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 : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (1766)	11/11/2000 1:45:11 PM
From: TraderGreg	Respond to of 6710

I will agree with Blue..while the Congress could possibly get away without counting FL, the public outcry and lawsuits would be deafening. The Congress will and should wait for all electors to get appointed. In the interim, Dennis Hastert will serve as Acting President(if necessary). But I sure hope old Strom declines to serve as Acting VP...he ran for President FIFTY TWO years ago! Besides, the stress could hospitalize him again. I would think that Lott would probably serve as Acting VP but who knows. TG

To: Ilaine who wrote (1766)	11/11/2000 3:11:06 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6710

Actually, I think whether that "shall" places a legal requirement on a state or its electors is something that courts would determine if it comes to this. But another question arises: Assuming this is a legal requirement, how can it be met if a state does not know who its electors are because the results of an election are unknown? Remember, the electors are different people depending on who wins. Is the day the electors vote postponed until the election is resolved? What if the outcome is not known by inauguration day?