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: Mr. Palau who wrote (68370)	11/10/2000 11:31:07 AM
From: Mr. Palau	Respond to of 769670

Here is the type of thing that could be going on soon. This is a summary of a court of appeal decision in California: "Action was brought contesting referendum election involving initiative measure which would authorize city to enter into agreement for development of certain city-owned property. The Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Philip M. Saeta, J., entered judgment concerning validity of various votes cast, which carried ballot measure, and appeal was taken. The Court of Appeal, Danielson, Acting P.J., held that: (1) absentee ballots marked with pen rather than punched were valid; (2) ballot punched "no" with transparent adhesive tape on reverse side holding "yes" chad in place was valid; (3) ballots punched "no" that also had other chads punched out were properly counted as "no" votes; (4) ballots not punched in voting squares could not be counted; (5) absentee ballot returned to city clerk's office by third party could not be counted; (6) ballot of man who moved from precinct in which he voted more than 29 days prior to election could not be voted; and (7) city clerk could refuse to count absentee ballot upon determining there was discrepancy between signature on ballot and voter's signature on affidavit of voter registration."