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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Waiting for the big Kahuna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (49222)	11/11/2000 9:59:20 AM
From: PMG	Respond to of 94695

That's correct! Regards PMG

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (49222)	11/11/2000 12:33:48 PM
From: Gary105	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 94695

Haim, thanks for your response. my main point is that neither candidate should be able to act with impugnity here. there needs to be a third force acting on behalf of the american public, outside the political circles. if the candidates actions results in prolonged uncertainty which results in a material loss of invested wealth by the american public, then the offending candidate and his backers should be held accountable. Respectfully, Gary

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (49222)	11/11/2000 5:12:27 PM
From: Paul Moerman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 94695

Haim, IMO you are naive to think that a revote in just Palm County would be fair to the state or the country. That's because different people might vote than originally, and people may vote differently than they did the first time based on knowledge of events since Nov 7th that the rest of us didn't have the benefit knowing when we cast our own votes. Palm County is NOT a representative cross section of the state of Florida. Therefore, if a revote were even allowed under law, as a minimum it should be for the entire state, not just one predominately partisan county.