process -- and there are lots of them -- can or should be fixed by a court. First, in many cases it wouldnt affect any races anyway, and courts do not get involved in such cases. Presumably, that is why nothing came out of the overvote problem in PB in 1996; even if there was a problem with the ballot in that election, why bring a lawsuit if there would be no change in any of the races? I think a more telling comparison would be to look at the rate of overvoting in PB against the rate in PB. If there is a statistically significant disparity, then the PB problems were not random, they were systemic, and a Court will probably take a hard look to see whether folks were disenfranchised, and whether this problem could affect the outcome of the election. The final thing is that for every fact we know at this time about what is going on, there are probably five things we don't know, and they could cut either way. The next few days will continue to be interesting.