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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Timelord who wrote (78542)	11/10/2000 4:48:23 PM
From: RWS	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

Thanks for trying to keep the facts upfront. I don't see any evidence of illegal activity to this point. The process is proceeding according to law and those who are demonstrating in the street, posting on the internet, or blabbering on the boob tube about the vote count are exercising their constitutional right to free speech. I would have preferred that Bush had not declared himself the winner just yet. It makes him seem a little too eager. As to the second recount that is only required if the candidate requests it, I read that there is a problem with the computer counting these ballots. If the voter punches one hole, but does not completely separate the punched out disk of paper from the ballot paper, the computer rejects the ballot. Only a hand count can determine if this is a legitimate ballot. With the results of the vote so close, Gore or any candidate owes it to himself and his supporters to make sure that the count is accurate. It is much more plausible that the 19,000 rejected ballots were ones turned in for another ballot to correct a mistake. RWS

To: Timelord who wrote (78542)	11/10/2000 5:00:57 PM
From: chowder	Respond to of 95453

>> It seems perfectly reasonable to request a hand recount in certain counties where there are questions of irregularities to make sure that the votes were counted right. << I agree with you Timelord! It makes sense to me that people who can't read right, probably can't count right. A third count is required, in my opinion. If we can't get the count right in this tightly controlled Democratic district, then I strongly suggest we narrow it down to a neighborhood. If that doesn't work, let's go for a duplex! Cheating occurred on both sides, and both sides intended to cheat prior to the election. May the best cheater win! dabum

To: Timelord who wrote (78542)	11/10/2000 8:55:14 PM
From: hdrjr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

Timelord, What makes you think a hand count is anymore accurate than a machine count. Does it come down to relying on an intepretation by a potentially biased human whether one hole is punched more clearly than another hole or are you saying the accuracy of a human counting votes is better than a machine? (Given that all holes are punched equally) Or are you just wanting a Gore win. "and the margin is so slim as to be meaningless" What? One vote is meaningful! One vote more for vs. against is the deciding number. I am more than willing to wait til the Nov. 17th, not Feb. 17th, but not willing to accept lawsuits, revotes, or any escalation into territory that only brings the U.S down to the level of many other countries throughout the world. Yesterday's news that Gore would not accept the results of the recount, no matter how they turnout (read Gore Loses) sounds like he plans to act as any other recently disposed demagogue. For the record I am an independent that voted for five republicans, four democrats, and four libertarians. hdr