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.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Howe who wrote (53131)	11/10/2000 4:43:13 PM
From: David Howe	Respond to of 74651

If the democratic party pushes this flimsy excuse for a law suit to court, they are willfully and knowingly violating the constitution and the law. They are damaging our country and violating the rights of the people. Result: Damage to the United States of America. Harm to the economy and our international standing. Creating a further split of America. Disabling the rightful winner of the presidential election and hampering his power to lead the nation. Method: Willfully and knowingly violating the constitution and the law. Willfully and knowingly using political power to gather support for a cause that is unjust. Willfully and knowingly pursuing legal action when none is justified in an effort to obtain personal goals at the expense of our nation's health. Crime: If this continues beyond the counting of the votes, this is bordering on treason. My opinion only. Dave

To: David Howe who wrote (53131)	11/10/2000 5:39:54 PM
From: Wes Stevens	Respond to of 74651

The law only applies to paper ballots - not machine.

To: David Howe who wrote (53131)	11/11/2000 3:48:06 PM
From: Nick Kline	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

I said: << There is apparently a state law in Florida that says you have to mark the ballots only to the right of the names. In this case though, the mark is in the middle of the names. >> Then David said: <<The ballot is not illegal and the Gore thieves know this. First, ballots of this type have been used for many years in Florida and other parts of the country (even in democratic campaign manager Daley's home county). This precedent makes the ballot valid. Second, the law you are referring to follows that direction with the statement 'when practical'. With as many candidates as there were, the Liberal Democrat that developed the ballot has argued that it was not practical to have all of the candidates on one page. >> First, its kind of stupid to call Gore supporters "the Gore thieves". Next you'll be accusing me of treason for disagreeing with you, or calling someone a clintonista. We don't need any labels. It's just about two guys who both want to win the presidency. Probably Bush won, but we don't know for sure. How can the votes vary that much from recount to now? They need to keep doing recounts until they reach a fixed point in every state that matters, Iowa, Wisconsin, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Florida... Here's my understanding of the ballot rules: You have to put the place to mark or choose the candidate on the right hand side. Like you say, there is some other rule says something like "whenever reasonable". But there is another rule that controls order on the ballot based on previous election rules or some such. And this rule means that Bush should be first and Gore second. Is Gore second, or third? (Buchanan was in the middle, but on the right hand side). What a mess. -nick And please, neither one is treasonous, or a commie stooge, and no one knows who really won, yet.